GRE作文2.5能申请美国院校吗
很多美国研究生院校，对于GRE写作的考试分数也有一定的要求。如果作文分数太低，也会影响我们的申请。那么具体的GRE写作如果是2.5分，是否可以申请院校呢?下面小编为大家整理了详细的内容，供大家参考!
GRE作文2.5能申请美国院校吗
一、GRE写作2.5美国研究生留学申请怎么样?
GRE考试的语言(Verbal)和数学(Quantitative)部分的分数区间为130分到170分，最终两部分成绩要汇总成为一个整数。GRE写作部分的分数可以从最低的0分，到最高的6分，期间分数会以0.5分为一个单位进行变化。所以这里主要说的作文分数2.5。
其实总之了，有点太低了，3分还勉强可以过.因为申请研究生主要是给教授打工,然后就有很多写作的task,所以一般都还会看看作文水平的.虽然GRE作文的确不算重点,但是有一个过得去的分数还是蛮必要的。
二、GRE写作分数低如何申请美国研究生留学?
1、文书优势：不过如果你朋友有很牛的推荐信或者论文发表之类的话,GRE就是浮云了.
2、理科比文科好申请：不过要看你的专业是什么，如果是文科的话，可能影响会更大，如果是理工科，会稍小一点。不过把托福的作文考高一点，文书写得漂亮一点，也可以一定程度上弥补这个遗憾。
3、合理规划，再次备战GRE考试：对于美国本土的学生来说，三到四个月的准备时间足够让学生准备GRE考试。但对于国际学生来说，由于语言问题，以及词汇量的不足，学生最好能够根据自己的英文水平适当的延长自己的准备时间。其他学生的准备时间对学生来说只有参考价值，毕竟不同的学生学习效率不同，所需学习时长自然就不同。因此，要准备GRE考试的同学们一定提早做好美国研究生申请时间表，适当延长自己的准备时间。
GRE写作满分范文1
The following appeared as a letter to the editor of a local newspaper.
"Five years ago, we residents of Morganton voted to keep the publicly owned piece of land known as Scott Woods in a natural, undeveloped state. Our thinking was that, if no shopping centers or houses were built there, Scott Woods would continue to benefit our community as a natural parkland. But now that our town planning committee wants to purchase the land and build a school there, we should reconsider this issue. If the land becomes a school site, no shopping centers or houses can be built there, and substantial acreage would probably be devoted to athletic fields. There would be no better use of land in our community than this, since a large majority of our children participate in sports, and Scott Woods would continue to benefit our community as natural parkland."
The argument about Scott Woods being undeveloped land seem to be a well thought out. The community has thought long and hard about what they wanted to do with the land. They do not want any homes or shopping malls on the land because it would not benefit the community as a natural parkland. By building the school on the vacant land is not benfiting the community as natural parkland either. There would be the same type of construction and traffic. That is very contradictory in itself. I think that the community would have to meet again and decide exactly was is best for this particular community and the children in the community. The presentation sounded so close and shut about what was going to be done about the land that it seemed usless for anybody to try to purchase it and do anything with the land. So if the Morganton community want something such as a school being built on the land that should have been what they voted on in the first place. They look very indecisive and even controlling. These are not very good ways to accomplish or do business.
Comments:
The opening sentences of this limited response seem to agree with the argument, describing it as "well thought out." However, the writer begins to construct a critique in the fourth sentence, identifying and briefly describing one flawed assumption: if the community members want to retain natural parkland, they will not be able to do so by building a school on that land.
This is the only analysis in the response, marking it as "plainly flawed." The remaining five sentences fail to develop or add to this critique. Some are tangential ("I think that the community would have to meet again???") and others are irrelevant ("They look very indecisive and even controlling").
The writing demonstrates limited language control. There are missing words, syntax errors, and several grammatical errors. For these reasons, the essay earns the score of 3.
GRE写作满分范文2
The following appeared as a letter to the editor of a local newspaper.
"Five years ago, we residents of Morganton voted to keep the publicly owned piece of land known as Scott Woods in a natural, undeveloped state. Our thinking was that, if no shopping centers or houses were built there, Scott Woods would continue to benefit our community as a natural parkland. But now that our town planning committee wants to purchase the land and build a school there, we should reconsider this issue. If the land becomes a school site, no shopping centers or houses can be built there, and substantial acreage would probably be devoted to athletic fields. There would be no better use of land in our community than this, since a large majority of our children participate in sports, and Scott Woods would continue to benefit our community as natural parkland."
Since the residents are changing the original statement that complies with the conditions of what an undeveloped site is, it is their responsibility to make sure that certain restrictions are followed. According to the definition of undeveloped land, keeping the natural elements and avoiding the tearing down of this elements is an issue to consider even if it is a school built on the site.
Even though the residents originally wanted to keep the property undeveloped and unbuilt, the fact that they emphasize that this area will subtantially be devoted to athletic fields, strongly supports the idea of the residents using the land for similar activities than that of the public parkland, . Moreover, the fact that the residents mentioned the community as being one where children will be the main participants of this area is persuasive enough to make this argument a strong one.
Comments:
This response is seriously flawed. The first paragraph obliquely addresses the argument made in the topic, but stops short of logical analysis. The second paragraph agrees with the argument and supports its assumptions. In essence, the writer exhibits an uncritical acceptance of the argument.
Aside from a few minor errors, the writer has control over syntax, grammar, and the conventions of standard written English. This response, though, warrants a score of 2, because it offers no discernible analysis of the logic of the argument.
GRE写作满分范文3
The following appeared as a letter to the editor of a local newspaper.
"Five years ago, we residents of Morganton voted to keep the publicly owned piece of land known as Scott Woods in a natural, undeveloped state. Our thinking was that, if no shopping centers or houses were built there, Scott Woods would continue to benefit our community as a natural parkland. But now that our town planning committee wants to purchase the land and build a school there, we should reconsider this issue. If the land becomes a school site, no shopping centers or houses can be built there, and substantial acreage would probably be devoted to athletic fields. There would be no better use of land in our community than this, since a large majority of our children participate in sports, and Scott Woods would continue to benefit our community as natural parkland."
A school should serve all students living nearby so that they can commute in a short distance. That will provide the better basic-human-needs. It is questioned that whether it is appropriate to establish a school in the area without locating houses. On the other hand, wouldn't it be good if the land is left untouch?
These are the facts of argument that readers might have after reading the message. The information is too opinionate therefore develop many questions. The writing given in the first part does not support the rest.
Comments:
The first paragraph of this fundamentally deficient response is apparently attempting to summarize the issues and terms of the argument. The attempt, though, is almost completely obscured by errors and the disorganized presentation of ideas. Paragraph 2 offers only the assessment that "the information is too opinionate therefore develop many questions."
The response warrants a score of 1 because it exhibits three of the scoring guide characteristics for a 1:
-- provides little evidence of the ability to understand and analyze
the argument
-- has severe and persistent errors in language and sentence structure
-- contains a pervasive pattern of errors in grammar, usage, and
mechanics that results in incoherence
GRE作文2.5能申请美国院校吗相关文章：
GRE作文2.5能申请美国院校吗
上一篇：gre作文2分是个什么水平
下一篇：1天搞定GRE作文4分模板
