- 相關(guān)推薦
2015年gmat報(bào)考指南之評(píng)分標(biāo)準(zhǔn)
GMAT寫作 滿分評(píng)分標(biāo)準(zhǔn)解讀
A 6 paper presents a cogent, well-articulated critique of the argument and demonstrates mastery of the elements of effective writing.
A typical paper in this category exhibits the following characteristics:
1.clearly identifies important features of the argument and analyzes them insightfully
2.develops ideas cogently, organizes them logically, and connects them with clear transitions
3.effectively supports the main points of the critique
4.demonstrates control of language, including diction and syntactic variety
5.demonstrates facility with the conventions of standard written English (i.e., grammar, usage, and mechanics) but may have minor errors
標(biāo)準(zhǔn)解讀
要點(diǎn) 1：clearly identifies important features of the argument and analyzes them insightfully
關(guān)鍵詞：identifies important features, insightfully
1.identifies important features即鑒別一篇Argument的邏輯漏洞和錯(cuò)誤。 important一詞說(shuō)明考生無(wú)需指出原文所有的邏輯錯(cuò)誤，只要發(fā)現(xiàn)主要的錯(cuò)誤，并進(jìn)行有理有據(jù)的批判即可。
2.insightfully即Data Mining(數(shù)據(jù)挖掘)。GMAT作文看重思辨， 并且非常強(qiáng)調(diào)對(duì)于每個(gè)主要邏輯錯(cuò)誤進(jìn)行深入的“理性批判”。理性批判的意思是洞察和挖掘每一類邏輯錯(cuò)誤“背后的邏輯原理”。 “insightful”要求考生從邏輯原理的層面來(lái)攻擊每一類邏輯錯(cuò)誤。
例如，在GMAT Argument題庫(kù)里調(diào)查(survey)類錯(cuò)誤屬于高頻邏輯錯(cuò)誤。 考生在寫文章的時(shí)候, 僅僅強(qiáng)調(diào)“此調(diào)查有問(wèn)題，數(shù)據(jù)不真實(shí)，結(jié)論站不住腳”等，是非常膚淺的。 真正的“理性批判”是要從“統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)”原理出發(fā)來(lái)指出調(diào)查的問(wèn)題。 例如從樣本的“quantity”和“quality”兩個(gè)角度來(lái)分析題中給出的調(diào)查。
1)"quantity"指樣本數(shù)量。此攻擊原理是“必須同時(shí)給出樣本的絕對(duì)數(shù)量以及所占的相對(duì)比例”。 例如某題目中給出如下的調(diào)查數(shù)據(jù)：5萬(wàn)名被調(diào)查者建議取消公司的打卡制度。 對(duì)于此題我們要看到題干中并未給出公司員工的總量： 如果總量很大，那么5萬(wàn)只占了很小的比例。 同樣地，另一題中：99%被調(diào)查的學(xué)生認(rèn)為作業(yè)量過(guò)大。對(duì)于此題我們依然要指出調(diào)查樣本總量的問(wèn)題：如果被調(diào)查學(xué)生的總量很小， 99%這一看似很高的比例也不能說(shuō)明問(wèn)題。
2)“quality”指樣本質(zhì)量。這也是調(diào)查類題目常見的一個(gè)錯(cuò)誤點(diǎn)。題庫(kù)中大量的調(diào)查類問(wèn)題都未指出樣本選擇是否隨機(jī)(random)。 如果不隨機(jī)，這些樣本的代表性(representativeness)無(wú)疑就被弱化了。
要點(diǎn) 2：develops ideas cogently, organizes them logically, and connects them with clear transitions
關(guān)鍵詞： organizes them logically、connects、clear transitions
“GMAT寫作的邏輯”包含形式邏輯和內(nèi)容邏輯: 形式邏輯就是指文章起承轉(zhuǎn)合的邏輯信號(hào)、邏輯連接詞。它們連接不同的內(nèi)容,使行文顯得有層次。內(nèi)容邏輯就是指文章含義推導(dǎo)過(guò)程的嚴(yán)密性，和我們后文即將解讀的排序方式是高度相關(guān)的。
organizes them logically是本條評(píng)分標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的核心。在GMAT Argument寫作里，只找到各類邏輯錯(cuò)誤(find problems)是不夠的。評(píng)分標(biāo)準(zhǔn)還要求我們很好地組織這些錯(cuò)誤(organize the problems which you have found)。 只找到邏輯錯(cuò)誤而沒有將其組織好是無(wú)法拿到滿分甚至高分的。
通常，考生可以運(yùn)用三種“排序方式”來(lái)組織邏輯錯(cuò)誤，即順序排序、主次排序和讓步排序。
1)順序排序--即按照各類錯(cuò)誤在原文中出現(xiàn)的順序進(jìn)行攻擊;
2)主次排序--即按照邏輯錯(cuò)誤的主次順序來(lái)排序，此種排序方式相比順序排序更為合理;
3)讓步排序--最邏輯化的排序方式：首先攻擊A錯(cuò)誤不成立;其次在攻擊B錯(cuò)誤不成立之前，假定即便A成立，B仍然不成立;最后引出即便A、B均成立，還可以得到C不成立。 這樣的“organization”顯示了強(qiáng)大的邏輯思辨能力。
因此，GMAT 作文考試要求考生不僅僅零散地找到幾個(gè)邏輯錯(cuò)誤，而且要合理地組織邏輯錯(cuò)誤的呈現(xiàn)順序,讓文章的段落之間連貫一致，渾然一體。
要點(diǎn) 3：effectively supports the main points of the critique
關(guān)鍵詞：main points of the critique
此條標(biāo)準(zhǔn)與上文中第一條評(píng)分標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，即identifies important features非常一致，強(qiáng)調(diào)鑒別一篇駁論文的重要特征以及主要邏輯漏洞。
要點(diǎn) 4：demonstrates control of language, including diction and syntactic variety
關(guān)鍵詞：variety
用詞用句的變化性能有效地體現(xiàn)行文語(yǔ)言的多樣性。
要點(diǎn) 5：demonstrates facility with the conventions of standard written English (i.e., grammar, usage, and mechanics) but may have minor errors
關(guān)鍵詞：standard written English, may have minor errors
1. standard written English
即使用標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的書面英語(yǔ)。英語(yǔ)口語(yǔ)體不合適用于GMAT這類準(zhǔn)學(xué)術(shù)型的分析性寫作中。 因此考生應(yīng)注意標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的書面英語(yǔ)的語(yǔ)法，用詞和文法。
2. may have minor errors
GMAT作文允許有錯(cuò)誤的存在。考官認(rèn)為，一篇滿分的文章可以有錯(cuò)誤，尤其是個(gè)別的拼寫錯(cuò)誤、語(yǔ)法錯(cuò)誤和用詞不當(dāng)。這不影響一篇文章得高分。 只要這篇文章準(zhǔn)確地提煉了要點(diǎn)、做到了精確的對(duì)應(yīng)匹配、邏輯性強(qiáng)、語(yǔ)言水平高即可。
范文賞析
GMAT Argument22
The following appeared as part of an editorial in an industry newsletter.
“While trucking companies that deliver goods pay only a portion of highway maintenance costs and no property tax on the highways they use, railways spend billions per year maintaining and upgrading their facilities. The government should lower the railroad companies’ property taxes, since sending goods by rail is clearly a more appropriate mode of ground transportation than highway shipping. For one thing, trains consume only a third of the fuel a truck would use to carry the same load, making them a more cost-effective and environmentally sound mode of transport. Furthermore, since rail lines already exist, increases in rail traffic would not require building new lines at the expense of taxpaying citizens.”
Answer：
This editorial asserts that property taxes for railroad companies should be lowered by the government. The first reason stated is that railroads spend a great deal of money every year maintaining and upgrading facilities. The second reason is that shipping goods by railroad is both cost-effective and environmentally sound. This argument is not convincing for several reasons.
First of all, the argument relies on an inaccurate comparison between railroad and truck company expenditure. Even though trucking companies do not pay property tax on the roads they use, they do pay taxes on the property they use, including the warehouses and the maintenance facilities they own. While trucking companies pay only a part of the total road maintenance cost, this is because the roads are public and were not designed for the sole use of the truck companies. Railroad companies must assume the entirety of maintenance and tax fees on their own facilities and tracks because they are privately owned; they have the chance to mitigate the costs by distributing these costs to other users through usage fees.
Additionally, the author unwarrantedly assumes that property taxes should be structured in order to provide for cost-effective and environmentally-friendly business practices. This assumption is dubitable because the fundamental use of property tax is to reflect the value of the property being taxed. Moreover, the author seems to think that cost-effective and environmentally-sound measures are relevant in equal proportion to tax relief. However, these are considerations which are totally separate. The impact of a practice on environment might be useful for determining tax structuring, but society does not automatically reward a business for its cost-efficiency.
Splitting the issues of cost-efficiency and environmental impact underscores an equivocal assertion in the claim that railway shipping is more appropriate. On the one hand, it may be appropriate for me to ship furniture by rail because it is the most cost-effective choice; on the other hand, it may be socially and environmentally responsible to encourage railway shipping because it is environmentally sound. The argument thus balances social correctness on the one hand, and personal values on the other.
In conclusion, this argument is a confusion of flimsy comparisons, conflated issues and highly ambiguous claims. I would not accept the conclusion without more information regarding tax structure, whether specific tax benefits should extend to property as well as to income and capital gains taxes, whether railway shipping does indeed provide increased social benefits, and whether it is justifiable to motivate increased railway shipping on this basis.
【gmat報(bào)考指南之評(píng)分標(biāo)準(zhǔn)】相關(guān)文章：
2015年gmat報(bào)考指南之成績(jī)復(fù)議12-10
2015年gmat報(bào)考指南：gmat退考03-28
2015年gmat報(bào)考指南：gmat轉(zhuǎn)考03-28
GMAT考試報(bào)考指南：考試注意事項(xiàng)03-22
2015年gmat考試指南之閱讀03-24
2015年GMAT報(bào)考條件03-22