2024年4月8日发(作者：)

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1

Issue test 1

As 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 6

The 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, chances

are 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, technology

frees 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 care

triage 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 6

The author of this essay stakes out a clear and insightful

position 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2

Essay Response — Score 5

Surely 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 efficiently

photodocument 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 Ttechnology 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 figure

out how to provide technology users with some direly-needed

direction.

Reader Commentary for Essay Response — Score 5

The 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 ).

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 nor

reduces 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3

Essay Response — Score 4

In 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 technological

devices, 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 example

Reader Commentary for Essay Response — Score 4

This 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4

Essay Response — Score 3

There 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 understanding

and 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 3

This 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 a

series 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5

Essay Response — Score 2

In 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 a

black 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 2

The 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 and

mechanics 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 1

Humans 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 1

The 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