GRE高頻優秀作文賞析

GRE作文雖然有官方題庫，但題目總數太多讓考生難以做到全部練一遍，因此看完題目直接看對應的范文學習寫法思路就成為了更有效率的做法。下面小編會為大家帶來GRE高頻作文賞析：All students should be required to take the driver's education course at...

GRE作文官方題庫ARGUMENT題目：

The following appeared in a letter to the school board in the town of Centerville:

"All students should be required to take the driver's education course at Centerville High School. In the past two years, several accidents in and around Centerville have involved teenage drivers. Since a number of parents in Centerville havecomplained that they are too busy to teach their teenagers to drive, some other instruction is necessary to ensure that these teenagers are safe drivers. Although there are two driving schools in Centerville, parents on a tight budget cannot afford to pay for driving instruction. Therefore aneffectiveand mandatory program sponsored by the high school is the only solution to this serious problem."

Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.

范文賞析

This letter recommends mandatory driver's education courses at Centerville High School based on three facts: during the last two years several Centerville car accidents have involved teenage drivers, Centerville parents are too busy to teach driving to their children, and the two private driver-education courses in the area are unaffordable. The argument suffers from several critical flaws. Let us look a more deeply.

【此段結構】

本段采用了標準的Argument開頭段結構，即：C – E - F的開頭結構，首句概括原文的C(Conclusion)。接下來的一句話概括了原文為了支持他的結論所引用的E(evidence)。較后尾句中給出開頭段到正文段的過渡句，指出原文在邏輯上存在F(Flaw)。

【此段功能】

本段作為Argument開頭段，具體功能就在發起攻擊。首先，概括原文的結論：信中推薦Centerville(后面簡稱C)高中進行強制driver's education。接下來分別列舉了原文為了支持這個結論引用的三個證據：過去兩年有幾起青少年的交通事故，C地區父母沒時間教孩子開車，當地兩個駕駛課程很難負擔的起。較后點出原文存在邏輯錯誤，引出后面的分析。

First of all, while teenagers were involved in accidents, it is unclear whether or not these individuals were Centerville High School students. Even if they were students responsible for causing the accidents, could those accidents have been avoided had these students enrolled in the high school's driving course? Without knowing the contributing factors to the accidents themselves, there is no way to determine which driver was at fault and/or how a driver-training course could have altered the events. The author should gather moreinformationabout the accidents upon which the argument is founded.

【此段結構】

本段采用了標準的Argument正文段結構，即：概括第一個邏輯錯誤的錯誤類型和原文犯錯位置，接下來給出合理的理由和他因來反駁原文。

【此段功能】

本段作為正文第一段，攻擊文章犯的主要邏輯錯誤：論據模糊。作者認為原文沒有交代青少年交通中事故是否有C高中的學生。接下來作者提出讓步，即便有C高中的學生，不能說明駕駛課程可以avoid accident。作者認為，如果不知道事故的原因，是無法說明司機有錯誤以及駕駛課程會減少事故的。

The argument is problematic in certain other respects as well. It assumes that a mandatory school-sponsored course would be effective yet provides no evidence to support this assumption. For example, is there a report on all of the schools which have adopted similar programs which indicates that, as a result of training accident rates have always gone, invariably, down?

【此段結構】

本段采用了標準的Argument正文段結構，即：概括第二個邏輯錯誤的錯誤類型和原文犯錯位置，接下來給出合理的理由和他因來反駁原文。

【此段功能】

本段作為正文第二段，攻擊文章犯的主要邏輯錯誤：錯誤因果。作者認為原文中“強制駕駛課程會有效果”這一論斷缺乏證據。作者提出質疑，有沒有關于同類學校通過駕駛課程減少事故率的例子?

In conclusion, the speaker fails to adequately support the recommendation for a school-sponsored mandatory driving course. To strengthen the argument, the author must provide clear evidence that the accidents did indeed involve Centerville High School students and that their careless driving was the primary contributing factor in the occurrence of the accidents. To better evaluate the argument, an audience would need more information about the affordability of the two private driving courses and about the effectiveness of a mandatory school-sponsored course compared to that of the two private courses.

【此段結構】

本段采用了標準的Argument結尾段結構，即：C – S的結尾結構，首先再次重申原文的站不住腳的Conclusion，接下來給出給合理建議Suggestion。