以下澳际留学更新2011gmat机经，以下2011年9月-10月gmat作文机经更新，AI，9月24日至10月9日，共41题。希望大家的gmat考试顺利!

　　25.It is the duty for an employee to put the company first.

　　考古：it is duty for an employee to put needs of a company first

　　提供观点：两方面，工作的时候应该把公司需要放在第一位，工作之外的时间就不一定

　　26 . 4次Scientists are continually redining the standards for what is benicial or harmful to the environment. Since these standards keep shifting, companies should resist changing their products and processes in response to each new recommendation until those recommendations become government regulations.”

　　“科学家在不断重新制定对环境什么是有利的，什么是有害的的标准。由于这些标准不停变动，面对新建议，公司应该保持他们的产品和流程不变直到新的建议成为国家标准为止。”

　　提供观点：

　　1. 科学家的建议也并不一定都是正确的。很有可能他的结论适用面很窄。或者他所得到的数据有错误等等。

　　2. 对企业来说频繁的变更产品和生产流程会造成很大的经济损失

　　3. 诚然等待国家制定标准很可能存在滞后等问题但是比较起来以上的问题还是应该等待国家制定标准。此外一个折中的方案是国家成立专门的机构快速地对新的方案和建议做出评价并迅速制定标准

　　split the difference lag evaluate

　　View1: The recommendations given by scientists are usually controversial or have inconsistent perspectives on same questions, thus can not provide clear directions on actions that companies should adopt,

　　View 2: changing products and processes too often will inevitably increase cost and lower productivity. Therore do harm to the companies .

　　View3: while waiting for government regulations may draw back the processes of solving the problems, it is relatively a better strategy for companies to follow. We can count on the authorities to speed up the process of conversion between scientific discoveries and official regulations.

　　北美范文：

　　The speaker argues that because scientists continually shift viewpoints about how our actions affect the natural environment, companies should not change their products and processes according to scientific recommendations until the government requires them to do so. This argument raises complex issues about the duties of business and about regulatory fairness and fectiveness. Although a wait-and-see policy may help companies avoid costly and unnecessary changes, three countervailing considerations compel me to disagree overall with the argument.

　　First, a regulatory system of environmental protection might not operate equitably. At first glance, a wait-and-see response might seem fair in that all companies would be subject to the same standards and same enforcement measures. However, enforcement requires detection, and while some violators may be caught, others might not. Moreover, a broad regulatory system imposes general standards that may not apply equitably to every company. Suppose, for example, that pollution from a company in a valley does more damage to the environment than similar pollution from a company on the coast. It would seem unfair to require the coastal company to invest as heavily in abatement or, in the extreme, to shut down the operation if the company cannot afford abatement measures.

　　Secondly, the argument assumes that the government regulations will properly rlect scientific recommendations. However, this claim is somewhat dubious. Companies with the most money and political influence, not the scientists, might in some cases dictate regulatory standards. In other words, legislators may be more influenced by political expediency and campaign pork than by societal concerns.

　　Thirdly, waiting until government regulations are in place can have disastrous fects on the environment. A great deal of environmental damage can occur bore regulations are implemented. This problem is compounded whenever government reaction to scientific evidence is slow. Moreover, the EPA might be overburdened with its detection and enforcement duties, thereby allowing continued environmental damage by companies who have not yet been caught or who appeal penalties.

　　In conclusion, despite uncertainty within the scientific community about what environmental standards are best, companies should not wait for government regulation bore reacting to warnings about environmental problems. The speaker’s recommended approach would in many cases operate inequitably among companies: moreover, it ignores the political-corruption factor as well as the potential environmental damage resulting from bureaucratic delay.

---

　　27.7次As fossil fuel resources are limited and vital, international agreements should be adopted to require all of the countries to reduce the dependence on fossil fuels.

　　考古

　　V1.since fossile fuel vailed and limited, international agreement 要 reduce fuel ...... 问你同意还是不同意

　　v2.Fossil fuel resources: For the Fossil fuel resources is XXX and limited, 有必要制定一个针对所有国家的 international agreement，来限制各个国家对fossil fuel的依赖。

---

　　28. It is people&aposs duty to disobey laws that they consider unjust. 7次

　　V1 people has a duty to disobey 他们认为unjust 的laws

　　V2. Should people have the responsibility to disobey the laws that they consider to be unreasonable.

　　V3. People have the duty to disobey laws that they consider unjust.

　　29.　相比OLD　WORKERS的经验和智慧，EMPLOYERS(考试悲剧犯超低级错误当成EMLOYEES..还好文章这里写的比较含糊)能从YOUNG　WORKERS　的ENERGY　和NEW　IDEAS获益更多4次

　　Employer benits more from the energy and new ideas of younger workers than from experience and wisdom of older workers

---

　　30. 6次延长人类寿命是一个错误，因为增加了资源的耗费Although most people wish to live long lives, attempting to significantly extend the average human life span would be a mistake. If achieved, this would place an enormous burden on resources, lowering the quality of life for everyone.

---

　　31 A nation should maintain a highly competitive educational system ---encourage the students to compete with each other and against students in other countries---- to ensure its own economic success. 黄金80原题：2次

　　“If a nation is to ensure its own economic success, it must maintain a highly competitive educational system in which students compete among themselves and against students from other countries.”

　　“如果一个国家要确保它的经济成功，它必须保持有高度竞争力的教育系统，在其中学生们相互竞争，还和国外的学生进行竞争。”

　　分析

　　1， advantage: make students better prepared for the future competition, etc.

　　2， disadvantages:very pressure and stressful

　　3， a rined educational system is prerred

　　提供观点：

　　View1: education play a very important part in determine a nation’s economic success.

　　Employees, government regulation strategies, corporate management level, technology—competitive power of products

　　View2: as the development of open market and global economy, education is also required to face international challenge.

　　Although sometimes competition might produce desired results such as ficiency and productivity, I still believe that our national economic success will be better promoted by an educational system that encourages cooperative learning among students, and with students from other countries.

　　being competitive fixes our focus externally, on marking and beating the progress of others with whom we compete. Such external motivation can direct our attention away from creative solutions to our problems, and away from important human values like cooperation and fair play. Indeed, a highly competitive environment can foster cheating and ruthless back-stabbing within an organization, and ill-will and mistrust among nations. In the extreme case, competition between nations becomes war.

　　北美范文

　　I don’t think it is a good idea to design an educational system that focuses mainly on competition. For although a little competition might produce desired results, in the long run too much competition will be destructive. Instead, I believe that our national economic success will be better promoted by an educational system that encourages cooperative learning among students, and with students from other countries.

　　Granted, competitiveness is an important aspect of human nature. And, properly directed, it can motivate us to reach higher and produce more, not to mention meet deadlines. But being competitive fixes our focus externally, on marking and beating the progress of others with whom we compete. Such external motivation can direct our attention away from creative solutions to our problems, and away from important human values like cooperation and fair play. Indeed, a highly competitive environment can foster cheating and ruthless back-stabbing within an organization, and ill-will and mistrust among nations. In the extreme case, competition between nations becomes war.

　　On the other hand, an environment of cooperation encourages us to discover our common goals and the best ways to achieve them. At the national and international levels, our main interests are in economic wellbeing and peace. In fact, economic success means little without the security of peace. Thus, global peace becomes a powerful incentive for developing educational models of cooperative learning, and implementing exchange programs and shared research projects among universities from different countries.

　　Moreover, research suggests that cooperative settings foster greater creativity and productivity than competitive ones. This has been shown to be the case both in institutions of higher learning and in business organizations. If true, it seems reasonable to argue that national economic success would be similarly tied to cooperative rather than competitive fort.

　　In conclusion, competition can provide an fective stimulus to achievement and reward. Even so, I believe it would be unwise to make competition the centerpiece of our educational system. We stand to reap greater benits, including economic ones, by encouraging cooperative learning.

　　以上澳际留学更新2011年gmat机经，以上2011年9月-10月gmat作文机经更新，AI，9月24日至10月9日，共41题。希望大家的gmat考试顺利!

gmat机经9-10月gmat作文机经AI(至10.9)(五)gmat作文机经

　　以下澳际留学更新2011gmat机经，以下2011年9月-10月gmat作文机经更新，AI，9月24日至10月9日，共41题。希望大家的gmat考试顺利!

　　25.It is the duty for an employee to put the company first.

　　考古：it is duty for an employee to put needs of a company first

　　提供观点：两方面，工作的时候应该把公司需要放在第一位，工作之外的时间就不一定

　　26 . 4次Scientists are continually redining the standards for what is benicial or harmful to the environment. Since these standards keep shifting, companies should resist changing their products and processes in response to each new recommendation until those recommendations become government regulations.”

　　“科学家在不断重新制定对环境什么是有利的，什么是有害的的标准。由于这些标准不停变动，面对新建议，公司应该保持他们的产品和流程不变直到新的建议成为国家标准为止。”

　　提供观点：

　　1. 科学家的建议也并不一定都是正确的。很有可能他的结论适用面很窄。或者他所得到的数据有错误等等。

　　2. 对企业来说频繁的变更产品和生产流程会造成很大的经济损失

　　3. 诚然等待国家制定标准很可能存在滞后等问题但是比较起来以上的问题还是应该等待国家制定标准。此外一个折中的方案是国家成立专门的机构快速地对新的方案和建议做出评价并迅速制定标准

　　split the difference lag evaluate

　　View1: The recommendations given by scientists are usually controversial or have inconsistent perspectives on same questions, thus can not provide clear directions on actions that companies should adopt,

　　View 2: changing products and processes too often will inevitably increase cost and lower productivity. Therore do harm to the companies .

　　View3: while waiting for government regulations may draw back the processes of solving the problems, it is relatively a better strategy for companies to follow. We can count on the authorities to speed up the process of conversion between scientific discoveries and official regulations.

　　北美范文：

　　The speaker argues that because scientists continually shift viewpoints about how our actions affect the natural environment, companies should not change their products and processes according to scientific recommendations until the government requires them to do so. This argument raises complex issues about the duties of business and about regulatory fairness and fectiveness. Although a wait-and-see policy may help companies avoid costly and unnecessary changes, three countervailing considerations compel me to disagree overall with the argument.

　　First, a regulatory system of environmental protection might not operate equitably. At first glance, a wait-and-see response might seem fair in that all companies would be subject to the same standards and same enforcement measures. However, enforcement requires detection, and while some violators may be caught, others might not. Moreover, a broad regulatory system imposes general standards that may not apply equitably to every company. Suppose, for example, that pollution from a company in a valley does more damage to the environment than similar pollution from a company on the coast. It would seem unfair to require the coastal company to invest as heavily in abatement or, in the extreme, to shut down the operation if the company cannot afford abatement measures.

　　Secondly, the argument assumes that the government regulations will properly rlect scientific recommendations. However, this claim is somewhat dubious. Companies with the most money and political influence, not the scientists, might in some cases dictate regulatory standards. In other words, legislators may be more influenced by political expediency and campaign pork than by societal concerns.

　　Thirdly, waiting until government regulations are in place can have disastrous fects on the environment. A great deal of environmental damage can occur bore regulations are implemented. This problem is compounded whenever government reaction to scientific evidence is slow. Moreover, the EPA might be overburdened with its detection and enforcement duties, thereby allowing continued environmental damage by companies who have not yet been caught or who appeal penalties.

　　In conclusion, despite uncertainty within the scientific community about what environmental standards are best, companies should not wait for government regulation bore reacting to warnings about environmental problems. The speaker’s recommended approach would in many cases operate inequitably among companies: moreover, it ignores the political-corruption factor as well as the potential environmental damage resulting from bureaucratic delay.

---

　　27.7次As fossil fuel resources are limited and vital, international agreements should be adopted to require all of the countries to reduce the dependence on fossil fuels.

　　考古

　　V1.since fossile fuel vailed and limited, international agreement 要 reduce fuel ...... 问你同意还是不同意

　　v2.Fossil fuel resources: For the Fossil fuel resources is XXX and limited, 有必要制定一个针对所有国家的 international agreement，来限制各个国家对fossil fuel的依赖。

---

　　28. It is people&aposs duty to disobey laws that they consider unjust. 7次

　　V1 people has a duty to disobey 他们认为unjust 的laws

　　V2. Should people have the responsibility to disobey the laws that they consider to be unreasonable.

　　V3. People have the duty to disobey laws that they consider unjust.

上12下

共2页

阅读全文

更多出国留学最新动态，敬请关注澳际教育手机端网站，并可拨打咨询热线：400-601-0022