stevendai曾发过他的习作。下面是他的备考经验（原文链接）：# _4 P; e& l8 k# X4 \& |  l
& Q2 j+ v& z$ s- K/ U7 \
by psychicle
6 [3 D- E8 C& G' Y
$ a1 h. X: A* d* N3 @3 ]( g9 SThis is going to be kind of an intense description of what I did, but perhaps it will also help for you! . k' m! _: J# z! q: M5 j& u
8 k  S6 O  x# \6 m6 A: l* H
BEFORE THE EXAM
1 s: V- s8 m* B( ?" W% A6 C8 M$ p
* o8 S2 T: L- Y- x" {1. Group the prompts
: o9 a7 ]0 W6 j
! Z' T3 c% \( p# H5 X' hTo prepare, I first looked through the entire list of topics and categorised them myself into about 9-10 different categories (i.e., politics & history, technology, learning & education, moral philosophy, etc.). That process helped me boil down the issue pool into something my mind could reasonably deal with! Also, I found it really helpful to do it myself instead of just using someone else's groupings, because thinking through the issues helped me understand my own way of thinking. (I'm happy to share my excel file though, if anyone wants it.)
& S! X, ~; q' E( O9 {
/ {) K3 @! {5 b9 n, }2. Identify as many perspectives on the issue as you can4 D$ K2 x  ^' p$ C; P

: Q- M3 H& P+ e) X) ~) pAs I read through them I asked myself what my position those topics were, in general and specifically, and I tried to think about the issue prompts in relation to each other. Often, I found overlap in that a few may provide different perspectives on each other, which helps you think outside of what conclusions you might otherwise reach. I also tried to brainstorm all the different ways of thinking about the issue to extend this further. It's important that you be generous when you do this: make the "opposite" positions intelligent, not ridiculous, as it will do you no favours to argue a strawman.' g' j1 e) u/ q! S

6 H* y/ H; N  N3 a1 A3. Challenge the assumptions * g& w6 J/ s$ L

) h- q+ v8 f6 }! ^4 JThen, I imagined having conversations with friends who took all those different positions about these things. I asked myself what I might be thinking and how I might respond. Where would we find common ground? Where would we disagree? What assumptions would the both the agreements and disagreements be based on? How might these be bolstered or undermined? How exactly would these link back to the original issue, i.e., why/how would these points be relevant?
0 U! a: E9 R  o* Z2 c) d
( _6 @: ^" R$ L+ z, k- I4. Sort out your thoughts
# D/ d  H5 A' A  L" L$ x9 ~  P7 H6 S! w6 _  o( W( U
Grade school English was good for many things. Key to the GRE was mind maps. While you won't have enough time to actually make a mind map, you can do as many as you like when you're just preparing. 1 a1 d' w7 B2 Z

& Q. h/ K. _1 v) q7 L9 I" M6 X2 G: t5. Refresh what already you know4 {5 Y$ t* f' n0 f

0 z+ q8 z" ?4 Q; AI reviewed my notes from college for "academic" references, flipped through old magazines (The Economist, Harper's, Wired, Monocle) for contemporary ones, and picked up a few really simple children's books on various topics (history, science, art) to remind myself of key names and dates. I also took someone's really good advice on this forum to memorise flexible examples and flesh them out with facts - when certain books were published, dates of revolutions, that kind of thing.
: A$ {4 t5 y" u. j7 n) F5 z4 l& O& S2 o1 [
DURING THE EXAM; ?! @) Q, \& |8 `# B1 J3 `
5 G4 w; P. x3 H, e* n
1. Write the body first, then the conclusion, then the intro
; x3 M' U3 @$ z# V# U* N+ P  ~
) M* v+ I" J$ S3 @4 g( fThis will help you get your main points down and then see where your argument is going. I think this was the single most useful piece of advice I got on the AWA, because one of my problems is to get too hung up on tweaking the argument till it's "just right" - but the GRE AWA doesn't ask for "just right", so don't kill yourself. Instead, aim for sufficiently cogent. It's not a thesis. Just get in there, say your piece, bookend your position with some intro and conclusion, and get out.
% X# }9 O  b% U0 ?2 U7 F, C
$ U4 T6 ^+ L" ^8 ^3 D; ~! c2. Never forget the prompt
* `3 F/ @5 l  i2 _
; O7 P+ X- X2 |( oEyes on the prize: I figured that I needed to keep focused on exactly what the prompt was saying, or more specifically, what I wanted it to say. I didn't want to leave anything to chance, I wanted to lead the reader through exactly how I understood it, so I spent time (and words) describing how I'd interpreted the prompt itself.
% ~4 F8 y, \9 S- L  `+ f& E4 [) Y: U
3. Write your face off
6 f% U' H6 q% ?7 P- R3 `. a
8 V! ], `* w/ N$ S# vType fast. As fast as you possibly can. Even when the stuff doesn't seem to make sense. Long essays are rewarded, for better or for worse, I figured. In the times I found myself veering off course, I would check myself again against the issue prompt. How was my current line of reasoning directly related to the prompt? How was it strengthening my current argument? How might someone who disagreed with me challenge that, and how would I counter them? These were the things I would try to make more explicit.
, m0 W: g. i" H7 O
7 p3 c6 y* Q( A2 a* A  jThat's all I can think of for now, but I'll post more if they come to mind. . o2 K& A# j9 K1 V& T" B

3 [/ v/ E/ {2 x2 K* z附件为他自编的题库分类。
* {: \; X9 b/ j  _( h0 f! @1 e( _" q3 B/ y
[ 本帖最后由 comorain 于 2009-8-20 17:49 编辑 ]

Q & A( _3 ~$ j) \1 J3 h1 }, X) S

, m5 E4 |* P. H- c) P# l/ D0 UQ(by KindOfBlue): Did you write that essay in only 45 minutes? If so, I am really impressed because I have having great trouble coming up with content. Do you have any tips on how to write so much in a short amount of time?
$ T/ j+ y# r2 t2 D- ]) m* Y# F
6 b) x# i2 J8 MA: Hey KindOfBlue, I realised I never answered your question. Yes - I did write it in 45 minutes, plus maybe 1 or 2 minutes." X$ Q8 g& `* Y% Q! _
$ w. }; M* e& B5 G
I think the key to writing a lot in the AWA is to write from what you know and what you're passionate about, i.e., whatever you would read about on your own just because you are interested - for me, that included movies, art, design, technology and science.+ Y- n- R8 N5 H& a' u. T) t3 _

$ L+ ~4 v! i& H2 j! b5 {! `7 WA brash belief that what you have to say is worthwhile is probably also helpful. Don't for a minute short sell an idea because you think that you might be "going down the wrong path".$ n: l9 a! L5 x9 ]" {: n5 ]0 d
, S6 n" V% M7 r, O7 ~
Instead, identify why you think it's relevant about an idea, explain that to the reader, and elucidate how your position on the prompt is supported by it. For me, it's easier to do this than start over. Besides, starting over could be the death knell for a high score; chopping all that text means valuable word count lost.* W% a4 W. z! `/ J, G+ p

* @; e3 I" }/ L( e3 n! cQ(by i200s ): psychicle,
9 b" E  b) n5 t% E; N8 Q' _7 z9 L* q$ x7 T
can you show us some techniques of analysis on an issue or an argument?" Z' ~. L; [) _$ b
That may be more significant than a general intro on the conquering AWA~
" R1 U" r2 j. \; R8 }/ j
1 R) v7 \3 ~! k8 g+ z. eThanks.7 O: A4 U3 @) d+ l9 S
; c( i5 e" w7 Q9 q. b" p
A: i2000s, not quite sure what you mean by techniques of analysis... like what different turns of phrase mean? I don't think I have anything like that. However I did research logical fallacies for the argument prompt.
& R6 p; o& p" n
: O. ~" W3 s! w/ @Q: By employing the phrase of "techniques of analysis", I mean how do youanalyze the topic of Issue in order to propose insight viewpoints andto raise complex supporting arguments? And what structure you think isthe most efficient organization of an article?...
3 W% S" D3 q; S2 L: n2 f6 k. m  Z+ N/ }/ G6 i" t3 P! j
I think you must have some powerful weapons on them. show us por favor, señor...6 w4 L7 E- Z& M4 ]4 H% B
& w, g) G5 l3 q$ b$ Z: M% [  a
A: i2000s - sorry for the late reply on "techniques of analysis". I hope this is still useful to you.7 S. ~  \& J; {3 q' A2 i

6 s9 A) S  s% x" rMost importantly, I think the key thing to do is to really understandand "attack" the prompt. Ask yourself all the 5Ws and 1Hs constantly asyou write, and answer them in your writing:
! d  k# K# v1 p  D, G 0 A. c; X/ C9 J+ h: V0 f% f* g
- Who does this involve?
2 y: L, e) k. v$ R' g) B- What are the implications for all the people involved? What would they say?
2 ~- s' k/ a, z  y# O& k+ a- Where and when would their positions be applicable?0 Q, d: Q7 V0 I& i' d' w
- Why would those positions be "good" or "bad" (i.e., defensible or not defensible)?
% K+ i3 S( M( \! G- How would you make those positions better or worse?
) O( `# z  }5 @- K& k % O0 ~0 O- [9 g) U
In terms of organisation, I think this formula is a favourite:
& {4 E4 {; b) `/ u  |6 E   ?( `% i3 q# `) ^4 H* R
Intro (thesis)1 z4 `9 S( h- _4 D3 E9 U5 B
Claim 1 (supported by grounds and warrant, tied back into thesis)
7 A: M( ~$ r1 i+ K+ @Claim 2 (supported by grounds and warrant, tied back into thesis)
7 ]& v0 o" S  t* L* Z9 x5 MClaim 3 (supported by grounds and warrant, tied back into thesis)
: z  A( \8 R, r5 S9 N/ ]6 Y( `Refutation (supported by grounds and warrant, tied back into thesis)5 _: S$ \# H+ a- e+ E. Q
Conclusion (restatement of thesis)% t5 t9 M# ^8 H; Z0 }+ r! x
( {) ?3 k/ N7 A
Finally, a general tip: read a lot, and find writers whose style youadmire. Note the phrases they use, how they apply them, how they linkthem. Then try to replicate these phrases in your own writing.8 ]7 \# n; H7 Z. K4 b

+ T- o3 L( T, lBy no means am I any expert - just some things that I focused on duringmy preparations that helped me. I hope you will find them useful too 0 S8 B: w8 b7 Q+ U+ G8 a
! D3 E* y1 n; O! x
[ 本帖最后由 comorain 于 2009-8-20 17:47 编辑 ]

I attended a writing workshop with a Putlizer-Prize-winning journalist who, during it, gave me one of the most insightful adages to live by: good writing is good thinking.9 D" t. v  w; |* z! C, j9 G

0 W. v8 Z4 r/ U. v$ C% P$ ]Here's a great read on this topic: Touchstone Magazine - Mere Comments: Postlude to the Morning of an Editor
  b2 m5 `# x0 ]' b, `  h& c$ r3 f6 {" Z' K$ H" }
Be clear on your position. Understand its implications. When you expand an idea, ensure that you explain exactly why your train of thought is relevant." N' {& `, r3 V8 @, q

& a( O. @; M# v2 x. N& }I am not sure what it usually takes to get a 6 on the AWA, but I think being genuinely curious helps. Honestly. Being widely read in English and keeping abreast of news in several areas means that you have more ideas to draw from when the time comes to issue forth an opinion.
: J( o6 O7 t5 M. n5 V$ f  U
7 ~0 Z& }- M5 l" L! ^Also, editing, writing and publishing in English has been a part of my professional experience, which really helps as it means I've had a lot of practice in negotiating the subtleties of this particular language.

a mind map! umm~~ * t  T6 u- H6 H. A3 R
thanks for sharing!

感谢分享~~~

下了，去看看
' e6 ^. k$ H3 t5 D今天模考不顺调剂下，再重整旗鼓

顶一下！

引用:

原帖由 comorain 于 2009-8-6 15:43 发表 & |( z2 C9 d' `
Q(by KindOfBlue): Did you write that essay in only 45 minutes? If so, I am really impressed because I have having great trouble coming up with content. Do you have any tips on how to write so much in  ...

$ g/ A3 p" s6 K  [. n4 h

/ T) U4 F2 o9 G6 w& G补充一点：
9 B2 H# S. q1 c+ b' W关于mindmap，可以访问http://www.verycd.com/topics/2748524/，下载相关软件和书籍。如果能很好的使用mindmap，你可能会发现西方思维方式的核心方式，并对issue和Argument的逻辑分析有更深入的认识。
4 ]3 b5 g5 z% b% x7 ~~。~