寄托家园留学论坛

查看: 77660|回复: 143

[资料分享] 【新GRE AW】官方题库+官方范文 [复制链接]

Rank: 9Rank: 9Rank: 9

声望
2482
寄托币
43983
注册时间
2012-2-5
精华
5
帖子
7865

美版版主 寄托优秀版主 备考先锋 AW小组活动奖 AW作文修改奖 IBT Zeal Aries白羊座 GRE梦想之帆 GRE斩浪之魂 GRE守护之星 US Applicant 满1年在任版主 寄托兑换店纪念章

发表于 2012-4-22 15:54:41 |显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 okqishi 于 2012-4-28 09:23 编辑

〓The GRE revised General TestAnalytical Writing〓


新GRE  AW题库







1楼: AW官方题库下载[PDF]

2楼: Issue官方范文(score6-1各一篇

3楼: Argument官方范文(score6-1各一篇

4楼: AW官方范文下载[PDF]



============================ 分割线 ============================

Issue题库:


Argument题库:  




附:AW官方原版题库(无编号+翻译):





官网链接:
Issue原题库:
http://www.ets.org/gre/revised_general/prepare/analytical_writing/issue/pool
Argument原题库: http://www.ets.org/gre/revised_general/prepare/analytical_writing/argument/pool


附件: 你需要登录才可以下载或查看附件。没有帐号?立即注册
已有 16 人评分寄托币 声望 收起 理由
抢救褐毛毛 + 1 瞻仰膜拜
qouz + 1 感谢分享
Sponge8o8 + 1 赞一个
sweetviver + 1 感谢分享
yyzdtccjdtc + 1 很给力!
AceMa + 1 赞一个!
清浊并饮 + 1 赞一个!
ono + 1 赞一个! 辛苦了!

总评分: 寄托币 + 25  声望 + 26   查看全部评分

使用道具 举报

Rank: 9Rank: 9Rank: 9

声望
2482
寄托币
43983
注册时间
2012-2-5
精华
5
帖子
7865

美版版主 寄托优秀版主 备考先锋 AW小组活动奖 AW作文修改奖 IBT Zeal Aries白羊座 GRE梦想之帆 GRE斩浪之魂 GRE守护之星 US Applicant 满1年在任版主 寄托兑换店纪念章

发表于 2012-4-22 15:54:59 |显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 okqishi 于 2012-4-22 16:33 编辑

Issue官方范文:


Sample EssayResponses and Reader Commentary for the Issue Task

As people relymore and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to thinkfor themselves will surely deteriorate.

Discuss theextent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain yourreasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting yourposition, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might nothold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.


Note: All responses arereproduced exactly as written, including errors, misspellings, etc.,if any.


Essay Response — Score6

The statement linkingtechnology negatively with free thinking plays on recent human experience overthe past century. Surely there has been no time in history where the livedlives of people have changed more dramatically. A quick reflection on a typicalday reveals how technology has revolutionized the world. Most people commute towork in an automobile that runs on an internal combustion engine. During theworkday, chances are high that the employee will interact with a computer thatprocesses information on silicon bridges that are .09 microns wide. Uponleaving home, family members will be reached through wireless networks thatutilize satellites orbiting the earth. Each of these common occurrences couldhave been inconceivable at the turn of the 19th century.


The statement attemptsto bridge these dramatic changes to a reduction in the ability for humans tothink for themselves. The assumption is that an increased reliance ontechnology negates the need for people to think creatively to solve previousquandaries. Looking back at the introduction, one could argue that without acar, computer, or mobile phone, the hypothetical worker would need to findalternate methods of transport, information processing and communication.Technology short circuits this thinking by making the problems obsolete.


However, this relianceon technology does not necessarily preclude the creativity that marks the humanspecies. The prior examples reveal that technology allows for convenience. Thecar, computer and phone all release additional time for people to live moreefficiently. This efficiency does not preclude the need for humans to think forthemselves. In fact, technology frees humanity to not only tackle new problems,but may itself create new issues that did not exist without technology. Forexample, the proliferation of automobiles has introduced a need for fuelconservation on a global scale. With increasing energy demands from emergingmarkets, global warming becomes a concern inconceivable to the horse-and-buggygeneration. Likewise dependence on oil has created nation-states that are notdependent on taxation, allowing ruling parties to oppress minority groups suchas women. Solutions to these complex problems require the unfetteredimaginations of maverick scientists and politicians.


In contrast to thestatement, we can even see how technology frees the human imagination. Consider how the digital revolution and the advent of the internet hasallowed for an unprecedented exchange of ideas. WebMD, a popular internetportal for medical information, permits patients to self research symptoms fora more informed doctor visit. This exercise opens pathways of thinking thatwere previously closed off to the medical layman. With increasedinterdisciplinary interactions, inspiration can arrive from the most surprisingcorners. Jeffrey Sachs, one of the architects of the UN Millenium DevelopmentGoals, based his ideas on emergency care triage techniques. The unlikelymarriage of economics and medicine has healed tense, hyperinflationenvironments from South America to Eastern Europe.


This last exampleprovides the most hope in how technology actually provides hope to the futureof humanity. By increasing our reliance on technology, impossible goals can nowbe achieved.  Consider how the late 20th century witnessed the completeelimination of smallpox. This disease had ravaged the human race since prehistoricaldays, and yet with the technology of vaccines, free thinking humans dared toimagine a world free of smallpox.  Using technology, battle plans weredrawn out, and smallpox was systematically targeted and eradicated.


Technology will alwaysmark the human experience, from the discovery of fire to the implementation ofnanotechnology. Given the history of the human race, there will be no limit tothe number of problems, both new and old, for us to tackle. There is no need toretreat to a Luddite attitude to new things, but rather embrace a hopefulposture to the possibilities that technology provides for new avenues ofhuman imagination.


Reader Commentary forEssay Response — Score 6

The author of thisessay stakes out a clear and insightful position on the issue and follows thespecific instructions by presenting reasons to support that position. The essaycogently argues that technology does not decrease our ability to think forourselves, but merely provides "additional time for people to live more efficiently."In fact, the problems that have developed alongside the growth of technology(pollution, political unrest in oil-producing nations) actually call for morecreative thinking, not less.


In further examples,the essay shows how technology allows for the linking of ideas that may neverhave been connected in the past (like medicine and economic models), pushingpeople to think in new ways. Examples are persuasive and fully developed;reasoning is logically sound and well supported.


Ideas in the essay areconnected logically, with effective transitions used both between paragraphs("However" or "In contrast to the statement") and withinparagraphs. Sentence structure is varied and complex and the essay clearlydemonstrates facility with the "conventions of standard written English(i.e., grammar, usage and mechanics)," with only minor errors appearing.Thus, this essay meets all the requirements for receiving a top score,a 6.


Essay Response — Score5

Surely many of us haveexpressed the following sentiment, or some variation on it, during our dailycommutes to work: "People are getting so stupid these days!"Surrounded as we are by striding and strident automatons with cell phones gluedto their ears, PDA's gripped in their palms, and omniscient, omnipresent CNNgleaming in their eyeballs, it's tempting to believe that technology hasisolated and infantilized us, essentally transforming us into dependent,conformist morons best equipped to sideswip one another in our SUV's.


Furthermore, hangingaround with the younger, pre-commute generation, whom tech-savviness seems tohave rendered lethal, is even less reassuring. With "Teen People"style trends shooting through the air from tiger-striped PDA to zebra-stripedPDA, and with the latest starlet gossip zipping from juicy Blackberry to teeny,turbo-charged cell phone, technology seems to support young people's worsttendencies to follow the crowd. Indeed, they have seemingly evolved intointergalactic conformity police. After all, today's tech-aided teens are, courtesyof authentic, hands-on video games, literally trained to kill; courtesy of chatand instant text messaging, they have their own language; they even have tinycameras to efficiently photodocument your fashion blunders! Is thisadolescence, or paparazzi terrorist training camp?


With all this evidence,it's easy to believe that tech trends and the incorporation of technologicalwizardry into our everyday lives have served mostly to enforce conformity,promote dependence, heighten comsumerism and materialism, and generally createa culture that values self-absorption and personal entitlement over cooperationand collaboration. However, I argue that we are merely in the inchoate stagesof learning to live with technology while still loving one another. After all,even given the examples provided earlier in this essay, it seems clear thattechnology hasn't impaired our thinking and problem-solving capacities.Certainly it has incapacitated our behavior and manners; certainly our valueshave taken a severe blow. However, we are inarguably more efficient in ourbadness these days. We're effective worker bees of ineffectiveness!


If T\technology has soincreased our senses of self-efficacy that we can become veritable agents ofthe awful, virtual CEO's of selfishness, certainly it can be beneficial.Harnessed correctly, technology can improve our ability to think and act forourselves. The first challenge is to figure out how to provide technology userswith some direly-needed direction.


Reader Commentary for EssayResponse — Score 5

The language of thisessay clearly illustrates both its strengths and weaknesses. The flowery andsometimes uncannily keen descriptions are often used to powerful effect, but atother times this descriptive language results in errors in syntax. See, forexample, the problems of parallelism in the second-to-last sentence ofparagraph 2 ("After all, today's tech-aided teens ...").


There is consistentevidence of facility with syntax and complex vocabulary ("Surrounded as weare by striding and strident automatons with cell phones glued to their ears,PDA's gripped in their palms, and omniscient, omnipresent CNN gleaming in theireyeballs, it's tempting to believe..."). However, such lucid prose isoften countered by an over-reliance on abstractions and tangential reasoning.For example, what does the fact that video games "literally train [teens]to kill" have to do with the use or deterioration of thinkingabilities?


Because this essaytakes a complex approach to the issue (arguing, in effect, that technologyneither enhances nor reduces our ability to think for ourselves, but can do oneor the other, depending on the user) and because the author makes use of"appropriate vocabulary and sentence variety," a score of 5 is appropriate.


Essay Response — Score4

In all actuality, Ithink it is more probable that our bodies will surely deteriorate long beforeour minds do in any significant amount. Who can't say that technology has madeus lazier, but that's the key word, lazy, not stupid. The ever increasingamount of technology that we incorporate into our daily lives makes peoplethink and learn every day, possibly more than ever before. Our abilities tothink, learn, philosophize, etc. may even reach limits never dreamed of beforeby average people. Using technology to solve problems will continue to help usrealize our potential as a human race.


If you think about it,using technology to solve more complicating problems gives humans a chance toexpand their thinking and learning, opening up whole new worlds for manypeople. Many of these people are glad for the chance to expand their horizonsby learning more, going to new places, and trying new things. If it wasn't forthe invention of new technological devices, I wouldn't be sitting at thiscomputer trying to philosophize about technology. It would be extremely hardfor children in much poorer countries to learn and think for themselves without the invention of the internet. Think what an impact the printing press, atechnologically superior mackine at the time, had on the ability of the humanrace to learn and think.


Right now we are seeinga golden age of technology, using it all the time during our every day lives.When we get up there's instant coffee and the microwave and all these greatthings that help us get ready for our day. But we aren't allowing our minds todeteriorate by using them, we are only making things easier for ourselves andsaving time for other important things in our days. Going off to school or workin our cars instead of a horse and buggy. Think of the brain power and geniusthat was used to come up with that single invention that has changed the way wemove across this globe.


Using technology tosolve our continually more complicated problems as a human race is definately agood thing. Our ability to think for ourselves isn't deteriorating, it'scontinuing to grow, moving on to higher though functions and more ingeniousideas. The ability to use what technology we have is an example


Reader Commentary forEssay Response — Score 4

This essay meets allthe criteria of a level-4 essay. The writer develops a clear position("Using technology to solve our problems will continue to help us realizeour potential as a human race"). The position is then developed with relevantreasons ("using technology to solve more complicat[ed] problems giveshumans a chance to expand their thinking and learning" and "we areseeing a golden age of technology").


Point 1, "usingtechnology," is supported with the simple but relevant notion thattechnology allows us access to information and abilities to which we would notnormally have access. Similarly, point 2, the "golden age," issupported by the basic description of our technologically saturated socialcondition. Though the overall development and organization of the essay doessuffer from an occasional misdirection (see paragraph 3's abrupt progressionfrom coffee pots to the benefits of technology to cars), the essay as a wholeflows smoothly and logically from one idea to the next.


It is useful to comparethis essay to the level-3 essay presented next. Though both essays entail somesurface-level discussion and often fail to probe deeply into the issue, thiswriter does take the analysis a step further. In paragraph 2, the distinctionbetween this essay and the next one (the level-3 response) can most clearly beseen. To support the notion that advances in technology actually help increasethinking ability, the writer draws a clever parallel between the promise ofmodern, sophisticated technology (computer) and the actual "impact"of equally "promising" and pervasive technologies of the past(printing press).


Like the analysis, thelanguage in this essay clearly meets the requirements for a score of 4. Thewriter displays sufficient control of language and the conventions of standardwritten English. The preponderance of mistakes are of a cosmetic nature("trying to solve more complicating problems.") There is a sentencefragment ("Going off ...") along with a comma  splice ("Ourability ... isn't deteriorating, it's continuing to grow ...") inparagraph 3. However, these errors are minor and do not interfere with theclarity of the ideas being presented.


Essay Response — Score3

There is no currentproof that advancing technology will deteriorate the ability of humans tothink. On the contrary, advancements in technology had advanced our vastknowledge in many fields, opening opportunities for further understanding andachievement. For example, the problem of dibilitating illnesses and diseasessuch as alzheimer's disease is slowing being solved by the technologicaladvancements in stem cell research. The future ability of growing new braincells and the possibility to reverse the onset of alzheimer's is now becoming areality. This shows our initiative as humans to better our health demonstratesgreater ability of humans to think.


One aspect where theability of humans may initially be seen as an example of deteriorating minds isthe use of internet and cell phones. In the past humans had to seek outinformation in many different enviroments and aspects of life. Now humans cansit in a chair and type anything into a computer and get an answer. Ourreliance on this type of technology can be detrimental if not regulated andregularily substituted for other information sources such as human interactionsand hands on learning. I think if humans understand that we should not havesuch a reliance on computer technology, that we as a species will advancefurther by utilizing the opportunity of computer technology as well as theother sources of information outside of a computer. Supplementing our knowledgewith internet access is surely a way for technology to solve problems whilecontinually advancing the human race.


Reader Commentary forEssay Response — Score 3

This essay never movesbeyond a superficial discussion of the issue. The writer attempts to developtwo points: that advancements in technology have progressed our knowledge inmany fields and that supplementing rather than relying on technology is "surelya way for technology to solve problems while continually advancing the humanrace." Each point, then, is developed with relevant but insufficientevidence. In discussing the potential of technology to advance knowledge inmany fields (a broad subject, rife with possible examples), the writer usesonly one limited and very brief example from a specific field (medicine andstem-cell research).


Development of thesecond point is hindered by a lack of specificity and organization. The writercreates what might be best described as an outline. The writer cites a need forregulation/supplementation and warns of the detriment of over-reliance upontechnology.  However, the explanation of both the problem and solution isvague and limited ("Our reliance ... can be detrimental. If humansunderstand that we should not have such a reliance ... we will advancefurther"). There is neither explanation of consequences nor clarificationof what is meant by "supplementing." This second paragraph is aseries of generalizations that are loosely connected and lack amuch-needed grounding.


In the essay, there aresome minor language errors and a few more serious flaws (e.g., "The futureability of growing new brain cells" or "One aspect where the abilityof humans may initially be seen as an example of deteriorating minds").Despite the accumulation of such flaws, the writer's meaning is generallyclear. Thus, this essay earns a score of 3.


Essay Response — Score2

In recent centuries,humans have developed the technology very rapidly, and you may accept somemerit of it, and you may see a distortion in society occured by it. To be lazyfor human in some meaning is one of the fashion issues in thesedays. There aremany symptoms and resons of it. However, I can not agree with the statementthat the technology make humans to be reluctant to thinkng thoroughly.


Of course, you can seethe phenomena of human laziness along with developed technology in some place.However, they would happen in specific condition, not general. What makes humanto be laze of thinking is not merely technology, but the the tendency of humanthat they treat them as a magic stick and a black box. Not understanding theaims and theory of them couses the disapproval problems.


The most importantthing to use the thechnology, regardless the new or old, is to comprehend thefundamental idea of them, and to adapt suit tech to tasks in need. Even if yourecognize a method as a all-mighty and it is extremely over-spec to your needs,you can not see the result you want. In this procedure, humans have to consideras long as possible to acquire adequate functions. Therefore, humans can notescape from using their brain.


In addition, thetechnology as it is do not vain automatically, the is created by humans. Thus,the more developed tech and the more you want a convenient life, the more youthink and emmit your creativity to breakthrough some banalmethod sarcastically.


Consequently, if youare not passive to the new tech, but offensive to it, you would not lose yourability to think deeply. Furthermore, you may improve the ability byadopting it.


Reader Commentary forEssay Response — Score 2

The language of thisessay is what most clearly links it to the score of 2. Amidst sporadic momentsof clarity, this essay is marred by serious errors in grammar, usage andmechanics that often interfere with meaning. It is unclear what the writermeans when he/she states, "To be lazy for human in some meaning is one ofthe fashion issues in thesedays," or "to adapt suit tech to tasksin need."


Despite such severeflaws, the writer has made an obvious attempt to respond to the prompt ("Ican not agree with the statement that the technology make humans to bereluctant to thinking thoroughly") as well as an unclear attempt tosupport such an assertion ("Not understanding the aims and theory of them[technology] couses the disapproval problems" and "The most importantthing to use the thechnology ... is to comprehend the fundamental idea ofthem"). On the whole, the essay displays a seriously flawed but notfundamentally deficient attempt to develop and support its claims.


(Note: In this specific case,the analysis is tied directly to the language. As the language falters, so toodoes the analysis.)


Essay Response — Score1

Humans have inventedmachines but they have forgot it and have started everything technically soclearly their thinking process is deterioating.


Reader Commentary forEssay Response — Score 1

The essay is clearly ontopic, as evidenced by the writer's usage of the more significant terms fromthe prompt: "technically" (technologically), "humans,""thinking" (think) and "deteriorating" (deteriorate). Suchusage is the only clear evidence of understanding. Meaning aside, the brevityof the essay (one sentence) clearly indicates the writer's inability to developa response that follows the specific instructions given ("Discuss theextent to which you agree or disagree with the statement above and explain yourreasoning for the position you take").


The language, too, isclearly level 1, as the sentence fails to achieve coherence. The coherentphrases in this one-sentence response are those tied to the prompt:"Humans have invented machines" and "their thinking process isdeteriorating." Otherwise, the point being made is unclear.


使用道具 举报

Rank: 9Rank: 9Rank: 9

声望
2482
寄托币
43983
注册时间
2012-2-5
精华
5
帖子
7865

美版版主 寄托优秀版主 备考先锋 AW小组活动奖 AW作文修改奖 IBT Zeal Aries白羊座 GRE梦想之帆 GRE斩浪之魂 GRE守护之星 US Applicant 满1年在任版主 寄托兑换店纪念章

发表于 2012-4-22 15:55:15 |显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 okqishi 于 2012-4-22 16:37 编辑

Argument官方范文:

Sample EssayResponses and Reader Commentary for the Argument Task

In surveys MasonCity residents rank water sports (swimming, boating and fishing) among theirfavorite recreational activities. The Mason River flowing through the city israrely used for these pursuits, however, and the city park department devoteslittle of its budget to maintaining riverside recreational facilities. Foryears there have been complaints from residents about the quality of theriver's water and the river's smell. In response, the state has recentlyannounced plans to clean up Mason River. Use of the river for water sports istherefore sure to increase. The city government should for that reason devotemore money in this year's budget to riverside recreational facilities.


Write a responsein which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Besure to explain how the argument depends on the assumptions and what theimplications are if the assumptions prove unwarranted.


Note: All responses are reproducedexactly as written, including errors, misspellings, etc., if any.


Essay Response — Score6

While it may be truethat the Mason City government ought to devote more money to riversiderecreational facilities, this author's argument does not make a cogent case forincreased resources based on river use. It is easy to understand why cityresidents would want a cleaner river, but this argument is rife with holes andassumptions, and thus, not strong enough to lead to increased funding.


Citing surveys of cityresidents, the author reports city resident's love of water sports. It is notclear, however, the scope and validity of that survey. For example, the surveycould have asked residents if they prefer using the river for water sports orwould like to see a hydroelectric dam built, which may have swayed residentstoward river sports. The sample may not have been representative of cityresidents, asking only those residents who live upon the river. The survey mayhave been 10 pages long, with 2 questions dedicated to river sports. We just donot know.  Unless the survey is fully representative, valid, and reliable,it can not be used to effectively back the author's argument.


Additionally, theauthor implies that residents do not use the river for swimming, boating, andfishing, despite their professed interest, because the water is polluted andsmelly. While a polluted, smelly river would likely cut down on river sports, aconcrete connection between the resident's lack of river use and the river's currentstate is not effectively made. Though there have been complaints, we do notknow if there have been numerous complaints from a wide range of people, orperhaps from one or two individuals who made numerous complaints. To strengthenhis/her argument, the author would benefit from implementing a normed surveyasking a wide range of residents why they do not currently use the river.


Building upon theimplication that residents do not use the river due to the quality of theriver's water and the smell, the author suggests that a river clean up willresult in increased river usage. If the river's water quality and smell resultfrom problems which can be cleaned, this may be true.  For example, if thedecreased water quality and aroma is caused by pollution by factories along theriver, this conceivably could be remedied. But if the quality and aroma resultsfrom the natural mineral deposits in the water or surrounding rock, this maynot be true. There are some bodies of water which emit a strong smell of sulphurdue to the geography of the area. This is not something likely to be affectedby a clean-up. Consequently, a river clean up may have no impact upon riverusage. Regardless of whether the river's quality is able to be improved or not,the author does not effectively show a connection between water quality andriver usage.


A clean, beautiful,safe river often adds to a city's property values, leads to increased tourismand revenue from those who come to take advantage of the river, and a betteroverall quality of life for residents. For these reasons, city government maydecide to invest in improving riverside recreational facilities. However, thisauthor's argument is not likely significantly persuade the city government toallocate increased funding.


Reader Commentary forEssay Response — Score 6

This insightfulresponse identifies important assumptions and thoroughly examines theirimplications. The proposal to spend more on riverside recreational facilitiesrests on three questionable assumptions, namely:

·        that the survey provides a reliablebasis for budget planning

·        that the river’s pollution and odor arethe only reasons for its limited recreational use

·        that efforts to clean the water andremove the odor will be successful

By showing that each assumptionis highly suspect, this essay demonstrates the weakness of the entire argument.For example, paragraph 2 points out that the survey might not have used arepresentative sample, might have offered limited choices, and might havecontained very few questions on water sports.

Paragraph 3 examinesthe tenuous connection between complaints and limited use of the river forrecreation. Complaints about water quality and odor may be coming from only afew people and, even if such complaints are numerous, other completelydifferent factors may be much more significant in reducing river usage.Finally, paragraph 4 explains that certain geologic features may preventeffective river clean-up. Details such as these providecompelling support.


In addition, carefulorganization ensures that each new point builds upon the previous ones. Forexample, note the clear transitions at the beginning of paragraphs 3 and 4, aswell as the logical sequence of sentences within paragraphs (specificallyparagraph 4).


Although this essaydoes contain minor errors, it still conveys ideas fluently. Note the effectiveword choices (e.g., "rife with . . . assumptions" and "may haveswayed residents"). In addition, sentences are not merely varied; theyalso display skillful embedding of subordinate elements. For example, note thesustained parallelism in the first sentence of theconcluding paragraph.


Since this responseoffers cogent examination of the argument and conveys meaning skillfully, itearns a score of 6.


Essay Response — Score5

The author of thisproposal to increase the budget for Mason City riverside recreationalfacilities offers an interesting argument but to move forward on the proposalwould definitely require more information and thought. While the correlationsstated are logical and probable, there may be hidden factors that prevent theCity from diverting resources to this project.


For example, considerthe survey rankings among Mason City residents. The thought is that such highregard for water sports will translate into usage. But, survey responses canhardly be used as indicators of actual behavior.  Many surveys conductedafter the winter holidays reveal people who list exercise and weight loss as atop priority. Yet every profession does not equal a new gym membership. Eventhe wording of the survey results remain ambiguous and vague.  While watersports may be among the residents' favorite activities, this allows for manyother favorites. What remains unknown is the priorities of the general public.Do they favor these water sports above a softball field or soccer field? Arethey willing to sacrifice the municipal golf course for better riversidefacilities? Indeed the survey hardly provides enough information to discernfuture use of improved facilities.


Closely linked to thesurveys is the bold assumption that a cleaner river will result in increasedusage. While it is not illogical to expect some increase, at what level willpeople begin to use the river? The answer to this question requires a survey tofind out the reasons our residents use or do not use the river. Is river waterquality the primary limiting factor to usage or the lack of docks and piers?Are people more interested in water sports than the recreational activitiesthat they are already engaged in? These questions will help the city governmentforecast how much river usage will increase and to assign a proportionalincrease to the budget.


Likewise, the author isoptimistic regarding the state promise to clean the river. We need to hear thesource of the voices and consider any ulterior motives. Is this a campaign yearand the plans a campaign promise from the state representative? What is thetimeline for the clean-up effort?  Will the state fully fund this project?We can imagine the misuse of funds in renovating the riverside facilities onlyto watch the new buildings fall into dilapidation while the state drags theriver clean-up.


Last, the author doesnot consider where these additional funds will be diverted from. The currentbudget situation must be assessed to determine if this increase can beafforded. In a sense, the City may not be willing to draw money away from otherkey projects from road improvements to schools and education. The authornaively assumes that the money can simply appear without forethought on whereit will come from.


Examining all thevarious angles and factors involved with improving riverside recreationalfacilities, the argument does not justify increasing the budget. While theproposal does highlight a possibility, more information is required to warrantany action.


Reader Commentary forEssay Response — Score 5

Each paragraph in thebody of this perceptive essay identifies and examines an unstated assumptionthat is crucial to the argument. The major assumptions discussed are:

·        that a survey can accurately predictbehavior

·        that cleaning the river will, in itself,increase recreational usage

·        that state plans to clean the river willactually be realized

·        that Mason City can afford to spend moreon riverside recreational facilities

Support within each paragraph is both thoughtful andthorough. For example, paragraph 2 points out vagueness in the wording of thesurvey: Even if water sports rank among the favoriterecreational activities of Mason City residents, other sports may still be muchmore popular. Thus, if the first assumption proves unwarranted, the argument tofund riverside facilities — rather than soccer fields or golf courses — becomesmuch weaker. Paragraph 4 considers several reasons why river clean-up plans maynot be successful (the plans may be nothing more than campaign promises orfunding may not be adequate). Thus, the weakness of the third assumptionundermines the argument that river recreation will increase and riversideimprovements will be needed at all.


Instead of dismissingeach assumption in isolation, this response places them in a logical order andconsiders their connections. Note the appropriate transitions between andwithin paragraphs, clarifying the links among the assumptions (e.g.,"Closely linked to the surveys …" or "The answer to thisquestion requires...").


Along with strongdevelopment, this response also displays facility with language. Minor errorsin punctuation are present, but word choices are apt and sentences suitablyvaried in pattern and length. The response uses a number of rhetoricalquestions, but the implied answers are always clear enough to support thepoints being made.


Thus, the responsesatisfies all requirements for a score of 5, but its development is notthorough or compelling enough for a 6.


Essay Response — Score4

The problem with thearguement is the assumption that if the Mason River were cleaned up, thatpeople would use it for water sports and recreation. This is not necessarilytrue, as people may rank water sports among their favorite recreationalactivities, but that does not mean that those same people have the financialability, time or equipment to pursue those interests.


However, even if thewriter of the arguement is correct in assuming that the Mason River will beused more by the city's residents, the arguement does not say why therecreational facilities need more money. If recreational facilities alreadyexist along the Mason River, why should the city allot more money to fund them?If the recreational facilities already in existence will be used more in thecoming years, then they will be making more money for themselves, eliminatingthe need for the city government to devote more money to them.


According to thearguement, the reason people are not using the Mason River for water sports isbecause of the smell and the quality of water, not because the recreationalfacilities are unacceptable.


If the city governmentalloted more money to the recreational facilities, then the budget is being cutfrom some other important city project. Also, if the assumptions provedunwarranted, and more people did not use the river for recreation, then muchmoney has been wasted, not only the money for the recreational facilities, butalso the money that was used to clean up the river to attract more people inthe first place.


Reader Commentary forEssay Response — Score 4

This competent responseidentifies two unstated assumptions:

·        that cleaning up the Mason River willlead to increased recreational use

·        that existing facilities along the riverneed more funding

Paragraph 1 offersreasons why the first assumption is questionable (e.g., residents may not havethe necessary time or money for water sports). Similarly, paragraphs 2 and 3explain that riverside recreational facilities may already be adequate and may,in fact, produce additional income if usage increases. Thus, the response isadequately developed and satisfactorily organized to show how the argumentdepends on questionable assumptions.


However, this essaydoes not rise to a score of 5 because it fails to consider several otherunstated assumptions (e.g., that the survey is reliable or that the efforts toclean the river will be successful). Furthermore, the final paragraph makessome extraneous, unsupported assertions of its own. Mason City may actuallyhave a budget surplus so that cuts to other projects will not be necessary, andcleaning the river may provide other real benefits even if it is not used morefor water sports.


This response is generallyfree of errors in grammar and usage and displays sufficient control of languageto support a score of 4.


Essay Response — Score3

Surveys are created tospeak for the people; however, surveys do not always speak for the wholecommunity. A survey completed by Mason City residents concluded that theresidents enjoy water sports as a form of recreation. If that is so evident,why has the river not been used? The blame can not be soley be placed on thecity park department. The city park department can only do as much as theyobserve. The real issue is not the residents use of the river, but their desirefor a more pleasant smell and a more pleasant sight. If the city governmentcleans the river, it might take years for the smell to go away. If the budgetis changed to accomodate the clean up of the Mason River, other problems willarise. The residents will then begin to complain about other issues in theircity that will be ignored because of the great emphasis being placed on MasonRiver. If more money is taken out of the budget to clean the river anassumption can be made. This assumption is that the budget for another part ofcit maintenance or building will be tapped into to. In addition, to the budgetbeing used to clean up Mason River, it will also be allocated in increasingriverside recreational facilites. The government is trying to appease itsresidents, and one can warrant that the role of the government is to please thepeople.  There are many assumptions being made; however, the governmentcan not make the assumption that people want the river to be cleaned so thatthey can use it for recreational water activities. The government has torealize the long term effects that their decision will have on the monetaryvalue of their budget.


Reader Commentary forEssay Response — Score 3

Even though much ofthis essay is tangential, it offers some relevant examination of the argument’sassumptions. The early sentences mention a questionable assumption (that thesurvey results are reliable) but do not explain how the survey might have beenflawed. Then the response drifts to irrelevant matters — a defense of the citypark department, a prediction of budget problems and the problem of pleasingcity residents.


Some statements evenintroduce unwarranted assumptions that are not part of the original argument(e.g., "The residents will then begin to complain about other issues"and "This assumption is that the budget for another part of citymaintenance or building will be tapped into"). Near the end, the responsedoes correctly note that city government should not assume that residents wantto use the river for recreation. Hence, the proposal to increase funding forriverside recreational facilities may not be justified.


In summary, thelanguage in this response is reasonably clear, but its examination of unstatedassumptions remains limited and therefore earns a score of 3.


Essay Response — Score2

This statement lookslike logical, but there are some wrong sentences in it which is not logical.


First, this statementmentions raking water sports as their favorite recreational activities at thefirst sentence. However, it seems to have a ralation between the first sentenceand the setence which mentions that increase the quality of the river's waterand the river's smell. This is a wrong cause and result to solvethe problem.


Second, as a reponse tothe complaints from residents, the state plan to clean up the river. As aresult, the state expects that water sports will increase. When you look at twosentences, the result is not appropriate for the cause.


Third, the laststatement is the conclusion. However, even though residents rank water sports,the city government might devote the budget to another issue. This statement isalso a wrong cause and result.


In summary, thestatement is not logical because there are some errors in it. The supportingsetences are not strong enough to support this issue.


Reader Commentary forEssay Response — Score 2

Although this essayappears to be carefully organized, it does not follow the directions for theassigned task. In his/her vague references to causal fallacies, the writerattempts logical analysis but never refers to any unstated assumptions.Furthermore, several errors in grammar and sentence structure interfere withmeaning (e.g., "This statement looks like logical, but there are somewrong sentences in it which is not logical").


Because this response"does not follow the directions for the assigned task" and containserrors in sentence structure and logical development, it earns a scoreof 2.


Essay Response — Score1

The statement assumesthat everyone in Mason City enjoys some sort of recreational activity, whichmay not be necessarily true. They statement also assumes that if the statecleans up the river, the use of the river for water sports will definitelyincrease.


Reader Commentary forEssay Response — Score 1

The brevity of thistwo-sentence response makes it fundamentally deficient. Sentence 1 states anassumption that is actually not present in the argument, and sentence 2correctly states an assumption but provides no discussion of its implications.Although the response may begin to address the assigned task, it offers nodevelopment. As such, it is clearly "extremely brief ... providing littleevidence of an organized response" and should earn a score of 1.


使用道具 举报

Rank: 9Rank: 9Rank: 9

声望
2482
寄托币
43983
注册时间
2012-2-5
精华
5
帖子
7865

美版版主 寄托优秀版主 备考先锋 AW小组活动奖 AW作文修改奖 IBT Zeal Aries白羊座 GRE梦想之帆 GRE斩浪之魂 GRE守护之星 US Applicant 满1年在任版主 寄托兑换店纪念章

发表于 2012-4-22 15:55:26 |显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 okqishi 于 2012-4-22 16:44 编辑

AW官方范文下载(与2楼、3楼内容相同):


附件: 你需要登录才可以下载或查看附件。没有帐号?立即注册

使用道具 举报

Rank: 9Rank: 9Rank: 9

声望
2482
寄托币
43983
注册时间
2012-2-5
精华
5
帖子
7865

美版版主 寄托优秀版主 备考先锋 AW小组活动奖 AW作文修改奖 IBT Zeal Aries白羊座 GRE梦想之帆 GRE斩浪之魂 GRE守护之星 US Applicant 满1年在任版主 寄托兑换店纪念章

发表于 2012-4-22 15:55:31 |显示全部楼层
继续占

使用道具 举报

Rank: 4

声望
40
寄托币
1422
注册时间
2012-4-23
精华
0
帖子
224
发表于 2012-4-23 14:30:17 |显示全部楼层
不错!!

使用道具 举报

Rank: 6Rank: 6

声望
257
寄托币
2536
注册时间
2012-2-13
精华
0
帖子
628

美版2015offer达人

发表于 2012-4-28 16:38:00 |显示全部楼层
顶一个
让我们面对现实,让我们忠于理想。

使用道具 举报

Rank: 4

声望
70
寄托币
855
注册时间
2012-3-22
精华
0
帖子
182

分享之阳

发表于 2012-5-2 14:43:50 |显示全部楼层
顶楼主,谢谢楼主分享了!
就这样吧~

使用道具 举报

Rank: 3Rank: 3

声望
69
寄托币
425
注册时间
2011-6-28
精华
0
帖子
71
发表于 2012-5-2 15:40:26 |显示全部楼层
顶一下小奇版主~

使用道具 举报

Rank: 9Rank: 9Rank: 9

声望
2482
寄托币
43983
注册时间
2012-2-5
精华
5
帖子
7865

美版版主 寄托优秀版主 备考先锋 AW小组活动奖 AW作文修改奖 IBT Zeal Aries白羊座 GRE梦想之帆 GRE斩浪之魂 GRE守护之星 US Applicant 满1年在任版主 寄托兑换店纪念章

发表于 2012-5-2 15:45:15 |显示全部楼层
顶一下小奇版主~
Helen_Jiang 发表于 2012-5-2 15:40

thx~:)

使用道具 举报

Rank: 9Rank: 9Rank: 9

声望
1556
寄托币
29103
注册时间
2010-12-13
精华
2
帖子
6596

荣誉版主 Sagittarius射手座 寄托优秀版主 GRE斩浪之魂 AW作文修改奖 枫华正茂 魅丽星 爱美星 德意志之心

发表于 2012-5-2 15:52:38 |显示全部楼层
赞认真
已有 1 人评分声望 收起 理由
dairyman + 1 =。=每次看到你头像都想捏你脸

总评分: 声望 + 1   查看全部评分

我更年期提前我自豪...凸(‵′)凸
( ̄ε(# ̄)  ╮( ̄▽ ̄)╭ ∑( ° △ °|||)︴ (= ̄ω ̄=) (→_→)  ( ̄▽ ̄)~*

使用道具 举报

Rank: 3Rank: 3

声望
6
寄托币
1248
注册时间
2011-7-9
精华
0
帖子
70
发表于 2012-5-2 19:32:21 |显示全部楼层
谢LZ,赞

使用道具 举报

Rank: 1

声望
0
寄托币
101
注册时间
2011-1-25
精华
0
帖子
7
发表于 2012-5-14 22:06:54 |显示全部楼层
LZ好人

使用道具 举报

Rank: 2

声望
46
寄托币
197
注册时间
2011-10-3
精华
0
帖子
6

US-applicant

发表于 2012-5-19 17:47:21 |显示全部楼层
不错~~~全部下下来了。

使用道具 举报

Rank: 9Rank: 9Rank: 9

声望
2366
寄托币
19361
注册时间
2007-8-27
精华
8
帖子
9083

荣誉版主 Aquarius水瓶座 US Applicant 港澳资深筒子 Golden Apple VISA版特殊贡献 Economist

发表于 2012-5-22 08:20:40 |显示全部楼层
帮忙up一下

使用道具 举报

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

报offer 祈福 爆照
回顶部 我要纠错