为什么写作需要多读多写【汇集10篇】

下面的材料旨在丰富学生在是非问题写作方面的思想和语言，考生在复习时可以先分类阅读这些篇章，然后尝试写相关方面的作文题。

对于素材中用黑体字的部分，特别建议你熟读，背诵，因为它们在语言和观点上都值得吸收。学习语言的人应该明白，表达能力和思想深度都靠日积月累，潜移默化。从某种意义上说，提高英语写作能力无捷径可走，你必须大段背诵英语文章才能逐渐形成语感和用英语进行表达的能力。这一关，没有任何人能代替你过。

因此，建议你下点苦功夫，把背单词的精神拿出来背诵文章。何况，并不是要求你背了之后永远牢记在心：你可以这个星期背，下个星期忘。这没有关系，相信你的大脑具有神奇的能力。背了工具箱里的文章后，你会惊讶的发现：I can think in English now！

1.?????? Proverbs

1. A graduation ceremony is an event where the commencement speaker tells thousands of students dressed in identical caps and gowns that individuality is the key to success.

2. The primary purpose of a liberal education is to make one’s mind a pleasant place in which to spend one’s time.

3. Next in importance to freedom and justice is popular education, without which neither freedom nor justice can be permanently maintained.

4. The classroom--not the trench--is the frontier of freedom now and forevermore.

5. Education’s purpose is to replace an empty mind with an open one.

6. It is the purpose of education to help us become autonomous, creative, inquiring people who have the will and intelligence to create our own destiny.

7. You see, real ongoing, lifelong education doesn’t answer questions; it provokes them.

8. People will pay more to be entertained than educated.

9.the most important function of education at any level is to develop the personality of the individual and the significance of his life to himself and to others. This is the basic architecture of a life; the rest is ornamentation and decoration of the structure.

10. The essence of our efforts to see that every child has a chance must be to assure each as equal opportunity, not to become equal, but to become different-to realize whatever unique potential of body, mind, and spirit he or she possesses.

11. A great teacher never strives to explain his vision-he simply invites you to stand beside him and see for yourself.

12. If you can read and don’, you are an illiterate by choice.

2. Damaging Research

A study by National Parent-Teacher Organization revealed that in the average American school, eighteen negatives are identified for every positive that is pointed out. The Wisconsin study revealed that when children enter the first grade, 80 percent of them feel pretty good themselves, but by the time they get to the sixth grade, only 10 percent of them have good self-images.

3. Education and Citizenship

An important aspect of education in the United States is the relationship between education and citizenship. Throughout its history this nation has emphasized public education as a means of transmitting democratic values, creating equality of opportunity, and preparing new generations of citizens to function in society. In addition, the schools have been expected to help shape society itself. During the 1950s, for example, efforts to combat racial segregation focused on the schools. Later, when the Soviet Union launched the first orbiting satellite, American schools and colleges came under intense pressure and were offered many incentives to improve their science and mathematics programs so that the nations would not fall behind the Soviet Union in scientific and technological capabilities.

Education is often viewed as a tool for solving social problems, especially social inequality. The schools, t is thought, can transform young people from vastly different backgrounds into competent, upwardly mobile adults. Yet these goals seem almost impossible to attain. In recent years, in fact, public education has been at the center of numerous controversies arising from the gap between the ideal and the reality. Part of the problem is that different groups in society have different have different expectations. Some feel that children should be taught basic job-related skills; still others believe education should not only prepare children to compete in society but also help them maintain their cultural identity (and, in the case of Hispanic children, their language). On the other hand, policymakers concerned with education emphasize the need to increase the level of student achievement and to improve parents in their children’s education.

Some reformers and critics have called attention to the need to link formal schooling with programs designed to address social problems. Sociologist Charles Moscos, for example, is a leader in the movement to expand programs like the Peace Corps, Vista, and Outward Bound into a system of voluntary national service. National service, as Moscos defines it, would entail “the full-time undertaking of public duties by young people whether as citizen soldiers or civilian servers-who are paid subsistence wages” and serve for at least one year. In return for this period of service, the volunteers would receive assistance in paying for college or other educational expenses.

Advocates of national service and school-to-work programs believe that education does not have to be confined to formal schooling. In devising strategies to provide opportunities for young people to serve their society, they emphasize the educational value of citizenship experiences gained outside the classroom. At this writing there is little indication that national service will become a new educational institution in the United States, although the concept is steadily gaining support among educators and social critics.

4. The Teacher’s Role

Given the undeniable importance of classroom experience, sociologists have done a considerable amount of research on what goes on in the classroom. Often they start from the premise that, along with the influence of peers, students’ experiences in the classroom are of central importance to their later development. One study examined the impact of a single first-grade teacher on her students’ subsequent adult status. The surprising results of this study have important implications. It is evident that good teachers can make a big difference in children’s lives, a fact that gives increased urgency to the need to improve the quality of primary-school teaching. The reforms carried out by educational leaders like James Comer suggest that when good teaching is combined with high levels of parental involvement the results can be even more dramatic.

Because the role of the teacher is to change the learner in some way, the teacher-student relationship is an important part of education. Sociologists have pointed out that this relationship is asymmetrical or unbalanced, with the teacher being in a position of authority and the student having little choice but to passively absorb the information provided by the teacher. In other words, in conventional classrooms there is little opportunity for the students to become actively involved in the learning process. On the other hand, students often develop strategies for undercutting the teacher’s authority: mentally withdrawing, interrupting, and the like. Hence, much current research assumes that students and teachers influence each other instead of assuming that the influence is always in a single direction.

5. Education Philosophy

For the past fifty years our schools have operated on the theories of John Dewey (1859-1953), an American educator and writer. Dewey believed hat the school’s job was to enhance the natural development of the growing child, rather than to pour information, for which the child had no context, into him or her. In the Dewey system, the child becomes the active agent in his own education, rather than a passive receptacle for facts.

Consequently, American schools are very enthusiastic about teaching “life skills” –logical thinking, analysis, creative problem--solving. The actual content of the lessons is secondary to the process, which is supposed to train the child to be able to handle whatever life may present, including all the unknowns of the future. Students and teachers both regard pure memorization as an uncreative and somewhat vulgar.

In addition to “life skills”, schools are assigned to solve the ever growing stoke of social problems. Racism, teenage pregnancy, alcoholism, drug use, reckless driving, and are just a few of the modern problems that have appeared on the school curriculum.

This all contributes to a high degree of social awareness in American youngsters.

6. Student Life

To the students, the most notable difference between elementary school and the higher levels is that in junior high they start “changing classes”. This means that rather than spending the day in one classroom, they switch classrooms to meet their different teachers. This gives them three or four minutes between classes in the hallways, where a great deal of the important social action of high school traditionally takes place. Students have lockers in these hallways, around which thy congregate.

Society in general does not take the business of studying very seriously. Schoolchildren have a great deal of free time, which they are encouraged to fill with extracurricular activities—sports, clubs, cheerleading, scouts—supposed to inculcate such qualities as leadership, sportsmanship, ability to organize, etc. those who don’t become engaged in such activities or have afterschool jobs have plenty of opportunity to “hang out”, listen to teenager music, and watch television.

Compared to other nations, American students do not have much homework. Studies also show that American parents have lower expectations for their children’s success in school than other nationalities do. (Historically, there has not been much correlation between American school success and success in later life.) “He’s just not a scholar”, the American parents might say, content that their son is on the swim team and doesn’t take drugs. (Some of the young do choose to study hard, for reason of their own, such as determining that the road to riches lies through Harvard Business School.)

What American schools do effectively teach is the competitive method. In innumerable ways children are pitted against each other—whether in classroom discussion, spelling bees, reading groups, or tests. Every classroom is expected to produce a scattering of A’s and F’s (teachers often grade A=excellent; B=good; C=average; D=poor; and F=failed). A teacher who gives all A’s looks too soft—so students are aware that they are competing for the limited number of top marks.

Foreign students sometimes don’t understand that copying from other people’s papers or from books is considered wrong and taken seriously. Here, it is important to show that you have done your own work and are displaying your own knowledge. It is more important than helping your friends to pass, whom we think do not deserve to pass unless they can provide their own answers. Group effort goes against the competitive grain, and American students do not study together as many Asians do. Many Asians in this country consider their group study habits a large contributor to their school success.

7. Adult Education

After complaining about many aspects of American life, a 40-year-old woman from Hong Kong concluded, “But where else could someone my age go back to school and get a degree in social work? Here you can change your whole life, start a new business, do what you really want to do.”

So at least to this person, school requirements weren’t inhibiting. And to millions of others, adult education is the path to a new career, or if not to a new career, to a new outlook. Schools generally encourage the older person who wants to start anew, and besides regular classes, schedule evening classes in special programs. Today there are so many people of retirement age in college that it is no longer remarkable.

8. Moral Relativism in American

Improving American education requires not doing new things but doing (and remembering) some good old things. At the time of our nation’s founding, Thomas Jefferson listed the requirements for a sound education in the Report of the Commissioners for the University of Virginia. In this landmark statement on American education, Jefferson wrote of the importance of education and writing, and of reading history, and geography. But he also emphasized the need “to instruct the mass of our citizens in these, their rights, interests, and duties, as men and citizens.” Jefferson believed education should aim at the improvement of both one’s “morals” and “faculties”. That has been the dominant view of the aims of American education for over two centuries. But a number of changes, most of them unsound, have diverted schools from these great pursuits. And the story of the loss of the school’s original moral mission explains a great deal.

Starting in the early seventies, “values clarification” programs started turning up in schools all over America. According to this philosophy, the schools were not to take part in their time-honored task of transmitting sound moral values; rather, they were to allow the child to “clarify” his own values (which adults, including parents, had no “rights” to criticize). The “values clarification” movement didn’t clarify values; it clarified wants and desires. This form of moral relativism said, in effect, that no set of values was right or wrong; everybody had an equal right to his own values; and all values were subjective, relative, and personal. This destructive view took hold with a vengeance.

In 1985 The York Times published an article quoting New York area educators, in slavish devotion to this new view, proclaiming, “They deliberately avoid trying to tell students what is ethically right and wrong.” The article told of one counseling session involving fifteen high school juniors and seniors. In the course of that session a student concluded that a fellow student had been foolish to return one thousand dollars she found in a purse at school. According to the article, when the youngsters asked the counselor’s opinion, “He told them he believed the girl had done the right thing, but that, of course, he would not try to force his values on them. ‘If I come from the position of what is wrong,’ he explained, ‘then I’m not their counselor.’”

Once upon a time, a counselor offered counselor, and he knew that an adult does not form character in the young by taking a stance of neutrality toward questions of right and wrong or by merely offering “choices” or “options”.

In response to the belief that adults and educators should teach children sound morals, one can expect from some quarters indignant objections (I’ve heard one version of it expressed countless times over the years): “Who are you to say what’s important?” or “Whose standards and judgments do we use?”

The correct response, it seems to me, is, is we ready to do away with standards and judgments? Is anyone going to argue seriously that a life of cheating and swindling is as worthy as a life of honest, hard work? Is anyone (with the exception of some literature professors at our elite universities) going to argue seriously the intellectual corollary, that a Marvel comic book is as good as Macbeth? Unless we are willing to embrace some pretty silly position, we’ve got to admit the need for moral and intellectual standards. The problem is that some people tend to regard anyone who would pronounce a definitive judgment as an unsophisticated Philistine or a closed-minded “elitist” trying to impose his view on everybody else.

The truth of the real world is that without standards and judgments, there can be no progress. Unless we are prepared to say irrational things—that nothing can be proven more valuable than anything else or that everything is equally worthless—we must ask the normative question. It may come, as a surprise to those who fell that to be “progressive” is to be value-neutral. But as Matthew Amold said, “the world is forwarded by having its attention fixed on the best things” and if the world can’t decide what the best things are, at least to some degree, then it follows that progress, and character, is in trouble. We shouldn’t be reluctant to declare that some things, some lives, books, ideas, and values are better than others. It is the responsibility of the schools to teach these better things.

At one time, we weren’t so reluctant to teach them. In the mid-nineteenth century, a diverse, widespread group of crusaders began to work for the public support of what was then called the “common school”, the forerunner of the public school. They were to be charged with the mission of school felt that the nation could fulfill its destiny only if every new generation was taught these values together in a common institution.

The leaders of the common school movement were mainly citizens who were prominent in their communities—businessmen, ministers, local civic and government officials. These people saw the schools as upholders of standards of individual morality and small incubators of civic and personal virtue; the founders of the public schools had faith that public education could teach good moral and civic character from a common ground of American values.

But in the past quarter century or so, some of the so-called experts became experts of value neutrality, and moral education was increasingly left in their hands. The commonsense view of parents and the publicthat schools should reinforce rather than undermine the values of home, family, and country, was increasingly rejected.

There are those today still that claim we are now too diverse a nation, that we consist of too many competing convictions and interests to instill common values. They are wrong. Of course we are a diverse people. We have always been a diverse people. And as Madison wrote in FederalistNo.10, the competing, balancing interests of a diverse people can help ensure the survival of liberty. But there are values that all American citizens share and that we should want all American students to know and to make their own: honesty, fairness, self-discipline, fidelity to task, friends, and family, personal responsibility, love of country, and belief in the principles of liberty, equality, and the freedom to practice one’s faith. The explicit teaching of these values is the legacy of the common schools, and it is a legacy to which we must return.

9. Schools Should Teach Values

People often said, “Yes, we should teach these values, but how do we teach them?” this question deserves a candid response, one that isn’t given often enough. It is by exposing our children to good character and inviting its imitation that we will transmit to them a moral foundation. This happens when teachers and principals, by their words and actions, embody sound convictions. As Oxford’s Mary Warnock has written, “You cannot teach morality without being committed to morality yourself; and you cannot be committed to morality yourself without holding that some things are right and others wrong.” The theologian Martin Buber wrote that the educator is distinguished from all other influences “by his will to take part in the stamping of character and by his consciousness that he represents in the eyes of the growing person a certain selection of what is, the selection of what is ‘right’, of what should be.” It is in this will, Buber says, in this clear standing for something, that the “vocation as an educator finds its fundamental expression.”

There is no escaping the fact that young people need as example principals and teachers who know the difference between right and wrong, good and bad, and who themselves exemplify high moral purpose.

As Education Secretary, I visited a class at Waterbury Elementary School in Waterbury, Vermont, and asked the students, “Is this a good school?” They answered, “Yes, this is a good school.” I asked them, “Why?” Among other things, one eight-year-old said, “The principal Mr. Riegel, makes good rules and everybody obeys them.” So I said, “Give me an example.” And another answered, “You can’t climb on the pipes in the bathroom. We don’t climb on the pipes and the principal doesn’t either.”

This example is probably too simple to please a lot of people who want to make the topic of moral education difficult, but there is something profound in the answer of those children, something education should pay more attention to. You can’t expect children to take messages about rules or morality seriously unless they see adults taking those rules seriously in their day-to-day affairs. Certain must be said, certain limits lay down, and certain examples set. There is no other way.

We should also do a better job at curriculum selection. The research shows that most “values education” exercises and separate courses in “moral reasoning” tend not to affect children’s behavior; if anything, they may leave children morally adrift. Where to turn? I believe our literature and our history are a rich quarry of moral literacy. We should mine that quarry. Children should have at their disposal a stock of examples illustrating what we believe to be right and wrong, good and bad—examples illustrating what are morally right and wrong can indeed be known and that there is a difference.

What kind of stories, historical events, and famous lives am I talking about? If we want our children to know about honesty, we should teach them about Abe Lincoln walking three miles to return six cents and conversely, about Aesop’s shepherd boy who cried wolf if we want them to know about courage, we should teach them about Joan of Arc, Horatius at the bridge, and Harriet Tubman and the Underground Railroad. If we want them to know about persistence in the face of adversity, they should know about the voyages of Columbus and the character of Washington during the Civil War. And our youngest should be told about the Little Engine That Could. If we want them to know about respect for the law, they should understand why Socrates told Crito: “No, I must submit to the decree of Athens.” If we want our children to respect the rights of others, they should read the Declaration of Independence, the Bill of Rights, the Gettysburg Address, and Martin Luther King, Jr.’ “Letter from Birmingham jail.” From the Bible they should know about Ruth’s loyalty to Naomi, Joseph’s forgiveness of his brothers, Jonathan’s friendship with David, the Good Samaritan’s kindness toward a stranger, and David’s cleverness and courage in facing Goliath.

These are only a few of the hundreds of examples we can call on. And we need not get into issues like nuclear war, abortion, creationism, or euthanasia. This may come as a disappointment to some people, but the fact is that the formation of character in young people is educationally a task different from, and prior to, the discussion of the great, difficult controversies of the day. First things come first. We should teach values the same way we teach other things: one step at a time. We should not use the fact that there are many difficult and controversial moral questions as an argument against basic instruction in the subject.

After all, we do not argue against teaching physics because laser physics is difficult, against teaching American history because there are heated disputes about the Founders’ intent. Every field has its complexities and its controversies. And every field has its basics, its fundamentals. So they are too with forming character and achieving moral literacy. As any parent knows, teaching character is a difficult task. But it is a crucial task, because we want our children to be healthy, happy, and successful but decent, strong, and good. None of this happens automatically; there is no genetic transmission of virtue. It takes the conscious, committed efforts of adults. It takes careful attention.

10. College Pressures

Mainly I try to remind that the road ahead is a long one and that it will have more unexpected turns than they think. There will be plenty of time to change jobs, change careers, change whole attitudes and approaches. They don not want to hear such liberating news. They want a map—right now – that they can follow unswervingly to career security, financial security, Social Security and, presumably, a prepaid grave.

What I wish for all students is some release from the clammy grip of the future. I wish them a chance to savor each segment of their education as an experience in itself and not as a grim preparation for the next step. I wish them the right to experiment, to trip and fall, to learn that defeat is as instructive as victory and is not the end of the world.

My wish, of course, is na?ve. One of the national gods venerated in our media—the million-dollar athlete, the wealthy executive—and glorified in our praise of possessions. In the presence of such a potent state religion, the young are growing up old.

I see four kinds of pressure working on college students today: economic pressure, parental pressure, peer pressure, and self-induced pressure. It is easy to look around for villains—to blame the colleges for charging too much money, the professors for assigning too much work, the parents for pushing their children too far, and the students for driving themselves too hard. But there are no villains: only victims.

“In the late 1960s.” one dean told me. “The typical question that I got from students was ‘Why is there so much suffering in the world’ or ‘how I can make a contribution?’ Today it’s ‘Do you think it would look better for getting into law school if I did a double major in history and political science, or just majored in one of them?’” many other deans confirmed this pattern. One said: “They are trying to find an edge—the intangible something that will look better on paper if two students are about equal.”

Note the emphasis on looking better. The transcript has become a sacred document, the passport to security. How one appears on paper is more important than how one appears in person. A is for Admirable and B is for Borderline, even though, in Yale’s official system of grading, A means “excellent” and B means “very good.” Today, looking very good is no longer good enough, especially for students who hope to go on to law school or medical school. They know that entrance into the better schools will be an entrance into the better law firms and better medical practices where they will make a lot of money. They also know that the odds are harsh. Yale Law School, for instance, matriculates 170students from an applicant pool of 3,700; Harvard enrolls 550 from a pool of 7,000.

It’s all very well for those of us who write letters of recommendation for our students to stress the qualities of humanity that will make them good lawyers or doctors. And it’s nice to think that admission officers are ready reading our letters and looking for the extra dimension of commitment or concern. Still, it would be hard for a student not to visualize these officers shuffling so many transcripts studded with As that they regard a B as positively shameful.

The pressure is almost as heavy on students who just want to graduate and get a job. Long gone are the days of the “gentleman’s C.” when students journeyed through college with a certain relaxation, sampling a wide variety of courses-music, art, philosophy, classics, anthropology, poetry, religion—that would send them out as liberally educated men and women. If I were an employer I would rather employ graduates who have this range and curiosity than those who narrowly pursued safe subjects and high grades. I know countless students whose inquiring minds exhilarate me. I like to hear the play of their ideas. I do not know if they are getting As or Cs, and I do not care. I also like them as people. The country needs them, and they will find satisfying jobs. I tell them to relax. They cannot.

Nor can I blame them. They live in a brutal economy. Tuition, room, and board at most private colleges now come to at least $7,000, not counting books and fees. This might seem to suggest that the colleges are getting rich. But they are equally battered by inflation. Tuition covers only 60 percent of what it costs to educate a student, and ordinarily the remainder comes from what college receives in endowments, grants, and gifts. Now, the remainder keeps being swallowed by the cruel costs—higher every year—of just opening the doors. Heating oil is up. Insurance is up. Postage is up. Health-premium costs are up. Everything is up. Deficits are up. We are witnessing in American the creation of a brotherhood of paupers—colleges, parents, and students, joined by the common bond of debt.

Today it is not unusual for a student, even if he works part time at college and full time during the summer, to accrue $5,000 in loans after four years—loans that he must start to repay within one year after graduation. Exhorted at commencement to go forth into the world, he is already behind as he goes forth. How could he not feel under pressure throughout college to prepare for this day of reckoning? I have used “he,” incidentally, only for brevity. Women at Yale are under no less pressure to justify their expensive education to themselves, their parents, and society. In fact, they are probably under more pressure. For although they leave college superbly equipped to bring fresh leadership to traditionally male jobs, society has not yet caught up with this fact.

Along with economic pressure goes parental pressure. Inevitably, the two are deeply intertwined.

I see many students taking pre-medical courses with joyless tenacity. They go off to their labs as if they were going to the dentist. It saddens me because I know tem in other corners of their life as cheerful people.

“Do you want to medical school?” I asked them.

“I guess so,” they say, without conviction, or “Not really.”

“Then why are you going?”

“Well, my parents want me to be a doctor. They are paying all this money and …”

Poor students, poor parents, they are caught in one of the oldest webs of love and duty and guilt. The parents mean will; they are trying to steer their sons and draughts toward a secure future. But the sons and daughter want to major in history or classics or philosophy—subjects with no “practical” value. Where’s the payoff on the humanities? It’s not easy to persuade such loving parents that the humanities do indeed pay off. The intellectual faculties developed by studying subjects like history and classics—an ability to synthesize and relate, to weigh cause and effect, to see events in perspective—are just the faculties that make creative leaders in business or almost any general field. Still, many fathers would rather put their money on courses that point toward specific profession—courses that are pre-law, pre-medical, pre-business, or, as I sometimes heard it put, “pre-rich.”

But the pressure on students is severe. They are truly torn. One part of them feels obliged to fulfill their parents’ expectations; after all, their parents are older and presumably wiser. Another part tells them that the expectations that are right for their parents are not right for them.

I know a student who wants to be an artist. She is very obviously an artist and will be a good one—she has already had several modest local exhibits. Meanwhile she is growing as a well-round person and taking humanistic subjects that will enrich the inner resources out of which her art will grow. But her father is strongly opposed. He thinks that an artist is a “dumb” thing to be. The student vacillates and tries to please everybody. She keeps up with her art somewhat furtively and takes some of the “dumb” courses her father wants her to take—at least they are dumb courses for her. She is a free spirit on a campus of tense students—no small achievement in it—and she deserves to follow her muse.

Peer pressure and self-induced pressure are also intertwined, and they begin almost at the beginning of freshman year.

“I had a freshman student I’ll call Linda,” one dean told me, “who came in and said she was under terrible pressure because her roommate, Barbara, was much brighter and studied all the time. I could not tell her that Barbara had come in two hours earlier to say the same thing about Linda.”

The story is almost funny—except that it is not. It is symptomatic of all the pressure put together. When every student thinks every other student is working harder and doing better, the only solution is to study harder still. I see students going off to the library every night after dinner and coming back when it closes at midnight. I wish they would sometimes forget about their peers and go to a movie. I hear the clacking of typewriters in the hours before dawn. I see the tension in their eyes when exams are approaching and papers are due: “Will I get everything done?”

Probably they won’t. They will get blocked. They will sleep. They will oversleep. They will bug out.

Part of the problem is that they are expected to do. A professor will assign five page papers. Several students will start writing ten page papers to impress him. Then more students will write ten page papers, and a few will raise the ante to fifteen. Pity the poor student who is still just doing the assignment.

“Once you have twenty or thirty percent of the student population deliberately overexerting,” one dean points out, “It’s bad for everybody. When a teacher gets more and more effort from his class, the student who is doing normal work can be perceived as not doing well. The tactic work, psychologically.”

Why cannot the professor just cut back and not accept longer papers? He can, and he probably will. But by then the term will be half over and the damage done. Grade fever is highly contagious and not easily reversed. Besides, the professor’s main concern is with his course. He knows his students only in relation to the course and does not know that they are also overexerting in their other courses. Nor is it really his business. He did not sign up for dealing with the student as a whole person and with all the emotional baggage the student brought along from home. That’s what deans, masters, chaplains, and psychiatrists are for.

To some extent this is nothing new: a certain number of professors have always been self-contained islands of scholarship and shyness, more comfortable with books than with people. But the new pauperism has widened the gap still further, for professors who actually like to spend time with students do not have as much time to spend. They are also overexerting. If they are young, they are busy trying to publish in order not to perish, hanging by their figure nails onto a shrinking profession.

If they are old and tenured, they are buried under the duties of administering departments—as departmental chairmen or members of committees—that have been thinned out by the budgetary axe.

Ultimately it will be the students’ own business to break the circles in which they are trapped. They are too young to be prisoners of their parents’ dreams and their classmates’ fears. They must be jolted into believing into themselves as unique men and women who have the power to shape their own future.

“Violence is being done to the undergraduate experience,” says Carlos Hortas. “College should be open-ended: at the end it should open many, many roads. Instead, students are choosing their goal in advance, and their choices narrow as they go along. It’s almost as if they think that the country has been codified in the type of jobs that exist-that they’ve got to fit into certain slots. Therefore, fit into the best paying slot.”

“They ought to take chances. Not taking chances will lead to life of colorless mediocrity. They’ll be comfortable. But something in the spirit will be missing.”

I have painted too drab a portrait of today’s students, making them seem a solemn lot. That is only half of their story; if they were so dreary I wouldn’t so thoroughly enjoy their company. The other half is that they are easy to like. They are quick to laugh and to offer friendship. They are not introverts. They are usually kind and are more considerate of one another than any student generation I have known.

Nor are they so obsessed with their studies that they avoid sports and extracurricular activities. On the contrary, they juggle their crowded hours to play on a variety of teams, perform with musical and dramatic groups, and write for campus publications. But this in turn is one more cause of anxiety. There are too many choices. Academically, they have 1,300 courses to select from; outside class they have to decide how much spare time they can spare and how to spend it.

This means that they engage in fewer extracurricular pursuits than their predecessors did. If they want to row on the crew and play in the symphony they will eliminate one; in the ‘60s they would have done both. They also tend to choose activities that are self-limiting. Drama, for instance, is flourishing in all twelve of Yale’s residential colleges, as it never has before. Students hurl themselves into these productions—as actors, directors, carpenters, and technicians—with a dedication to create the best possible play, knowing that the day will come when the run will end and they can get back to their studies.

They also cannot afford to be the willing slave of organizations like the Yale Daily News. Last spring at the one-hundredth anniversary banquet of that paper—who’s past chairmen include such once and future kings as Potter Stewart, Kingman Brewster, and William F. Buckley, Jr.—much was made of the fact that the editorial staff used to be small and totally committed and that “newsies” routinely worked fifty hours a week. In effect they belonged to a club; Newsies is how they defined themselves at Yale. Today’s students will one or two articles a week, when he can, and he defines himself as a student. I’ve never heard the word Newsie except at the banquet.

If I have described the modern undergraduate primarily as a driven creature who is largely ignoring the blithe spirit inside who keeps trying to come out and play, it’s because that’s where the crunch is, not only at Yale but throughout American education. It’s why I think we should all be worried about the values that are nurturing a generation so fearful of risk and so goal-obsessed at such an early age.

I tell students that there is no one “right” way to get ahead—that each of them is a different person, starting from a different point and bound for a different destination. I tell neither them that change is a tonic and that all the slots are not codified nor the frontiers closed. One of my ways of telling them is to invite men and women who have achieved success outside the academic world to come and talk informally with my students during the year. They are heads of companies or ad agencies, editors of magazines, politicians, public officials, television magnates, labor leaders, business executives, Broadway products, artists, writers, economists, photographers, scientists, historians—a mixed bag of achievers.

I asked them to say a few words about how they got started. The students assume that they started in their present profession and knew all along that it was what they wanted to do. Luckily for me, most of them got into their field by a circuitous route, to their surprise, after many detours. The students are startled. They can hardly conceive of a career that was not pre-planned. They can hardly imagine allowing the hand of God or chance to nudge them down some unforeseen trail.

11. To Err Is Wrong

In the summer of 1979, Boston Red Sox first baseman Carl Yastrzemski became the fifteenth player in baseball history to reach the three thousand hit plateaus. This event drew a lot of media attention, and for about a week prior to the attainment of this goal, hundreds of reports covered Yaz’s every more. Finally, one reporter asked, “Hey Yaz, aren’t you afraid all of this attention will go to your head?” Yastrzemski replied, “I look at this way: in my career I’ve been up to bat over ten thousand times. That means I’ve been unsuccessful at the plate over seven thousand times. That fact alone keeps me from getting a swollen head.”?

Most people consider success and failure as opposites, but they are actually both products of the same process. As Yaz suggest, an activity that produces a hit may also produce a miss. It is the same with creative thinking; the same energy that generates good creative ideas also produces errors.

Many people, however, are not comfortable with errors. Our educational system, based on “the right answer” belief, cultivates our thinking in another, more conservative way. From an early age, we are taught that right answers are good and incorrect answers are bad. This value is deeply embedded in the incentive system used in most schools:

Right over 90% of the time = “A”

Right over 80% of the time = “B~”

Right over 70% of the time = “C~” Right over 60% of the time = “D~” Less than 60% correct, you fail.

From this we learn to be right as often as possible and to keep our mistakes to a minimum. We learn, in other words, that “to err is wrong.

Playing It Safe

With this kind of attitude, you aren’t going to be taking too many chances. If you learn that failing even a litter penalizes you (e.g., being wrong only 15% of the time garners you only a “B” performance), you learn not to make mistakes. And more important, you learn not to put yourself to situation where you might fall. This leads to conservative thought pattern designed to avoid the stigma our society puts on “failure”.

I have a friend who recently graduated from college with a Master’s degree in Journalism. For the last six month, she has been trying to find a job, but to no avail. I talked with her about situation, and realized that her problem is that she doesn’t know how to fail. She went through eighteen years of schooling to try any approaches where she might fail. She has been conditioned to believe that failure is bad in and of itself, rather than a potential stepping-stone to new ideas.

Look around. How many middle managers, housewives, administrators, teachers, and other people do you see who are to try anything new because of this failure? Most of us have learned not to make mistakes in public. As a result, we remove ourselves from many learning experience except for those occurring in the most private of circumstances.

Different Logic

From a practical point of view, “to err is wrong” makes sense. Our survival in the everyday world requires us to perform thousand of small tasks without failure. Think about it: you wouldn’t last very long if you were to step out in front of traffic or stick your hand a pot of boiling water. In addition, engineers whose bridges collapse, stock brokers who lose money for their clients, and copywriters whose ad campaigns decrease sales won’t keep their jobs very long.

Nevertheless, too great an adherence to the belief “to err is wrong” can greatly undermine your attempts to generate new ideas. If you are more concerned with producing right answers than generating original ideas, you’ll probably make uncritical use of the rules, formulae, and procedures used to obtain these right answers. By doing this, you’ll by-pass the germinal phase of the creative process, and thus spend litter time testing assumptions, challenging the rules, asking what-if questions, or just playing around with the problem. All of these techniques will produce some incorrect answers, but in the germinal phase errors are viewed as a necessary by-product of creative thinking. As Yaz would put it, “if you want the hits, be prepared for the misses.” That’s the way the game of life goes.

Errors as Stepping Stones

Whenever an error pops up, the usual response is “Jeez, another screw up, what went wrong this time?” the creative thinker, on the other hand, will realize the potential value of errors, and perhaps say something like, “Would you look at that! Where can it lead our thinking?” and then he or she will go on to use the error as a stepping stone to a new idea. As a matter of fact, the whole history of discovery is filed with people who used erroneous assumptions and failed ideas as stepping-stones to new ideas. Columbus thought he was finding a shorter route to India. Johannes Kepler stumbled on to the idea of interplanetary gravity because of assumptions that were right for the wrong reasons. And, Thomas Edison knew 1800 ways not to build a light bulb.

The following story about the automotive genius Charles Kettering exemplifies the spirit of working through erroneous assumptions to good ideas. In 1912, when the automobile industry was just beginning to grow, Kettering was interested in improving gasoline engine efficiency. The problem he faced was“knockthe phenomenon in which gasoline takes too long to burn in the cylinder-thereby reducing efficiency.

Kettering began searching for ways to eliminate the “knock.” He thought to him, “How can I get the gasoline to combust in the cylinder at an earlier time?” the key concept here is “early”. Searching for analogous situations, he looked around for models of “things that happen early.” He thought of historical models, physical models, and biological models. Finally, he remembered a particular plant, the trailing arbutus, which “happens early,” i.e., it blooms in the snow (“earlier” than other plants). One of this plant’s chief characteristics is its’ red leaves, which help the plant retain light at certain wavelengths. Kettering figured that it must be the red color, which made the trailing arbutus bloom earlier.

Now came the critical step in Kettering’s chain of thought. He asked himself, “How can I make the gasoline red?” perhaps I’ll put red dye in the gasoline—maybe that’ll make it combust earlier.” He looked around his workshop, and found that he didn’t have any red dye. But he did happen to have some iodine—perhaps that would do. He added the iodine to the gasoline and, lo and behold, the engine didn’t “knock”.

[英语作文写作的需要背诵的部分

作文要自由真实地抒写性灵，发表见解。从这两年高考作文反馈的信息看，某些文章表面上文采飞扬，实际上往往充斥着寻章摘句和矫揉造作。专家们已经厌烦那种浮华的文风，大声疾呼还原作文的真实。于多数学生而言，“清水出芙蓉”的要求自然太高，但发诸内心的真情，自然为文的朴素却终不可少。

在大众亦步亦趋的今天，应该如何独树一帜，让作文真正亮丽起来呢?无他，“繁华落尽见真淳”，让“词藻”让位于“思想”，说自己想说的话，抒自己该抒的情。

第一，不要让自我的思想被别人挟持。作文是作者思想认识的外现，一个人思想境界如何，对社会对人生的看法认识如何，往往决定所写文章思想认识水平的高低。诚然，对于广大中学生而言，生活体验及生活刺激不够多，重大事件对他们的激荡与磨砺不够，因而在文字间始终缺少思想的深刻以及它给人带来的震撼。然而，作文本是一门抒发情感的快乐课程，你无需具备冯友兰那般高深的哲学境界，你也不必拥有鲁迅那般锋利无比的投枪和匕首。但是你要拥有一颗为自己跳动的心，一支表达自己情怀的笔。

第二，思想来源于对生活的提炼。学生们常常会感慨三点一线的生活方式成为了自己思想的桎梏。其实，学生们并未远离多姿的生活，而是他们没有做生活的有心人提炼自己的生活。身边无闲事，世界有热点，值得思索的问题不计其数。然而，学生们习惯了对生活的漠然，忽略着一个又一个生活的哲学。背资料，学范文，宿构成文以不变应万变。其实作文要有思想有深度，首要的是关注生活，提炼生活，做一个生活在思考中的人。

第三，腹有诗书气自华。这似乎是老掉牙的话题，但时至今日，依然有提及的必要性。随着时代的进步，可供阅读的媒介与日俱增，但多数学生因浮躁的心理作祟，不读书，不静心读书;还有一部分学生，书读得不可谓不多，但根本就不会读书，阅读面狭窄，只关注青春文学、影视文学，只管情节不重思想，不善从作品中去观照人生和社会。文章被作为一种技术来学习，对其中情商因素视而不见。作家莫言说：“一个人如果不能在青少年时期获得一种对语言的感觉，只怕一辈子都很难写出漂亮的文章。”作文是悟出来的，它离不开学生的阅读和对作品的领悟这至关重要的基础一环。

庄子曰：“彼其充实，不可以已。”胸中有丘壑，写作起来自然一发难收。当文章是为了真正要表达自己的想法和见解而作的时候，自然会“下笔如有神”。

什么是新闻?不同的文化背景，不同的意识形态，就有不同的回答。下面是新闻写作需要那些基础知识，欢迎参考阅读！

在美国，麦尔文·曼切尔著的(新闻报道与写作)一书，引述了过去和现在新闻学家对新闻的一些解释。例如：

达纳在１８６９年至１８９７年主管过(纽约太阳报)，他说，新闻是“社会上大多数人感兴趣，而且在此以前从未对它注意过的那些事情。”

达纳的一个编辑提出了一个经典性的新闻概念：“狗咬人，不是新闻；人咬狗，才是新闻。”(注：这是达纳１８８２年办(纽约太阳报)时，他属下的采访主任约翰·ｂ·博加特对一个青年记者说的。)

另外一个新闻的典型概念是斯坦利·瓦利克尔提出来的。他是本世纪三十年代初期(纽约先驱论坛报)的采编主任。他说，新闻是建立在三个“ｗ”的基础上：“妇女(women)、金钱(wampun)和坏事(wrongdoing)”。

其实，以上表述并非科学意义的下定义，但他们的观点却集中地代表了西方新闻学的基本立场，即一切反常的、有刺激性的、人们好奇的事才是新闻。这种观点当然有其深厚的人文背景及经济基础，虽然他们对新闻定义的认识已侧重在“读者兴趣”上，但其实质仍不能脱离“利润”的操纵。

在中国，“新闻”这个词最早出现在(新唐书)。(新唐书)记载：初唐神龙年间(公无７０５年前后)，有一个叫孙处玄的文人曾说过：“恨天下无书以广新闻”。孙处玄曾投书当时执政的大臣恒彦范，评论时政得失，未被采纳，他就挂冠而去，可见他是个很关心时事政治的人。这样的人对没有书刊传播新闻(当时印刷术尚未应用于书籍)表示不满，是理所当然的事。孙处玄这句议论竟被载入(新唐书)，说明尽管唐代还未完全具备传播新闻的条件，但人们已意识到需要报道这类新闻的传播工具。“新闻”一词在这里是指“最近消息”。

(现代汉语词典)释“新闻”为：①报纸或广播电台等报道的国内外消息：新闻广播／采访新闻。②指社会上最近发生的新事情。

(辞海)对新闻的解释是：①报社、通讯社、广播电台、电视台等新闻机构对当前政治事件或社会事件所作的报道。要求迅速、及时，真实，言简意明，以事实说话。形式有消息、通讯、特写、记者通信、调查报告、新闻图片、电视新闻等。②指被人当作谈助的新奇事情。如(红楼梦)第一回：“众人当作一件新闻传说。”

1943年9月陆定一提出：“新闻就是新近发生的事实的报道。”

1981年8月中宣部在京召开全国18大城某地的报纸工作座谈会，其会议纪要对新闻定义作了新的诠释：

“新闻反映新发生的、重要的、有意义的、能引起广泛兴趣的事实，具有迅速、明了、简短的特点，是一种最有效的宣传形式。”

定语修饰的限制显然是考虑了“读者兴趣”，同时也顾及到了“社会效果”，这些是对陆定一定义的有效补充，然而其偏颇也是显而易见的。综合上述种种看法，我们不妨把新闻定义小结为：

“新闻是对新近发生或发现的有社会意义的能引起广泛兴趣的事实的传播。”

明确了新闻定义，我们再来区别广义的新闻与狭义的新闻。广义的新闻包括消息、通讯、特写、调查报告、新闻评论等，是报纸、广播、电视等媒体中常见的报道体裁。狭义的新闻专指消息。

二、新闻价值

对新闻定义的不同见解，尤其是社会主义新闻学与西方新闻学对新闻定义的根本分歧，归根到底是由于对新闻价值的不同认识所决定的。

西方新闻界认为测定某一事件和某种思想所具有的新闻价值的因素有以下六个方面：(一)时间性：报道最近发生或正在发生的事实，时间愈近，价值愈高；(二)显著性：报道对象要有声望或出名，人、地、物等愈出名，价值愈高；(三)接近性：事实与读者在空间、关系等方面愈接近便愈能引起兴趣；(四)新奇性：冲突、异常、冒险、变动等能满足读者的猎奇心理；(五)重要性：能引起震动，影响很多人的事件；(六)人情味：悲欢离合、幽默、悬念等带有人情味的生活事件。在这诸多的因素中，“读者兴趣”是衡量新闻价值的唯一标准。我们在借鉴其合理性的一面时，也不能忽视这种“新闻价值观”导致的负面影响。

社会主义新闻学认为，新闻价值就是选择和衡量事实是否报道及如何报道的标准。它包含两层意思：一是事实本身所具有的价值，即事实本身的重要性、影响力和新鲜程度等；二是读者接受新闻后的受益程度，即新闻所引起的社会效果。前者是先决条件，但没有后者前者也失去了意义。概括起来社会主义新闻学认为判定事实所具有的新闻价值的因素主要有以下几个方面：(一)指导性与思想性：坚持社会主义方向，宣传党的方针政策，以正确的舆论引导人；(二)重要性与显著性：内容重要，社会影响大；(三)普遍性与迫切性：反映群众呼声，关注社会热点；(四)知识性与趣味性：传播高尚的、健康的、大众的知识与情趣；(五)时效性与真实性：坚持新闻的“真”，突出新闻的“新”。

三、写作原则

(一)坚持四项基本原则，自觉执行党的宣传纪律；

(二)实事求是，用事实说话；

(三)迅速及时，讲求时效；

(四)在写作技巧上遵守以下10条写作规则：

１、在你没有理解事件本身之前，不要动笔去写。

２、在你不知道你要说些什么之前不要动笔去写。

３、要表现，不要陈述。

４、把精彩的引语放在消息的前头。

５、把精彩的实例或轶事放在消息的前头。

６、运用具体名词和富于动作色彩的动词。

７、尽量少用形容词，不要在动词上再加用副词。

８、尽量避免自己去作判断和推理，让事实说话。

９、在消息中不要提那些你回答不了的问题。

１０、写作要朴实、简洁、诚实、迅速。

总之，新闻写作要做到四个字：真、新、快、活。

以下几段话应成为我们写作新闻的座右铭：

△我们应当说真话，因为这是我们的力量所在！((列宁全集)第９卷第２８３页)ァ饔蒙活中的生动的具体事例来教育群众“是报刊在从资本主义到社会主义的过渡时期的主要任务。”((列宁全集)第２８卷第８３页)

△我们党所办的报纸，我们党所进行的一切宣传工作，都应当是生动的，鲜明的，尖锐的，毫不吞吞吐吐。这是我们革命无产阶级应有的战斗风格。((毛泽东选集)第１２１７页)

△为报道真实新闻而奋斗！(周恩来给(新闻日报)增刊的题词)

△在新的历史时期，新闻工作坚持为社会主义服务，为人民服务，就要坚定地全面准确地宣传党的基本路线，宣传建设有中国特色的社会主义的理论和决策，宣传全国各族人民在现代化建设和改革开放中的业绩和经验。(xx(关于党的新闻工作的几个问题))

△坚持正面宣传为主的方针并不否认新闻的特点。新闻的特点，人们可以作多种概括，但照我看，除了前面谈到的党性以外，还要注意真实性、时效性和可读性。(李瑞环(坚持正面宣传为主的方针))

第二节消息的写作

おハ息即狭义的新闻，它是对新近发生的有社会意义并引起公众兴趣的事实的简短报道。因此，真实性、时效性及文字少、篇幅小成为消息的基本特征。

一、消息种类

(一)动态消息：也称动态新闻，这种消息迅速、及时地报道国内国际的重大事件，报道社会主义建设中的新人新事、新气象、新成就、新经验。动态消息中有不少是简讯(短讯、简明新闻)，内容更加单一，文字更加精简，常常一事一讯，几行文字。

(二)综合消息：也称综合新闻，指的是综合反映带有全局性情况、动向、成就和问题的消息报道。

(三)典型消息：也称典型新闻，这是对某一部门或某一单位的典型经验或成功做法的集中报道，用以带动全局，指导一般??四)述评消息：也称新闻述评，它除具有动态消息的一般特征外，还往往在叙述新闻事实的同时，由作者直接发出一些必要的议论，简明地表示作者的观点。记者述评、时事述评就是其中的两种。

以上四类消息，以动态消息较易写作，可以经常练习写一些，从实践中提高新闻写作能力。

二、消息写作

写作消息要设想并回答读者问的问题，这些问题就构成了新闻五要素，即：when(何时)、where(何地)、who(何人)、what(何事)、why(何故)。有的新闻学上补充了一个要素：how(如何)。在五个w和一个h中，最主要的是what(何事)、who(何人)。写作时要认真写好这几个方面的内容。

当我们弄清了“我要说些什么”，接下来就是“怎么说这些内容”，显然这涉及到了如何安排消息的结构。只要我们用心分析一下报刊发表的消息，就会发现，消息的结构比较固定、简单，大多数消息的结构都是“倒金字塔”式的，即：最重要的材料放在开头，次要材料放在后面。消息的结构具体表现为：标题、导语、主体、结尾，并在文中穿插背景材料。

(一)标题

标题是消息的眼睛，拟写得好，可以吸引读者；拟写得差，一篇好消息也会被埋没。可见标题有着向读者推荐的作用。如：(两位某地长直接关怀大港“油郎”喜结良缘)(新华社1990年1月6日电讯稿)、(地球三分钟净增五百人)(新华社1996年7月13日电讯稿)、(杭城新事见新风拎书拜年书压岁)(1991年2月19日(解放日报))。

消息的标题必须简明、准确地概括消息内容，帮助读者理解报道的事实?ハ息标题有主?正题)、引题(眉题)、副题(次题)三种。

主题：概括与说明主要事实和思想内容。

引题：揭示消息的思想意义或交待背景，说明原因，烘托气氛。

副题：提示报道的事实结果，或作内容提要。

(二)导语

导语是指一篇消息的第一自然段或第一句话。它是用简明生动的文字，写出消息中最主要、最新鲜的事实，鲜明地提示消息的主题思想。

导语的要求，一是要抓住事情的核心，二是要能吸引读者看下去。要做到第一条，必须具备训练有素的分析能力；要做到第二条，则要有写作技巧。

导语写作中的思维过程，通常是以作者的自问自答开始的：

①什么事情是已经发生的事件中最重要的？

②什么人参加进去了？——谁干的或谁讲的？

③是用直接性导语，还是用延缓性导语？

④有没有什么吸引人的词汇或生动形象的短语要写进导语中？

⑤主题是什么？什么样的动词能最有效地吸引读者？

以上五个问题中，第三个问题涉及到导语的类型。那末，导语有哪些类型呢？

一类是直接性导语：直接写出事实的核心的导语。多是陈述性的像速记一样地反映事实。

另一类是延缓性导语：多用于“软”消息。即所报道的不是正在发展中的、变化中的或突发性的事件。它通常用来设置一种现场或创造某种气氛。多是解释性、说明性的。

导语的形式主要有：

１、叙述式。用摘录或综合的方法，把消息中最新鲜、最主要的事实简明扼要地写出来。

２、描写式。对消息的主要事实或某一有意义的侧面作简洁朴素而又有特色的描写，以酿成气氛。

３、提问式。先揭露矛盾，鲜明地、尖锐地提出问题，再作简要的回答，引起读者的关注和思考。

４、结论式。把结论写在开头，提示报道某一事物的意义或目的或总结。

５、号召式。提出号召，给读者指出方向和奋斗目标。

另外还有摘要式、评论式、综合式、解释式等等。

(三)主体

这是消息的主干部分。它紧接导语之后，对导语作具体全面的阐述，具体展开事实或进一步突出中心，从而写出导语所概括的内容，表现全篇消息的主题思想。应按“时间顺序”或“逻辑顺序”写作，但仍然要先写主要的，再写次要的。

(四)背景

１、什么是背景？新闻背景，指事件的历史背景、周围环境及与其它方面的联系等。写新闻有时要交代背景，目的在于帮助读者深刻理解新闻的内容和价值，起到衬托、深化主题的作用，也就是回答五个“ｗ”中的why(为什么)。

西方新闻学认为背景就是对新闻事件作出的解释。美国新闻学家赖斯特说得很清楚：“我看不出新闻背景与解释有什么区别。”“解释，在我看来，就是新闻报道的深入化。就是把单一的新闻事件放到一系列的事件中去写”，“就是提供新闻的背景知识，从而使读者能够对新闻事件作出客观的判断。”

但是“解释”不是议论，解释本身就是事实，也就是说用事实去解释。所以新闻背景又称之为“事实背景”。

２、背景有哪些作用？

第一个作用，是说明新闻事件的起因。

第二个作用，显示或帮助读者理解新闻事件的重要性。

第三个作用，突出新闻稿件的新闻价值。

第四个作用，表明记者的观点。记者是不准在新闻中发表议论的，但是，谁也无法禁止记者通过自己来写的新闻表达自己的立场和看法。纯客观的报道是不存在的。

３、背景的类型有几种？常见的有三种：对比性的，说明性的，注释性的。有的新闻学则将背景分为四种：人物背景、地理背景、历史背景和事物背景。

(五)结尾

新闻的结尾有小结式、启发式、号召式、分析式、展望式……等等。这些结尾写作与一般记叙文结尾的写作并无大的不同。

第三节通讯的写作

通讯是以叙述、描写为主要表达方式，将具有新闻价值的人物或事件及时、具体、生动地予以报道的新闻体裁。

一、通讯特点

通讯作为报刊、电台等媒体最主要的体裁之一，新闻性显然是基本的特征。而新闻性中，真实、时效、思想性及典型意义构成了它的不同层面。就报道对象言，或是人物、事件，或是经验、成果、工作情况、社会风貌等，都必须是真实的，不允许虚构或“合理想象”，而且报道对象应该具有必须的思想性和典型意义。就报道时效言，通讯虽不及消息这般快速敏捷，有时为将人物、事件报道细致完整需时较长，但也必须及时，仍须有很强的时效概念。除去真实、时效的新闻性特征，通讯的主要特点有：

1、生动性。

通讯尤其是人物通讯具有一定的文学色彩。消息在表达上主要是平面的叙述，语言追求简洁、明快、准确。通讯则较多借用文学手段，可以描写、抒情、对话，可以用比喻、象征、拟人等修辞。因此通讯在语言和表达方法上都具有一定的文学性，它在报道真实的人和事的过程中，善于再现情景，平添许多生动和形象，给人以立体感、现场感。

此外，通讯虽然一般以第三人称叙述为主，但在“见闻”、“采访记”一类的通讯中，也采用第一人称。不过其中的“我”主要起见证人或采访线索的作用。在效果上第一人称的使用也增加了一些亲切感。

2、完整性。

通讯须相对完整、具体地报道人物或事物的过程。消息侧重写事，叙述简明扼要，一般不展开情节。通讯可写人物也可写事件，其材料比消息丰富、全面，其容量比消息厚实、充足。它要求详劲具体地报告事件的经过、演绎人物的命运，充分展开情节，甚至描写细节和场面。这些既是生动性的表现，同时也是内容完整性、具体化的要求。

3、评论性。

通讯须运用夹叙夹议的方法对人或事作出直接的评论。消息是以事实说话，除述评消息一般不允许作者直接发表议论。通讯则要求在报道人物或事件的同时，表露记者的感情与倾向。然而通讯的评论不同于议论性文体的论证，它须时时紧扣人物或事件，依傍事实作适时的、恰到好处评价点拨。因此这是一种通过描写、叙述、抒情等表达手段进行的议论，它的特点是以情感人，理在情中。

二、通讯种类

1、人物通讯

是以人物的思想、言行、事迹和命运为报道内容的通讯。人物通讯并非仅仅是“名人通讯”，报道对象的选择取决于其蕴含的新闻价值，一般来说人物必须具有先进性或典型性。在取材上可写“全人全貌”，也可截取片断着重写人物的某个侧面或阶段。此两类一般以人物的“行”为主，而“人物专访”则以写人物的“言”为主。通过记者的专访，记述人物的谈话，从而揭示其精神世界。

2、事件通讯

是以具典型意义的事件为报道对象的通讯。事件通讯时效性较强，它围绕中心事件选材，虽不着力刻划人物，但往往通过典型事件表现一群人或一个集体。所以它通过较为详尽地展示事件的完整过程，挖掘其意义，揭示其本质，进而反映社会风尚，弘扬时代精神?コ人物通讯与事件通讯外，另有?ldquo;工作通讯”，这是介绍某单位先进事迹，传播其典型经验和做法，以指导一般的通讯；“概貌通讯”，这是记述某地区、部门、行业、工程的新面貌、新气象的通讯。报刊上常见的“见闻”、“纪行”、“巡礼”、“散记”均属此类。此外，还有以写一段片断、一个场景、一场冲突为对象的“新闻故事”、“小通讯”之类，它们以生动、快捷的形式宣传新人新事新风尚，实为通讯家属中不可忽视的一员。

三、通讯写作

1、关于选材与提炼主题

占有材料对通讯写作来说就是通过扎实细致的采访广泛搜集第一手材料。随后在纷繁的直接材料中剥离出典型材料、背景材料。这些材料不仅要求真实，而且要有意义，具有典型性、指导性，同时还要有意味，具有具体、完整、感人的生动性、情节性。在这般基础上根据深和新的原则提炼主题，通讯才可能呼应社会关注热点，反映时代风尚特点，宣传党的路线方针，从而以正确的舆论引导人，以先进的人物激励人，以真实的事件震撼人。然而通讯写的是真人真事，其主题必须从实际生活中提炼而来，不能随意“拔高”，更不能虚构夸大，它永远不能违背新闻的真实性原则。

2、关于写人

事因人生，人以事观。人与事虽不可分，但在人物通讯与事件通讯中的确有以人为主和以事为主之别，为叙述方便故而分之?バ慈嗽谖难Т醋髦幸鸦累丰富经验，?ldquo;非虚构”的原则下，我们不妨可借用其多种手段，并注意以下三个方面：第一，形与神兼备。即不仅要写出人物的行为和事迹，更要展示其精神世界；第二，言与行统一。人物语言、行为表达、传递出人物的思想，而不同的语气、句式、词汇及动作表情、神态等是极富个性色彩的内心表露形式。写好了人物的言与行，无疑是写活了人；第三，画龙必须点睛。如果说言行、事例、情节勾勒出人物的整体形象称为“龙”，那么揭示人物行为意义，指出人物个性特点的评点便是“睛”。“画龙”用的是纪实的叙述、描写，“点睛”则是超脱的议论或抒情。

3、关于叙事

通讯离不开写事，事件通讯更须完整地叙述事件的起因、人员、场面、结果等，以交待事件的复杂性和社会影响度。叙事要注意两点：第一，理清主线、丰满细节。一个新闻事件的发生、发展过程中，有因有果，有人有事，头绪多而关系复杂，作者须理清主线，按事件原貌将其完整地、动态地、立体地呈现给读者。而为实现这一目标，就须选择典型的细节。一篇优秀的事件通讯，必然有几个生动感人的细节来充分展示主线，使作品丰满而具现场感。第二，时间为经、时间为纬。通讯须有一定的时间要领因为事件、故事总在于一定的时间和空间中。纺织好时空画面既是一个结构总是也是一个表达方法问题。篇幅不长而情节不太复杂的事件通讯可多运用插叙、补叙、分叙等手段，充分展开矛盾和利用背景材料，使文章有变化起伏。容量大而情节复杂的事件通讯则常常运用时空交叉方式，以时间推进、空间变换等手段来切割事件，构成若干侧面。经过作者精心的组合剪辑将事件完整而利落地报告于世。

显然选材与提炼主题是各类通讯写作中必须面对的，而写人与叙事则因通讯品种不同而有所侧重。但是通讯的写作模式也必然带来约束，因而通讯的散文化写法亦开始为人注目。所谓的散文化倾向有以下几个特点：(一)生活面更趋广阔，(二)结构不拘一格，(三)技法更多样化，(四)报道呈系列化。

思考与练习：

一、阅读下列消息，然后给它拟写引题和正题：

本报讯(记者董洪亮)我国唯一的教育艺术刊物(教育艺术)杂志日前度过了五周岁生日。冰心老人、贺敬之等知名人士为之题词致贺。

(教育艺术)由中华教育艺术研究会暨中华教育艺术家协会、首都师范大学青年教育艺术研究所共同主办，李燕杰教授担任社长。该刊以“激扬正气，振奋民魂”为办刊宗旨，主要栏目有“名家谈教育艺术”、“时代精神磁场”、“青春思絮”、“教育艺术一千问”等。(教育艺术)杂志被海内外读者誉为“青年的良师，家长的益友，干部的参谋，教师的助手”。

((中国教育报)1994年11月17日第2版)

二、一件新闻在不同的报纸上刊出时，会因编辑的眼光不同而出现不同的标题。请就近日发生的一件重大新闻，比较、分析各大报纸刊出时的标题有何不同。

三、写一篇新闻，报道学校或班上新近组织的某项活动。时间、地点、事件要交代清楚，还要注意详略得当，有条有理?ニ摹⑾旅嬲庠蛱馕?卫生部写信感谢空军某部官兵)的消息与通讯(为了六十一个阶级弟兄)是同题材的报道，请仔细比较两文章，谈谈通讯与消息在确立主题、写作方法等方面的异同。

新华社20日讯卫生部最近写信给人民解放军空军领导机关，表扬和感谢空军某部官兵为了抢救平陆某地公路工地食物中毒的员工，克服各种困难，完成了空投药品的任务。

信上说，2月3日，山西某某平陆某地风陵渡公路工地上发生六十多人食物中毒事故，当地某地委来电话后，经与你们联系，立即得到大力支援，派专机前往空投药品。飞行员们为了抢救工人阶级兄弟的生命，毫不犹豫地连夜起飞，迅速地执行这一任务。由于药品的及时供应，使全体中毒员工经过抢救脱离了生命危险。这一英雄行为，充分说明了人民空军战士有高度的为人民服务的精神和共产主义风格。

信上还说，空军战士抢救中毒工人的事迹，大大地鼓舞了病人和平陆某地全某地人民的革命意志，他们纷纷写信感谢党中央和毛主席对他们的关怀，感谢人民空军的大力支援。中共平陆某地委还将此事件写成材料，向全某地人民进行教育，学习人民解放军忠于祖国、忠于人民的高贵品质。

五、阅读近期报纸，书面推荐人物通讯、事件通讯、概貌通讯各一件。

六、实地采访，写一篇通讯。

通过记人的言行和事情的经过来表达一定的中心思想的文章就是记叙文。有的记叙文只简单地写一人一事，但更多的记叙文，所写的人物之间的关系比较复杂，事情的变化发展比较曲折，时间的迁移和场地的变换也比较频繁，就是比较复杂的记叙文了。那么写记叙文需要注意什么?下文是小编整理的相关内容，欢迎阅读参考!

写记叙文，无论是简单的，或是复杂的都要注意下列几点:——记叙文写作指导

第一，交代清楚。

写记叙文必须交代清楚时间、地点、人物、事件、原因、结果，使读者对发生的事件有全面而清楚的了解。这就是记叙文的“六要素”。凡是记叙性体裁的文章，如通讯、特写、报告文学、记叙散文，包括小说，都要具备这六要素。

《祝福》这篇小说，其故事发生的时间，是旧中国年终祝福的时候。地点是鲁镇。故事中涉及的人物，有“我”、“鲁四老爷”、“祥林嫂”等。事情的经过是祥林嫂两次到鲁家佣工，不但受到严重剥削，而且精神上也受到摧残，最后沦为乞丐。故事发生的原因，是祥林嫂寡居之后，被迫到鲁家佣工，故事的结果是当样林嫂被鲁家撵出之后，年终祝福的时候，默默地死去了。由于小说的六要素交代得清清楚楚，所以，读者看了这篇文章之后，会对内容有清楚的理解。从而产生对祥林嫂的同情和对旧社会的僧恨。

第二，级索分明。

要把复杂的内容记叙得条理清楚，确定线索是非常重要的。它能把纷繁的材料贯穿起来，组成一个有机的整体。《结婚现场会》这篇文章涉及“我”、王拴牛、郑谷雨、武艾英等众多人物，故事情节波澜起伏，矛盾冲突尖锐复杂，但是由于作者紧紧抓住了王拴牛要不要彩礼这条线索，因此故事的情节紧凑条理，中心十分突出。一般的记叙文只有一条线索，但有的却有几条线索。《药》这篇脍炙人口的小说，就有一明一暗两条线索。随着这两条线索的连接、交织、融会，使故事的情节由开端、发展、高潮到结局，众多人物形象逐步地鲜明地出现在读者面前，主题思想也步步深化。

第三，记叙其体。

所谓具体，不是不分巨细、胡子眉毛一把抓，把文章记成“流水账”，而要用事实说话，要善于选择最能反映人物精神面貌的典型事例来表达主题。例如《汉堡港的变奏》这篇散文，在刻画吉亚特这个人物时，就用了极为精练的笔墨，勾勒了这个自视是行家，看不起中国人的小工头的。文章写道:“一号工头吉亚特是一个有几十年工龄的行家，两撇小胡子，矮小而精明，极有本事，就是看不起中国人。汉川号的大副根本指挥不动他。”容寥数语，.就把自视为行家、傲视中国人的小胡子写活了。可是，当他不按配载图执行，“卡了壳”之后，那个原来“满不在乎地拍着胸脯”，“翘着小胡子说”，“我有把握”，“我从来没被动过”的吉亚特，这时却狼狈万状，“满头大汗地来找贝汉廷”请教了。事实教育了他，使他转变了，‘小胡子吉亚特摊开双手，耸了耸肩说:‘太奇妙了，这些货简直是按你们船舱的尺码定做的!”这里刻画吉亚特，着里不多，但人物栩栩如生，呼之欲出。这不仅绘声绘色地写出这个工头对中国人的看法的转变，也从反面衬托了船长贝汉廷的才干和胆识。

[记叙文写作需要注意什么

根据提供书面材料作文时，要注意三点：一、认真审题，明确要求。二、紧扣主题，决定取舍。三、活跃思路，发挥想象。小编收集了小升初作文写作注意事项，欢迎阅读。

(一)缩写注意：①不能改变原文的中心思想和体裁，甚至连人称也不能变。②不能改变原文的记叙顺序和主要内容，保留主干。③概括复杂的内容要全面，语言要简明扼要。④改后的短文要衔接过渡自然，首尾连贯。⑤合理安排各部分之间的大致比例。

(二)扩写注意：①不能改变原文的中心思想、体裁、人称、叙事方法和顺序。②不能改变原文中的主要人物和事件。③扩充的内容只能根据原文情节合理地发展，不能任意增加。

(三)改写改写，就是改变原文的体裁与人称、结构及语言等，写出与原文形式不同的文章。一是改变体裁。把原文从一种体裁改写成另一种体裁。二是改变人称。常见的是把第一人称改为第三人称，或把第三人称改变第一人称，内容不作变动。

(四)续写注意：①续写时一定要认真阅读原文，弄清原文所写事件的时间、地点、人物和事件的起因、经过、结果。②要根据题目要求，大胆想象。③不能改变原文的体裁，续写中可以增添次要人物，但主要人物不能改变。④续写部分的语言特点和风格要尽量与原文保持一致。

(五)看图作文 第一，看单幅图作文。第二，看多幅图作文。看图作文的一般步骤是：看、说、写。

阅读下面的文字，按照要求作文。

即使是不懂画的人，也能一眼看出中国画和西洋画的不同之处：西洋画，满；中国画，空。一张画纸，画得满满当当不留一点空白，是西洋油彩画；一张画纸，寥寥数笔丹青于白宣纸之上，是中国画。

中国画的最高境界，在于水墨留白；中国话的最高境界，在于话音留三分。真正有分量的人，只讲有分量的话。一个敢于少讲话的人，必定是对自己话中传达的威力有信心的人。衣若素雅，能凸显你的脸庞；妆若素淡，能映衬出你的气质。着墨少一点，否则它会抢了要害之处的风头。

人生需要留白。那些人生的留白，让你看起来更为丰富。一个会布局的人，永远不会把人生塞得太满。

一、审题指导

这是新材料作文的命题模式，这种模式的审题往往具有一定的难度。从材料内容看，中国画“水墨留白”，留的不是毫无意义的“空白”，而是为了以“无”衬“有”，以“虚”衬“实”，以画卷上的空白突出那寥寥数笔丹青的神韵；它留的也不是一无所有的“空白”，而是为了给读者驰骋想象的空间，以品味以无胜有的“丰富”和含蓄隽永的韵味。另外，“敢于少讲话”“衣若素雅”“妆若素淡”，也都是这样的情况。由此不难推知，人生的“留白”也不是消极的无所作为，而是要凸显你“要害之处的风头”，“让你看起来更为丰富”，其姿态是积极进取的，是用留白让你当下的生命更加厚重，让你将来的日子更加精彩。部分学生被材料中的艺术的留白干扰了思路，殊不知这毕竟是比喻类材料作文，人生的留白不完全等同于艺术的留白，它指的是人生路上的停顿，是人生旅途中适时的休止，正所谓“乐于止步，才能见他处别有洞天”。

二、立意指导

水墨留白只存在于画作，人生留白的含义才是我们这次写作的着眼点。人生的留白不同于水墨画的含蓄隽永，意味深长，也不在于给读者留有想象的空间。它是一种人生旅途中的停顿和休止，是人生的大境界，大智慧，它绝非无物可放的空白，也并非愚者的迟钝，也不是技穷者的无奈，而是博大精深者的沉淀和思索，是精益求精者的酝酿和沉潜，是大彻大悟者的诗意和淡泊。诗人出世，作家沉潜，明星复出，政客转行，大佬退役，诸多名人在忙碌中留白，又在留白后继续追求生活，追逐梦想。

通过上述分析，我们便可以从人生的角度，概括材料的中心含意：

1、人生应“留白”，留白是人生必要的休整，休息之后才能义无反顾，一鼓作气冲向人生的终点。

2、人生应“留白”，留白是对过去的反思和沉淀，懂得反思过去，铭记历史，才能更好地开拓未来。

3、人生应“留白”，留白是为将来的酝酿和沉潜，是为了灿烂的明天不断积蓄力量。

4、人生应“留白”，留白是停下忙碌的内心，让自己懂得欣赏和享受生活，并诗意的栖居。

5、人生应“留白”，留白是停下追名逐利的脚步，找回真实的自我，卸下心灵的重担，拥有淡泊宁静的心境和清风朗月的胸怀。

导语：其实，摩拜单车自入市以来，曾多次被人为破坏，破坏方式五花八门，有的被扔河道，有的二维码遭喷漆，有的被从楼上直接扔下，有的车胎被割开。下面是yuwenmi小编为备考的同学准备的作文素材，欢迎阅读与借鉴，谢谢!

近日，摩拜单车官方公众号曝光了一起摩拜单车遭人为破坏的事件：一男子将多辆摩拜单车扔进黄浦江，之后又砸坏了6辆。所以该公众号发出“摩拜单车已身负重伤，需要你们的救援”，向社会寻求目击证人。其实，摩拜单车自入市以来，曾多次被人为破坏，破坏方式五花八门，有的被扔河道，有的二维码遭喷漆，有的被从楼上直接扔下，有的车胎被割开。而据报道显示，在“共享单车”成为绿色出行工具，广受群众欢迎的情况下，恶意毁坏车辆所造成的损失，也成了企业难以承受的成本负担和共享单车健康可持续发展的瓶颈与障碍。

尽管网约单车的出现还很“稚嫩”，存在一些弊端甚至影响用户体验，但其具有的发展优势是显而易见的，单车租赁不仅利民便民、绿色环保，是时下最便捷健康的短途出行方式，与互联网的完美对接，更打破了传统固有的存取车方式，使得在一座城市的任何一处，都能借助手机的APP终端实现存取车和埋单缴费，同时，出行是高频应用，其分享经济模式也颇被资本看好，除了摩拜单车和ofo，这个领域还有小鸣单车和优拜单车等。小鸣单车10月份宣布已完成1亿元人民币的A轮融资;优拜单车计划11月份正式上线。由此可见，不用太长时间，网约单车就会在“占领”京沪等大城市的同时，迅速向中小城市扩展。非但会成为城市民众新的便捷出行方式，更有助于社会绿色环保意识理念的提升。

显然，网约单车租赁的便捷和“无人看守”，也成了一座城市文明素质的“试纸”，对共享单车进行“花式”破坏的丑陋行为也是频频上演，一直对单车租赁未来踌躇满志的摩拜单车企业似乎也有些招架不住，不得不通过公众号向社会“告饶”：摩拜单车已身负重伤，需要你们的救援。既有呼吁社会善待单车之意，同样更有对政府加强公共管理的期盼。相关数据表明，摩拜单车成本大概是3000元左右，在没有损坏正常运营情况下，需要2年左右才能收回成本。即便其他企业单车成本较低，在“满负荷”且无损坏的前提下，收回成本也需要半年，如果“花式”恶意破坏频率继续升高和蔓延，非但让共享单车企业呈现“负效益”，能否可持续下去，着实都很难说。

其实，因为用于租赁的共享单车多是由企业定制生产，与市场销售自行车有很大区别，又具有特制的定位扫码系统，能被个人占为己有的可能性不大，即便是故意隐藏或“花式”破坏共享单车的“肇事者”，也完全是一种“损人不利己”的恶意发泄而已，应对这种畸形心态驱使的恶意破坏，仅靠企业完善管理加强防范是远远不够的。实际上，网约单车企业不只是一种经营行为，同时也是向社会提供的一项公共服务产品，共享单车必须依靠政府和全社会共同来保护，笔者以为，经营企业应当与政府相关行政执法部门联手建立一套共享单车的保护机制，对于诸如像整车“扔进河道”， 二维码及整车喷漆等完全让单车失去共享价值的行为，警方更应当及时介入，将其列为损害公私财物案件来查处，总之，共享单车需要共同保护，既是在维护企业合法利益，更是在维护公共利益。

无论是由政府兴建的公共服务设施，还是由企业提供的经营性公共服务产品，市民群众有免费或有偿使用的选择，却没有随意甚至故意损坏的权利，共享单车遭遇各种“花式”破坏，更说明即使在北京这样的国家首都城市，市民的文明素质和修养也有待进一步提升，而随着社会经济的发展和互联网企业的不断涌现兴起，政府和企业为城市公共服务提供的各种“自助”设施、设备甚至代步工具势必会更多，文明素质提不上去，保护共享设施、设备的意识不能提高，不只会遏制城市文明进步的脚步，让城市公共服务的成本大幅增加，最终损害还是自己，北京如此，其他城市同样更不例外。

导语：要写好高考作文，不仅仅需要写作技巧和丰富的作文素材，还需要内在的力量。下面我们来看看写好高考作文需要哪三种力量的支撑。

一、作文需要人文精神的支撑

作文一味追求语言华美、结构精巧、技巧娴熟，而轻视传统文化的积淀，忽略人文精神的关怀，这种技巧训练作出的文章无疑都缺乏丰厚的底蕴和隽永的思想，单薄而又贫瘠。

如何提高自己的人文素养呢?首先，要关注世界政治、科技、社会动态，让自己的生活中有不竭的源泉。

其次，了解和学习世界各民族的优秀文化，从而使我们的文章既具有中国特色，又具有鲜明的时代特色。

二、作文需要个性思想的支撑

作文要有个性，要表达自己对自然、社会、人生的独特感受和真切体验，要体现创新精神。个性的背后离不开思想，思想是在具体的事件和情境中，明得的理、获得的悟、取得的思考。只有有了思想，作文才能是人生的史记，才会富有生命的质感。作文不能用几条规范标准代替自己丰富的思想活动，应该使自己思想的触角伸向生活的每个角落。只有拥有了自己个性的思想，“文”才能载“道”，这个“道”，才能被人接受。

三、作文需要主体意识的支撑

目前我们写作往往处于一种模仿和被动接受的状态，不是“情郁于中而必发乎外”，而是具有很强的应对性。其原因有二：一是命题中的“无我”现象——很多老师布置的作文题学生十分反感，最后不是“我不愿写”就是“我写的不是我”;其二是受“文以载道”的影响，过分强调作文要带有强烈的社会责任感，把“利他”放在第一位，使得文章“无我”，个性得不到张扬，自我得不到宣泄。

树立作文的主体意识，要把写作当成是人生体验，是一种独立、积极、自主、自由的创造性活动，而不应该在某些方面进行条条框框的限制。

下面是小编为大家准备的写作需要三种支撑，欢迎阅读。

一、作文需要人文精神的支撑

作文一味追求语言华美、结构精巧、技巧娴熟，而轻视传统文化的积淀，忽略人文精神的关怀，这种技巧训练作出的文章无疑都缺乏丰厚的底蕴和隽永的思想，单薄而又贫瘠。

如何提高自己的人文素养呢?首先，要关注世界政治、科技、社会动态，让自己的生活中有不竭的源泉。

其次，了解和学习世界各民族的优秀文化，从而使我们的文章既具有中国特色，又具有鲜明的时代特色。

二、作文需要个性思想的支撑

作文要有个性，要表达自己对自然、社会、人生的独特感受和真切体验，要体现创新精神。个性的背后离不开思想，思想是在具体的事件和情境中，明得的理、获得的悟、取得的思考。只有有了思想，作文才能是人生的史记，才会富有生命的质感。作文不能用几条规范标准代替自己丰富的思想活动，应该使自己思想的触角伸向生活的每个角落。只有拥有了自己个性的思想，“文”才能载“道”，这个“道”，才能被人接受。

三、作文需要主体意识的支撑

目前我们写作往往处于一种模仿和被动接受的状态，不是“情郁于中而必发乎外”，而是具有很强的应对性。其原因有二：一是命题中的“无我”现象——很多老师布置的作文题学生十分反感，最后不是“我不愿写”就是“我写的不是我”;其二是受“文以载道”的影响，过分强调作文要带有强烈的社会责任感，把“利他”放在第一位，使得文章“无我”，个性得不到张扬，自我得不到宣泄。

树立作文的主体意识，要把写作当成是人生体验，是一种独立、积极、自主、自由的创造性活动，而不应该在某些方面进行条条框框的限制。

通过记人的言行和事情的经过来表达一定的中心思想的文章就是记叙文。下面是小编为大家收集整理的记叙文写作需要注意哪些方面，欢迎大家阅读参考!

有的记叙文只简单地写一人一事，但更多的记叙文，所写的人物之间的关系比较复杂，事情的变化发展比较曲折，时间的迁移和场地的变换也比较频繁，就是比较复杂的记叙文了。

写记叙文，无论是简单的，或是复杂的都要注意下列几点:——记叙文写作指导

第一，交代清楚。

写记叙文必须交代清楚时间、地点、人物、事件、原因、结果，使读者对发生的事件有全面而清楚的了解。这就是记叙文的“六要素”。凡是记叙性体裁的文章，如通讯、特写、报告文学、记叙散文，包括小说，都要具备这六要素。

《祝福》这篇小说，其故事发生的时间，是旧中国年终祝福的时候。地点是鲁镇。故事中涉及的人物，有“我”、“鲁四老爷”、“祥林嫂”等。事情的经过是祥林嫂两次到鲁家佣工，不但受到严重剥削，而且精神上也受到摧残，最后沦为乞丐。故事发生的原因，是祥林嫂寡居之后，被迫到鲁家佣工，故事的结果是当样林嫂被鲁家撵出之后，年终祝福的时候，默默地死去了。由于小说的六要素交代得清清楚楚，所以，读者看了这篇文章之后，会对内容有清楚的理解。从而产生对祥林嫂的同情和对旧社会的僧恨。

第二，级索分明。

要把复杂的内容记叙得条理清楚，确定线索是非常重要的。它能把纷繁的材料贯穿起来，组成一个有机的整体。《结婚现场会》这篇文章涉及“我”、王拴牛、郑谷雨、武艾英等众多人物，故事情节波澜起伏，矛盾冲突尖锐复杂，但是由于作者紧紧抓住了王拴牛要不要彩礼这条线索，因此故事的情节紧凑条理，中心十分突出。一般的记叙文只有一条线索，但有的却有几条线索。《药》这篇脍炙人口的小说，就有一明一暗两条线索。随着这两条线索的连接、交织、融会，使故事的情节由开端、发展、高潮到结局，众多人物形象逐步地鲜明地出现在读者面前，主题思想也步步深化。

第三，记叙其体。

所谓具体，不是不分巨细、胡子眉毛一把抓，把文章记成“流水账”，而要用事实说话，要善于选择最能反映人物精神面貌的典型事例来表达主题。例如《汉堡港的变奏》这篇散文，在刻画吉亚特这个人物时，就用了极为精练的笔墨，勾勒了这个自视是行家，看不起中国人的小工头的。文章写道:“一号工头吉亚特是一个有几十年工龄的行家，两撇小胡子，矮小而精明，极有本事，就是看不起中国人。汉川号的大副根本指挥不动他。”容寥数语，.就把自视为行家、傲视中国人的小胡子写活了。可是，当他不按配载图执行，“卡了壳”之后，那个原来“满不在乎地拍着胸脯”，“翘着小胡子说”，“我有把握”，“我从来没被动过”的吉亚特，这时却狼狈万状，“满头大汗地来找贝汉廷”请教了。事实教育了他，使他转变了，‘小胡子吉亚特摊开双手，耸了耸肩说:‘太奇妙了，这些货简直是按你们船舱的尺码定做的!”这里刻画吉亚特，着里不多，但人物栩栩如生，呼之欲出。这不仅绘声绘色地写出这个工头对中国人的看法的转变，也从反面衬托了船长贝汉廷的才干和胆识。