gmat写作是一个需要长期坚持的备考过程，更是一个平时积累的过程，阶段性的总结也是一种备考的技巧，今天，小编就为大家带来gmat写作课程总结，希望大家能够把这些总结运用到自己的备考中!
句式总结：
1. Firstly, the promoting company fails to take the costs of purchasing the on-line software into consideration.
2. For example, Alibaba pays almost 10% of
3. Thirdly, even if the costs can be saved from training, it does not guarantee that the profitability will increase.
4. the arugment omits some very significant factors
5. To bolster the conclusion, more evidences should be provided in the arugument.
6. The argument that XXX can XXX omits some important concerns that must be address to substantiate the argument
7. This alone does not constitute the a logical arugment in favor of , and it certainly not provide support or proof of the main argument
8. Not address the cause of the problem
9. Firstly ,the argument assumes that the XXXX,XXX is unknown or inaccurate
10. Because the argument leaves out several key issues, it’s not sound or pervasive
11. The argument would have been more thorough and convincing
12. 另外，入场后可以先别急着点continue，可以先把模板默写出来，到时候开始awa的时候再照着抄可以省很多时间
13. attributed the decline in profits to
14. 时态用一般现在时
15. in this argument, the author concludes that
Sample 1
The author cites that fact that a new employee needs to be trained before they work, so an on-line training program
will be recommanded by this company to help the company save training costs. To support this argument, the author
provides the evidence that the face-to-face training will cost a lot compared with the on-line one. This argument
sounds somewhat convincing, but after a quick but careful analysis, it is problematic in three aspects.
Firstly, the promoting company fails to take the costs of purchasing the on-line software into consideration. This
argument just oversimplifies the cost of the software purchasing by thinking that the face-to-face training will cost a lot
from both the experienced employees and new ones. However, this is not the case. Learning the personal training
from the experienced employees, the new employees can maximize their involvements in the program and can obtain
the first-hand experiences from them. For example, Alibaba pays almost 10% of their annual expenses on employees
training by sending them out to overseas to learn the lastest knowledge and skills. If Alibaba simply offered the
on-line training, there is not enough interaction for its employees to improve their skills timely and combine with their
real experience in the real world.
Secondly, even if the costs of the purchasing are affordable, not every employee is necessary to be fully trained. The
program also commits a fallacy that all of the new employees need to be trained on-line equally. However, if there are
some new employees who are experienced in the same industry for couple years, but they just new to the company, it
is not necessary to train them fully on-line.
On the contrary, they just need some proper training of the company and get better prepared. Moreover, some
positions are not required to be trained on-line, such as the cleaners and so on. If the company just thinks everyone
needs to be trained on-line and more costs will be wasted on unnecessary purchasing of the programs. Therefore, if
the company can clearly classify the groups of employees that need on-line training, more costs will be saved.
Thirdly, even if the costs can be saved from training, it does not guarantee that the profitability will increase. The
argument fails to claim that how much percent of costs that training takes up and it also omits the sales of the
company which also has significant influence on the profits. For example, if the cost budgets of training just merely
takes up a small amount of the total costs, there is no reason for the company to spend so much money to purchase
the on-line program. Moreover, if sales of the company still keep the same or drop down due to the inefficent
management structures, wrong developing strategies, the profits will undoubtedly drop. Without taking other factors
into consideration, it is imprudent forthe author to promise that the purchase of the on-line software will increase the
company's profits.
Overall, the arugment omits some very significant factors that should have been taken into consideration, so it is
neither convincing nor persuasive. To bolster the conclusion, more evidences should be provided in the arugument.
Only by doing this can the argument be more compelling and logica
模考1
communications sessions conducted by high-level management. The argument conclude that the most employees at Company X now feel that the improvement most needed at the company has been made. But there's 3 fault about the logical of the argument.
First, the company didn't identify what kind of communication improvment is need by the employee. The result of the survey only mentioned communications between employees and management but not specific what kind of management was in the relation ship. For example, employee may only need to get better communication with their direct manager on some daliy working issues.Oboviously, the communications sessions conducted by high-level management can't help in improvment for employees above. So the seesions may conduct in a wrong direction.
Secondly, communications sessions conducted by high-level management will be less effective in improve commucation than other forms such as one -to-one talk or e-system which can be used to collect the questions proposed by employee. The high managers can't feedback insight of the questions asked in the session due to the time limits. So the solution carried out by the company seems not very effecntive and it cast a doubt if this session is realy helpful.
Third, the argument conclude that the employee feels the improvement most needed at the company has been made without any survey. As a impelemetor of the action ,the company can't come to above conclusion by themselves. Since the conclusion was about the feeling of the employee,the feedback from the employee is esstional. However, nothing of the employee's feedback was taken in consideration in the argument.
The argument fails to guarantee the effective of the improvement by carrying out less effictive actions, missing clean understanding about employee's request and ignoring of employee's feedback. The conclusion of the argument is unconving.
模考二
The arguments above claims that base on the traveler's increasing interesting on foregine coutires the corporate will start a world tour theme park. And according to the corporate successful experience on a space-travel theme park, the argument expect a tenfold increase of attendance for the World Tour theme park.This argument fails to bring some important factors of the successful of new project into consideration and ignores the logical of the the comparison of tow different kind of parks,making it weak on the conclusion.
Firstly, the corporate believes that the World Tour theme park will be successful base on assumption that the traveler who go foreign countries mainly interested on the famous foreign buildings and the food of foreign countries. This assumption need to be further proved. For example, some travelor may only were attracted by the nature beauty or the culture of foreign countries. So the building and food the corporate plan to replicas will fail in attracting attendance to the theme park.
Secondly, the location where the World Tour' theme park will be bulided is the capital city which has large percentages of international residents and of children under the age of 16. Some survey need to be taken in order to invetegate if the international residents are more interesting in visite the theme park than the domestic residents. Since most international residents have been to different country, why are they more likely to visite the theme park other than demestic residents who have never been abroad. So the loaction of the park need some thorough consideration.
Thirdly, it's inlogical that argument forecast that there will be tenfold increase of the World Tour theme park base on the successful experience of the space travel theme park . These tow kind of theme park is totally different in the content and attendants of the park are of different groups. Besides, the openning of a new park may bring more serious competitions to both of the park. So not only will the World Tour' theme park can't gain tenfold attendance in the furture but also the space-travel theme park will face a decline in attendance.
The argument fails to get the conclusion base on its three faults as above. If the corporate can take more survey and bring more proof of the success of the the theme park in the argument, the argument will be more convincing and reasonalbe.