GRE写作Argument 范文：政府与教育类

题目：
According to a recent report, cheating among college and university students is on the rise. However, Groveton College has successfully reduced student cheating by adopting an honor code, which calls for students to agree not to cheat in their academic endeavors and to notify a faculty member if they suspect that others have cheated. Groveton's honor code replaced a system in which teachers closely monitored students; under that system, teachers reported an average of thirty cases of cheating per year. In the first year the honor code was in place, students reported twenty-one cases of cheating; five years later, this figure had dropped to fourteen. Moreover, in a recent survey, a majority of Groveton students said that they would be less likely to cheat with an honor code in place than without. Thus, all colleges and universities should adopt honor codes similar to Groveton's in order to decrease cheating among students.
范文及解析:
:In this report the author concludes that colleges should adopt an honor code in order to reduce the frequency of cheating. To support this conclusion the author points out that the first year after switching from a monitoring system to an honor system the annual number of reported cheating incidents at Groveton College decreased from 30 (as reported by teachers) to 21 (as reported by students following the honor code) and that five years later the number decreased to 14. The author also cites a survey in which most students indicated they would be less likely to cheat under an honor system than if they are closely monitored. This argument is unconvincing for several reasons.
【本段结构】
本文采用了标准的Argument开头段结构，即C—A—F的开头结构。本段首先概括原文的Conclusion，之后简要提及原文为支持其结论所引用的一系列Assumption及细节，最后给出开头段到正文段的过渡句，指出原文的Flaw，即这些Assumption无法让原文的结论具有说服力。
【本段功能】
作为Argument开头段，本段具体功能就在于发起攻击并概括原文的结论，即大学应该采取和Groveton College相同的Honor code制度以用来避免学生们考试作弊的情况。本段接下来提到了原文中为支持之前的Conclusion所提供的证据，即在采用这种制度后，报告的学生作弊人数下降了，以及一个能表明学生们对于考试作弊态度的调查。文章提及这些信息，为是在正文段中对这些Assumption即将进行的具体攻击做铺垫。
First and foremost, the argument relies on the assumptions that Groveton students are just as capable of detecting cheating as faculty monitors, and that these students are just as likely to report cheating whenever they observe it. However, without evidence to substantiate these assumptions one cannot reasonably conclude that the honor code has, in fact, resulted in a decline in the incidence of cheating at Groveton.
【本段结构】
本段采用了标准的Argument正文段结构，即先是提及原文的第一个逻辑错误，之后分析该逻辑错误的原因，接下来，进一步分析这样的错误为什么让原文的Conclusion不成立。
【本段功能】
作为正文第一段，本段攻击原文所犯的第一个重要逻辑错误——类比类错误。原文假设，学生们拥有和教师一样的检测出其他学生考试作弊的能力，但事实上这种类比并不一定成立。所以，原文的这个假设是不合理的。
The argument also assumes that during the five-year period, all other conditions possibly affecting the reported incidence of cheating at Groveton remained unchanged. Such conditions include the number of Groveton students and the overall integrity of the student body. After five years it is entirely possible that these conditions have changed and that the reported decrease in cheating is attributable to one or more such changes. Thus, without ruling out such alternative explanations for the reported decrease, the argument fails to convince me that the honor code has, in fact, contributed to a decline in the incidence of cheating at Groveton.
【本段结构】
本段采用了标准的Argument正文段结构，即先是提及原文的第二个逻辑错误，之后分析该逻辑错误的原因，接下来，进一步分析这样的错误为什么让原文的Conclusion不成立。
【本段功能】
作为正文第二段，本段攻击原文所犯的第二个重要逻辑错误——类比类错误。原文假设在这五年中，Groveton College的其它条件并没有改变。但事实上一旦这些条件发生了改变，原文当中的数据和细节信息不足以说明这种防作弊制度的真实效果。所以，原文的关于这种过去和现在的时间类比是不合理的。
Finally, the survey that the author cites might be unreliable in any of three respects: the author fails to assure us that the survey's respondents are representative of all college students, the survey results depend on the honesty and integrity of the respondents and hypothetical predictions about one's future behavior are inherently less reliable than reports of proven behavior. Lacking credible evidence from a reliable survey, the recommendation for the widespread adoption of the honor system becomes invalid.
【本段结构】
本段采用了标准的Argument正文段结构，即先是提及原文的第三个逻辑错误，之后分析该逻辑错误的原因，接下来，进一步分析这样的错误为什么让原文的Conclusion不成立。
【本段功能】
作为正文第三段，本段攻击原文所犯的第三个重要逻辑错误——样本类错误。原文假设采用的调查是有说服力的，但该调查所抽取的学生样本并不一定是具有代表性的，有可能学生们的回答和他们今后的行为是有差异的。所以，原文的这个样本类假设是不成立的。
In conclusion, to persuade an audience that other colleges should adopt an honor code in order to reduce cheating, the author must supply clear evidence that cheating at Groveton decreased after the honor code was instituted there, and that it is this code that was responsible for the decrease. Finally, to better assess the reliability of the survey an audience would need specific information about the survey's sampling methodology.
【本段结构】
本段采用的Argument结尾段结构是单纯的Suggestion结构。即，本段给出了可以增强原文说服力的合理建议Suggestion，包括原文作者需要进一步提供的证据和信息等。
【本段功能】
本段作为Argument结尾段，具体功能为对原文当中的逻辑问题提出建议。段落给出合理的建议包括：作者需要提供证据来表明这样的防作弊机制真的是有效果的;此外，作者需要提供一些更详细的信息来表明原文当中调查的可靠程度。不难发现，结尾段总结提出的建议与正文各段中依次攻击的错误遥相呼应，即分别对应了类比类错误和样本类错误，这使全篇文章显得浑然一体。
获取更多GRE写作高分素材，请联系在线老师或拨打新通教育免费热线。