Reader Commentary for Essay Response Score 3
This essay never moves beyond a superficial discussion of the issue. The writer attempts to develop two points: that advancements in technology have progressed our knowledge in many fields and that supplementing rather than relying on technology is surely a way for technology to solve problems while continually advancing the human race. Each point, then, is developed with relevant but insufficient evidence. In discussing the potential of technology to advance knowledge in many fields , the writer uses only one limited and very brief example from a specific field .
Development of the second point is hindered by a lack of specificity and organization. The writer creates what might be best described as an outline. The writer cites a need for regulation/supplementation and warns of the detriment of over-reliance upon technology. However, the explanation of both the problem and solution is vague and limited . There is neither explanation of consequences nor clarification of what is meant by supplementing. This second paragraph is a series of generalizations that are loosely connected and lack a much-needed grounding.
In the essay, there are some minor language errors and a few more serious flaws . Despite the accumulation of such flaws, the writers meaning is generally clear. Thus, this essay earns a score of 3.
【GRE范文鉴赏(1)】相关文章:
最新
2016-03-01
2016-03-01
2016-03-01
2016-03-01
2016-03-01
2016-03-01