GRE寫作官方題庫(kù)高頻ARGUMENT題目滿分范文分享：cheating among college and university students

　　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.

　　【滿分范文賞析】

　　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.

　　【本段結(jié)構(gòu)】

　　本文采用了標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的Argument開頭段結(jié)構(gòu)，即C—A—F的開頭結(jié)構(gòu)。本段首先概括原文的Conclusion，之后簡(jiǎn)要提及原文為支持其結(jié)論所引用的一系列Assumption及細(xì)節(jié)，最后給出開頭段到正文段的過渡句，指出原文的Flaw，即這些Assumption無法讓原文的結(jié)論具有說服力。

　　【本段功能】

　　作為Argument開頭段，本段具體功能就在于發(fā)起攻擊并概括原文的結(jié)論，即大學(xué)應(yīng)該采取和Groveton College相同的Honor code制度以用來避免學(xué)生們考試作弊的情況。本段接下來提到了原文中為支持之前的Conclusion所提供的證據(jù)，即在采用這種制度后，報(bào)告的學(xué)生作弊人數(shù)下降了，以及一個(gè)能表明學(xué)生們對(duì)于考試作弊態(tài)度的調(diào)查。文章提及這些信息，為是在正文段中對(duì)這些Assumption即將進(jìn)行的具體攻擊做鋪墊。

　　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.

　　【本段結(jié)構(gòu)】

　　本段采用了標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的Argument正文段結(jié)構(gòu)，即先是提及原文的第一個(gè)邏輯錯(cuò)誤，之后分析該邏輯錯(cuò)誤的原因，接下來，進(jìn)一步分析這樣的錯(cuò)誤為什么讓原文的Conclusion不成立。

　　【本段功能】

　　作為正文第一段，本段攻擊原文所犯的第一個(gè)重要邏輯錯(cuò)誤——類比類錯(cuò)誤。原文假設(shè)，學(xué)生們擁有和教師一樣的檢測(cè)出其他學(xué)生考試作弊的能力，但事實(shí)上這種類比并不一定成立。所以，原文的這個(gè)假設(shè)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.

　　【本段結(jié)構(gòu)】

　　本段采用了標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的Argument正文段結(jié)構(gòu)，即先是提及原文的第二個(gè)邏輯錯(cuò)誤，之后分析該邏輯錯(cuò)誤的原因，接下來，進(jìn)一步分析這樣的錯(cuò)誤為什么讓原文的Conclusion不成立。

　　【本段功能】

　　作為正文第二段，本段攻擊原文所犯的第二個(gè)重要邏輯錯(cuò)誤——類比類錯(cuò)誤。原文假設(shè)在這五年中，Groveton College的其它條件并沒有改變。但事實(shí)上一旦這些條件發(fā)生了改變，原文當(dāng)中的數(shù)據(jù)和細(xì)節(jié)信息不足以說明這種防作弊制度的真實(shí)效果。所以，原文的關(guān)于這種過去和現(xiàn)在的時(shí)間類比是不合理的。

　　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.

　　【本段結(jié)構(gòu)】

　　本段采用了標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的Argument正文段結(jié)構(gòu)，即先是提及原文的第三個(gè)邏輯錯(cuò)誤，之后分析該邏輯錯(cuò)誤的原因，接下來，進(jìn)一步分析這樣的錯(cuò)誤為什么讓原文的Conclusion不成立。

　　【本段功能】

　　作為正文第三段，本段攻擊原文所犯的第三個(gè)重要邏輯錯(cuò)誤——樣本類錯(cuò)誤。原文假設(shè)采用的調(diào)查是有說服力的，但該調(diào)查所抽取的學(xué)生樣本并不一定是具有代表性的，有可能學(xué)生們的回答和他們今后的行為是有差異的。所以，原文的這個(gè)樣本類假設(shè)是不成立的。