Hi! I am a student who are preparing for GRE, and happen to find this spectacular homepage.
I was wondering what my GRE writing score would be, so I posted my responses to the GRE question below. Since I speak English as a second language and don’t have many writing experiences, my essay would be somewhat laughable. Please excuse for my poor English level, and all of you are welcome to give any harsh feedbacks and score(0~6, which is same scale as actual GRE test)to me.
Thank you
Q)
Claim: Governments must ensure that their major cities receive the financial support they need in order to thrive.
Reason: It is primarily in cities that a nation’s cultural traditions are preserved and generated.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim and the reason on which that claim is based.
A)
These days, lots of debates are going on towards the issue that whether we should guarantee cities with finance. I do not agree with the statement that we should decide to support cities financially, and it is not needed to focus and support financially on cities, and it is better to give attentions to both city and suburb.
There are tons of evidences that country sides have myriads of things that are correlated with cultural traditions. People often forget about the facts that lots of amazing ruins are situated in place other than cities. It is not hard to think of examples of the cases; since it is far from our views, it is easy to forget them. The ancient Korean temple which is located in suburb called Kyeong-Ju. Despite the fact that it is located in the rural area, many tourists eager to go there to have a look on the temple. The temple is preserved in good condition, and the reason of it is because it receives many cares. Had this construction did not supported, it probably collapsed to dust, and we could have no chance to look at it. Hence, it is better to give attentions to both the cities and suburbs.
Next, not only the non-living things that are situated in suburbs are matter, but also the people residing in the area are important as well. But, suppose that we invest lots of moneys in cities, and neglect country sides. I am convinced that the rural areas population would drop significantly, and things would go worse if somethings do not fix it. Since the monetary situation of the government is limited, it is likely that they can help small number of areas. If they focus on cities, and do not consider about suburbs, it would worsen the situations of the country sides, and in result, it is possible that many people abandon their homes, and head to the cities. We can see for ourselves by looking around us. Young people are leaving their homes to work in cities to earn money due to the fact that they do not have enough job sectors in their home town. The population of rural areas are dropping remarkably, and if we support them financially, it can slow and even turn their situations into bright side.
Contrary to above statements, it can be advantageous to support cities more than others. If they do not have any financial problems, they would likely have chances to expend moneys on developing their cultures. If things go smoothly, they would develop the cities which are full of traditional things, and likely to gather travelers, and earn tons of moneys. So, it can be said that there are also a positive side regarding supporting cities more than rural areas financially.
To sum it up, it is recommendable that government pay equal attentions towards cities and country sides due to the above reasons: things associated with tradition are also located in country side, and population of the rural area would likely to go down.