ETS官网GRE3分范文欣赏

 　　Essay Response — Score 3

　　There is no current proof that advancing technology will deteriorate 1 the ability of humans to think. On the contrary, advancements 2 in technology had advanced our vast knowledge in many fields, opening opportunities for further understanding and achievement. For example, the problem of dibilitating illnesses and diseases such as alzheimer's disease is slowing being solved by the technological 3 advancements in stem cell research. The future ability of growing new brain cells and the possibility to reverse the onset 4 of alzheimer's is now becoming a reality. This shows our initiative as humans to better our health demonstrates greater ability of humans to?think.
　　One aspect where the ability of humans may initially 5 be seen as an example of deteriorating 6 minds is the use of internet and cell phones. In the past humans had to seek out information in many different enviroments and aspects of life. Now humans can sit in a chair and type anything into a computer and get an answer. Our reliance on this type of technology can be detrimental 8 if not regulated and regularily substituted for other information sources such as human interactions and hands on learning. I think if humans understand that we should not have such a reliance on computer technology, that we as a species will advance further by utilizing 9 the opportunity of computer technology as well as the other sources of information outside of a computer. Supplementing our knowledge with internet access is surely a way for technology to solve problems while continually advancing the human?race.
　　Reader Commentary for Essay Response — Score 3This 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 10 evidence. In discussing the potential of technology to advance knowledge in many fields (a broad subject, rife 11 with possible examples), the writer uses only one limited and very brief example from a specific field (medicine and stem-cell?research).
　　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 7 of over-reliance upon technology.? However, the explanation of both the problem and solution is vague and limited ("Our reliance ... can be detrimental. If humans understand that we should not have such a reliance ... we will advance further"). There is neither explanation of consequences nor clarification of what is meant by "supplementing." This second paragraph is a series of generalizations 12 that are loosely connected and lack a much-needed?grounding.
　　In the essay, there are some minor 13 language errors and a few more serious flaws (e.g., "The future ability of growing new brain cells" or "One aspect where the ability of humans may initially be seen as an example of deteriorating minds"). Despite the accumulation of such flaws, the writer's meaning is generally clear. Thus, this essay earns a score of?3.