3月11日北美sat写作真题回忆.

　　别看北美3月11日的sat写作考试已经结束多时，但这次的真题，与国内孩纸而言，还是很有价值的!出于此，今天的文章，澳际与童鞋们分享这一天的sat写作真题，正在进行sat写作学习的孩纸，可以了解了解!

　　总体而言，本次sat写作考试整体偏难。下面，澳际就将3月11日的sat写作真题送上，sat写作学习者们不妨感受下!

　　一、阅读部分

　　本次阅读难度适中稍难，出现了2篇Science文章(其中1篇还是paired passage)，1篇Social Science文章，1篇History文章，还有一篇文学类文章。

　　其中History的文章是Emerson之于政府和个人关系的论述，也可算作Social Science政治类文章。

　　由此可见，Science类型的文章占比进一步加大!

　　第一篇: 文学类文章，小说，难度稍易

　　文章大意：节选的是小说中第一章刚开始的部分，描述了Briony这个孩子的一些性格特点和爱好。比如非常爱整洁，喜欢藏秘密，11岁开始写自己第一个故事等。将这个女孩栩栩如生的刻画出来。题目多为细节题。

　　第二篇: 社科类Social Science文章，难度适中

　　文章大意：本文讲述了一个概念 - metaphor(隐喻手法)，以及它对人心理产生的印象和作用。文章开头举了一个metaphor的例子，说如果没有去过一个城市，而另一个人对这个城市的描述是脏乱差，这个隐喻手法就会在我们脑子中根深蒂固，即使发现是不准确的，也很难被去除。文章随后用科学实验的例子，继续通过数据去说明metaphor对人心理产生的影响。例子是描述一个城市的犯罪，用两个不同的词汇描述，一个描述犯罪是“像猛兽肆虐城市”，一个是像“病毒散播城市”，然后让受访者选择解决方案，凶猛型的“增加警力和监狱”和温和型“教育并扶植经济”，结果完全不一样。

　　第三篇: 科学Science类，难度稍高

　　本文讲述的通过研究动物骨头标本的一种实验方法，来推断恐龙的年龄，以及它们体重和年龄的关系。文章给出了不同恐龙种族，如暴龙等，它们年龄和体重的关系图。本篇涉及多道图表题。

　　第四篇: 历史政治History类，难度稍高

　　文章大意：文章阐述的是Emerson对政府和个人之见关系的见解，也就是民主主义和个人主义之见的矛盾。感兴趣的同学可以阅读一下原文。

　　第五篇: 科学Science类，难度适中

　　文章大意：第五篇文章是Paired Passage。两篇文章，都是讲火星的。第一篇讲火星上在亿万年前，科学研究表明发现有湖泊 (warm little pond) 的存在。文章介绍了这个湖的地点，大小，并且论述因为这个湖的存在，具备了生命的基本条件，提出了一个理论设想。 而第二篇则提出，火星上有水源并且有较长时间孵化出史前生命这个传统观点，可能是错误的。研究表明火星有可能是在极短的时间内遭遇了地球从未经历的大变化，水源消失，没有足够的时间是的生命孵化。

　　题型总结：

　　A. 主旨题: 基本每篇均有涉及, 全文主旨和段落主旨。

　　B. 结构题: 一段话问你放在什么地方，要特别小心答案“After number XX”，不要误以为是直接在“XX”处插入这段话。

　　C. 排除法+找对应: 考察细节的比较多, 同时伴随循证题一起出现。

　　D. 循证题: 每篇2题左右, 难度中等。

　　E. 图表题: 内容较丰富, 但如果能够正确提取关键信息, 拿下并不困难。

　　F. 词汇题: 平均每篇1～2题, 正常。

　　二、语法部分

　　本次语法题较为简单。文章理解也不难。明显对于阅读题来说要轻松些。很多题目不用通篇全部读完整，这样可以帮助我们节省时间。当如遇到主旨题、结构体，还是需要耐心的读一下所提到的段落。

　　第一篇

　　本文讲的是绿色能源的两种介绍。其中主要介绍了biofuel，举的例子是algae fuel，描述了建筑物如何使用绿色能源向建筑物提供energy，减少能源消耗。

　　第二篇

　　本文讲的是Dudley Randall这位诗人，在60年代的Black Arts Movement中，如何创办了Broadside Press，通过将诗歌印刷在传统的宣传页上，传播诗歌这个艺术内容。文章主要讲述的是传统宣传页在这个运动中如何被重新使用，以及Broadside Press的成功。

　　第三篇

　　本文讲的是2012到2024年期间，全美国的工作岗位会增加，而同期的基础劳动岗位(如基建，建设公人，暖通等)的需求量会增加的更多。所以文章从几个方面去举例阐述，希望现在更多的年轻人能加入并从事基础劳动岗位的技能学习。比如由于政府的规章制度更加严格，对基础设施的标准更加苛刻，使得这些岗位的技能要求更加高标准，并且是“铁饭碗”。

　　第四篇

　　本文讲的Frank Lloyd Wright这位建筑师在30年代构思的一个理想城市设计：Broadacre City。Wright这位建筑师觉得当时的城市设计非常糟糕，所以他一生致力于设计一个理想城市。文章描绘了Broadacre City的一些设计理念，比如较少的高楼大厦，通过高速公路连接城市周边的农场等。

　　三、数学部分

　　本次考试数学部分并不是特别困难，一个明显的趋势是几何题减少，代数题增加。应用题不要掉以轻心，耐心读完题，看清楚问的是什么。

　　四、写作部分

　　作者论述了为什么营养品分析和减肥专家遭到疯狂追捧?人人都可成为营养达人?追捧是否合理?如何回归理性，正确看待营养品分析和减肥专家。

　　写作原文回顾：

　　Everyone has opinions. You probably know what they say about that. But leaving aside the olfactory qualities of all the opinions to which we are entitled, we at least tend to know when our opinions are just opinions. But not with nutrition*, where not only does everyone have an opinion, but everyone seems to think theirs is an expert opinion. And our culture seems to be okay with that. I’m not.

　　By the same token, I’m not convinced that someone who happens to live through a bad car crash to drive again is automatically qualified to take over NHTSA, or set up shop as a motor vehicle safety expert, and dispense advice accordingly.

　　Call me crazy.

　　I am not at all sure that someone who inadvertently sets fire to his kitchen, and manages to put out the fire bore burning everything entirely down, is a shoe-in as fire commissioner, or qualifies as a fire safety expert. I am not sure that he should go on to establish a cottage industry in fire safety, selling expert advice in books, blogs, and programs.

　　I would have my doubts if someone who has driven for 10 years without ever having an airbag deploy writes a book, starts an organization and launches a social movement to oppose airbags as a government conspiracy. She might be convinced that airbags are a ploy by the “Big Auto” industry to dupe the public and drive up prices, but that wouldn’t make it so.

　　I’m not entirely persuaded that someone who happens to have gone hiking in Alaska once without being eaten by a bear is de facto a leading authority on bears, and qualified to dispense expert guidance on how to handle them.

　　I don’t think someone who has been a passenger on a plane is automatically a credible source about how to fly one. I don’t think anyone who has driven over a suspension bridge necessarily knows how best to build one. I don’t think someone treated once by a neurosurgeon gets to offer expert commentary on the nuances of brain surgery.

　　I trust these examples all seem pretty silly. We would never allow for claims of expertise, and cottage industries based on them, to be established on such flighty nonsense.

　　Unless, of course, the claims of expertise and cottage industries pertained to nutrition and weight loss — in which case, that’s exactly what we would do. It’s exactly what we are doing.

　　Everyone who has ever gotten fat and then lost weight is embraced as an expert, fully authorized by our culture to dispense advice and sell books advising others on how to succeed. For the most part, every one of these makes a case different from every other — and yet every one is convinced they have found the universal formula. And over and over again, the faithful, or hopul, line up and reach for their credit cards.

　　Don’t get me wrong — I am delighted for very individual who figures out how to lose weight, and more importantly, find health. I am delighted each time someone finds a path they can follow to lasting vitality. But the notion that this automatically registers as expertise is exactly analogous to the car crash and kitchen fire examples above. In any area other than nutrition and weight control, we would either laugh or roll our eyes.

　　Everyone who has ever eaten seems to be granted an equally authoritative opinion about nutrition.

　　This is not just nonsense. It’s dangerous nonsense.

　　I am not arguing that nutrition is special and should be treated differently simply because it is one of the most profound influences on human health (it is). I am not arguing that nutrition should be treated with particular respect because it makes the list of top three causes of premature death and chronic disease, and can exert a positive influence just as great (it does). I am not suggesting that nutrition should be shown unique derence because it represents the construction material for the growing bodies of children and grandchildren we love.

　　Quite the contrary; I am saying we need to stop treating nutrition differently. We simply need to treat it as we do any other subject that matters, and a whole lot of harm and confusion would go away. We need to stop treating nutrition with unique disdain.

　　What harm ensues from that disdain? Every silly diet to come down the pike gets the same treatment. I know this, because I do multiple media interviews every week about whatever the fad diet du jour happens to be (the latest theme is intermittent fasting, by the way). These diets are then featured on television and in print in a way that gives them all comparable credibility. And we are all kept in a state of perpetual confusion about what’s what.

　　The result? We already have far too many silly diets than any one of us could try in a lifetime, and we just keep getting fatter and sicker all the while. Competing versions of dogma are a catalyst for nothing but dissent and quagmire.

　　The recurrent promise of magic from sources given credibility they don’t deserve forestalls the unified, culture-wide commitment to eating well and being active that really could addyears to our lives, and life to our years. And yes — we really do know what eating well means. We are not by any means clueless about the basic care and feeding of Homo sapiens, and how bizarre it would be if we were! Our knowledge of optimal nutrition is by no means perfect, but it is genuine knowledge — and there is no need to make perfect the enemy of good.

　　Admittedly, there are differences of opinion among even legitimate experts in nutrition. To some extent, this is the inevitable parsing of details that occurs among experts in any field; it’s about the icing, not the cake. To some extent, this is a byproduct of our incomplete and evolving knowledge of nutrition and health.

　　But I do believe it is compounded by our tendency to treat any opinion on nutrition as an expert opinion. To get noticed at all in such context, some otherwise legitimate experts wind up exaggerating their perspectives to the point of disfigurement. I see this as the very unfortunate result of collusion among a culture that fails to require true expertise as a basis for expert opinion; a news media that profits from the perpetual uncertainty of their audience, and thus their receptivity to the next false promise; and experts willing to do whatever it takes to be heard above this din. Alas.

　　All it would take to fix this stultifying mess is to treat nutrition and weight management like every other legitimate field of inquiry. With no more respect than all the others, but no less either.

　　We don’t care what people not trained to do neurosurgery think about neurosurgical technique. They are not qualified to opine. When it comes to building airplanes or suspension bridges, we want to hear from the right kinds of highly-trained engineers, not some character who happened to ride in a plane once, or drive across a bridge. When it comes to flying those planes, we want things in the hands of trained pilots — not some guy with a lot of frequent-flyer miles and strong convictions. And I’m confident we want special military operations delegated to our elite troops, and not someone who saw Zero Dark Thirty and came out convinced he could have done a better job.

　　For now, anyone who shares opinions about nutrition or weight loudly and often enough — or cleverly enough — is embraced as an authority, with no one generally even asking what if any training they’ve had. This is compounded by the fact that, in the famous words of Bertrand Russell, “Fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser men so full of doubts.” It is the least substantiated, most uninformed opinions about how to eat that will come at you with the greatest conviction. That’s your first clue that something is awry, because true expertise always allows for doubt.

　　We have created a seething stew of opinion about everything to do with nutrition, including, presumably, stew. That leaves us with far too many cooks, many lacking credentials to be in the kitchen in the first place. I trust everyone knows what that means.

　　-fin

　　*I am by no means suggesting readers buy this textbook! Rather, I cite it simply to show I’ve done my homework. The third edition of ‘Nutrition in Clinical Practice’ is currently in the works.

　　2017年3月11日的sat写作真题，童鞋们感觉如何?为了更好地帮助大家进行sat写作学习，上述的文章，澳际还准备了相应的范文，各位可一定要认真解读呢!好啦，今天的内容，到这里就全部结束了，想了解更多的话，还请继续锁定澳际教育sat写作频道!谢谢合作!

　　澳际留学深知每一个留学人都是独一无二的，因此我们非常厌恶制作中文文书而后翻译成英文的落后方式。令人遗憾的是，这正是很多DIY申请者和留学公司无法避免的行为。中西思维差异而导致的中式英语和词不达意等弊病对申请结果影响恶劣，我们则会根据申请者个人特点和录取委员会的思维逻辑进行纯英文创作。我们追求用地道的英语精彩展现申请人的特点，将Be Yourself 和Admission Officers' Thinking在每一份文书中完美结合。这不仅极大增加了成功机会，也让文书的写作变成了与我们的用户进行心灵交流的一种仪式。这个过程，不断感动着参与到其中的我们并为此骄傲。

　　澳际六步曲文书创作与学校申请服务项目根据各项考试成绩和背景提升情况最终确定学校和专业;根据所选学校的要求和特点制定有针对性的申请方案;根据所选学校的要求和特点创作有针对性的申请文书;指导申请人完成Writing Sample/Research Proposal 和Portfolio 的制作;指导申请人办理成绩单、在读证明、毕业证明，存款证明等相关申请材料;指导申请人完成网上申请和邮寄申请材料。