GMAT作文并不提倡特立独行的立意或是诙谐讨巧的语言，反而它要求的是考生按照既定的结构进行讨论提出观点;因而考生需要确立对于GMAT的题目的惯用作文结构，并在考试中尽量遵循确立的结构快速形成作文的基本结构，尤其是开篇和收尾段，从而可以留有相对充裕的时间构思并写作中间部分。所以本文就把GMAT作文更看重结构给大家介绍下。
开头结尾可预设
开篇和收尾段一般遵循英文文章的一贯行文结构，即开篇立题，而收尾再立题，因而在开篇和收尾段的写作上考生可预先设定好提出和确立观点的结构，即是进一步设定段落的结构，也就是句式数量和安排。如果考生预先考虑好了该段提出观点的结构，以及所需要的句式数量和安排，考生便可以在考场上从容地先确立自己的观点，并快速形成开篇段;收尾段也是如此，除所确立的观点外，考生均可预先设定，这就省去了大量花在句式写作上的构思时间，将更多的时间留给中间部分。
写作备考三要素
在准备中需要注意以下三个要素：即句式数量，句式内容，和句式安排。考生能明确句式数量，即可以明确句子字数，从而进一步构思句式内容;在准备句式内容时，建议考生仅将模板和推荐句式作为参考，可以借鉴其结构或是表述方式，而不是照搬其内容或是干脆照抄;而之后考生即可确立若干套的句式安排，但无需过多，并试用不同题目进行写作以确定段落的通用性，在考试中也可驾轻就熟。
》》点击了解GMAT写作如何写出画龙点睛的结尾
GMAT满分作文举例
题目
The following appeared as part of an article in a daily newspaper:
"Most companies would agree that as the risk of physical injury occurring on the job increases, the wages paid to employees should also increase. Hence it makes financial sense for employers to make the workplace safer: they could thus reduce their payroll expenses and save money."
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. In your discussion be sure to analyze the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For example, you may need to consider what questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and what alternative explanations or counterexamples might weaken the conclusion. You can also discuss what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the argument, what changes in the argument would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.
首段
This argument states that it makes financial sense for employers to make the workplace safer because by making the workplace safer then lower wages could be paid to employees. This conclusion is based on the premise that as the list of physical injury increases, the wages paid to employees should also increase. However, there are several assumptions that may not necessarily apply to this argument. For example, the costs associated with making the workplace safe must outweigh the increased payroll expenses due to hazardous conditions. Also, one must look at the plausability of improving the work environment. And finally, because most companies agree that as the risk of injury increases so will wages doesn’t necessarily mean that the all companies which have hazardous work environments agree.
中间段1
The first issue to be addressed is whether increased labor costs justify large capital expenditures to improve the work environment. Clearly one could argue that if making the workplace safe would cost an exorbitant amount of money in comparison to leaving the workplace as is and paying slightly increased wages than it would not make sense to improve the work environment. For example, if making the workplace safe would cost $100 million versus additional payroll expenses of only $5,000 per year, it would make financial sense to simply pay the increased wages. No business or business owner with any sense would pay all that extra money just to save a couple dollars and improve employee health and relations. To consider this, a cost benefit analysis must be made. I also feel that although a cost benefit analysis should be the determining factor with regard to these decisions making financial sense, it may not be the determining factor with regard to making social, moral and ethical sense.
中间段2
This argument also relies on the idea that companies solely use financial sense in analysing improving the work environment. This is not the case. Companies look at other considerations such as the negative social ramifications of high on-job injuries. For example, Toyota spends large amounts of money improving its environment because while its goal is to be profitable, it also prides itself on high employee morale and an almost perfectly safe work environment. However, Toyota finds that it can do both, as by improving employee health and employee relations they are guaranteed a more motivated staff, and hence a more efficient staff; this guarantees more money for the business as well as more safety for the employees.
中间段3
Finally one must understand that not all work environments can be made safer. For example, in the case of coal mining, a company only has limited ways of making the work environment safe. While companies may be able to ensure some safety precautions, they may not be able to provide all the safety measures necessary. In other words, a mining company has limited ability to control the air quality within a coal mine and therefore it cannot control the risk of employees getting blacklung. In other words, regardless of the intent of the company, some jobs are simply dangerous in nature.
末段
In conclusion, while at first it may seem to make financial sense to improve the safety of the work environment sometimes it truly does not make financial sense. Furthermore, financial sense may not be the only issue a company faces. Other types of analyses must be made such as the social ramifications of an unsafe work environment and the overall ability of a company to improve that environment (i.e., coal mine). Before any decision is made, all this things must be considered, not simply the reduction of payroll expenses.
》》点击了解GMAT作文理清结构方能得高分
以上就是关于GMAT作文更看重结构的内容介绍，复习GMAT需要耐力和耐心，无论是刚看的还是刷过几次的都要沉住气，利用好百利天下和其他各类资源，发现自己的问题，不要闷着做题，适当的时候总结一下事半功倍!大家继续加油，700+就在前方!
您还可能关注：
