(病历文)
In this argument, the arguer recommends us to use Adams, one of the two leading real estate firms in our town, to sell our homes if you want to instead of Fitch, the other leading one. To justify his conclusion, the arguer provides the clear evidence that Adams has 40 real estate agents in contrast to the number 25 of Fitch, and even many of which are only part-time. In addition, he cited the fresh statistics of revenues of both Adams and Fitch, which respectively are $168,000 and $144,000. To make it more conceivable, the arguer even lists out a self-experienced case to exhibit the superior sell speed of Adams to Fitch. Although all the evidences above seem reasonable, a careful examination of this argument would reveal how groundless it is.
In the first place, the arguer unfairly assumes Adams service is better than Fitchs with the assumption that more agents, more satisfaction. The 40 agents in Adams might be poorly trained and unqualified with an extremely low work efficiency, thus enlarging the number of the agents is the only feasible compensation. While Fitchs 25 agents may be well trained and be rich in experience, although many of them work only part-time, under the present work condition it is enough. And also the quality of the service cant be oversimplified to only a factor of the number of employees, which, in our common sense, has no necessary correlation. It is some other things should be taken into consideration, such as social reputation, the feedbacks of customers and the companys culture and spiritual, to avoid making the assertion too unwarranted.
In the second place, the statistics offered by the arguer cant elucidate anything. It seems true that Adams achievement is greater than Fitchs through the comparison of revenues, but the data itself is too vague to be informative. Taking into account the service charge, which cant be omitted in this case, we absolutely have adequate reasons to doubt the charge from Adams is far larger than Fitch, which eventually leads to such a gap. Another possibility of the result is contributing to the types of house they are entrusted to sell, since no evidence showed that Adams can afford to sell the lower-price estates while Fitch can assume the opposite ones, thus the phenomenon arises.
Last but not least, in short of legitimacy is that Fitch really sells homes slower than Adams does. According to the arguers narrative, he entrusted his home to Fitch ten years ago when the balance of offer-request heavily outweighed the left side and Fitch selling it in more than four months is nothing but a miracle. Adams, instead, sold his another home in one month last year during which the request for house might be booming as a result of influx of the foreign immigrants. Under this circumstance, Adams success, however, is merely ordinary. Besides, the two houses sold out no doubt have natural differences, which tightly related to the smooth process of selling, such as location, structure, areas, and materials. The arguer thus makes so hasty a generalization regardless of these crucial points.
As it stands, the argument is not well reasoned in lack of some indispensable evidence. To make it logically acceptable, the arguer would demonstrate that the superior quality of Adams agents and the relatively lower charge comparable to Fitchs. Additionally, more details should be evinced, concerning the actual estate situation in those periods of time and fundamental instructions of the two sold houses, to rule out the above-mentioned possibilities. (587 words)
点评:该范文充斥着上面讨论的各种毛病,仅开头就131字,加上结尾超过200字,已经远远超过正文1/3篇幅,是不可取的。许多模式句型充斥,结尾老套,不值得学习借鉴。另外很多考生关心这样一来字数就不合要求。ETS从来没有对作文字数有要求,尽管网上流行说法认为阅卷者将字数列为打分项目之一,但是在ETS公布的评分标准中是觅不着踪迹的,况且ETS极讲究科学性,不会以貌取人,但求以理服人,这
从他考试的设计可以看出来。所以正常的ARGUMENT作文可以在350500字之间,而ISSUE可在450600之间,这是按正常打字速度与思维速度指定的标准。很多网上作文包括我这里的某些范文都有远远超过500,600字的,很少是在真正全封闭作业下,45分钟或30分钟内完成的,在考试时间内,按上述标准的字数作文拿满分是绰绰有余的,事实说明一切,我的诸多战友,包括前面提及的Violet,从来都是靠5步一杀,3步一枪,(500字左右ISSUE,300字左右ARGUMENT),在4,6级词汇范围内稳拿5分6分,可见一斑。不相信的考生应该自己在PP2、PP3的作文模考中亲身体验,我会在最后推荐大家一个行之有效的快速练习作文速度和质量枪手作文速成训练法,我们这一辈称为替身杀手的人都是这样练出来的。
小升初面试技巧:根据简历猜题目
小升初面试剖析,揭开神秘面纱
小升初电脑大派位:大派位操作流程及志愿填报
文件:朝阳区2010小升初入学政策及推优方案
西城小升初电脑大派位今年四中八中首招派位生
2010小升初朝阳几所重点初中校点评
小升初关注:个人艺术特长加分政策将取消
小升初家长必备:2011北京特长招生四大走势
小升初推优:北京中小学三好生体质标准降5分
朝阳新增13所小升初推优校 推优数增加530个
人大附中小升初面试题汇编1
朝阳小升初推优力度加大 推优生增至600人
家长晒小升初面试题,千奇百怪难上难
海淀区体质监测成绩直接挂钩明年小升初推优
北京西城中小学外地生 提供暂住证户口可入学
推优——不可不知的小升初入学途径三
专家解读:2010北京小升初特长招生四大走势
小升初推优政策:超重小学生将无缘市级三好生
2010参考:海淀区09小升初推荐分配具体安排
小升初关注:小学市级三好学生评选有哪些条件
北京海淀区小升初推优将延续“打分排队”
西城区09小升初推优标准以及日程安排表及其他
人大附中小升初面试题汇编5
西城区小升初特长招生办法及招生情况
海淀小升初推优政策
小升初:北京市教委暂不取消小升初特长生
北京市教委:小升初特长生不能跨区就学
小升初家长经验分享:2010小升初推优成功谈
2010小升初参考:2009东城区小升初推优政策
北京各区2010小升初特长生招生测试政策大全
| 不限 |
| 英语教案 |
| 英语课件 |
| 英语试题 |
| 不限 |
| 不限 |
| 上册 |
| 下册 |
| 不限 |