北美留学考试英文作文满分速成法——“魔板”填空法

来自：滴答网


在大学的考G考T的经验以及两年寒假在**的刻苦培训，加上半年来在**作文教学，使我更加深刻地明白了作文的写作的确存在短期突破的可能性与必要性。

记得在大学时代，各个大学的BBS上包括我们**就广为流传着“作文魔板”这个名词，没有自己体会过用套路写作的人其实根本不可能理解到这其中的奥秘，因为有的人说背“魔板”是不可能得到高分的，而另一些人却说不背“魔板”得到的高分是没有“性价比”的。实际上，就我个人而言，我认为魔板的背诵是非常必要的，但绝对不是能是盲目的！

大家都知道，我们中国人其实在英语的听说读写四个环节上最薄弱的就是输出的两个能力：说和写；而最强的就是输入的两个能力：读和听。而如果我们想在出国的道路上成为佼佼者，那么在保持传统强项的同时是否应该特别加强一下我们的口语和写作能力呢？

而根据我考TSE(TEST OF SPOKENENGLISH)的经验，其实口语考试分数的高低(注意这里仅仅是指考试分数)几乎完全取决于你到底背了多少段落。因为口语的TOPIC是覆盖面非常广泛的：教育、文化、历史、生物、科技、艺术等等，所以这就从客观上决定了考生必须背大量的段落，而实际上背的过程中也就是把不涉及过于具体内容的话背下来，到考试的时候再把听到或看到题目要求的具体内容往里面加。一定要注意是从背具体的段落到提炼抽象的魔板最后再回到具体的段落：

具体
抽象
具体

下面我就分别以新TOFEL的综合部分和GRE/GMAT作文的“阿狗”部分为例分别给大家分享一下我个人对于满分的一些理解。

TOEFL iBT
其实新托福加了综合部分以后，我个人认为是降低了难度。因为原来老托福的作文作为新托福作文的独立部分并没有什么太大的改变，而且大家都知道作文水平的提高不是一朝一夕的事情，那么我刚才说的不能盲目就是指大家不能在这个需要体现真正写作水平的部分去背段落，因为这个是会被认为是舞弊行为的。那么在综合、独立各占15分的时候，我们如果能把握住任何一个部分的高分实际上平均下来的分数就不会低。而综合部分由于是先读一篇文章，再听一段录音，然后让我们谈文章与录音的相互关系，而不用发表自己的观点这一题目本身的客观要求就决定了它是可以背由固定标准语句组成的“魔板”的。这正如研究生入学考试英语写作的小作文和雅思写作的小作文一样是有固定套路的。比如录音讲座要么就是质疑或者反驳了阅读段落；要么就是支持或者加强了阅读段落，所以只需要把相关描述质疑或者反驳与描述支持或者加强的固定语句背下来就可以得到一个相对较高的分数，如果考生同时又把相关要点表达准确和清楚了的话，那么满分是完全可能的。当综合部分有15分在手的时候，独立部分只要及格那么就能至少获得24分的作文高分！
比如以下两个“魔板“是分别描述质疑或者反驳以及支持或者加强的：

　　Integrated Writing Task
　　How the Integrated Writing Task is phrased:
　　If the lecture challenges the information in the reading passage, thewriting task will usually be phrased in one of the following ways:
　　ØSummarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain howthey cast doubt on specific points made in the reading passage.
　　ØSummarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain howthey challenge specific claims/arguments made in the reading passage.
　　ØSummarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to specificallyexplain how they answer the problems raised in the reading passage.
　　Showing Challenge
　　In the lecture, the professor made several points about______________. The professor argues that__________________.
　　However, the reading contends that________________.
　　The professor’s lecture casts doubts on the reading by using a numberof points that are contrary to___________________________.
　　The first point that the professor uses to cast doubt on the reading is that_________________.
　　According to the professor,________________________________.
　　_______________ differs from the reading in that the reading states _______________________________.
　　The point made by the professor casts doubt on the reading because_______________________.
　　Another point that the professor uses to casts doubt on the reading is ___________________________________.
　　The professor claims that______________________________________.
　　However, the reading states _____________________________________.
　　This point is contradicted by_____________________________________.
　　Finally, the professor stated that, on the contrary of the reading, _____________________________________.
　　In other words,______________________________________.
　　This directly contradicts what the reading passage indicates, because___________________________.
　　In conclusion, the points made in the lecture contradict the reading.
　　_________________and_______________ demonstrate that ___________is in doubt.
　　If the lecture supports or strengthens the information in the readingpassage, the writing task will usually be phrased in one of thefollowing ways:
　　ØSummarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to specificallyexplain how they support the explanations in the reading passage.
　　ØSummarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to specificallyexplain how they strengthen specific points made in the reading passage.
　　Showing support
　　In the lecture, the professor made several points about_______________.
　　The professor argues that______________________________.
　　The points made by the professor agree with________________.
　　In fact, the examples used by the professor support_________________.
　　The first point that the professor uses to support the reading is that_______________________.
　　According to the professor,_____________________________.
　　_______________________supports the reading, which holds that_______________________.
　　The point made by the professor supports the reading because_____________________.
　　Furthermore, the professor bolsters the reading by stating that_______________.
　　The professor claims that_________________________________.
　　This point agrees with the reading, which contends that______________.
　　__________________ shows the truth of the reading because___________.
　　Finally, the professor stated that, in support of the reading, ______________________________.
　　Specifically,__________________________________________.
　　This perfectly reinforced what the reading passage indicates, because___________________________.
　　In conclusion, the points made in the lecture support the reading.
　　________________ and ________________________demonstrate that ________________________is invalid.

　　接下来，我将以如下例子来告诉大家如果提炼“魔板”：
　　Getting the Templates
　　The first point the professor makes that casts doubt on the readingis his point about the behavior of stags. The professor shows how theactions of animal can be interpreted in different ways. For example,some people interpret the stag’s actions as being for the “good of thespecies,” but the professor shows that the stag is actually acting inself-interest. This casts doubt on the reading because it appears thatthe crickets’ behavior can be interpreted as helping only individualcrickets and not the group as a whole. The professor then talks aboutthe results of the experiment, which seems to indicate the crickets areacting only in self-interest.
　　Another point the professor makes that casts doubt on the reading ishis point about the intelligence of animals and insects. As he states,it would seem to require a lot of intelligence to evaluate how abehavior will affect an entire species. This makes the explanation inthe reading seem less likely; a cricket is probably unable to think ofthe consequences of its actions. It is more likely that the cricket isonly acting out of self-preservation, as the professor indicates.
　　The first point the professor makes that casts doubt on the reading is his point about__________________________________.
　　The professor shows that_____________________________________.
　　For example, ______________________________, but the professor shows that_______________________________________.
　　This casts doubt on the reading because it appears that_________________________________.
　　The professor then talks about_________________________, which seems to indicate that___________________________.
　　Another point the professor makes that casts doubt on the reading is his point about__________________________________.
　　As he states, it would seem to___________________________.
　　This makes the explanation in the reading seem less likely;_____________________________________.
　　It is more likely that________________________, ad the professor indicates.

实际上，大家从上面这个例子就可以发现“魔板”的提取过程就是这样的：
先认真读完一篇满分范文
再用笔划掉其中涉及题目具体内容的部分
最后把余下来的部分抄写下来即可
但“魔板”做出来后只是做了一小半工作，大家还必须学会如何往里面填空，实际上最简单的方法就是看着题目把具体内容自己填进去，然后跟范文对比，找出填空的[s:102]技巧所在，因为在后半部分的GRE/GMAT中我还会详细讲解，所以这里只是先告诉大家这样一个简单方法。
大家如果想在今后新托福的考试中作文部分有所突破，那么就应该按照我这个提炼“魔板”的方法，去至少提炼20篇左右的满分范文，再加以有机排列组合成自己独特的考试“魔板”，最后进行集中填空，那么新托福作文25分将不再是神话。

GRE/GMAT
下面，我将再用GRE/GMAT的作文填空法来帮大家强化“魔板”的方法以及填空的概念。
其实跟新托福一样，GRE/GMAT中作文也分为两个部分：“一休”和“阿狗”。那么这

两个部分也是同等重要，而且一个难以短期突破，一个只能短期突破，所以“魔板”的作用就在这里显示出来了。“阿狗”由于是驳论文，不需要发表考生自己的观点，只需要考生指出段落的逻辑错误即可，那么专门用来写驳论文的反驳式段落就显得非常重要，而我们大家都没有学过如何去写驳论文，所以可以说不背“魔板”基本就不可能及格。而背“魔板”也分高手和水手，所以我个人认为有以下三重境界：
知道如何提炼“魔板”
知道需要将提炼的“魔板”排列组合成自己的考试“魔板”
知道怎么往“魔板”里正确、恰当地填空
只有达到这三重境界的全部才可能获得满分。下面我将以几个例子来巩固“魔板”的提炼方法以及重点介绍如何填空，而排列组合由于非常简单而且因人而异，这里就不再介绍，有问题可以发邮件跟我交流。

1. 开头段
　　In this argument, the arguer concludes that sending the mechanics ofGAA to a two-week QCS on proper maintenance procedures willautomatically lead to improved maintenance and to greater customersatisfaction along with greater profits for the airline. To support theconclusion, the arguer points out that the performance of themaintenance crews in the automobile racing industry improved markedlyafter their crews had attended the seminar. In addition, the arguerreasons that since the maintenance crews of the automobile racingindustry and the mechanics of GAA perform many of the same functions,the airlines will gain similar benefits from the training program. Thisargument suffers from several critical fallacies.

　　In this argument, the arguer recommends that C should advise itscitizens to install both air conditioners and fans for cooling in orderto reduce the cost of electricity. To justify this claim, the arguerprovides the evidence that many citizens of C suffer from the risingcosts of electricity. In addition, he cites the result of a recentstudy that using fans alone costs more than using air conditionersalone, and that using both fans and air conditioners costs less thaneither using fans or air conditioners alone. A careful examination ofthis argument would reveal how groundless the conclusion is.

　　In this analysis, the arguer claims that P University should offeremployment to the spouse of each new faculty member that they hire. Tosubstantiate the conclusion, the arguer cites the example of B Collegewhere professors prefer to have their spouse employed in the samegeographical area. In addition, the arguer assumes that this offer ofpossible job for their spouse on the campus, no matter whether it willbe accepted, is the only factor that new professors consider indeciding whether to accept a university position. This argument isunconvincing for several critical flaws.

　　In this argument, the arguer advocates that the C Corporation shouldhire DF, a family owned local company that offers varied menu of fishand poultry, instead of GT Company, the present supplier of food in C’semployee cafeteria. The recommendation is based on the observation thatthe GT is expensive, that its prices have kept rising, that it does notserve special diets, and that three employees complained about it.Meanwhile, the arguer assumes D to be a better choice for C because asample lunch of this company that the arguer happened to taste wasdelicious. This argument is problematic for two reasons.

　　The conclusion in this argument is that F College can expect toincrease enrollment by promising to find jobs for students aftergraduation. In support of this prediction, the arguer claims thatcollege-bound students are increasingly concerned about job prospectsafter graduation. Moreover, the arguer assumes that this attempt hasthree benefits: (1) to enable F to compete with more famous schools;(2) to encourage students to start career preparation early; (3) toencourage students to complete their coursework. This argument isfraught with vague, oversimplified and unwarranted assumptions.

2. 中间段
　　First, the argument is based on a false analogy. The arguer simplyassumes that airplane mechanics and automobile maintenance crewsperform many similar functions, but he does not provide any evidencethat their functions are indeed comparable. As we know, the structure,operation and function of airplanes and those of automobiles differconspicuously. It is true that both the airplane and the automobileneed refueling and engine maintenance, but even here there existfundamental differences: the structure and the building materials ofeach other’s engines are different, so is the oil they use. Therefore,even though the two-week Quality-Care Seminar proved effective inimproving the performance of the maintenance crews in the automobileracing industry, there is no guarantee that it will work just as wellfor airplane mechanics

　　Second, the arguer commits a fallacy of hasty generalization. Even ifthe maintenance of the airline has been improved as a result of sendingits mechanics to the Seminar, which is, of course , unwarrantedassumption, it does not follow that there will be greater profits aswell as greater customer satisfaction for airline. As we know, customersatisfaction depends on several major factors other than goodmaintenance of the airplane. For instance, customers are generallyconcerned about the punctuality, the on-board service, the ticketprice, the luggage handling procedure and even the discount, all ofwhich are ignored by the arguer. Besides, the arguer does not provideany solid information concerning how the airplane can improve itsprofits. Unless Get-Away Airlines can significantly increase itscustomers or passengers and at the same time cut down its costs, bothof which are unknown from this argument, there is no guarantee that itwill “inevitably” harvest greater profits. Actually, the arguer’srecommendation of investing in this training program a the only way toincrease customer satisfaction an profits would most probably turn outto be ineffective and misleading.

　　In the first place, the arguer fails to take into account thegeographical factors in the analysis. While we informed that there arewide geographical differences in the nation of Claria, and that manycitizens are experiencing rising costs of electricity, the arguer failsto make clear the exact number of those citizens or their percentage inthe national population, as well as the geographical distribution ofthese citizens. If only a small portion of the whole population areexperiencing the rising costs of electricity while most familiars donot have similar experience, then the reason might be that the formerdo not use electricity sparingly. In this case, the rising costs ofthose families have nothing to do with what kind of electric appliancethey use to cool their house. Or if only families living in hot areasare spending more money on cooling, then it is unwise to requirecitizens living in temperate and frigid zones to install both fans andair conditioners, in the absence of all this information, it isimpossible for us to install both fans and air conditioners. In theabsence of all this information, it is impossible for us to evaluatethe recommended policy that is intended to help every householdnationwide to reduce their electricity cost.

　　In the second place , the comparison in this argument is incompleteand selective, the arguer discovers that using fans alone is more costeffective than using air conditions alone, and that using both fans andair conditioners are the least expensive way of cooling. However, thearguer fails to provide any information regarding the actual amount oftime for using, respectively, fans alone, air conditioners alone, andboth fans and air conditioners in those three groups of surveyedfamilies. It is very likely that these three groups of families arelocated in three very different climatic regions of Claria, and hencethe amount of days of the year during which they need to cool theirhouses varies significantly. Families living in cooler areas of thenation certainly cool their houses for fewer hours and hence use lesselectricity than families living in hot areas, no matter what coolingappliance they use. Unless we are certain that the surveyed familiesling in the same climatic region, or that they need to cool theirhouses for the same amount of hours in the same year although they livein different regions, which is very unlikely, we have every reason todoubt the trustworthiness of this comparative study. Furthermore onelectricity may be using more electricity for purposes other thancooling. Unless the arguer also takes this factor into consideration,the comparison is unconvincing.

　　First of all, the argument is based on a hasty generalization.According to the cited studies, professors at Bronston College arehappier living in small towns when their spouses are also employed inthe local area than when their spouses work in distant areas, which isunderstandable. This fact tells very little about what actualconditions the professors often consider as important when they choosewhere to work. Even if we accept the arguer’s assumption that whethertheir spouse can find a job in the local area Is the only importantquestion that new professors consider when they decide whether toaccept is it likely that the professor will consider accepting theuniversity’s offer. Consequently, it is unwarranted to assume that newprofessors will accept Pierce’s offer whether their spouse can findsatisfactory employment in the local area.

　　In addition, the arguer fails to consider several other relevantfactors that may influence professors’ decision. For instance, sincePierce’s location is not ideal, the pay it offers should be high enoughto be attractive. New gifted professors are also concerned about theposition they can have and the courses they supposed to teach in thenew university. What’s more, what researchers care most about might bethe university’s research conditions such as laboratory equipments,adequate research funds, etc.

　　Finally, the arguer hints that the morale of Pierce’s entire staff islow, but he fails to analyze the causes. Is it because the managementof the university is poor, or because the pay is too low, or becausethe local area stuffers from economic depression, or because the localenvironment is severely damaged by industrial pollution? Under thesecircumstances, offering employment to the spouse would be ineffectiveat all for the purpose of attracting more new professors. Furthermore,if these problems do exist, even if Pierce succeeds in hiring many ofthe most gifted teachers and researchers of the country, the generalmoral of the whole faculty would remain low.

　　The major problem with this argument is that the arguer fails toconvince us that Cedar’s present supplier the Good-Taste should befired. First, the fact that the Good-Taste is the second most expensivecaterer in the city may be due to its better foods, quality service andhigh reputation in this industry. Second, the fact that it prices havebeen rising for the last three years may be due to nationwide inflationor the rising cost in the food industry. Third, the fact that Good-Taste refuses to serve special diets does not indicate that it cannotmeet the needs of Cedar Corporation unless the arguer can demonstratethat Good-Taste served special diets at first and now it refuses to doso hence disappointing Cedar’s employees complained, which makes itimpossible for us to e valuate the overall service of Good-Taste. Maybethese three people are those few on special diets. Even if they haveevery reason to complain about the foods or service of the supplier ona certain day, these three people’s opinion lacks the necessaryrepresentativeness based on which we can make any general judgmentconcerning the overall performance of Good-Taste.

　　Another point worth considering is the arguer’s hasty generalization.We are informed that Discount serves fish and poultry, but we do notknow whether Cedar’s employee all prefer this limited menu. We canbelieve that one sample lunch that the arguer happened to taste wasindeed delicious, but based on this slim information, we can neverevaluate the overall performance of Discount.

　　One major assumption in short of legitimacy is the causalrelationship claimed between college-bound students’ increasing concernabut job prospects after graduation and their expectation on theuniversity to find jobs for them. Students’ increasing concern aboutjob prospects may mean that when they choose which university to go tothey prefer those universities that can offer the majors most likely tolead to more job opportunities and higher income after graduation. Theymay also be more interested in prestigious universities because theirstudents are more competitive and more welcomed in the job market. Asis known to everyone, in a market economy, promising to find jobs forstudents is impractical and hence rather doubtful. This strategy mayprove misleading and counterproductive in the end. Instead of promisingjobs to students, Foley College should devote its resources and effortsto offering more majors with good job prospects as well as attractingmore prestigious professors to enhance its reputation.

　　In addition, the conclusion is based on a gratuitous assumption thatpromising students jobs will make students more conscious in theirstudy. This, however, is unwarranted. When students do not have toworry about their employment after graduation, they feel no pressure intheir study; as a result, they will become more passive and dependentand gradually lose the initiative to improve themselves. Although it ismore likely that they will complete their coursework, but when theygraduate, no company would like to employ them. By then theuniversity’s promise will turn not to be meaningless.

3. 结尾段

　　In summary, the conclusion reached in this argument is in valid andmisleading. To make the argument more convincing, the arguer would haveto prove that college-bound students are most concerned about thepromise of jobs after graduation and the F College can keep its promisein the end. Moreover, I would suspend my judgment about the credibilityof the recommendation until the arguer can provide concrete evidencethat promising students jobs can actually encourage them to work harderin their study. Otherwise, the arguer is simply begging the questionthroughout the argument.

　　To conclude, the argument is not persuasive as it stands. Before weaccept the conclusion, the arguer must present more facts that GT hasindeed to meet the requirements of C Corporation. To solidify theargument, the arguer would have to produce more evidence concerning thefoods and service of D and how they can better meet the needs of C’semployees.

　　As it stands, the argument is not well reasoned. To make it logicallyacceptable, the arguer would have to demonstrate that an offer ofemployment to the spouse is the only condition that new professorsconsider on accepting P’s offer. Additionally, the arguer must provideevidence to rule out other possible causes of the low staff morale atthe university.

　　To sum up, the conclusion lacks credibility because the evidencecited in the analysis does not lend strong support to what the arguermaintains. To strengthen the argument the arguer would have to providemore evidence concerning the percentage of the affected families andtheir geographical distribution. To better evaluate the argument, wewould need more information regarding the electric expense relevant tothe actual amount of time for cooling among, respectively, the threegroups of households and the amount of electricity used for otherpurposes in all three groups of families under survey.

　　In conclusion, the arguer fails to establish a causal relationshipbetween sending Get-Away’s mechanics to the Quality-Care Seminar andimproved maintenance, greater customer satisfaction and greater profitsfor the airline. To strengthen the argument, the argument, the arguerwould have to provide evidence that automobile maintenance and airplanemaintenance are similar in every aspect. To better evaluate theargument, we would need more information about the relationship betweenimproved maintenance and greater customer satisfaction along withgreater profits.

[ 本帖最后由 没有没有 于 2007-12-7 00:53 编辑 ]

好长的作文啊

好贴要顶起来