GRE考试写作范文Issue

1. 科技1. 26.43.(科技使思考能力下降)|| 91.(科技为了提高效率，使人有更多时间休息)|| 132.(沟通)I embrace the belief that counting on technology to solve problems may produce some negative effects. Nevertheless, the author ignores the advantages the technology brings about.In a pragmatic society which worships efficiency,we human beings live in the thrall of technology and our lives aretechnologically textured for most of our waking moments. We make our technologies and they in turn shape us.【1】I embrace the belief that counting on technology to live a luxurious and convenient life mayproduce some negative effects. Nevertheless, the author ignores the advantages the technology brings about. In a pragmatic society which worships efficiency,we human beings live in the thrall of technology and our lives aretechnologically textured for most of our waking moments. We make our technologies and they in turn shape us.【26】To begin with, people cannot live without moderntechnologies andwaste much more time on them nowadays. To a certain extent, technologies prevent people from developing into truly strong and independent individuals.Some teachers cannot give a fluent lecture without their PPT. Papers in electronic format have made plagiarism easier than ever. Copying and pasting of paragraphs or even entire essays now can be performed with just a few mouse clicks.People can easily get what they want from the Internet without any analytical and critical thinking. For this reason, the concern that the ability of human to think will deteriorate by modern technology is somewhatreasonable.There is no denying that technology has greatly changed our lives in every aspect. Computer, robots and measuring instrumentshave provided convenience and even security in our works and daily lives. For example, remote-controlled robots were used at the quake-hit Fukushima nuclear plant to measure radiation levels, replacing humans to work inside the damaged plant. Robots have become great job assistants in extreme environments. Emails, cell phones, blogs, twitters and social networks allow people to have more freedom and comfort in their interpersonal interactions and relational maintenance.They have dramatically changed how we talk with friends and the nature of those relationships.People have to make more efforts to learn the new technology in case of being obsoleted. Modern technology is enhancing our efficiency and force people to learn.The world of technologyiscomplicated and ever-changing. It is not justifiable to estimate modern technologies from the view of their disadvantages we realize, exactly as uncritical adulation or profound antipathyis the expression of lack of disinterestedness. People consciously learn the world through their own experience.In addition, it is hard to tell what will exactly happen in the future, as people could not imagine that our cellphones would do so many thingsas our smartphones do todayseveral years ago. Modern technologies are created by human beings, thus the obstacles resulting from technologies will be likewise surmounted by human beings sooner or later. In this sense, human minds will not be deteriorate, but rather improved in the advance of technology. Therefore, diversity perspectives could help people see the world differently and provide the seeds of innovation.In sum, the statement correctly asserts that overly depending on modern technology without any critical thinking can reduce the ability of human to think for themselves. But it is not appropriate to ignore the convenience and improvement that technology brings about to human beings. Thus problems resulting from technology will be finally solved by great talents and self-control of human beings in advance of technology.64.(人脑高于机器)I partly agree with the speaker’s assertion that machines are only advanced tools which human beings invent. Nevertheless, the author ignores the superiority technology presents. We human beings live in the thrall of technology and our lives seem to be technologically textured for most of our waking moments. We make our technologies and they in turn shape us.Admittedly, with the advance of Artificial Intelligence, many machines, robots, and computers can do many things as we human do. However, as many of the mechanisms behind human intelligence are still poorly understood, computer programs can simulate the complex processes of human thought and cognition only to a limited extent. AI systems cannot model the richness and subtlety of human mind andcompletely mimic human thoughts. Human beings invent the new machines to discover and reform the society.The term “superior”can refer to the memory power, speed, flexibility and forth. However, there is no denying that computer, robots and measuring instrumentshave made better performance in our works and daily lives. For example, remote-controlled robots were used at the quake-hit Fukushima nuclear plant to measure radiation levels, replacing humans to work inside the damaged plant. Those machines could achieve great performance in extreme environments. The calculation speed of supercomputers can reach 17 petaflops, which is much faster than human mind could do. For this reason, can we still say that the human mind always performs better than machines?The world of technologyiscomplicated and ever-changing. It is not justifiable to estimate the value of machines from the view whether it can surpass human mind.It is hard to tell what will exactly happen in the future. Just several years ago, people could not imagine that our cellphones would do so many things as our smartphones do today. Modern technologies are created by human beings, thus the obstacles resulting from technologies will be surmounted by human beings as well. In this sense, human minds will be improved along with the advance of technology. Every coin has two sides. Diversity perspectives could help people see the world differently and provide the seeds of innovation.In sum,101. (科技与教育)I embrace the belief that counting on technology to teach may greatly change the way of learning, and the disadvantages the technology brings about cannot be ignored as well. In a pragmatic society which worships efficiency,we human beings live in the thrall of technology and our lives aretechnologically textured for most of our waking moments. We make our technologies and they in turn shape us.To begin with, there is no denying that technology has greatly changed our lives in every aspect. Computer, robots and measuring instrumentshave provided convenience and even security in our works and daily lives. For example, remote-controlled robots were used at the quake-hit Fukushima nuclear plant to measure radiation levels, replacing humans to work inside the damaged plant. Robots have become great job assistants in extreme environments. Emails, cell phones, blogs, twitters and social networks allow people to have more freedom and comfort in their interpersonal interactions and relational maintenance.They have dramatically changed how we talk with friends and the nature of those relationships. People have to make more efforts to learn the new technology in case of being obsoleted. Modern technology is enhancing our efficiency and force people to learn.However, precisely since people are overly depending on video, computers, and Internet, such modern technologies become fetters and shackles to hinder students’real learning andprevent them from developing into truly strong and independent individuals.Papers in electronic format have made plagiarism easier than ever. Copying and pasting of paragraphs or even entire essays now can be performed with just a few mouse clicks.Students can easily get what they want from the Internet without any analytical and critical thinking. For this reason, the concern that the ability of human to think will deteriorate by modern technology is somewhat reasonable.The world of technologyiscomplicated and ever-changing. It is not justifiable to estimate modern technologies from the view of their disadvantages we realize, exactly as uncritical adulation or profound antipathy is the expression of lack of disinterestedness. People consciously learn the world through their own experience.In addition, it is hard to tell what will exactly happen in the future, as people could not imagine that our cellphones would do so many things as our smartphones do todayseveral years ago. Modern technologies are created by human beings, thus the obstacles resulting from technologies will be likewise surmounted by human beings sooner or later. In this sense, human minds will not be deteriorate, but rather improved in the advance of technology. Therefore, diversity perspectives could help people see the world differently and provide the seeds of innovation.In sum,2.文化+城市2. 5. 117.|| 119.(古建筑和现代发展)I agree with the speaker’s assertion that anyone who wants to understand the pivotal characteristics of a society should study its major cities. The major city is the center of the place where people engage in the political, economic, and culture activities. Nevertheless, it is not the only rational approach andmerely studying its major city is far from enough. The wide rural area is another important place which represents another reality of the social existence.【2】I partly agree with the speaker’s assertion that major cities should ensure its prosperity, since the major city is the center of the place where people engage in the political, economic, and culture activities. Nevertheless, it is impossible for the government to provide sufficientfinancial support to precipitate the fully development of major cities. 【5】I agree with the speaker’s assertion that major cities have already inherited many cultural traditions of their nations. The major city is always the center of the place where people engage in the political, economic, and culture activities. Nevertheless, the cultural traditions are not only generated and blossomed in cities. The wide rural area is another important place which represents another reality of the social existence. 【117】To begin with, the major cities are the centers of a nation's politics and culture, and they represent the highest achievement of civilization because of its moderate climate, comfortable environment and convenient transportation.In addition, the major cities, such the New York city,Parisand London, have witnessed the historical change of their country. The Statue of Liberty is an icon of freedom and independence of the United States. The Eiffel Tower was used for radio transmission in the First World War. Buckingham Palace, as the official residence and principal workplace of the British monarch, has recorded a long history of British Royal Family. Those famous landmarks in major cities are the symbols of their countries which represent the core values of their people and societies. In this sense, the importance to study major cities is obvious and self-evident.However, can the New York city fully represent the whole United States? Can the lives of people who live in Beijing portray a full picture on the people’s livelihood in China? The answer is no. A country has a diverse range of peoples and cultures. Compared with major cities, rural area can preserve much more cultures and traditions. For example, Hakka people, living in the rural area near the Dong river in China, still use glyph. In addition, globalization and migration accelerate the communication among different countries, but gradually assimilate the culture and traditions, especially in major cities. In metropolis, people always drink coffees in Starbucks, eat hamburgers in KFC or Mcdonald's, go shopping in Wal-Mart, sent messages with iPhone. The distinctive characteristics of a country are fading away. Thus, merely studying major cities cannot trulyexcavate the diversity and peculiarity of their cultures and traditions.Government operations and Income distributions are the main two types of government expenditures. As governments struggle to pay for such basics as education and health care, government funding for culture is limited. Although amuseum director in Italy even once burned some of his most prized pieces in protest against the Italian government's cuts to the arts, completely depending on government funding would prevent many cultural organizations from growing and generating incomes. The money from many charity organizations instead plays an important role to ensure cultural organizations well operated. Some cultural organizations even have developed into a mature industry chain, such as Hollywood and Disney, which can earn millions of money and has become a cultural identity of a city, even a country. 【5，7】The world of cultureiscomplicated and ever-changing. It is not justifiable to estimate characteristics of a society from the view of studying its major cities. Only studying major cities, while leaving apart the other rural areas, would definitely not help in understanding a society. Every coin has two sides. Therefore, diversity perspectives could help people see the world differently and provide the seeds of innovation.【2，117】22. 122. 122. (研究社会要研究其英雄人物) 44. 75. 84. (媒体时代中再不可能有英雄) || 24. 29. 52. (赞扬好的，忽略坏的)|| 77.(研究现代文化要研究其年轻人)To begin with, the achievements of a nation’s rulers, artists, or scientists can represent its prosperity to a certain extent, especially in a modern society. Martin Luther King,as a civil rights activist,ended racial segregation and racial discrimination through civil disobedience.Marie Curie, who is famous for her pioneering research on radioactivity, successfully discovered two elements, polonium and radium. Edison invented the incandescent light. Einstein questioned Newtonian mechanics in reconciling the laws of classical mechanics with the laws of the electromagnetic field so as to establish his special theory of relativity. Their achievements have dramatically promoted the politic, economic and scientific level of their nations, which can fully represent the thrivingand prosperity of their nations.Scandals can easily confuse the public opinions so that the people cannot make the objective evaluation about the celebrities and politicians. The rapid advance of mass mediaaccelerates the wide spread of scandals. For higher audience rating, ethical scandals of celebrities and politicians always be exaggerated. For example, when it comes to Bill Clinton, the public are always interested in his sexual scandal, but not concerned about his great achievements as a president. Since people are more easily captured by bad things, the advent of scandals always makes the public divert its attentions to trifles and ignore the importance and truth.True heroes can withstand the media scrutiny. Bill Gates had been the CEO of Microsoft for thirty years, leading it into the biggest supplier of the computer software in the world. Steve Jobs was the CEO of Apple for several decades, bringing Apple from near bankruptcy to profitability. They improve the living standard of humans and reshape our life irreversibly. Thus, they are heroes in the modern world.38. 78. (社交圈决定自我认识)3.教育3. 13. 15. 20. 32. 35. 39. 46. 98. 129. 135. 136. 137. 140.Educational institutions indeed have the responsibility to give their students some advice on learning or career planning. Nevertheless,I cannot embrace the belief that educational institutions should dissuade them not pursue the fields where they seeminglyend up with nothing. Everyone actually has different ideas about success. In anever-changing society which worships efficiency, nobody possibly make an accurate prediction about the future.To begin with, our world usually defines success in terms of money, fame, popularity, followers and so on. Some people want a golden Rolex on their wrist and a Mercedes in their driveway, but some people consider success as making a contribution to our society and science. Martin Luther Kingended racial segregation and racial discrimination through civil disobedience, successfully achieving his dreams as a civil rights activist. Marie Curie, who is famous for her pioneering research on radioactivity, successfully discovered two elements, polonium and radium. Those who are finally successful fearlessly persist in pursuing their dreams in the fields they are interested in. They chose their jobs not for lucrative careers, or even the job in these fields is plentiful, only based on their talents and interests. Thus, success indeed means to become a great manwho wewant to be, not what society or others push us into becoming.Moreover, success often comes from serendipity, which is by its very nature unpredictable and not part of any good plan. People exceling in a variety of fields may have more opportunities to achieve success. Leonardo da Vinci had great talents inboth sciences and arts, two seemingly unrelated thingswhich stimulate one another for common development. His paintings have subtlelight effects and meticulousportraying of figuresowing to his study of optics, biology and mathematics. Observantas a painter, he designed a helicopter, a tank, a calculator and so forth, which are as impressive and innovative as his artistic work. For this reason, educational institutions should encourage their students to take a variety courses as many as possible.Failure, to a certain extent, can be regarded as another approach to get closer to success. Edison invented the incandescent lightwith a lot of trial and error. Infants learn how to walk and run by falling down again and again. It is part and parcel that adolescents discover their social niche, and develop self-confidence and assertiveness, only by the way of the sorts of awkward social encounters. Making mistakes in a good directionnecessarily becomes accumulating rich experience to be successful. Therefore, educational institutions should insteadput a concerted effort in encouraging, assisting and praising their students, but rather dissuading.The world iscomplicated and ever-changing. It is not justifiable to estimate goals of education from the view of the status quo we see, exactly as uncritical adulation or profound antipathy is the expression of lack of disinterestedness. People consciously learn the world through their own experience.Nobodycan portray a full picture on a student's potential for a work judgment, just as people could not imagine that our cellphones would do so many things as our smartphones do todayseveral years ago. In this sense, parents, educators and educational institutions should not prevent students from pursuing their ostensiblynaïve dreams. Diversity perspectives could help them see the world differently and providestudents the seeds of innovation.In sum, the statement falsely asserts that educational institutions should dissuade their students from pursuing their dreams which seems unlikely to fail. There are many natural barriers inhibiting educational institution from fully understanding the students’different values of success. Failures sometimes can make positive influence on the career development. Thus it is not necessary of educational institutions to take measures to judge their future.prospect56. (科学发现都是巧合)I embrace the belief that many inventionsand substances were discovered accidentally. Nevertheless, the author ignores the ascendancyof repeated experiments and hardworking. In anever-changing society which worships efficiency,perspiration and inspiration may seem like two distinct elements coexisting in the character of genius.Success often comes from serendipity, which is by its very nature unpredictable and not part of any good plan. Columbus discovered the new continent—America while his primary goal was to find his way to India. Rontgen accidentally discovered X-ray in the experiments of investigating the fluorescent effect from the various types of vacuum tube equipment.Newton was inspired to formulate his theory of gravitation by watching the fall of an apple from a tree. Many anecdotes of scientists illustrate that success indeed need inspiration.Precisely since inspiration is a kind of unconscious burst of creativity, which cannot be controlledor planned in advance,those who excel in a variety of fields may have more opportunities to inspire themselves and achieve success. Leonardo da Vinci had great talents inboth sciences and arts, two seemingly unrelated thingswhich stimulate one another for common development. His paintings have subtlelight effects and meticulousportraying of figures owing to his study of optics, biology and mathematics. Observantas a painter, he designed a helicopter, a tank, a calculator and so forth, which are as impressive and innovative as his artistic work.In this sense, people necessarily acquire knowledge of various academic disciplines as they can influence each other.However, we cannot completely deny the importance of perspiration. Edison invented the incandescent lightwith a lot of trial and error. Infants learn how to walk and run by falling down again and again. It is part and parcel that adolescents discover their social niche, and develop self-confidence and assertiveness, only by the way of the sorts of awkward social encounters. Truth is discovered through trial and error.Marie Curie, who is famous for her pioneering research on radioactivity, did a lot of experiments after the accidental discovery of radioactive rays and eventuallydiscovered two elements, polonium and radium. Makinga little progresstowards a good directionnecessarily becomes a way to accumulaterich experience to be successful. Only by painstaking research and continuous learning, can a suddeninspirationbe transferred into real achievements.The world iscomplicated and ever-changing. It is not justifiable to estimateinspiration from the view of its advantages, exactly as uncritical adulation or profound antipathy is the expression of lack of disinterestedness. People consciously learn the world through their own experience.Nobodycan portray a full picture on the proportions of inspiration and perspiration in the process of discovering new things.Diversity perspectives could help them see the world differently and provide students the seeds of innovation.In sum,70. 73. 112(老师、学生都该涉足更多领域)Success often comes from serendipity, which is by its very nature unpredictable and not part of any good plan. People exceling in a variety of fields may have more opportunities to achieve success. Leonardo da Vinci had great talents inboth sciences and arts, two seemingly unrelated thingswhich stimulate one another for common development. His paintings have subtlelight effects and meticulousportraying of figures owing to his study of optics, biology and mathematics. Observantas a painter, he designed a helicopter, a tank, a calculator and so forth, which are as impressive and innovative as his artistic work. For this reason, educational institutions should encourage their students to take a variety courses as many as possible.Although some people want a golden Rolex on their wrist and a Mercedes in their driveway, the majority of people consider success as making a contribution to our society and science based on their own interests. Martin Luther Kingended racial segregation and racial discrimination through civil disobedience, successfully achieving his dreams as a civil rights activist. Marie Curie, who is famous for her pioneering research on radioactivity, successfully discovered two elements, polonium and radium. Those who are finally successful fearlessly persist in pursuing their dreams in the fields they are interested in. If universities compel their teachers and students to take too many courses regardless of their own interests and energy, studentsmay not be fully educated, but rather weary of studying, which deviates from the original intention of education.The world iscomplicated and ever-changing. It is not justifiable to estimate effects of education from numbers of courses students and teachers take, exactly as uncritical adulation or profound antipathy is the expression of lack of disinterestedness. People consciously learn the world through their own experience.Nobodycan portray a full picture on a student's potential from the courses they take, just as people could not imagine our cellphones would do so many things as our smartphones do todayseveral years ago. In this sense, universities should not blindly require students from pursuing their ostensiblynaïve dreams. Diversity perspectives could help universities see the matter differently and provide teachers and students the seeds of innovation.In sum,6. 14. 96. 116.(大学前该上统一课程)I partly agree with the speaker’s assertion that before students enter their college, national curriculum can help them widely understand their cultural and traditions. Nevertheless, compulsorynational curriculum may ignore the diversity of students’ talents and interests.Admittedly, the same national curriculum may fosterdominant values of the society and history. By reading the unifiedhistory books, students realize that the Statue of Liberty is an icon of freedom and independence of the United States, the Eiffel Tower was used for radio transmission in the First World War, and Buckingham Palace, as the official residence and principal workplace of the British monarch, has recorded a long history of British Royal Family. The orthodox ideas and contents can be delivered to the students, and prevent students from being heavily influenced by the preconceptionsof scandals and rumors on the newspapers and Internet.Moreover, central curriculum provides wider view than provincial curriculum as the central government is able to spend enough time and money to compile the materials, and invite more great educators and experts to participate in the process. Teachers can share many parts of the curriculum and get some help from another teacher with professional knowledge. The course before college is important in education system precisely since students learn basic knowledge of whole life including individual growth and socialization. If students do not fully consider all subjects, they tend to select their college majors according to just interests or bias.However, implementingcompulsorynational curriculum among all the students may encounter numerous obstacles. As a unified multi-ethnic nation, many ethnic groups have their own language, words and culture. National curriculum cannot fully consider the features of all the ethnic groups. In addition, more time spending on national curriculum is bound to decreasing the energy to study their ethnic language and culture. For this reason, the policy which is required all of its students to study the same national curriculum obstructsthe development of the diversity of the cultures.The world iscomplicated and ever-changing. It is not justifiable to estimate national curriculumbased on the view of its advantages or disadvantages, just as we cannot concludethat everybody has the meal merely because we have.Just as several years ago, people could not imagine that our cellphones would do so many things as our smartphones do today, it is hard to tell what will exactly happen if the same national curriculum is implemented. Every coin has two sides. Therefore, diversity perspectives could help people see the world differently and provide the seeds of innovation.In sum,12. 25.(大学教育免费)I embrace the belief that government should fund the students who cannot afford the high tuitions of their university. Nevertheless, it is unreasonable and impossible to merely depend on the government funding to completely solve the fund shortage. Some organizations andenterprises likewise need to involve themselves into the financial aid of students.1. Government should undoubtedlyattach its great importanceand efforts to educations, especially the primary education. Governments have always offered the necessary funding support to those students who are really in need.As we know, student financial aid has well played an indispensable role no matter in developed countries, or developing countries. Governments generally provide various types of funding, such as grants, loans, work-study programs, scholarships and so forth, and the education loans obtained through the federal government have lower interest rate. In this sense, government has always made great efforts to help the students who cannot afford their tuitions.2. Nevertheless, it is imprudent to a certain extent to offer a free university education to students. Firstly schools would require more government funds so as to cover their operation expenses, if their tuition revenues decreased. As the government funding is limited after all, and they need to maintain the operation of governments and income distributions, it would increase the burden on local and federal government. Secondly such funding as grants, loans, work-study programs, scholarships can effectively stimulate students to work and study harder so as to cover their own tuitions. It has an extremely positive impact on the living and growth of students. Therefore, providing a free university education is very unnecessary for this reason.3.。

GREissue写作范文我给大家整理了GRE issue写作范文，盼望大家可以借鉴里面的短语、句子或思路，给自己的写作找一些思路和灵感,下面我就和大家共享，来观赏一下吧。

GRE issue写作范文：冒险与方案题目：Success in any realm of life comes more often from taking chances or risks than from careful and cautious planning.在生活的全部领域中，胜利往往更多的来自于把握机会或者冒险而不是通过认真谨慎的方案。

正文：The speaker asserts people are more likely to attain success when taking chances or risks than planning carefully and cautiously. However, after comparing the characteristics of careful planning and taking chances, I strongly hold that they are of the same importance in the pursuit of success.In competitive sports, while making appropriate training plans and effective competition strategies constitute necessary conditions of winning the matches, taking risks is almost inevitable when athletes or their coaches confront a sudden matter that might influence the course of a match and that has not been taken into consideration beforehand. In modern competitive sports, it is widely acknowledged that scientific and effective training contributes to athletes’ better performance during matches. Good competition strategies, on the other hand, resulting in the better allocation of physical force, better use of skills or the higher rate inscoring, also play a vital role.However, when the star players of a soccer team or a basketball team are off the game or fail to implement their chief coachs strategic intention, leaving the whole team in adverseness, the coach faces the choice whether to substitute he/she or not. No doubt substituting a star player with a bench player means taking risk because the bench player may not perform as good as the star player and may make matters worse. If this happens, the substitution will incur discontentment of the players and critique from the teams fans, media and the boss. The capability of the coach may then be suspected and he/she may even be fired. Nevertheless, if the coach dares not to take the risk to substitute a poorly performed star player, his/her team will probably lose the game. Taking chances and risks is reasonable when one is dealing with something that has not been taken into consideration previously. So, in competitive sports, planning and risking are both necessary.In academic fields, careful and cautious planning is required for large projects and application disciplines while revolutionary scientific breakthroughs are almost impossible without taking chances or risks. Before starting the research project on human genome, scientists had already made plans on the content and method of the research. They did not have to take any chances or risks because all they should do have already been carefully planned. There were no technical obstacles that had not been solved. Therefore, they just followed the plan step by step and accomplished the project in the end. As for significant scientific breakthroughs, they are the important discoveries and theories that disaccord, at least to some extent, with established principles or our intuitions, such as the Theory of Relativity and quantum mechanics. One has no choice but to take chances because established theories may not be applicable on the boundary of what is known and what is unknown. Only after being examined through experiments, practices and observations, can they be confirmed or belied. In a word, planning and taking chances or risks are different means for different levels of academic researches.In the business world, cautious planning contributes to the long-term development of a company and at the same time, risking is imperative for a company to survive, develop and thrive in the highly competitive society. Planning carefully on inquiring market, training stuff and manufacturing products ensure a companys long-term development by keeping its profit increasing or at least not declining. On the other hand, taking risks, such as incorporating with another company, involving in the market fields that have already been occupied by other enterprises or involving in the market fields that are not considered so profitable, is also necessary because these may save the company from the adversity or help to set foot in new businesses. Clearly,in the business field, planning and risking complement each other.To conclude, success in any realm of life comes equally from taking chances or risks and from careful and cautious planning. In most cases, they complement each other and pave the way towards success.GRE Issue写作优秀实例：达到目标的手段题目：If a goal is worthy, then any means taken to attain it are justifiable.只要值得，不择手段达到目的是合理的。

新GREIssue官方范文整合想要提高新GREIssue 的分数，多看官方范文是必须的，快来一起学习吧。

下面就和大家分享，来欣赏一下吧。

新GREIssue 官方范文1Issue test 4“A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college.”Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree ordisagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position youtake. In developing and supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not beadvantageous and explain how these examples shape your position.Essay Response – Score 6Nations should not require that all students study the same national curriculum. If every child were presented with the same material, it wouldassume that all children learn the same and that all teachers are capable of teaching the same material in the same way. In addition to neglecting differences in learning and teaching styles, it would also stifle creativityandcreate a generation of drones. The uniformity would also lend itself to governmental meddling in curriculum that could result in the destruction ofdemocracy. If every teacher is forced to teach a certain text, the governmentneed only change that text to misinform an entire generation. Lastly, a standardized curriculum would also adversely affect students who come from lowerincome families or families who have little education as they might not have asmany resources for learning outside of school.Children all learn in very different ways. If the curriculum is standardized completely, it leaves little room for exploratory learning. Onechild may learn how to spell from reading, another may learn from phonics. Ifthe curriculum is standardized, suppose one aspect is dropped, that may excludecertain children from learning adequately. This is not to say of course that there shouldn’t be requirements, but they should be general requirements, notsomething so specific as a curriculum. Especially at the high school level thiswould be detrimental to the variety of subjects that a student can learn. Standards and the “No Child Left Behind” act in America are already forcing thereduction in programs such as art and music that have a less defineable curriculum. Additionally, education systems are rarely funded well enough toachieve the general goal of educating children. If a national curriculum wereimplemented, would it come with a significant increase in financial support?History suggests that it would not.Teachers also have different methods of teaching; if say, the English curriculum of all high schools were standardized, then a book that one teacherteaches excellently and therefore inspires students to read more and learn ontheir own might be eliminated, and although that teacher ought to be capableenough to teach the curriculum books, his or her students will still be missingout on what might have been a great learning experience. It also limits how muchof the teacher’s unique knowledge he or she can bring to the classroom. It isthese inspirational books or experiences that allow teachers to reach students;if they are put in a mold, the quality of teaching and learning will go down.Learning should be enjoyable and children and adolescents should be taughtnot only the curriculum in school, but that the body of knowledge that exists inthe world today is enormous and that you can learn your whole life. Having anational curriculum implies that there is a set group of things worth learningfor every person. Maybe this is true, but for students, it sets up a world wherethere is a finite amount of knowledge to be acquired for the purpose of regurgitating it on a test. Teaching a standard curriculum doesn’t encourageinquiries; it doesn’t make students ask questions like, “Why?” and“How?”School’s real purpose is teaching people to learn, not just teaching them a setgroup of facts. By teaching them to learn, students can continue doing so, theycan extend skills from one area of knowledge to another. This type of learningfosters creativity that can be used not only in math or science or English, butin art or music or creative writing. Teaching a brain to go beyond being a filecabinet for facts is the best way to teach creativity. Creativity is too often assumed to be something only for the arts. It is creativity that results in innovation and it is innovation that has resulted in the greatest achievementsof humanity in the sciences and humanities alike.Finally, the education system of a country is designed to put all childrenon a level playing field. Though this is only an ideal, it is a noble ideal. If the school curriculum becomes standardized, children who have highly educatedparents, or more money to buy books outside of school, or more resourcesfortutors or private schools will immediately gain a foothold. Poorer students fromuneducated families in the current American school system are already at adisadvantage, but at least now there is hope through variety that something canreach out to them and inspire them. There is hope that they can find a classthat interests them. If the curriculum becomes rigid and standardized, it is these disadvantaged students who fall through the cracks.There are many reasons not to standardize the curriculum. The uniqueness ofstudents and teachers is the most obvious, but students from less educated backgrounds will suffer the most. The creativity of a nation as a whole wouldfall with a standardized curriculum. Most importantly though is the question ofwho and what? Who chooses the curriculum? What is important enough that it mustbe taught? These questions assume that there is some infallible committee thatcan foresee all and know what knowledge will be important in everyone’s lives.There is no person, no group, no comittee capable of deciding what knowledge isnecessary. Curriculum should have standards, not be standardized and educationshould be as much about knowledge as it about learning to learn.Reader Commentary for Essay Response – Score 6This outstanding response develops an articulate and insightful positionrejecting the prompt’s recommendation of a national curriculum. The writerunderstands a national curriculum to mean both the material that is taught andthe way it is taught. The essay offers a wide-ranging discussion of the practical and theoretical implications of a national curriculum for students,for teachers, and for a nation. For example, the response argues that prescribing particular content and teaching methods might make it more difficultfor teachers to tailor lessons to students with different learning styles and might also force effective teachers to adopt teaching methods that are lesseffective for them and their students. Although the essay clearly rejects therecommendation for a national curriculum, the writer does concede that there isa need for educational standards that are flexible enough to allow for individual, socioeconomic, and regional differences.The response maintains a well-focused, wellorganized discussion, developingeach point fully and connecting ideas logically without relying on obvioustransitional phrases. The writing is fluent, despite minor errors in grammar andmechanics; sentence structure is varied and diction is effective. In sum, thisresponse meets all of the criteria for a score of 6.新GREIssue 官方范文2Essay Response – Score 5While it may be to the advantage of a nation that all its students learnthe same basic information, this can be accomplished without going to the lengths of having a national curriculum. By requiring that all students know acertain amount in basic areas of knowledge without specifying the details, anation can achieve the same benefits of a national curriculum without undulydenying the freedom of teachers to teach as they see fit. A system of simplenational standards is good enough. To go further and create a full-fledged national curriculum would gain nothing and impair the ability of teachers.It is important to ensure that all students learn the fundamentals of different subject areas. In order to graduate from high school, for example, allstudents should have a good understanding of algebra, of basic concepts inscience and history, and an ability to read critically. These are skills that will benefit people in all kinds of different careers. Even if you never manipulate an equation after graduating from high school, you will have a farbetter understanding of the world around you if you know simple facts of mathand science. Fields such as English and history are even more important, as theyare absolutely necessary to maintain an informed citizenry capable ofmakingimportant decisions that all citizens of a democracy are called upon to make. Inorder to achieve this, it is necessary to have national standards of education.Most teachers are very capable of imparting knowledge on students, and mostschool boards are similarly well-intentioned. Nevertheless, without nationalstandards, some students are bound to fall through the cracks, and some schoolboards, under pressure from groups of parents, may eliminate certain subjectmatter from schools, as has happened recently with the teaching of evolution inconservative areas of the United States. In order to ensure that all students learn all that they need to know as functioning adults, some kind of nationalstandards should be in place.These national standards, however, need not go so far as to constitute asingle national curriculum. No one knows a class of students better thanitsteachers, and no one else can shape a curriculum for their maximum benefit. Anational curriculum would necessarily mean a one-size-fits-all approach, andwhat is appropriate in one classroom may not be in another. Partly this is aresult of the intellectual levels of the students in question: some may be ableto learn far more about a particular subject than others. But it is also a question of student goals. The desire for specialization begins before college.A student who wants to become an auto mechanic should be able to take auto shopclasses, classes which would not be of interest to a future lawyer or scientist.This notion may sound unacceptably elitist in today’s climate in which a collegeeducation has become almost an automatic goal of education, but it does not needto be this way. Students with limited interest in higher education should beable to opt out, to follow another curriculum that is more likely to lead to happiness later in life. As a society, we should not discourage them, but ratherensure that there are enough highpaying jobs available for skilled laborers withhigh school diplomas.Everyone needs certain basic knowledge in order to function in societytoday. To this extent, we need national standards of instruction for students.But we do not need to cram every student into the same classes and force them tolearn what we think is best for them.Reader Commentary for Essay Response – Score 5This strong response presents a generally thoughtful, well-developed analysis of the issue and conveys meaning clearly. The introductory paragraphclearly disagrees with the prompt’s recommendation: “By requiring that allstudents know a certain amount in basic areas of knowledge without specifyingthe details, a nation can achieve the same benefits of a nationalcurriculumwithout unduly denying the freedom of teachers to teach as they see fit.” Thewriter supports this position by first arguing for the necessity of national standards, citing the individual’s need for fundamental knowledge in core areas,and by asserting that such knowledge makes for an informed, thoughtful citizenry. The discussion furthers this argument by examining some of the disadvantages of a rigid national curriculum, namely the inability of a nationalcurriculum to accommodate students’individual needs and interests.The response develops its position with strong reasons and examples, thoughthese reasons and examples are not always fully developed. For example, theresponse asserts that kn owledge of English and history is “absolutely necessaryto maintain an informed citizenry” and that “in order to achieve this, it is necessary to have national standards of education,” but it never really explainshow or why national standards would result in better-informed citizens thanregional standards or a national curriculum would.The response maintains a clear focus and organization with clear and logical transitions. Although the response conveys ideas clearly and demonstrates facility with standard written English, it lacks the precision ofexpression necessary for the highest score. In sum, this response demonstratesall of the characteristics required to earn a score of 5.新GREIssue 官方范文3Essay Response – Score 4As an educator, this topic is quite controversial to me. By having one setcurriculum in the entire nation, students would be taught the same material.Students from the rural Texas will study the same thing as students in Brooklyn,NY and suburban Chicago. If they move from state to state, they will havecovered the same material and they would be able to participate in class rightaway. You could also say that all students should have learned the same material, for which they should all be equal and should have the sameopportunities. But it is unrealistic. I disagree with a national curriculum because all students are not the same, they have different interests, and thiscurriculum would not permit teachers to explore and teach to students interests.First, a curriculum that becomes nation wide is supposed to teach all students the same material and perhaps the same way. All seventh graders willhave to solve algebraic equations and then they will all be the same. But students are not the same. All children develop at different rates, they havedifferent abilities. One cannot expect a child from Uptown Manhattan to be doingthe same thing as the kids in southern Illinois. The conditions are different,they have different funding and quality of teachers. Parents involvement intheir childrens education is different and that would affect what the studentslearn.Besides having different abilities, the students have different interestsor necesities. In one part of the nation it may be important to learn trigonometry and calculus because it is a high tech area. They use many computers and there might be a big market for careers in that field, but in another part of the country it might be more important to learn about farmingand erosion. That the interest would be different. Teachers also need the freedom to teach what the students are interested in. If the kids want to knowabout the Chicano Movement, they should have the opportunity to learn about it,instead of learning about African American Civil Rights Movement. City kids areinterested in different things than kids rural areas, as well as kids from the East Coast and the West Coast.For these reasons I would have to disagree with a national curriculum.Children are different and they should have the right to learn about things theyare interested in. Teachers should have the freedom to teach what he/she thinksis more important or interesting to their students. Teachers should teach theirstudents, not a curriculum.Reader Commentary for Essay Response – Score 4This response presents a competent analysis of the issue and conveys meaning with acceptable clarity. The writer begins by acknowledging some of theperceived strengths of a national curriculum but then disagrees with the prompt,arguing that “all students are not the same, they have different interests, andthis curriculum would not permit teachers to explore and teach to students interests.” The writer supports this position by suggesting tha t a standardizedapproach to education will fail to address the different types of students whomake up a nation’s youth; for instance, students in two different geographicalareas may be subject to different socioeconomic conditions as well as differentcultural attitudes toward the role of education. The writer continues exploringthe role of geography by pointing out that different areas naturally emphasizedifferent aspects of curriculum based upon regional concerns and that a nationalcurriculum would unfairly homogenize education.The response is adequately focused and organized, and although it containssome errors, it demonstrates sufficient control of language in order to expressits ideas.新GREIssue 官方范文4Essay Response – Score 3Until now, many countries have mandatory course for their students untilthey enter the college. It is beneficial to students to have same amout knowledge in their schools. Also, I agree this recommendation because thesereasons.Even if students have extraordinary abilities to study, it just will be some specific parts of academic fields. Generally, most ordiany students haveabilities to follow their study through their courses. For all students, if people want to be had same knowledge and same academic background, the nationalcurriculum is essential. Of course, some people don’t want to follow their mandatoyr courses so that someone takes privite classes in their house or takesa different class in other substituted schools. However, if students want to enter the college, they have to take a national test, for example, SAT. Like this test will require generalized knowledge until in the high school. For preparing this test, every students have to study requisited courses of SAT.Even though some students take privite courses, they also have to prepare theseclasses. Because of this, national curriculum is needed. If they do not need totake a test to enter the college, they won’t prepare these classes. However,until now, every college wants to accept to be experimented students so thatthey need standarized test for everybody. Recently, even though national curriculum is becoming a social issue to criticize its efficency, if governmentsdon’t change their policy about thier educational programs, it has to exist inthe education.However, the same national curriculum has some troubles. If one studentdoesn’t follow the same curriculum, this student will be fale to enter the college. The mandatory curriculum does not allow individual characteristics,some students who have surprisingly abilities for other fields, for example,playing chess, singing the classic song, and operating computer systems, willnot enter the college. So, we should consider this problem in the same nationalcurriculum.Nevertheless, the system of the education will not change to allow otherpossibilities, a nation has to require all of their students to study the same courses, until the college. It is related to educational systems so that it is difficult to decide whatever is right. However, while the current educaitonalsystem exist a nation, the country should require the same curriculum to itsstudents.Reader Commentary for Essay Response – Score 3This response demonstrates some competence in analyzing the issue and inconveying meaning, but it is obviously flawed. The writer adopts a position ofagreement with the prompt, arguing that since higher education requires studentsto pass standardized exams, a curriculum which emphasized the same education forall students would be more conducive to passing college entrance exams and testssuch as the SAT. In the course of this argument, the writer does consider thatthe implementation of a national curriculum would remove the opportunity forstudents to explore areas of study outside their core coursework but argues thatthis loss can be made up during the students’university coursework.The response presents a clear position on the issue and develops that position with relevant reasons and examples, but it fails to convey ideas withacceptable clarity; it has problems in language and sentence structure that result in a lack of clarity. These frequent minor errors and occasionalmajorerrors in grammar, usage, and mechanics preclude the response from receiving anupper-half score. In order to merit a score of 4, this response would need todemonstrate better control of the conventions of standard written English.新GREIssue 官方范文5Essay Response – Score 2A nation should teach all it’s students the same national curriculum untilthey enter college so that can prepare for college. Allowing everyone to learnthe same curriculum will teach our society how to communicate with one another.This is a nation of equal opportunity and should be treated and taught equally.I believec that this would allows young individuals to get an better understanting of all different kinds of religions, culture,and society. All school teach the same history,but some may forcus more on what they feel isimportant then depending on where you are from.Reader Commentary for Essay Response – Score 2After agreeing with the prompt’s recommendation, this brief essay presentsa series of unsupported claims about education and culture. The discussion failsto develop any of these claims with relevant reasons and/or examples or to makelogical connections between them; as a result, the discussion is disorganizedand unfocused. The final sentence states that all schools “teach the same history,but some may forcus more on what they feel is important then dependingon where you are from.” As a result of the response’s frequent errors in language and sentence structure, it isn’t at all clear whether this statement isintended as an observation of current practices or a recommendation that historycurricula should be flexible enough to account for regional interests.Though this response does contain frequent errors and lacks sentencevariety, these flaws serve more to impede clarity than to interfere significantly with meaning. The essay is scored a 2 primarily because it is “seriously limited in addressing the specific task directions and inpresentingor developing a position on the issue.”Essay Response – Score 1No i disagree with recommendation becaus it is not compulsary to student tostudy same national curriculum until they enter college.Each and every student is own idea and family dream so,could not say likethat student study the same nation curriculum until they enter college.we createa enviroment to all student are go and come in different country so we shareover idea and comfortably leave with each other.It is very necessary to colobrate with each other we develope owr nationand different technology. We take a example of “SUNITA VILLIUM” she is aAmerican scientist work in “NASA” basically she is a INDIAN.But she complitestudy in USA.So,it is not necessary to studay in own national Curriculum .but we devlopeenvironment to student study with different country and devlope nation name andover parents name.Also develope support position it is very advantageous for student.sometime what happen student is intelligent but he/she not able to study well wedevelope some kind of facillity to student study well and he/she devlope overcountry.To conclude “A nation should not require all of its student to study thesame national curriculum until they entre college.”Reader Commentary for Essay Response – Score 1Although this essay is obviously attempting to respond to the prompt’srecommendation, its severe problems in language and sentence structure and itspervasive grammar, usage, and mechanics errors make it impossible to discernwhether the writer understands the recommendation made in the prompt. In fact,the only clear phrases in the response are those that are borrowed from theprompt. These fundamental deficiencies in analytical writing warrant a score of1.新GREIssue 官方范文整合。

GRE作文ISSUE满分范文GRE作文ISSUE满分范文，希望可以给大家一些写作参考。

"Success, whether academic or professional, involves an ability to survive in a new environment and, eventually, to change it."Many wonder the intrinsic impact of industrial revolution over the last century. Is it a blessing or a curse? Ever since the invention of steam engine, mass production enabled factories to make out products in a madly efficient manner, while machines also supplanted innumerous traditionally skilled artisan, forcing them out of work. Gone are the days when they boasted of their craftsmanship that they assumed to be able support their family all their life. Consumers became more aspiring to novel design instead of durability as goods were made to be discarded.Hundreds years later, with the first installation of integrated circuit on the chip, another profound turnover took place. Now the computer pervades our life so much that one may find himself half illiterate in absence of input skill. This time, thousands of jobs were created in Silicon Valley, transforming some of the few into billionaire over one night. Nevertheless, the original inventor might not expect that the ensuing slow down and thus recession in IT sector would approach so soon in less than 10 years, which is obviously less than a presumable 15 years time normal for a periodical change.Positive or negative, one mark that characterizes the technological bombardment indicates a constant fact: changes exist ubiquitously and operating at an ever-increasing tempo; those who fail to catch up with the torrent of change would ineluctably engulfed by billows, floating no where and eventually dissolve as negligible bubbles.Favors as well as opportunities goes to who adapt to the contemporary trend. Fully recognizing this axiom, long before the scientists announced accomplishment of sketches of human genes or earlier successful cloning of Doris, candidates preparing for university admission have smelt the sense. Today, in the U.S., biology and its branch disciplines become the first choice for top students of senior high, determining that this subject, foretold as the third wave in technology, could bring them brilliant future as“Bill Gates”dreamt the same in the previous wave.In addition to academic realm, respect would be paid to people who though deprived of their past secure professions, choose not to be a loser in the whimsical society. Like the artisans who lost jobs, a vast number of skilled laborer in China’s city of Wengzhou have undergone darkness and depressio n in those old days. However, after years of endeavor and refinement, they prove their value again. By accurately posit the economic trend and market demand, they play an active role in almost all economic sectors, garments, catering and lodging, hi-tech industry, you name it.While ability honed in surviving the fickleness of the world makes the path through success shorter, it is essential for the more ambitious to acquire the pith of reformist and lead the trend. In this way, it could help him distinguish from the mediocracy and platitude. This is absolutely not an easy task. Inborn insight and foresight are needed to tell uncommon out of the commonplace; extraordinary perseveranceand encouragement is a must to face the coming challenges against his iconoclasm. Very few people crowned with triumph possess this quality, whether the Nobel Prize winner or those who makes coverage on the Times.In sum, as shown in the course of history, success, whether academic or professional, involves an ability to surviving in a new environment and---, eventually, ---to change it. Now some elite persons have again forecast that another social change is impending. Are you ready for that?上述就是一篇GRE作文ISSUE满分范文介绍，希望上述信息以供大家参考，更好地备考GRE考试。

新gre考试作文新题库issue精选5篇新gre考试作文新题库issue精选5篇新gre考试作文新题库解析issue1The best way to teach—whether as an educator, employer, or parent—is to praise positive actions and ignore negative ones.无论是教育工作者、雇主，还是父母，教育的最佳方法是是赞扬积极的行为，忽视消极的行为。

Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure to address the most compelling reasons and/or examples that could be used to challenge your position.讨论你在多大程度上同意或者不同意题目中的观点，在发展和支持你的立场时，确保使用那些最具说服力的原因和/或例证来挑战你所持有的立场。

新gre考试作文新题库解析issue2The luxuries and conveniences of contemporary life prevent people from developing into truly strong and independent individuals.现代生活的奢华和便利，让人们无法成为真正强大、独立的个体。

Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.文章中讨论你是在多大程度上同意或者不同意题目的论点，并解释你选取这一立场的原因。

GRE考试写作范文Issue汇总今日我搜集了一些GRE issue 的优秀范文，快来一起学习吧，下面我就和大家共享，来观赏一下吧。

.GRE考试写作范文IssueMost people recognize the benefits of individuality, but the fact is that personal economic success requires conformity.Personal economic success might be due either to ones investment strategy or to ones work or career. With respect to the former, non-conformists with enough risk tolerance and patience invariably achieve more success than conformists. With respect to the latter, while non-conformists are more likely to succeed in newer industries where markets and technology are in constant flux, conformists are more likely to succeed in traditional service industries ensconced in systems and regulations.Regarding the sort of economic success that results from investing ones wealth, the principles of investing dictate that those who seek risky investments in areas that are out of favor with the majority of investors ultimately reap higher returns than those who follow the crowd. It is conformists who invest, along with most other investors, in areas that are currently the most profitable, and popular. However, popular investments tend to be overpriced, and in the long run their values willcome down to reasonable levels. As a result, given enough time conformists tend to reap lower rewards from their investments than nonconformists do.Turning to the sort of economic success that one achieves by way of ones work, neither conformists nor non-conformists necessarily achieve greater success than the other group.In consumer-driven industries, where innovation, product differentiation and creativity are crucial to lasting success, non-conformists who take unique approaches tend to recognize emerging trends and to rise above their peers. For example, Ted Turners departure from the traditional format of the other television networks, and the responsiveness of Amazons Jeff Bezos to burgeoning Internet commerce, propelled these two non-conformists into leadership positions in their industries. Particularly in technology industries, where there are no conventional practices or ways of thinking to begin with, people who cling to last years paradigm, or to the status quo in general, are soon left behind by coworkers and competing firms.However, in traditional service industries--such as finance, accounting, insurance, legal services, and health care--personal economic success comes not to non-conformists but rather to those who can work most effectively within the constraints of established practices, policies and regulations. Of course, a clever idea for structuring a deal, ora creative legal maneuver, might play a role in winning smaller battles along the way. But such tactics are those of conformists who are playing by the same ground rules as their peers; winners are just better at the game.In conclusion, non-conformists with sufficient risk tolerance and patience are invariably the most successful investors in the long run. When it comes to careers, however, while non-conformists tend to be more successful in technology-and consumer-driven industries, traditionalists are the winners in system-driven industries pervaded by policy, regulation, and bureaucracy.GRE考试写作范文IssueWhat society has thought to be its greatest social, political, and individual achievements have often resulted in the greatest discontent.I strongly agree that great achievements often lead to great discontent. In fact, I would assert more specifically that great individual achievements can cause discontent for the individual achiever or for the society impacted by the achievement, or both. Nevertheless, it is important to acknowledge that whether a great achievement causes great discontent can depend on ones personal perspective, as well as the perspective of time.With respect to individual achievements, great achievers are by nature ambitious people and therefore tend to be dissatisfied anddiscontent with their accomplishments-no matter how great. Great athletes are compelled to try to better their record-breaking performances; great artists and musicians typically claim that their greatest work will be their next one--a sign of personal discontent. And many child protégés, especially those who achieve some measure of fame early in life, later suffer psychological discontent for having peaked so early. Perhaps the paradigmatic modern example of a great achievers discontent was Einstein, whose theoretical breakthroughs in physics only raised new theoretical conundrums which Einstein himself recognized and spent the last twenty years of his life struggling unsuccessfully to solve.Individual achievements can often result in discontent on a societal level. The great achievement of the individual scientists responsible for the success of the Manhattan Project resulted in worldwide anxiety over the threat of nuclear annihilation--a form of discontent with which the worlds denizens will forever be forced to cope. Even individual achievements that at first glance would appear to have benefited society turn out to be causes of great discontent. Consider the invention of the automobile, along with the innovations in manufacturing processes and materials that made mass production possible. As a result we have become a society enslaved to our cars, relying on them as crutches not only for transportation but also for affording us a false sense ofsocioeconomic status. Moreover, the development of assembly-line manufacturing has served to alienate workers from their work, which many psychologists agree causes a great deal of personal discontent.Turning from individual achievements to societal, including political, achievements, the extent to which great achievements have caused great discontent often depends on ones perspective. Consider, for example, Americas spirit of Manifest Destiny during the 19th Century, or British Imperialism over the span of several centuries. From the perspective of an Imperialist, conquering other lands and peoples might be viewed as an unqualified success. However, from the viewpoint of the indigenous peoples who suffer at the hands of Imperialists, these so-called achievements are the source of widespread oppression and misery, and in turn discontent, to which any observant Native American or South African native could attest.The extent to which great socio-political achievements have caused great discontent also depends on the perspective of time. For example, F.D.R.s New Deal was and still is considered by many to be one of the greatest social achievements of the 20th Century. However, we are just now beginning to realize that the social-security system that was an integral part of F.D.R.s social program will soon result in great discontent among those workers currently paying into the system but unlikely to see any benefits after they retire.To sum up, I agree that great achievements, both individual and socio-political, often result in great discontent. Moreover, great individual achievements can result in discontent for both the individual achiever and the society impacted by the achievement. Nevertheless, in measuring the extent of discontent, we must account for varying personal and political perspectives as well as different time perspectives.GRE考试写作范文IssueThe well-being of a society is enhanced when many of its people question authority.The speaker asserts that when many people question authority society is better off. While I contend that certain forms of disobedience can be harmful to any society, I agree with the speaker otherwise. In fact, I would go further by contending that societys well-being depends on challenges to authority, and that when it comes to political and legal authority, these challenges must come from many people.Admittedly, when many people question authority some societal harm might result, even if a social cause is worthy. Mass resistance to authority can escalate to violent protest and rioting, during which innocent people are hurt and their property damaged and destroyed. The fallout from the 1992 Los Angeles riots aptly illustrates this point. The authority which the rioters sought to challenge was that of the legal justice system which acquitted police officers in the beating of RodneyKing. The means of challenging that authority amounted to flagrant disregard for criminal law on a mass scale--by way of looting, arson, and even deadly assault. This violent challenge to authority resulted in a financially crippled community and, more broadly, a turning back of the clock with respect to racial tensions across America.While violence is rarely justifiable as a means of questioning authority, peaceful challenges to political and legal authority, by many people, are not only justifiable but actually necessary when it comes to enhancing and even preserving societys well-being. In particular, progress in human rights depends on popular dissension. It is not enough for a charismatic visionary like Gandhi or King to call for change in the name of justice and humanity; they must have the support of many people in order to effect change. Similarly, in a democracy citizens must respect timeless legal doctrines and principles, yet at the same time question the fairness and relevance of current laws. Otherwise, our laws would not evolve to reflect changing societal values. It is not enough for a handful of legislators to challenge the legal status quo; ultimately it is up to the electorate at large to call for change when change is needed for the well-being of society.Questioning authority is also essential for advances in the sciences. Passive acceptance of prevailing principles quells innovation, invention, and discovery, all of which clearly benefit any society. In fact, the verynotion of scientific progress is predicated on rigorous scientific inquiry--in other words, questioning of authority. History is replete with scientific discoveries that posed challenges to political, religious, and scientific authority. For example, the theories of a sun-centered solar system, of humankinds evolution from other life forms, and of the relativity of time and space, clearly flew in the face of authoritative scientific as well as religious doctrine of their time. Moreover, when it comes to science a successful challenge to authority need not come from a large number of people. The key contributions of a few individuals---like Copernicus, Kepler, Newton, Darwin, Einstein, and Hawking---often suffice.Similarly, in the arts, people must challenge established styles and forms rather than imitate them; otherwise, no gemtinely new art would ever emerge, and society would be worse off. And again, it is not necessary that a large number of people pose such challenges; a few key individuals can have a profound impact. For instance, modern ballet owes much of what is new and exciting to George Ballanchine, who by way of his improvisational techniques posed a successful challenge to established traditions. And modern architecture arguably owes its existence to the founders of Germanys Bauhaus School of Architecture, which challenged certain authoritative notions about the proper objective, and resulting design, of public buildings.To sum up, in general I agree that when many people question authority the well-being of society is enhanced. Indeed, advances in government and law depend on challenges to the status quo by many people. Nevertheless, to ensure a net benefit rather than harm, the means of such challenges must be peaceful ones.GRE考试写作范文IssueIt is the artist, not the critic, who gives society something of lasting value.This statement asserts that art, not the art critic, provides something of lasting value to society. I strongly agree with the statement. Although the critic can help us understand and appreciate art, more often than not, critique is either counterproductive to achieving the objective of art or altogether irrelevant to that objective.To support the statement the speaker might point out the three ostensible functions of the art critic. First, critics can help us understand and interpret art; a critic who is familiar with a particular artist and his or her works might have certain insights about those works that the layperson would not. Secondly, a critics evaluation of an art work serves as a filter, which helps us determine which art is worth our time and attention. For example, a new novel by a best-selling author might nevertheless be an uninspired effort, and if the critic can call our attention to this fact we gain time to seek out more worthwhileliterature to read. Thirdly, a critic can provide feedback for artists; and constructive criticism, if taken to heart, can result in better work.However, reflecting on these three functions makes clear that the art critic actually offers very little to society.The first function is better accomplished by docents and teachers, who are more able to enhance a laypersons appreciation and understanding of art by providing an objective, educated interpretation of it. Besides, true appreciation of art occurs at the moment we encounter art; it is the emotional, even visceral impact that art has on our senses, spirits, and souls that is the real value of art. A critic can actually provide a disservice by distracting us from that experience.The critics second function that of evaluator who filters out bad art from the worthwhile is one that we must be very wary of. History supports this caution. In the role of judge, critics have failed us repeatedly. Consider, for example, Voltaires rejection of Shakespeare as barbaric because he did not conform to neo-classical principles of unity. Or, consider the complete dismissal of Beethovens music by the esteemed critics of his time. The art critics judgment is limited by the narrow confines of old and established parameters for evaluation. Moreover, critical judgment is often misguided by the ego; thus its value is questionable in any event.I turn finally to the critics third function: to provide useful feedbackto artists. The value of this function is especially suspect. Any artist, or anyone who has studied art, would agree that true art is the product of the artists authentic passion, a manifestation of the artists unique creative impulse, and a creation of the artists spirit. If art were shaped by the concern for integrating feedback from all criticism, it would become a viable craft, but at the same time would cease to be art.In sum, none of the ostensible functions of the critic are of much value at all, let alone of lasting value, to society. On the other hand, the artist, through works of art, provides an invaluable and unique mirror of the culture of the time during which the work was produced a mirror for the artists contemporaries and for future generations to gaze into for insight and appreciation of history. The art critic in a subordinate role, more often than not, does a disservice to society by obscuring this mirror.11。

gre写作6分issue范文Title: "The Value of Dissent in a Progressive Society"In any society that aims to progress and thrive, dissent is not just a right but an absolute necessity. It is like the grit in an oyster that has the potential to produce a pearl.Some might argue that dissent creates chaos and division. They look ata group of protesters chanting on the street and see only disorder. However, this view is as short sighted as a mole that can't see beyond its little hole. Dissent is often the first sign that there is something wrong in the system. For example, in the early days of the civil rights movement in the United States, the voices of those who dissented against segregation were initially seen as troublemakers. But in reality, they were the ones who had the courage to point out the blatant injustice of a society that treated people differently based on the color of their skin.Dissent also serves as a catalyst for innovation. Think about it. If everyone in a company or a community simply nodded their heads and agreed with every idea put forward, we would be stuck in a rut. It's the person who says, "Hey, that's a dumb idea. Why don't we try this instead?" whooften pushes the boundaries. For instance, in the world of technology,Steve Jobs was known for his ability to dissent from the common thinking of the time. When most computer companies were focused on making big, bulky machines for businesses, Jobs had the vision to think that personal computers could be sleek, user friendly, and designed for the averageperson at home. His dissent from the established norms led to the creationof Apple products that have revolutionized the way we communicate, work,and live.Moreover, dissent is an essential part of a democratic society. A democracy is not a dictatorship where one voice rules all. It is a chorus of voices, and dissent ensures that all voices are heard, not just the loudest or the most popular. When citizens are allowed to dissent, they are participating in the shaping of their own society. They are saying, "We are part of this, and we have a say in how it runs." It's like a big, messy family dinner where everyone has the right to speak their mind, even if it means disagreeing with the family patriarch or matriarch.However, dissent should not be confused with mindless opposition. There is a difference between having a well thought out, reasoned dissent andjust being contrarian for the sake of it. The former is like a surgeon's scalpel, precise and aimed at cutting out the diseased parts of society. The latter is like a wild, flailing sword that can cause more harm than good.In conclusion, a society that values progress should embrace dissent with open arms. It should encourage its citizens to speak up when they see something wrong, to question the status quo, and to offer alternative solutions. Because in the end, it is through the healthy exchange of different opinions, even those that are uncomfortable and unpopular, that a society can truly move forward and reach new heights. It's like a ship sailing on the ocean. Dissent is the wind that can either capsize the ship if it's uncontrolled, but if harnessed correctly, it can take the ship to uncharted and wonderful destinations.。

新GREIssue官方范文整理今天给大家整理新GREIssue 官方范文，快来一起学习吧。

下面我就和大家分享，来欣赏一下吧。

新GREIssue 官方范文整理1Issue test 1As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate.Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.Essay Response — Score 6The statement linking technology negatively with free thinking plays on recent human experience over the past century. Surely there has been no time in history where the lived lives of people have changed more dramatically. A quick reflection on a typical day reveals how technology has revolutionized the world. Most people commute to work in an automobile that runs on an internal combustion engine. During the workday, chancesare high that the employee will interact with a computer that processes information on silicon bridges that are .09 microns wide. Upon leaving home, family members will be reached through wireless networks that utilize satellites orbiting the earth. Each of these common occurrences could have been inconceivable at the turn of the 19th century.The statement attempts to bridge these dramatic changes to a reduction in the ability for humans to think for themselves. The assumption is that an increased reliance on technology negates the need for people to think creatively to solve previous quandaries. Looking back at the introduction, one could argue that without a car, computer, or mobile phone, the hypothetical worker would need to find alternate methods of transport, information processing and communication. Technology short circuits this thinking by making the problems obsolete.However, this reliance on technology does not necessarily preclude the creativity that marks the human species. The prior examples reveal that technology allows for convenience. The car, computer and phone all release additional time for people to live more efficiently. This efficiency does not preclude the need for humans to think for themselves. In fact, technologyfrees humanity to not only tackle new problems, but may itself create new issues that did not exist without technology. For example, the proliferation of automobiles has introduced a need for fuel conservation on a global scale. With increasing energy demands from emerging markets, global warming becomes a concern inconceivable to the horse-and-buggy generation. Likewise dependence on oil has created nation-states that are not dependent on taxation, allowing ruling parties to oppress minority groups such as women. Solutions to these complex problems require the unfettered imaginations of maverick scientists and politicians.In contrast to the statement, we can even see how technology frees the human imagination. Consider how the digital revolution and the advent of the internet has allowed for an unprecedented exchange of ideas. WebMD, a popular internet portal for medical information, permits patients to self research symptoms for a more informed doctor visit. This exercise opens pathways of thinking that were previously closed off to the medical layman. With increased interdisciplinary interactions, inspiration can arrive from the most surprising corners. Jeffrey Sachs, one of the architects of the UN Millenium Development Goals, based his ideas on emergency caretriage techniques. The unlikely marriage of economics and medicine has healed tense, hyperinflation environments from South America to Eastern Europe.This last example provides the most hope in how technology actually provides hope to the future of humanity. By increasing our reliance on technology, impossible goals can now be achieved. Consider how the late 20th century witnessed the complete elimination of smallpox. This disease had ravaged the human race since prehistorical days, and yet with the technology of vaccines, free thinking humans dared to imagine a world free of smallpox. Using technology, battle plans were drawn out, and smallpox was systematically targeted and eradicated.Technology will always mark the human experience, from the discovery of fire to the implementation of nanotechnology. Given the history of the human race, there will be no limit to the number of problems, both new and old, for us to tackle. There is no need to retreat to a Luddite attitude to new things, but rather embrace a hopeful posture to the possibilities that technology provides for new avenues of human imagination.Reader Commentary for Essay Response — Score 6The author of this essay stakes out a clear and insightfulposition on the issue and follows the specific instructions by presenting reasons to support that position. The essay cogently argues that technology does not decrease our ability to think for ourselves, 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 more creative thinking, not less.In further examples, the essay shows how technology allows for the linking of ideas that may never have been connected in the past (like medicine and economic models), pushing people to think in new ways. Examples are persuasive and fully developed; reasoning is logically sound and well supported.Ideas in the essay are connected logically, with effective transitions used both between paragraphs (However or In contrast to the statement) and within paragraphs. Sentence structure is varied and complex and the essay clearly demonstrates 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.新GREIssue 官方范文整理2Essay Response — Score 5Surely many of us have expressed the following sentiment, or some variation on it, during our daily commutes to work: People are getting so stupid these days! Surrounded as we are by striding and strident automatons with cell phones glued to their ears, PDAs gripped in their palms, and omniscient, omnipresent CNN gleaming in their eyeballs, its tempting to believe that technology has isolated and infantilized us, essentally transforming us into dependent, conformist morons best equipped to sideswip one another in our SUVs.Furthermore, hanging around with the younger, pre-commute generation, whom tech-savviness seems to have rendered lethal, is even less reassuring. With Teen People style trends shooting through the air from tiger-striped PDA to zebra-striped PDA, and with the latest starlet gossip zipping from juicy Blackberry to teeny, turbo-charged cell phone, technology seems to support young peoples worst tendencies to follow the crowd. Indeed, they have seemingly evolved into intergalactic conformity police. After all, todays tech-aided teens are, courtesy of authentic, hands-on video games, literally trained to kill; courtesy of chat and instant text messaging, they have their own language; they even have tiny cameras to efficientlyphotodocument your fashion blunders! Is this adolescence, or paparazzi terrorist training camp?With all this evidence, its easy to believe that tech trends and the incorporation of technological wizardry into our everyday lives have served mostly to enforce conformity, promote dependence, heighten comsumerism and materialism, and generally create a culture that values self-absorption and personal entitlement over cooperation and collaboration. However, I argue that we are merely in the inchoate stages of learning to live with technology while still loving one another. After all, even given the examples provided earlier in this essay, it seems clear that technology hasnt impaired our thinking and problem-solving capacities. Certainly it has incapacitated our behavior and manners; certainly our values have taken a severe blow. However, we are inarguably more efficient in our badness these days. Were effective worker bees of ineffectiveness!If T\technology has so increased our senses of self-efficacy that we can become veritable agents of the awful, virtual CEOs of selfishness, certainly it can be beneficial. Harnessed correctly, technology can improve our ability to think and act for ourselves. The first challenge is to figureout how to provide technology users with some direly-needed direction.Reader Commentary for Essay Response — Score 5The language of this essay clearly illustrates both its strengths and weaknesses. The flowery and sometimes uncannily keen descriptions are often used to powerful effect, but at other times this descriptive language results in errors in syntax. See, for example, the problems of parallelism in the second-to-last sentence of paragraph 2 (After all, todays tech-aided teens ...).There is consistent evidence of facility with syntax and complex vocabulary (Surrounded as we are by striding and strident automatons with cell phones glued to their ears, PDAs gripped in their palms, and omniscient, omnipresent CNN gleaming in their eyeballs, its tempting to believe...). However, such lucid prose is often 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 thinking abilities?Because this essay takes a complex approach to the issue (arguing, in effect, that technology neither enhances norreduces our ability to think for ourselves, but can do one or the other, depending on the user) and because the author makes use of appropriate vocabulary and sentence variety, a score of 5 is appropriate.新GREIssue 官方范文整理3Essay Response — Score 4In all actuality, I think it is more probable that our bodies will surely deteriorate long before our minds do in any significant amount. Who cant say that technology has made us lazier, but thats the key word, lazy, not stupid. The ever increasing amount of technology that we incorporate into our daily lives makes people think and learn every day, possibly more than ever before. Our abilities to think, learn, philosophize, etc. may even reach limits never dreamed of before by average people. Using technology to solve problems will continue to help us realize our potential as a human race.If you think about it, using technology to solve more complicating problems gives humans a chance to expand their thinking and learning, opening up whole new worlds for many people. Many of these people are glad for the chance to expand their horizons by learning more, going to new places, and trying new things. If it wasnt for the invention of new technologicaldevices, I wouldnt be sitting at this computer trying to philosophize about technology. It would be extremely hard for children in much poorer countries to learn and think for themselves with out the invention of the internet. Think what an impact the printing press, a technologically superior mackine at the time, had on the ability of the human race to learn and think.Right now we are seeing a golden age of technology, using it all the time during our every day lives. When we get up theres instant coffee and the microwave and all these great things that help us get ready for our day. But we arent allowing our minds to deteriorate by using them, we are only making things easier for ourselves and saving time for other important things in our days. Going off to school or work in our cars instead of a horse and buggy. Think of the brain power and genius that was used to come up with that single invention that has changed the way we move across this globe.Using technology to solve our continually more complicated problems as a human race is definately a good thing. Our ability to think for ourselves isnt deteriorating, its continuing to grow, moving on to higher though functions and more ingenious ideas. The ability to use what technology we have is an exampleReader Commentary for Essay Response — Score 4This essay meets all the criteria of a level-4 essay. The writer develops a clear position (Using technology to solve our problems will continue to help us realize our potential as a human race). The position is then developed with relevant reasons (using technology to solve more complicat[ed] problems gives humans a chance to expand their thinking and learning and we are seeing a golden age of technology).Point 1, using technology, is supported with the simple but relevant notion that technology allows us access to information and abilities to which we would not normally have access. Similarly, point 2, the golden age, is supported by the basic description of our technologically saturated social condition. Though the overall development and organization of the essay does suffer from an occasional misdirection (see paragraph 3s abrupt progression from coffee pots to the benefits of technology to cars), the essay as a whole flows smoothly and logically from one idea to the next.It is useful to compare this essay to the level-3 essay presented next. Though both essays entail some surface-level discussion and often fail to probe deeply into the issue, this writer does take the analysis a step further. In paragraph 2,the distinction between this essay and the next one (the level-3 response) can most clearly be seen. To support the notion that advances in technology actually help increase thinking ability, the writer draws a clever parallel between the promise of modern, sophisticated technology (computer) and the actual impact of equally promising and pervasive technologies of the past (printing press).Like the analysis, the language in this essay clearly meets the requirements for a score of 4. The writer displays sufficient control of language and the conventions of standard written English. The preponderance of mistakes are of a cosmetic nature (trying to solve more complicating problems.) There is a sentence fragment (Going off ...) along with a comma splice (Our ability ... isnt deteriorating, its continuing to grow ...) in paragraph 3. However, these errors are minor and do not interfere with the clarity of the ideas being presented.新GREIssue 官方范文整理4Essay Response — Score 3There is no current proof that advancing technology will deteriorate the ability of humans to think. On the contrary, advancements in technology had advanced our vast knowledge in many fields, opening opportunities for further understandingand achievement. For example, the problem of dibilitating illnesses and diseases such as alzheimers disease is slowing being solved by the technological advancements in stem cell research. The future ability of growing new brain cells and the possibility to reverse the onset of alzheimers is now becoming a reality. This shows our initiative as humans to better our health demonstrates greater ability of humans to think.One aspect where the ability of humans may initially be seen as an example of deteriorating minds is the use of internet and cell phones. In the past humans had to seek out information in many different enviroments and aspects of life. Now humans can sit in a chair and type anything into a computer and get an answer. Our reliance on this type of technology can be detrimental if not regulated and regularily substituted for other information sources such as human interactions and hands on learning. I think if humans understand that we should not have such a reliance on computer technology, that we as a species will advance further by utilizing the opportunity of computer technology as well as the other sources of information outside of a computer. Supplementing our knowledge with internet access is surely a way for technology to solve problems while continually advancing the human race.Reader Commentary for Essay Response — Score 3This essay never moves beyond a superficial discussion of the issue. The writer attempts to develop two points: that advancements in technology have progressed our knowledge in many fields and that supplementing rather than relying on technology is surely a way for technology to solve problems while continually advancing the human race. Each point, then, is developed with relevant but insufficient evidence. In discussing the potential of technology to advance knowledge in many fields (a broad subject, rife with possible examples), the writer uses only one limited and very brief example from a specific field (medicine and stem-cell research).Development of the second point is hindered by a lack of specificity and organization. The writer creates what might be best described as an outline. The writer cites a need for regulation/supplementation and warns of the detriment of over-reliance upon technology. However, the explanation of both the problem and solution is vague and limited (Our reliance ... can be detrimental. If humans understand that we should not have such a reliance ... we will advance further). There is neither explanation of consequences nor clarification of what is meant by supplementing. This second paragraph is aseries of generalizations that are loosely connected and lack a much-needed grounding.In the essay, there are some minor language errors and a few more serious flaws (e.g., The future ability of growing new brain cells or One aspect where the ability of humans may initially be seen as an example of deteriorating minds). Despite the accumulation of such flaws, the writers meaning is generally clear. Thus, this essay earns a score of 3.新GREIssue 官方范文整理5Essay Response — Score 2In recent centuries, humans have developed the technology very rapidly, and you may accept some merit of it, and you may see a distortion in society occured by it. To be lazy for human in some meaning is one of the fashion issues in thesedays. There are many symptoms and resons of it. However, I can not agree with the statement that the technology make humans to be reluctant to thinkng thoroughly.Of course, you can see the phenomena of human laziness along with developed technology in some place. However, they would happen in specific condition, not general. What makes human to be laze of thinking is not merely technology, but the the tendency of human that they treat them as a magic stick and ablack box. Not understanding the aims and theory of them couses the disapproval problems.The most important thing to use the thechnology, regardless the new or old, is to comprehend the fundamental idea of them, and to adapt suit tech to tasks in need. Even if you recognize 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 consider as long as possible to acquire adequate functions. Therefore, humans can not escape from using their brain.In addition, the technology 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 you think and emmit your creativity to breakthrough some banal method sarcastically.Consequently, if you are not passive to the new tech, but offensive to it, you would not lose your ability to think deeply. Furthermore, you may improve the ability by adopting it.Reader Commentary for Essay Response — Score 2The language of this essay is what most clearly links it to the score of 2. Amidst sporadic moments of clarity, this essay is marred by serious errors in grammar, usage andmechanics that often interfere with meaning. It is unclear what the writer means when he/she states, To be lazy for human in some meaning is one of the fashion issues in thesedays, or to adapt suit tech to tasks in need.Despite such severe flaws, the writer has made an obvious attempt to respond to the prompt (I can not agree with the statement that the technology make humans to be reluctant to thinking thoroughly) as well as an unclear attempt to support such an assertion (Not understanding the aims and theory of them [technology] couses the disapproval problems and The most important thing to use the thechnology ... is to comprehend the fundamental idea of them). On the whole, the essay displays a seriously flawed but not fundamentally 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 too does the analysis.)Essay Response — Score 1Humans have invented machines but they have forgot it and have started everything technically so clearly their thinking process is deterioating.Reader Commentary for Essay Response — Score 1The essay is clearly on topic, as evidenced by the writers usage of the more significant terms from the prompt: technically (technologically), humans, thinking (think) and deteriorating (deteriorate). Such usage is the only clear evidence of understanding. Meaning aside, the brevity of the essay (one sentence) clearly indicates the writers inability to develop a response that follows the specific instructions given (Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement above and explain your reasoning for the position you take).The language, too, is clearly level 1, as the sentence fails to achieve coherence. The coherent phrases in this one-sentence response are those tied to the prompt: Humans have invented machines and their thinking process is deteriorating. Otherwise, the point being made is unclear新GREIssue 官方范文整理。

GREIssue优秀范文GRE写作不仅考察考生的英语力量，还考察考生的规律与思维力量，我整理了一些GRE的范文，盼望可以关心到大家，下面我就和大家共享，来观赏一下吧。

GRE Issue优秀范文Most cultures encourage individuals to sacrifice a large part of their own personalities in order to be like other people.Thus ,most people are afraid to think or behave differently because they do not want to be excluded.The speaker claims that most cultures encourage conformity at the expense of individuality, and as a result most people conform for fear of being excluded.While i find the second prong of this dual claim well support overall by empirical evidence,I take exception with the first prong;aside from the cultures created by certain oppressive political regimes,no culture need encourage its members to conform to prevailing ways of thought and behavior;in fact ,all the evidence shows that cultures attempt to do just the opposite.As a threshold matter ,it is necessary to distinguish between conformity that an oppressive ruling state imposes on its own culture and conformity in a free democratic society.In the former case , people are not only encouraged but actually coerced into suppressing individualpersonality; and indeed these people are afraid to think and behave differently-but not for fear of being excluded but rather for fear of punishment and persecution by the state.the modern Communist and Fascist regimes are fitting examples.With respect to free democratic societies, it might be tempting to dismiss the speakers dual claim out of hand .After all ,true democratic states are predicted on individual freedoms-of choice ,speech,expression,religion,and so forth.Ostensibly ,these freedoms serve to promote individuality,even non-conformity,in our personas,our lifestyles ,and our opinioons and attitudes.Yet,one look at any democratic society reveals a high degree of conformity among its members.Every society has its own bundle of values,customs ,and mores which most of its members share.Admittedly,within any culture springs up various subcultures which try to distinguish themselves by their own distinct values,customs, and mores.In the U.S,for instance, African-American have developed a distinct dialect,known as Ebonics,and a distinct body language and attitude which affords them a strong sub-cultural identity of their own.Yet , the undeniable fact is that humans,given the actual freedom to either conform or not conform, choose to think and behave in ways similar to most people in their social group-however we define that group.Nor is there much empirical evidence of any cultural agenda,either overt or covert, to encourage conformity in thought and behavior among the members of any culture.To the contrary,the predominant message in most cultures is that people should cultivate their individuality.Consider,for example,the enduring and nearly ubiquitous icon of the ragged individualist,who charts his or her own course,bucks the trend,and achieves notoriety through individual creativity,imagination, invention,or entrepreneurship.Even our systems of higher education seem to encourage individualism by promoting and cultivating critical and independent thought among its students.Yet,all the support for forging ones one unique persona,career,lifestyle,opinions ,and even belief system,turns out to be hype.In the final analysis,most people choose to conform. And understandably so ;after all ,it is human nature to distrust,and even shun,others who are too difference from us .Thus to embrace rugged individualism is to risk becoming an outcast,the natural consquence of which is to limit ones socioeconomic and career opportunities.This prospect suffices to quell our yearning to be different ;thus the speaker is correct that most of us resign ourselves to conformity for fear of being left behind by our peers.Admittedly ,few cultures are without rugged individualists-the exceptional aritsts ,inventors,explorers,social reformers,and entrepreneurs who embrace their autonomy of thoughtand behavior,then test their limits.And paradoxically,it is the achievements of these notable non-conformists that are responsible for most cultural evolution and progress.Yet such notables are few and far between in what is otherwise a world of insecure,even fearful,cultural conformists.To sum up,the speaker is correct that most people choose to conform rather than behave and think in ways that run contraty to their cultures norms,and that fear of being exduded lies at the heart of this choice.Yet, no culture need encourage conformity;most humans recognize that there is safety of numbers ,and as a result freely choose conformity over the risks,and potential rewards ,of non-conformity.GRE Issue优秀范文There are two types of laws: just and unjust. Every individual in a society has a responsibility to obey just laws and, even more importantly, to disobey and resist unjust laws.According to this statement, each person has a duty to not only obey just laws but also disobey unjust ones. In my view this statement is too extreme, in two respects. First, it wrongly categorizes any law as either just or unjust; and secondly, it recommends an ineffective and potentially harmful means of legal reform.First, whether a law is just or unjust is rarely a straightforward issue. The fairness of any law depends on ones personal value system. This isespecially true when it comes to personal freedoms. Consider, for example, the controversial issue of abortion. Individuals with particular religious beliefs tend to view laws allowing mothers an abortion choice as unjust, while individuals with other value systems might view such laws as just.The fairness of a law also depends on ones personal interest, or stake, in the legal issue at hand. After all, in a democratic society the chief function of laws is to strike a balance among competing interests. Consider, for example, a law that regulates the toxic effluents a certain factory can emit into a nearby river. Such laws are designed chiefly to protect public health. But complying with the regulation might be costly for the company; the factory might be forced to lay off employees or shut down altogether, or increase the price of its products to compensate for the cost of compliance. At stake are the respective interests of the companys owners, employees, and customers, as well as the opposing interests of the regions residents whose health and safety are impacted. In short, the fairness of the law is subjective, depending largely on how ones personal interests are affected by it.The second fundamental problem with the statement is that disobeying unjust laws often has the opposite affect of what was intended or hoped for. Most anyone would argue, for instance,that our federal system of income taxation is unfair in one respect or another. Yetthe end result of widespread disobedience, in this case tax evasion, is to perpetuate the system. Free-riders only compel the government to maintain tax rates at high levels in order to ensure adequate revenue for the various programs in its budget. 14Yet another fundamental problem with the statement is that by justifying a violation of one sort of law we find ourselves on a slippery slope toward sanctioning all types of illegal behavior, including egregious criminal conduct. Returning to the abortion example mentioned above, a person strongly opposed to the freedom-of-choice position might maintain that the illegal blocking of access to an abortion clinic amounts to justifiable disobedience. However, it is a precariously short leap from this sort of civil disobedience to physical confrontations with clinic workers, then to the infliction of property damage, then to the bombing of the clinic and potential murder.In sum, because the inherent function of our laws is to balance competing interests, reasonable people with different priorities will always disagree about the fairness of specific laws. Accordingly, radical action such as resistance or disobedience is rarely justified merely by ones subjective viewpoint or personal interests. And in any event, disobedience is never justifiable when the legal rights or safety of innocent people are jeopardized as a result.GRE Issue优秀范文Anyone can make things bigger and more complex. What requires real effort and courage is to move in the opposite direction---in other words, to make things as simple as possible.Whether making things simple requires greater effort and courage than making them bigger and more complex depends on the sort of effort and courage. Indisputably, the many complex technological marvels that are part-and-parcel of our Lives today are the result of the extraordinary cumulative efforts of our engineers, entrepreneurs, and others. And, such achievements always call for the courage to risk failing in a large way. Yet, humans seem naturally driven to make things bigger and more complex; thus refraining from doing so, or reversing this natural process, takes considerable effort and courage of a different sort, as discussed below.The statement brings immediately to mind the ever-growing and increasingly complex digital world. Todays high-tech firms seem compelled to boldly go to whatever effort is required to devise increasingly complex products, for the ostensible purpose of staying ahead of their competitors. Yet, the sort of effort and courage to which the statement refers is a different one--bred of vision, imagination, and a willingness to forego near term profits for the prospect of making lasting contributions. Surely, a number of entrepreneurs and engineers today are mustering that courage, and are making the effort to create farsimpler, yet more elegant, technologies and applications, which will truly make our lives simpler in sharp contrast to what computer technology has delivered to us so far.Lending even more credence to the statement is the so-called big government phenomenon. Human societies have a natural tendency to create unwieldy bureaucracies, a fitting example of which is the U.S. tax-law system. The Intemal Revenue Code and its accompanying Treasury Regulations have grown so voluminous and complex that many certified accountants and tax attorneys admit that they cannot begin to understand it all.Admittedly, this system has grown only through considerable effort on the part of all three branches of the federal government, not to mention the efforts of many special interest groups.Yet, therein lies the statements credibility. It requires great effort and courage on the part of a legislator to risk alienating special interest groups, thereby risking reelection prospects, by standing on principle for a simpler tax system that is less costly to administer and better serves the interests of most taxpayers.Adding further credibility to the statement is the tendency of most people to complicate their personal lives--a tendency that seems especially strong in todays age of technology and consumerism. The greater our mobility, the greater our number of destinations each day;the more time-saving gadgets we use, the more activities we try to pack into our day; and with readier access to information we try to assimilate more of it each day. I am hard-pressed to think of one person who has ever exclaimed to me how much effort and courage it has taken to complicate his or her life in these respects. In contrast, a certain self-restraint and courage of conviction are both required to eschew modern conveniences, to simplify onesdaily schedule, and to establish and adhere to a simple plan for the use of ones time and money.In sum, whether we are building computer networks, government agencies, or personal lifestyles, great effort and courage are required to make things simple, or to keep them that way. Moreover, because humans na~traUy tend to make things big and complex, it arguably requires more effort and courage to move in the opposite direction. In the final analysis, making things simple---or keeping them that way--takes a brand of effort born of reflection and restraint rather than sheer exertion, and a courage character and conviction rather than unbridled ambition.GRE Issue优秀范文Most people would agree that buildings represent a valuable record of any societys past, but controversy arises when old buildings stand on the ground that modern planners feel could be better used for modern purpose. In such situation, modern development should be givenprecedence over the preservation of historic buildings so that comtemporary needs can be served;The speaker asserts that wherever a practical, utilitarian need for new buildings arises this need should take precedence over our conflictiong interest in preserving historic buildings as a record of our past. In my view, however, which interest should take precedence should be determined on a cast-by-cast basis-and should account not only for practical and historic consideration but also aethetic ones.In determing whether to raze an older building, planners should of course consider tht communitys current and anticipated utilitarain needs. For example, if an additional hospital is needed to adequately serve the health-care needs of a fast-growing community, this compelling interest might very well outweigh any interest in preserving a historic building that sits on the proposed site. Or if additional parking is needed to ensure the economic servival of a citys downtown district, this interest might take precedence over the historic value of an old structure that stands in the way of a parking structure. On the other hand, if the need is mainly for more office space, in some cases an architecturally appropriate add-on or annex to an older building might serve just as well as razing the old building to make way for a new one. Of course, an expensive retrofit might not be worthwhile if no amount of retrofitting would meet the need.Competing with a communitys utilitarian needs is an interest preserving the historical record. Again, the weight of this interest should be determined on a case-by-case basis. Perhaps an older building uniquely represents a bygone area, or once played a central role in the citys history as a municipal structure. Or perhaps the building once served as the home of a founding family or other significant historical figure, or as the location of an important historical event. Any of these scenarios might justify saving the building at the expense of the practical needs of the community. On the other hand, if several older buildings represent the same historical era just as effectively, or if the buildings history is an unremarkable one, then the historic value of the building might pale in comparison to the value of a new structure that meets a compelling practical need.Also competing with a communitys utilitarian needs is the aesthetic and architectural value of the building itself-apart from historical events with which it might be associated. A building might be one of only a few that represents a certain architectural style. Or it might be especially beautiful, perhaps as a result of the craftsmanship and materials employed in its construction-which might be cost-prohibitive to replicate today. Even retrofitting the building to accommodate current needs might undermine its aesthetic as well as historic value, by altering its appearance and architectural integrity. Of course it is planners shouldstrive to account for aesthetic value nonetheless.In sum, whether to raze an older building in order to construct a new one should never be determined indiscriminately. Instead, planners should make such decision on a case-by-case basis, weighing the communitys practical needs against the buildings historic and aesthetic value.。