The shortened GRE has one writing task: Analyze an Issue, thirty minutes, scored 0 to 6 separately from Verbal and Quant. Many programmes barely look at it — and a bad one is still noticed, so the goal is a solid 4.5 to 5 for modest effort rather than a 6 for a lot.
Take a position and keep it. The prompt gives a claim and specific instructions about what to consider. A clear, argued position scores better than a balanced survey that never commits. Address the instructions given — they are part of the task, not decoration.
A structure that works, every time:
- Introduction — restate the issue in your own words, state your position, name the two or three grounds you will argue from. Three sentences.
- Concession paragraph — the strongest case against you, stated fairly, then why it does not overturn your position. Doing this early buys credibility for everything after it.
- Two body paragraphs — one ground each. Claim, then a specific example, then the sentence that says why the example supports the claim. That last sentence is the one weak essays omit.
- Conclusion — what follows if you are right. Not a summary.
Examples must be specific. "Many studies show" is worth nothing. A named policy, a named company, a historical episode, something from your own field — anything concrete. Two specific examples outperform six vague gestures, and you do not need to be an expert: you need to be exact.
Write plainly. Graders read fast. Short sentences, clear connectives (*because*, *however*, *as a result*), one idea per paragraph. Long words used imprecisely cost marks; they do not earn them.
Budget the thirty minutes. Five to plan — position and two grounds written down before you start — twenty to write, five to re-read. The re-read is for sense and for typing errors, not for rewriting.