GRE ANALYTICAL WRITING CHEAT SHEET

ISSUE ESSAY (30 minutes)

Task

• Position-taking essay: Defend YOUR reasoned stance on a given claim/recommendation

• No "correct" answer — graded on reasoning quality, not position correctness

• Respond to specific instruction (agree/disagree, extent, conditions, etc.)

Structure (5 paragraphs recommended)

|---------|-----|--------|

High-Yield Strategies

Thesis quality markers:

• "Although X argues Y, Z is more accurate because..."

• "While A has merit, B is the more foundational capability because..."

• NOT: "Adaptability is important and many people agree."

Example specificity ladder:

• ❌ Weak: "Many companies innovate successfully"

• ✓ Strong: "Amazon's reinvestment in AWS despite retail losses illustrated long-term thinking"

• ✓ Best: Name + specific decision + outcome + timeframe

Scope qualifiers (when absolute claims are too strong):

• "In most cases," "under specific conditions," "when resources permit"

Scoring (0–6 scale)

|---------|---------|----------|

---

ARGUMENT ESSAY (30 minutes)

Task

• Critique-based essay: Analyze logical quality of SOMEONE ELSE'S argument

• Do NOT take position on underlying topic (don't defend or attack the conclusion)

• Identify assumptions, flaws, missing evidence per the specific instruction

Key Difference from Issue

|-------|----------|

7 Common Logical Flaws (Decision Tree)

|------|-----------|---------|-----|

Structure for Each Flaw

For every logical flaw you identify:

Name it explicitly → "This argument commits a correlation-causation error..."

Explain why it weakens the argument → "Because X, the evidence doesn't establish that Y..."

Specify what evidence would fix it → "To strengthen this, the argument would need to show..."

Critical Warnings

• ❌ Do NOT defend the argument's conclusion (even if you agree with it)

• ❌ Do NOT argue whether the conclusion is true in reality

• ❌ Do NOT treat it as an Issue essay (you're not taking a stand)

• ✓ Focus on logical structure, not factual accuracy

Scoring (0–6 scale)

|---------|---------|----------|

Section	Do	Avoid
Intro	State clear, specific thesis in sentence 1; preview structure	"Many arguments exist on both sides"; wishy-washy hedging
Body (3–4)	One specific point per paragraph; develop with concrete named example	Vague generalities; "many companies show X"
Concession-Rebuttal	Acknowledge strongest counterargument; explain why it doesn't undermine YOUR position (substantive rebuttal)	Ignoring opposing view; superficial "but I still believe"
Conclusion	Synthesize + connect to broader implications (policy, education, society)	Restate thesis only; summarize without synthesis
Score 6	Score 4	Score <4
Cogent, well-developed reasoning	Clear position, relevant support	Unclear position; weak/irrelevant support
Specific, compelling examples	May lack full development	Vague examples or none
Substantive counterargument engagement	Limited complexity	Ignores counterargument
Clear, varied prose	Acceptable but plain	Confusing or repetitive
Issue	Argument
Your position + defend it	Their position + critique it logically
Examples support YOUR view	Analysis reveals logical gaps in THEIR view
Acknowledge counterargument to show nuance	Identify logical fallacies (no personal agreement)
Flaw	Definition	Example	Fix
Correlation ≠ Causation	Assumes coinciding events = causal link	"Sales rose after ad campaign, so ads caused sales growth" (ignores market trends, seasonal demand)	Need evidence ruling out alternative causes
Unrepresentative Sample	Generalizes from non-representative subset	"5 Silicon Valley startups succeeded with no business plan, so startups don't need plans"	Evidence from diverse, representative population
False Analogy	Concludes A ≈ B without sufficient similarity	"Company X cut costs by eliminating benefits; Hospital Y should do the same" (different industries, different employee needs)	Show relevant dissimilarities OR relevant similarities
Temporal Assumption	Assumes past conditions still apply	"Last decade, our customers preferred price over quality; we should cut R&D" (market preferences shift)	Current data on customer preferences
Either-Or Fallacy	Assumes only two options when more exist	"Either we expand production or close the factory" (could diversify product line)	Identify overlooked alternatives
Circular Reasoning	Uses conclusion as supporting premise	"Art education builds creativity because creative students benefit from art class"	Independent evidence for the causal claim
Missing Alternative Explanation	Ignores other possible causes	"Test scores rose after new curriculum; curriculum caused improvement" (could be better teacher training, increased funding, improved student nutrition)	Consider and rule out competing causes
Score 6	Score 4	Score <4
Identifies multiple relevant logical flaws	Identifies some logical issues	Misses major flaws or off-topic critique
Each flaw analyzed in depth (3-part treatment)	Flaws named but under-developed	Superficial flaw identification
Clear articulation of reasoning	Acceptable clarity	Confusing or poorly organized
Considers scope, missing info, evidence needed	Limited engagement with evidence gaps	Doesn't address evidence quality

---

TEST-DAY CHEAT: Which Essay Type?

Issue: You defend your own reasoned position Argument: You critique someone else's logical reasoning

Read the instruction carefully. The prompt will say "Discuss the extent to which you agree / you disagree" (ISSUE) or "Write a response in which you analyze / you examine the argument's assumptions" (ARGUMENT).