不才考的不好, 就作文还拿得出手些, 下面的作文是我考场的原文 为了让大家真实体会6分啥样, 我连敲错的敲漏的字母都没有改. 直接端上来. 攒下人品.
1.战线不能长, 少做无用功/重复活. 文章一定要长. 打字要快, 要学会COPY&
ASTE.
2. 别用大词, 外国人分不出我们的大词小词, 越唠叨越好, 简单别出错比复杂出错强, 我一个大词没用, 全高中词汇
4.本人复习方法: 看1遍本月作文题目, 大概没不认识的字, 考前一晚写个自己的模板, 第二天早上再看两遍. OK, 上阵.
Read the argument and the instructions that follow it, and then make any notes that will help you plan your
response. Begin typing your response in the box at the bottom of the screen.
The following appeared in the letters-to-the-editor section of a local newspaper.
“Muscle Monthly, a fitness magazine that regularly features pictures of bodybuilders using state-of-the-art
exercise machines, frequently sells out, according to the owner of Skyview Newsstand. To help maximize
fitness levels in our town's residents, we should, therefore, equip our new community fitness center with
such machines.”
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. In your discussion be sure to analyze the line of
reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For example, you may need to consider what
questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and what alternative explanations or counterexamples
might weaken the conclusion. You can also discuss what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the
argument, what changes in the argument would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would
help you better evaluate its conclusion.
In this argument the author reached a conclusion that in order to help maximize fitness levels in our town's
residents, we should equip our new community fitness center with the state-of-the art exercise machines
which the Musle Monthly fitness magazine features pictures. That is because the state-of-the art exercise
machines frequently sells out, according to the owner of Skyview Newsstand. Although at first glance, the
argument appears to be somewhat convincing, it has some significant drawbacks and the author's
reasoning is logically flawed. By only not carefully evaluating the author's reasoning and logic but also
performing a deep and fundemental case-by-case analysis, we can see the author fails to consider the
following factors.
In the first place, the author argues that to help maximize fitness levels in our town's residents, we should
equip our new community fitness center with the state-of-the art exercise machines, and these machines
should be the ones which the Musle Monthly fitness magazine features. It is correct that according to the
owner of Skyview Newsstand, the exercise machines frequently sells out in the other places. However, that
is not to say, in our community, the same kind of sales performance can be expected. For example, although
people in our community and people in other community all go to gym and use exercise machines, they may
not necessarily want to use the same kind of machines. Therefore, we can conclude that the author makes
a false analogy.
Secondly, the author fails to explain where, when and from whom the the owner of Skyview Newsstand got
the information. Did he/she claim that the state-of-the art exercise machines frequently sells out because
she/he took a survey by himself? Or he/she just heard that from others? Who took part in the survey? How
many people took part in the survey? Did everybody in the survey respond it? These questions are all
unanswered. So it is clear to say there is no evidence that the survey is done properly by random sampling.
Furthermore, there is no evidence to suggest that the claim that the owner of Skyview Newsstand which
the author's opinion is based on is correct.
Thirdly, the authors assumes that everything will remain unchaged in the future. Admittedly, the
state-of-the-art exercise machines are very popular right now, and no matter why they are so popular
(probably due to the advertising in the Muscle Monthly), we can not deny the fact this kind of machine
frequently sells out. However, that is not to say in the future it will remain popular. There is no guarteen
that it will still sell out frequently when the time and space change.
To sum up, the conclusion that we should equip our new community fitness center with the state-of-the art
exercise machines which the Musle Monthly fitness magazine features pictures, although has some merits in
the light of common sense and experience from daily life, is not convincing because the author's fails to
consider the important factors discussed above. In order to improve his/her argument, the author should
correct the false analogy and maybe collect information from a serious ramdomly sampling statistics rather
than using the owner of Skyview Newsstand's claim.
Analysis of an Issue
Read the statement and the instructions that follow it, and then make any notes that will help you plan
your response. Begin typing your response in the box at the bottom of the screen.
“Constant innovation and change within an organization are as likely to damage the organization as they
are to improve it.”
Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion stated above. Support your views with
reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.
The statement of the issue claims that constant innovation and change within an organization are likely to
demage the organization, just like they are likely to improve it. The seemingly simple and straight-forward
issue has a complex nature, therefore there are hardly any certainly answers to it. To some extent, I agree
with the author's viewpoint that constant innovation and change within an organization may not always be a
good thing for an organization. However, as different people may hold different opinion due to distinctive
education levels, family backgrouds, value judgements and life experience, we can not simply conclude that
constant innovation and change within an organization are in all cases, like to demage the organization. To
discuss this complex issue we need to perform a careful case-by-case analysis as discussed below.
Firstly, the issue that constant innovation and change within an organization are likely to demage the
organization, just like they are likely to improve it, is correct in some cases. For example, for a small company,
the expense of innovation and change might be too expensive for them to afford, if they kept constant
innovation and change that might demage the company's finance and it may fall bankruptcy. Also, the same
applied to more traditional companies, like corporate finance side of the investment banks, they earn credits
because they provide constant good services to their corporate clients, not because they kept changing the
way of financing the debts. The more tradtional ways are preferred in the sectors which orgainizations are
expected to perform constant and stable.
On the other hand, the issue is only partically correct, due to differenct natures of different organization
sectors. Admittedly, the bank's corporate finance and probably also the private banking sector should not
always come up with new ideas as the clients want them to be safe and stable. However, other divisions in
an investment bank, say Information Technology or Fixed Income products divisions, need a lot of innovation
to be successful. For instance, in order to improve the business, one of the largest investment bank, Goldman
Sachs, invested a huge amount of money in the research of their Fixed Income, Currency and Derivatives
department, and as a result, they earn excessive return in this business. This investment is not wasted, but
in the opposite, save the company from the recent subprime crisis. I belive that is a very good example to
illustrate that in many cases, still, the innovation and change within an organization are valuable.
In addition, we need to take into accout the pros and cons of the innovation and change within an
organization. Carefully weighing the cost and benefits and find the break-even point of the two are crucial.
For example, if the cost of the innovation and change is higher than the benefit of it, we should not put
money into the innovation and change within an organization. In the opposite, if the cost of the innovation
and change is lower than the benefit of it, we should certainly invest in the innovation and change within an
organization.
To sum up, although the claim that constant innovation and change within an organization are likely to
demage the organization as they are to improve it, has some merit due to the fact that smaller companies
and traditional companies may not benefit as much in the innovation, is still not convincing in certain cases as
I discussed in the third paragraph. To take all these factors into account, we can safely arrive at the
conclusion that, the constant innovation and change within an organization is morely likely to benefit largers
organization in the emerging markets and high technology markets than the more traditional ones and the
smaller ones.
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2008-11-15 04:53:00
楼主
