option
sequence | question
stringlengths 11
354
| article
stringlengths 231
6.74k
| id
stringlengths 5
8
| label
int64 0
3
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
[
"The students were indifferent to learning.",
"Teachers' salary was not high enough.",
"Teachers' work was too demanding.",
"Jobs elsewhere were too meaningful."
] | Why were the teacher turnover rates so high according to the Berkeley study? | When University of California-Berkeley released a study this month showing alarmingly high teacher turnover rates at Los Angeles charter schools, I wasn't surprised.
That's not a slam at local charter schools. It's just that the study echoed something I'd observed many times, starting with my niece.
Bright and cheerful, my niece longed to teach high-needs children. She started out in the San Francisco public schools, where she was assigned to the district's toughest elementary school. Fifth-graders threw chairs across the room - and at her. Parents refused to show up for conferences.
She wasn't willing to deal with this level of indifference and teacher abuse, so she switched to a highly regarded charger elementary school in the Bay Area where she poured her energy into her job and it showed. Her students' test scores were high as those in a nearby wealthy school district, despite the obstacles these children faced.
Yet by her fourth year, my niece was worn out, depleted of the energy it took to work with a classroom of sweet but deeply needy children who pleaded to stay in her classroom when it was time to leave. The principal's offer of a $10,000 raise couldn't stop her from giving notice. She went to work at that wealthy school district next door - for less money.
Over the years, I've met many impassioned teachers at charter schools, only to call them the next year and find they've left. The authors of the Berkeley study theorize that the teachers leave because of the extraordinary demands: long hours, intense involvement in students' complicated lives, continual searches for new ways to raise scores. Even the strongest supporters of the reform movement concede that the task of raising achievement among disadvantaged students is hard work.
It's unlikely that we can build large-scale school reform on a platform of continual new demands on teachers - more time, more energy, more devotion, more responsibility - even if schools find ways to pay them better. This is the bigger challenge facing schools. We need a more useful answer to the Berkeley study than "Yea, its really hard work." | 2095.txt | 2 |
[
"It will give rise to more problems.",
"It is not likely to be successful.",
"It will have a positive impact on education.",
"It demands the local authorities' support."
] | What is the author's comment on the current school reform movement? | When University of California-Berkeley released a study this month showing alarmingly high teacher turnover rates at Los Angeles charter schools, I wasn't surprised.
That's not a slam at local charter schools. It's just that the study echoed something I'd observed many times, starting with my niece.
Bright and cheerful, my niece longed to teach high-needs children. She started out in the San Francisco public schools, where she was assigned to the district's toughest elementary school. Fifth-graders threw chairs across the room - and at her. Parents refused to show up for conferences.
She wasn't willing to deal with this level of indifference and teacher abuse, so she switched to a highly regarded charger elementary school in the Bay Area where she poured her energy into her job and it showed. Her students' test scores were high as those in a nearby wealthy school district, despite the obstacles these children faced.
Yet by her fourth year, my niece was worn out, depleted of the energy it took to work with a classroom of sweet but deeply needy children who pleaded to stay in her classroom when it was time to leave. The principal's offer of a $10,000 raise couldn't stop her from giving notice. She went to work at that wealthy school district next door - for less money.
Over the years, I've met many impassioned teachers at charter schools, only to call them the next year and find they've left. The authors of the Berkeley study theorize that the teachers leave because of the extraordinary demands: long hours, intense involvement in students' complicated lives, continual searches for new ways to raise scores. Even the strongest supporters of the reform movement concede that the task of raising achievement among disadvantaged students is hard work.
It's unlikely that we can build large-scale school reform on a platform of continual new demands on teachers - more time, more energy, more devotion, more responsibility - even if schools find ways to pay them better. This is the bigger challenge facing schools. We need a more useful answer to the Berkeley study than "Yea, its really hard work." | 2095.txt | 1 |
[
"work out the ending of a novel in advance.",
"follow the writing methods learned at school.",
"remodel the main character in writing.",
"make changes to the stories they first construct."
] | The writers that the author is familiar with confess that they would | I have known very few writers, but those I have known, and whom I respected, confess at once that they have little idea where they are going when they first set pen to paper. They have a character, perhaps two; they are in that condition of eager discomfort which passes for inspiration; all admit radical changes of destination once the joumey has begun; one, to my certain knowledge, spent nine months on a novel about Kashmir, then reset the whole thing in the Scottish Highlands. I never heard of anyone making a "skeleton", as we were taught at school. In the breaking and remaking, in the timing, interweaving, beginning afresh, the writer comes to discern things in his material which were not consciously in his mind when he began.
This organic process, often leading to moments of extraordinary self-discovery, is of an indescribable fascination. A blurred image appears, he adds a brushstroke and another, and it is gone; but something was there, and he will not rest till he has captured it. Sometimes the' yeast within a writer outlives a book he has written. I have heard of writers who read nothing but their own books, like adolescents they stand before the mirror, and still cannot fathom the exact outline of the vision before them. For the same reason, writers talk interminably about their own books, winkling out hidden meanings, superimposing new ones, begging response from those around them.
Of course a writer doing this is misunderstood: he might as well try to explain a crime or a love affair. He is also. Incidentally, an unforgivable bore. This temptation to cover the distance between himself and the reader, to study his image in the sight of those who do not know him, can be his undoing: he has begun to write to please.
A young English writer made the pertinent observation a year or two back that the talent goes into the first draft, and the art into the drafts that follow. For this reason also the writer, like any other artist, has no resting place, no crowd or movement in which he may take comfort, no judgment from outside which can replace the judgment from within. A writer makes order out of the anarchy of his heart; he submits himself to a more ruthless discipline than any critic dreamed of, and when he flirts with fame, he is taking time off from living with himself, from the search for what his world contains at its inmost point. | 3.txt | 3 |
[
"depends on skillful planning.",
"is predictable and methodological.",
"depends on the writers' experiences.",
"is disorderly and unsystematic."
] | According to the passage, the process of writing | I have known very few writers, but those I have known, and whom I respected, confess at once that they have little idea where they are going when they first set pen to paper. They have a character, perhaps two; they are in that condition of eager discomfort which passes for inspiration; all admit radical changes of destination once the joumey has begun; one, to my certain knowledge, spent nine months on a novel about Kashmir, then reset the whole thing in the Scottish Highlands. I never heard of anyone making a "skeleton", as we were taught at school. In the breaking and remaking, in the timing, interweaving, beginning afresh, the writer comes to discern things in his material which were not consciously in his mind when he began.
This organic process, often leading to moments of extraordinary self-discovery, is of an indescribable fascination. A blurred image appears, he adds a brushstroke and another, and it is gone; but something was there, and he will not rest till he has captured it. Sometimes the' yeast within a writer outlives a book he has written. I have heard of writers who read nothing but their own books, like adolescents they stand before the mirror, and still cannot fathom the exact outline of the vision before them. For the same reason, writers talk interminably about their own books, winkling out hidden meanings, superimposing new ones, begging response from those around them.
Of course a writer doing this is misunderstood: he might as well try to explain a crime or a love affair. He is also. Incidentally, an unforgivable bore. This temptation to cover the distance between himself and the reader, to study his image in the sight of those who do not know him, can be his undoing: he has begun to write to please.
A young English writer made the pertinent observation a year or two back that the talent goes into the first draft, and the art into the drafts that follow. For this reason also the writer, like any other artist, has no resting place, no crowd or movement in which he may take comfort, no judgment from outside which can replace the judgment from within. A writer makes order out of the anarchy of his heart; he submits himself to a more ruthless discipline than any critic dreamed of, and when he flirts with fame, he is taking time off from living with himself, from the search for what his world contains at its inmost point. | 3.txt | 3 |
[
"success.",
"happiness.",
"failure.",
"sorrow."
] | The word "undoing" in the third paragraph probably suggests | I have known very few writers, but those I have known, and whom I respected, confess at once that they have little idea where they are going when they first set pen to paper. They have a character, perhaps two; they are in that condition of eager discomfort which passes for inspiration; all admit radical changes of destination once the joumey has begun; one, to my certain knowledge, spent nine months on a novel about Kashmir, then reset the whole thing in the Scottish Highlands. I never heard of anyone making a "skeleton", as we were taught at school. In the breaking and remaking, in the timing, interweaving, beginning afresh, the writer comes to discern things in his material which were not consciously in his mind when he began.
This organic process, often leading to moments of extraordinary self-discovery, is of an indescribable fascination. A blurred image appears, he adds a brushstroke and another, and it is gone; but something was there, and he will not rest till he has captured it. Sometimes the' yeast within a writer outlives a book he has written. I have heard of writers who read nothing but their own books, like adolescents they stand before the mirror, and still cannot fathom the exact outline of the vision before them. For the same reason, writers talk interminably about their own books, winkling out hidden meanings, superimposing new ones, begging response from those around them.
Of course a writer doing this is misunderstood: he might as well try to explain a crime or a love affair. He is also. Incidentally, an unforgivable bore. This temptation to cover the distance between himself and the reader, to study his image in the sight of those who do not know him, can be his undoing: he has begun to write to please.
A young English writer made the pertinent observation a year or two back that the talent goes into the first draft, and the art into the drafts that follow. For this reason also the writer, like any other artist, has no resting place, no crowd or movement in which he may take comfort, no judgment from outside which can replace the judgment from within. A writer makes order out of the anarchy of his heart; he submits himself to a more ruthless discipline than any critic dreamed of, and when he flirts with fame, he is taking time off from living with himself, from the search for what his world contains at its inmost point. | 3.txt | 2 |
[
"he is not clear about what he will write at the beginning.",
"he should constantly edit his work to make it perfect.",
"he has to face a lot of responses given by readers.",
"he should add brushstrokes to the appearing blurred images."
] | According to the passage, the writer has no resting place because | I have known very few writers, but those I have known, and whom I respected, confess at once that they have little idea where they are going when they first set pen to paper. They have a character, perhaps two; they are in that condition of eager discomfort which passes for inspiration; all admit radical changes of destination once the joumey has begun; one, to my certain knowledge, spent nine months on a novel about Kashmir, then reset the whole thing in the Scottish Highlands. I never heard of anyone making a "skeleton", as we were taught at school. In the breaking and remaking, in the timing, interweaving, beginning afresh, the writer comes to discern things in his material which were not consciously in his mind when he began.
This organic process, often leading to moments of extraordinary self-discovery, is of an indescribable fascination. A blurred image appears, he adds a brushstroke and another, and it is gone; but something was there, and he will not rest till he has captured it. Sometimes the' yeast within a writer outlives a book he has written. I have heard of writers who read nothing but their own books, like adolescents they stand before the mirror, and still cannot fathom the exact outline of the vision before them. For the same reason, writers talk interminably about their own books, winkling out hidden meanings, superimposing new ones, begging response from those around them.
Of course a writer doing this is misunderstood: he might as well try to explain a crime or a love affair. He is also. Incidentally, an unforgivable bore. This temptation to cover the distance between himself and the reader, to study his image in the sight of those who do not know him, can be his undoing: he has begun to write to please.
A young English writer made the pertinent observation a year or two back that the talent goes into the first draft, and the art into the drafts that follow. For this reason also the writer, like any other artist, has no resting place, no crowd or movement in which he may take comfort, no judgment from outside which can replace the judgment from within. A writer makes order out of the anarchy of his heart; he submits himself to a more ruthless discipline than any critic dreamed of, and when he flirts with fame, he is taking time off from living with himself, from the search for what his world contains at its inmost point. | 3.txt | 1 |
[
"They have little ideas before they start writing.",
"Their talent goes into all their drafts.",
"It does harm to their writing when they flirt with fame.",
"They try to increase communication with readers."
] | Which of the following statements about writers is TRUE according to the last paragraph? | I have known very few writers, but those I have known, and whom I respected, confess at once that they have little idea where they are going when they first set pen to paper. They have a character, perhaps two; they are in that condition of eager discomfort which passes for inspiration; all admit radical changes of destination once the joumey has begun; one, to my certain knowledge, spent nine months on a novel about Kashmir, then reset the whole thing in the Scottish Highlands. I never heard of anyone making a "skeleton", as we were taught at school. In the breaking and remaking, in the timing, interweaving, beginning afresh, the writer comes to discern things in his material which were not consciously in his mind when he began.
This organic process, often leading to moments of extraordinary self-discovery, is of an indescribable fascination. A blurred image appears, he adds a brushstroke and another, and it is gone; but something was there, and he will not rest till he has captured it. Sometimes the' yeast within a writer outlives a book he has written. I have heard of writers who read nothing but their own books, like adolescents they stand before the mirror, and still cannot fathom the exact outline of the vision before them. For the same reason, writers talk interminably about their own books, winkling out hidden meanings, superimposing new ones, begging response from those around them.
Of course a writer doing this is misunderstood: he might as well try to explain a crime or a love affair. He is also. Incidentally, an unforgivable bore. This temptation to cover the distance between himself and the reader, to study his image in the sight of those who do not know him, can be his undoing: he has begun to write to please.
A young English writer made the pertinent observation a year or two back that the talent goes into the first draft, and the art into the drafts that follow. For this reason also the writer, like any other artist, has no resting place, no crowd or movement in which he may take comfort, no judgment from outside which can replace the judgment from within. A writer makes order out of the anarchy of his heart; he submits himself to a more ruthless discipline than any critic dreamed of, and when he flirts with fame, he is taking time off from living with himself, from the search for what his world contains at its inmost point. | 3.txt | 2 |
[
"she worked at a club on the day",
"she said visitors on Thursdays",
"she visited a club on Thursday",
"a special visitor came on Thursday"
] | Mrs. Clarke looded forward to Thursday because_ . | On Thursday afternoon Mrs. Carke, dressed for going out, took her handbag with her money and her key in it, pulled the door behind her to lock it and went to the over 60s Club. She always went there on Thursdays. It was a nice outing for an old woman who lived alone.
At six o'clock she cane home, let herself in and at once smelt cigarette smoke. Cigarette smoke in her house? How? How? Had someone got in? She checked the back door and the windows. All were locked or fastened, as usual. There was no sign of forced entry.
Over a cup of tea she wondered whether someone might have a key that fitted her front door-"a master key"perhaps. So she stayed at home the following Thursday. Nothing happened. Was anyone watching her movements? On the Thursday after that she went out at her usual time,dressed as usual, but she didn't go to the club. Instead she took a short cut home again, letting herself in through her garden and the back door. She settled down to wait.
It was just after four o'clock when the front door bell rang.Mrs. Clarke was making a cup of tea at the time. The bell rang again, and then she heard her letter-box being pushed open. With the kettle of boiling water in her hand, she moved quietly towards the front door. A long piece of wire appeared through the letter-box, and then a hand. The wire turned and caught around the knob on the door-lock. Mrs. Clarke raised the kettle and poured the water over the hand. There was a shout outside, and the skin seemed to drop off the fingers like a glove. The wire fell to the floor, the hand was pulled back, and Mrs. Clarke heard the sound of running feet. | 1638.txt | 2 |
[
"Mrs.Clarke would have found a broken door or window",
"he or she was still in the house",
"things would have been thown about",
"he or she would have needed a master key"
] | If someone had made a forced entery,_ . | On Thursday afternoon Mrs. Carke, dressed for going out, took her handbag with her money and her key in it, pulled the door behind her to lock it and went to the over 60s Club. She always went there on Thursdays. It was a nice outing for an old woman who lived alone.
At six o'clock she cane home, let herself in and at once smelt cigarette smoke. Cigarette smoke in her house? How? How? Had someone got in? She checked the back door and the windows. All were locked or fastened, as usual. There was no sign of forced entry.
Over a cup of tea she wondered whether someone might have a key that fitted her front door-"a master key"perhaps. So she stayed at home the following Thursday. Nothing happened. Was anyone watching her movements? On the Thursday after that she went out at her usual time,dressed as usual, but she didn't go to the club. Instead she took a short cut home again, letting herself in through her garden and the back door. She settled down to wait.
It was just after four o'clock when the front door bell rang.Mrs. Clarke was making a cup of tea at the time. The bell rang again, and then she heard her letter-box being pushed open. With the kettle of boiling water in her hand, she moved quietly towards the front door. A long piece of wire appeared through the letter-box, and then a hand. The wire turned and caught around the knob on the door-lock. Mrs. Clarke raised the kettle and poured the water over the hand. There was a shout outside, and the skin seemed to drop off the fingers like a glove. The wire fell to the floor, the hand was pulled back, and Mrs. Clarke heard the sound of running feet. | 1638.txt | 0 |
[
"because she didn't want to miss the club again",
"to see if the thief was hnging about outside",
"to the club but then changed her mind",
"in an attempt to trick the thief"
] | On the third Thursday Mrs. Clarke went out_ . | On Thursday afternoon Mrs. Carke, dressed for going out, took her handbag with her money and her key in it, pulled the door behind her to lock it and went to the over 60s Club. She always went there on Thursdays. It was a nice outing for an old woman who lived alone.
At six o'clock she cane home, let herself in and at once smelt cigarette smoke. Cigarette smoke in her house? How? How? Had someone got in? She checked the back door and the windows. All were locked or fastened, as usual. There was no sign of forced entry.
Over a cup of tea she wondered whether someone might have a key that fitted her front door-"a master key"perhaps. So she stayed at home the following Thursday. Nothing happened. Was anyone watching her movements? On the Thursday after that she went out at her usual time,dressed as usual, but she didn't go to the club. Instead she took a short cut home again, letting herself in through her garden and the back door. She settled down to wait.
It was just after four o'clock when the front door bell rang.Mrs. Clarke was making a cup of tea at the time. The bell rang again, and then she heard her letter-box being pushed open. With the kettle of boiling water in her hand, she moved quietly towards the front door. A long piece of wire appeared through the letter-box, and then a hand. The wire turned and caught around the knob on the door-lock. Mrs. Clarke raised the kettle and poured the water over the hand. There was a shout outside, and the skin seemed to drop off the fingers like a glove. The wire fell to the floor, the hand was pulled back, and Mrs. Clarke heard the sound of running feet. | 1638.txt | 3 |
[
"needed a piece of wire to open it",
"could he opened from inside without a key",
"could't be opened without a key",
"used a knob instead of a key"
] | The lock on the front door was one which_ . | On Thursday afternoon Mrs. Carke, dressed for going out, took her handbag with her money and her key in it, pulled the door behind her to lock it and went to the over 60s Club. She always went there on Thursdays. It was a nice outing for an old woman who lived alone.
At six o'clock she cane home, let herself in and at once smelt cigarette smoke. Cigarette smoke in her house? How? How? Had someone got in? She checked the back door and the windows. All were locked or fastened, as usual. There was no sign of forced entry.
Over a cup of tea she wondered whether someone might have a key that fitted her front door-"a master key"perhaps. So she stayed at home the following Thursday. Nothing happened. Was anyone watching her movements? On the Thursday after that she went out at her usual time,dressed as usual, but she didn't go to the club. Instead she took a short cut home again, letting herself in through her garden and the back door. She settled down to wait.
It was just after four o'clock when the front door bell rang.Mrs. Clarke was making a cup of tea at the time. The bell rang again, and then she heard her letter-box being pushed open. With the kettle of boiling water in her hand, she moved quietly towards the front door. A long piece of wire appeared through the letter-box, and then a hand. The wire turned and caught around the knob on the door-lock. Mrs. Clarke raised the kettle and poured the water over the hand. There was a shout outside, and the skin seemed to drop off the fingers like a glove. The wire fell to the floor, the hand was pulled back, and Mrs. Clarke heard the sound of running feet. | 1638.txt | 1 |
[
"because Mrs.Clarke refused to open the door",
"when the man's glove dropped off",
"because it was too hot to hold",
"because the man justwanted to get away"
] | The wire feel to the floor_ . | On Thursday afternoon Mrs. Carke, dressed for going out, took her handbag with her money and her key in it, pulled the door behind her to lock it and went to the over 60s Club. She always went there on Thursdays. It was a nice outing for an old woman who lived alone.
At six o'clock she cane home, let herself in and at once smelt cigarette smoke. Cigarette smoke in her house? How? How? Had someone got in? She checked the back door and the windows. All were locked or fastened, as usual. There was no sign of forced entry.
Over a cup of tea she wondered whether someone might have a key that fitted her front door-"a master key"perhaps. So she stayed at home the following Thursday. Nothing happened. Was anyone watching her movements? On the Thursday after that she went out at her usual time,dressed as usual, but she didn't go to the club. Instead she took a short cut home again, letting herself in through her garden and the back door. She settled down to wait.
It was just after four o'clock when the front door bell rang.Mrs. Clarke was making a cup of tea at the time. The bell rang again, and then she heard her letter-box being pushed open. With the kettle of boiling water in her hand, she moved quietly towards the front door. A long piece of wire appeared through the letter-box, and then a hand. The wire turned and caught around the knob on the door-lock. Mrs. Clarke raised the kettle and poured the water over the hand. There was a shout outside, and the skin seemed to drop off the fingers like a glove. The wire fell to the floor, the hand was pulled back, and Mrs. Clarke heard the sound of running feet. | 1638.txt | 3 |
[
"studies on the cause of cancer",
"controversial view-points in the cause of cancer",
"the relationship between electricity and cancer.",
"different ideas about the effect of electricity on caner."
] | The main idea of this passage is _ . | Can electricity cause cancer? In a society that literally runs on electric power, the very idea seems preposterous. But for more than a decade, a growing band of scientists and journalists has pointed to studies that seem to link exposure to electromagnetic fields with increased risk of leukemia and other malignancies. The implications are unsettling, to say the least, since everyone comes into contact with such fields, which are generated by everything electrical, from power lines and antennas to personal computers and micro-wave ovens. Because evidence on the subject is inconclusive and often contradictory, it has been hard to decide whether concern about the health effects of electricity is legitimate-or the worst kind of paranoia.
Now the alarmists have gained some qualified support from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. In the executive summary of a new scientific review, released in draft form late last week, the EPA has put forward what amounts to the most serious government warning to date. The agency tentatively concludes that scientific evidence "suggests a casual link" between extremely low-frequency electromagnetic fields-those having very longwave-lengths-and leukemia, lymphoma and brain cancer, While the report falls short of classifying ELF fields as probable carcinogens, it does identify the common 60-hertz magnetic field as "a possible, but not proven, cause of cancer in humans."
The report is no reason to panic-or even to lost sleep. If there is a cancer risk, it is a small one. The evidence is still so controversial that the draft stirred a great deal of debate within the Bush Administration, and the EPA released it over strong objections from the Pentagon and the Whit House. But now no one can deny that the issue must be taken seriously and that much more research is needed.
At the heart of the debate is a simple and well-understood physical phenomenon: When an electric current passes through a wire, tit generates an electromagnetic field that exerts forces on surrounding objects, For many years, scientists dismissed any suggestion that such forces might be harmful, primarily because they are so extraordinarily weak. The ELF magnetic field generated by a video terminal measures only a few milligauss, or about one-hundredth the strength of the earth's own magnetic field, The electric fields surrounding a power line can be as high as 10 kilovolts per meter, but the corresponding field induced in human cells will be only about 1 millivolt per meter. This is far less than the electric fields that the cells themselves generate.
How could such minuscule forces pose a health danger? The consensus used to be that they could not, and for decades scientists concentrated on more powerful kinds of radiation, like X-rays, that pack sufficient wallop to knock electrons out of the molecules that make up the human body. Such "ionizing" radiations have been clearly linked to increased cancer risks and there are regulations to control emissions.
But epidemiological studies, which find statistical associations between sets of data, do not prove cause and effect. Though there is a body of laboratory work showing that exposure to ELF fields can have biological effects on animal tissues, a mechanism by which those effects could lead to cancerous growths has never been found.
The Pentagon is for from persuaded. In a blistering 33-page critique of the EPA report, Air Force scientists charge its authors with having "biased the entire document" toward proving a link. "Our reviewers are convinced that there is no suggestion that (electromagnetic fields) present in the environment induce or promote cancer," the Air Force concludes. "It is astonishing that the EPA would lend its imprimatur on this report." Then Pentagon's concern is understandable. There is hardly a unit of the modern military that does not depend on the heavy use of some kind of electronic equipment, from huge ground-based radar towers to the defense systems built into every warship and plane. | 265.txt | 3 |
[
"there is casual link between electricity and cancer.",
"electricity really affects cancer.",
"controversial.",
"low frequency electromagnetic field is a possible cause of cancer"
] | The view-point of the EPA is _ . | Can electricity cause cancer? In a society that literally runs on electric power, the very idea seems preposterous. But for more than a decade, a growing band of scientists and journalists has pointed to studies that seem to link exposure to electromagnetic fields with increased risk of leukemia and other malignancies. The implications are unsettling, to say the least, since everyone comes into contact with such fields, which are generated by everything electrical, from power lines and antennas to personal computers and micro-wave ovens. Because evidence on the subject is inconclusive and often contradictory, it has been hard to decide whether concern about the health effects of electricity is legitimate-or the worst kind of paranoia.
Now the alarmists have gained some qualified support from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. In the executive summary of a new scientific review, released in draft form late last week, the EPA has put forward what amounts to the most serious government warning to date. The agency tentatively concludes that scientific evidence "suggests a casual link" between extremely low-frequency electromagnetic fields-those having very longwave-lengths-and leukemia, lymphoma and brain cancer, While the report falls short of classifying ELF fields as probable carcinogens, it does identify the common 60-hertz magnetic field as "a possible, but not proven, cause of cancer in humans."
The report is no reason to panic-or even to lost sleep. If there is a cancer risk, it is a small one. The evidence is still so controversial that the draft stirred a great deal of debate within the Bush Administration, and the EPA released it over strong objections from the Pentagon and the Whit House. But now no one can deny that the issue must be taken seriously and that much more research is needed.
At the heart of the debate is a simple and well-understood physical phenomenon: When an electric current passes through a wire, tit generates an electromagnetic field that exerts forces on surrounding objects, For many years, scientists dismissed any suggestion that such forces might be harmful, primarily because they are so extraordinarily weak. The ELF magnetic field generated by a video terminal measures only a few milligauss, or about one-hundredth the strength of the earth's own magnetic field, The electric fields surrounding a power line can be as high as 10 kilovolts per meter, but the corresponding field induced in human cells will be only about 1 millivolt per meter. This is far less than the electric fields that the cells themselves generate.
How could such minuscule forces pose a health danger? The consensus used to be that they could not, and for decades scientists concentrated on more powerful kinds of radiation, like X-rays, that pack sufficient wallop to knock electrons out of the molecules that make up the human body. Such "ionizing" radiations have been clearly linked to increased cancer risks and there are regulations to control emissions.
But epidemiological studies, which find statistical associations between sets of data, do not prove cause and effect. Though there is a body of laboratory work showing that exposure to ELF fields can have biological effects on animal tissues, a mechanism by which those effects could lead to cancerous growths has never been found.
The Pentagon is for from persuaded. In a blistering 33-page critique of the EPA report, Air Force scientists charge its authors with having "biased the entire document" toward proving a link. "Our reviewers are convinced that there is no suggestion that (electromagnetic fields) present in the environment induce or promote cancer," the Air Force concludes. "It is astonishing that the EPA would lend its imprimatur on this report." Then Pentagon's concern is understandable. There is hardly a unit of the modern military that does not depend on the heavy use of some kind of electronic equipment, from huge ground-based radar towers to the defense systems built into every warship and plane. | 265.txt | 0 |
[
"it may stir a great deal of debate among the Bush Administration.",
"every unit of the modern military has depended on the heavy use of some kind of electronic equipment.",
"the Pentagon's concern was understandable.",
"they had different arguments."
] | Why did the Pentagon and Whit House object to the release of the report? Because _ . | Can electricity cause cancer? In a society that literally runs on electric power, the very idea seems preposterous. But for more than a decade, a growing band of scientists and journalists has pointed to studies that seem to link exposure to electromagnetic fields with increased risk of leukemia and other malignancies. The implications are unsettling, to say the least, since everyone comes into contact with such fields, which are generated by everything electrical, from power lines and antennas to personal computers and micro-wave ovens. Because evidence on the subject is inconclusive and often contradictory, it has been hard to decide whether concern about the health effects of electricity is legitimate-or the worst kind of paranoia.
Now the alarmists have gained some qualified support from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. In the executive summary of a new scientific review, released in draft form late last week, the EPA has put forward what amounts to the most serious government warning to date. The agency tentatively concludes that scientific evidence "suggests a casual link" between extremely low-frequency electromagnetic fields-those having very longwave-lengths-and leukemia, lymphoma and brain cancer, While the report falls short of classifying ELF fields as probable carcinogens, it does identify the common 60-hertz magnetic field as "a possible, but not proven, cause of cancer in humans."
The report is no reason to panic-or even to lost sleep. If there is a cancer risk, it is a small one. The evidence is still so controversial that the draft stirred a great deal of debate within the Bush Administration, and the EPA released it over strong objections from the Pentagon and the Whit House. But now no one can deny that the issue must be taken seriously and that much more research is needed.
At the heart of the debate is a simple and well-understood physical phenomenon: When an electric current passes through a wire, tit generates an electromagnetic field that exerts forces on surrounding objects, For many years, scientists dismissed any suggestion that such forces might be harmful, primarily because they are so extraordinarily weak. The ELF magnetic field generated by a video terminal measures only a few milligauss, or about one-hundredth the strength of the earth's own magnetic field, The electric fields surrounding a power line can be as high as 10 kilovolts per meter, but the corresponding field induced in human cells will be only about 1 millivolt per meter. This is far less than the electric fields that the cells themselves generate.
How could such minuscule forces pose a health danger? The consensus used to be that they could not, and for decades scientists concentrated on more powerful kinds of radiation, like X-rays, that pack sufficient wallop to knock electrons out of the molecules that make up the human body. Such "ionizing" radiations have been clearly linked to increased cancer risks and there are regulations to control emissions.
But epidemiological studies, which find statistical associations between sets of data, do not prove cause and effect. Though there is a body of laboratory work showing that exposure to ELF fields can have biological effects on animal tissues, a mechanism by which those effects could lead to cancerous growths has never been found.
The Pentagon is for from persuaded. In a blistering 33-page critique of the EPA report, Air Force scientists charge its authors with having "biased the entire document" toward proving a link. "Our reviewers are convinced that there is no suggestion that (electromagnetic fields) present in the environment induce or promote cancer," the Air Force concludes. "It is astonishing that the EPA would lend its imprimatur on this report." Then Pentagon's concern is understandable. There is hardly a unit of the modern military that does not depend on the heavy use of some kind of electronic equipment, from huge ground-based radar towers to the defense systems built into every warship and plane. | 265.txt | 1 |
[
"the force of the electromagnetic field is too weak to be harmful.",
"the force of the electromagnetic field is weaker than the electric field that the cells generate.",
"electromagnetic field may affect health.",
"only more powerful radiation can knock electron out of human body."
] | It can be inferred from physical phenomenon _ . | Can electricity cause cancer? In a society that literally runs on electric power, the very idea seems preposterous. But for more than a decade, a growing band of scientists and journalists has pointed to studies that seem to link exposure to electromagnetic fields with increased risk of leukemia and other malignancies. The implications are unsettling, to say the least, since everyone comes into contact with such fields, which are generated by everything electrical, from power lines and antennas to personal computers and micro-wave ovens. Because evidence on the subject is inconclusive and often contradictory, it has been hard to decide whether concern about the health effects of electricity is legitimate-or the worst kind of paranoia.
Now the alarmists have gained some qualified support from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. In the executive summary of a new scientific review, released in draft form late last week, the EPA has put forward what amounts to the most serious government warning to date. The agency tentatively concludes that scientific evidence "suggests a casual link" between extremely low-frequency electromagnetic fields-those having very longwave-lengths-and leukemia, lymphoma and brain cancer, While the report falls short of classifying ELF fields as probable carcinogens, it does identify the common 60-hertz magnetic field as "a possible, but not proven, cause of cancer in humans."
The report is no reason to panic-or even to lost sleep. If there is a cancer risk, it is a small one. The evidence is still so controversial that the draft stirred a great deal of debate within the Bush Administration, and the EPA released it over strong objections from the Pentagon and the Whit House. But now no one can deny that the issue must be taken seriously and that much more research is needed.
At the heart of the debate is a simple and well-understood physical phenomenon: When an electric current passes through a wire, tit generates an electromagnetic field that exerts forces on surrounding objects, For many years, scientists dismissed any suggestion that such forces might be harmful, primarily because they are so extraordinarily weak. The ELF magnetic field generated by a video terminal measures only a few milligauss, or about one-hundredth the strength of the earth's own magnetic field, The electric fields surrounding a power line can be as high as 10 kilovolts per meter, but the corresponding field induced in human cells will be only about 1 millivolt per meter. This is far less than the electric fields that the cells themselves generate.
How could such minuscule forces pose a health danger? The consensus used to be that they could not, and for decades scientists concentrated on more powerful kinds of radiation, like X-rays, that pack sufficient wallop to knock electrons out of the molecules that make up the human body. Such "ionizing" radiations have been clearly linked to increased cancer risks and there are regulations to control emissions.
But epidemiological studies, which find statistical associations between sets of data, do not prove cause and effect. Though there is a body of laboratory work showing that exposure to ELF fields can have biological effects on animal tissues, a mechanism by which those effects could lead to cancerous growths has never been found.
The Pentagon is for from persuaded. In a blistering 33-page critique of the EPA report, Air Force scientists charge its authors with having "biased the entire document" toward proving a link. "Our reviewers are convinced that there is no suggestion that (electromagnetic fields) present in the environment induce or promote cancer," the Air Force concludes. "It is astonishing that the EPA would lend its imprimatur on this report." Then Pentagon's concern is understandable. There is hardly a unit of the modern military that does not depend on the heavy use of some kind of electronic equipment, from huge ground-based radar towers to the defense systems built into every warship and plane. | 265.txt | 0 |
[
"They are indifferent.",
"They are worried very much.",
"The may exercise prudent avoidance.",
"They are shocked."
] | What do you think ordinary citizens may do after reading the different arguments? | Can electricity cause cancer? In a society that literally runs on electric power, the very idea seems preposterous. But for more than a decade, a growing band of scientists and journalists has pointed to studies that seem to link exposure to electromagnetic fields with increased risk of leukemia and other malignancies. The implications are unsettling, to say the least, since everyone comes into contact with such fields, which are generated by everything electrical, from power lines and antennas to personal computers and micro-wave ovens. Because evidence on the subject is inconclusive and often contradictory, it has been hard to decide whether concern about the health effects of electricity is legitimate-or the worst kind of paranoia.
Now the alarmists have gained some qualified support from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. In the executive summary of a new scientific review, released in draft form late last week, the EPA has put forward what amounts to the most serious government warning to date. The agency tentatively concludes that scientific evidence "suggests a casual link" between extremely low-frequency electromagnetic fields-those having very longwave-lengths-and leukemia, lymphoma and brain cancer, While the report falls short of classifying ELF fields as probable carcinogens, it does identify the common 60-hertz magnetic field as "a possible, but not proven, cause of cancer in humans."
The report is no reason to panic-or even to lost sleep. If there is a cancer risk, it is a small one. The evidence is still so controversial that the draft stirred a great deal of debate within the Bush Administration, and the EPA released it over strong objections from the Pentagon and the Whit House. But now no one can deny that the issue must be taken seriously and that much more research is needed.
At the heart of the debate is a simple and well-understood physical phenomenon: When an electric current passes through a wire, tit generates an electromagnetic field that exerts forces on surrounding objects, For many years, scientists dismissed any suggestion that such forces might be harmful, primarily because they are so extraordinarily weak. The ELF magnetic field generated by a video terminal measures only a few milligauss, or about one-hundredth the strength of the earth's own magnetic field, The electric fields surrounding a power line can be as high as 10 kilovolts per meter, but the corresponding field induced in human cells will be only about 1 millivolt per meter. This is far less than the electric fields that the cells themselves generate.
How could such minuscule forces pose a health danger? The consensus used to be that they could not, and for decades scientists concentrated on more powerful kinds of radiation, like X-rays, that pack sufficient wallop to knock electrons out of the molecules that make up the human body. Such "ionizing" radiations have been clearly linked to increased cancer risks and there are regulations to control emissions.
But epidemiological studies, which find statistical associations between sets of data, do not prove cause and effect. Though there is a body of laboratory work showing that exposure to ELF fields can have biological effects on animal tissues, a mechanism by which those effects could lead to cancerous growths has never been found.
The Pentagon is for from persuaded. In a blistering 33-page critique of the EPA report, Air Force scientists charge its authors with having "biased the entire document" toward proving a link. "Our reviewers are convinced that there is no suggestion that (electromagnetic fields) present in the environment induce or promote cancer," the Air Force concludes. "It is astonishing that the EPA would lend its imprimatur on this report." Then Pentagon's concern is understandable. There is hardly a unit of the modern military that does not depend on the heavy use of some kind of electronic equipment, from huge ground-based radar towers to the defense systems built into every warship and plane. | 265.txt | 2 |
[
"promote the three-year, dual-degree program.",
"attract the attention of investment banks and oil companies.",
"work out measures to solve environmental problems.",
"raise a fund for environmental protection."
] | Students at the University of Michigan Erb Institute held the party probably in order to _ | The partygoers who gathered on a small farm outside campus were not your typical gaggle of business school students. Sure, some would soon move on to plum jobs at investment banks and oil companies, but instead of traditionally celebrating their success, they opted for a "sellout party." The event was held by students at the University of Michigan Erb Institute, a three-year, dual-degree program between the university's business and natural resources schools. Most of the institute's students are environmental advocates first, business people second, yet see the importance of money in making a difference. They represent a small but growing cadre of M.B.A.-wielding social activists who plan to bring about change, one PowerPoint presentation at a time.
Greg Shopoff, a third-year student at the Erb Institute, studied geology at Colorado College and briefly considered going into environmental law. But he found the legal profession too slow for his tastes and opted for business school. "If you can harness the impact of business for good," he says, "you have the potential for larger-scale change in a shorter period of time." More students have begun thinking like Shopoff, and business schools clearly see the shift. At the Erb Institute, director Tom Lyon notes the program has grown from five new students a year to as many as 25. The sheer number of business school classes like Corporate Social Responsibility and Competitive Environmental Strategy is up across the country, and school officials say students are asking for more conferences, lectures, and workshops on social and environmental stewardship. "This generation has grown up with a much higher global awareness," says Kriss Deiglmeier, director of the Stanford School of Business Center for Social Innovation. "They see what kind of problems we're facing and want to be engaged in solving them."
On the hiring side of the job market, recruiters from both non- and for-profits are looking increasingly for this type of multifaceted talent. In the nonprofit sector, the push makes good business sense. More money is now at stake within mission-based organizations than just a couple of years ago, and nonprofits compete more fiercely with one another for funds and with corporations for government contracts. "A decade ago, nonprofits would not have appreciated as much how useful an M.B.A. would be," says Sharon Oster, director of the Yale School of Management Program on Social Enterprise. "Now there are more opportunities for M.B.A. grads to move into that sector."
Corporations provide the rest of the rising demand for these students, especially as they see that environmental values can help boost the bottom line. Both companies and environmental consulting groups are hiring. Environmental Defense-a nonprofit advocacy group that partnered with FedEx to promote its hybrid electric fleet and also helped McDonald's phase out Styrofoam packaging-actively seeks out multidisciplinary employees who understand environmental issues but use business acumen to address them.
The intersection between financial know-how and social responsibility is not really new-just look at the number of CEOs on the boards of nonprofits and charities. But as M.B.A. programs have stepped up, schools serve not only as the nexus between corporate America and students but also as the link between business savvy and the need for social and environmental advocacy. | 3679.txt | 2 |
[
"he was more interested in business than in legal profession.",
"he thought business was a shortcut for him to become an influential person.",
"he wanted to solve the environmental problems through business that he can make better use of.",
"he thought legal procedures is not efficient in harnessing the impact of business for good."
] | Greg Shopoff chose to study business rather than environmental law because _ | The partygoers who gathered on a small farm outside campus were not your typical gaggle of business school students. Sure, some would soon move on to plum jobs at investment banks and oil companies, but instead of traditionally celebrating their success, they opted for a "sellout party." The event was held by students at the University of Michigan Erb Institute, a three-year, dual-degree program between the university's business and natural resources schools. Most of the institute's students are environmental advocates first, business people second, yet see the importance of money in making a difference. They represent a small but growing cadre of M.B.A.-wielding social activists who plan to bring about change, one PowerPoint presentation at a time.
Greg Shopoff, a third-year student at the Erb Institute, studied geology at Colorado College and briefly considered going into environmental law. But he found the legal profession too slow for his tastes and opted for business school. "If you can harness the impact of business for good," he says, "you have the potential for larger-scale change in a shorter period of time." More students have begun thinking like Shopoff, and business schools clearly see the shift. At the Erb Institute, director Tom Lyon notes the program has grown from five new students a year to as many as 25. The sheer number of business school classes like Corporate Social Responsibility and Competitive Environmental Strategy is up across the country, and school officials say students are asking for more conferences, lectures, and workshops on social and environmental stewardship. "This generation has grown up with a much higher global awareness," says Kriss Deiglmeier, director of the Stanford School of Business Center for Social Innovation. "They see what kind of problems we're facing and want to be engaged in solving them."
On the hiring side of the job market, recruiters from both non- and for-profits are looking increasingly for this type of multifaceted talent. In the nonprofit sector, the push makes good business sense. More money is now at stake within mission-based organizations than just a couple of years ago, and nonprofits compete more fiercely with one another for funds and with corporations for government contracts. "A decade ago, nonprofits would not have appreciated as much how useful an M.B.A. would be," says Sharon Oster, director of the Yale School of Management Program on Social Enterprise. "Now there are more opportunities for M.B.A. grads to move into that sector."
Corporations provide the rest of the rising demand for these students, especially as they see that environmental values can help boost the bottom line. Both companies and environmental consulting groups are hiring. Environmental Defense-a nonprofit advocacy group that partnered with FedEx to promote its hybrid electric fleet and also helped McDonald's phase out Styrofoam packaging-actively seeks out multidisciplinary employees who understand environmental issues but use business acumen to address them.
The intersection between financial know-how and social responsibility is not really new-just look at the number of CEOs on the boards of nonprofits and charities. But as M.B.A. programs have stepped up, schools serve not only as the nexus between corporate America and students but also as the link between business savvy and the need for social and environmental advocacy. | 3679.txt | 2 |
[
"there are more vacancies in nonprofits than before.",
"nonprofits are now also doing business to earn more money.",
"nonprofits need to be more efficient so as to be more competitive.",
"nonprofits have to compete with for-profits for funds now."
] | Nonprofits need to hire more M.B.A. graduates now than a decade ago because _ | The partygoers who gathered on a small farm outside campus were not your typical gaggle of business school students. Sure, some would soon move on to plum jobs at investment banks and oil companies, but instead of traditionally celebrating their success, they opted for a "sellout party." The event was held by students at the University of Michigan Erb Institute, a three-year, dual-degree program between the university's business and natural resources schools. Most of the institute's students are environmental advocates first, business people second, yet see the importance of money in making a difference. They represent a small but growing cadre of M.B.A.-wielding social activists who plan to bring about change, one PowerPoint presentation at a time.
Greg Shopoff, a third-year student at the Erb Institute, studied geology at Colorado College and briefly considered going into environmental law. But he found the legal profession too slow for his tastes and opted for business school. "If you can harness the impact of business for good," he says, "you have the potential for larger-scale change in a shorter period of time." More students have begun thinking like Shopoff, and business schools clearly see the shift. At the Erb Institute, director Tom Lyon notes the program has grown from five new students a year to as many as 25. The sheer number of business school classes like Corporate Social Responsibility and Competitive Environmental Strategy is up across the country, and school officials say students are asking for more conferences, lectures, and workshops on social and environmental stewardship. "This generation has grown up with a much higher global awareness," says Kriss Deiglmeier, director of the Stanford School of Business Center for Social Innovation. "They see what kind of problems we're facing and want to be engaged in solving them."
On the hiring side of the job market, recruiters from both non- and for-profits are looking increasingly for this type of multifaceted talent. In the nonprofit sector, the push makes good business sense. More money is now at stake within mission-based organizations than just a couple of years ago, and nonprofits compete more fiercely with one another for funds and with corporations for government contracts. "A decade ago, nonprofits would not have appreciated as much how useful an M.B.A. would be," says Sharon Oster, director of the Yale School of Management Program on Social Enterprise. "Now there are more opportunities for M.B.A. grads to move into that sector."
Corporations provide the rest of the rising demand for these students, especially as they see that environmental values can help boost the bottom line. Both companies and environmental consulting groups are hiring. Environmental Defense-a nonprofit advocacy group that partnered with FedEx to promote its hybrid electric fleet and also helped McDonald's phase out Styrofoam packaging-actively seeks out multidisciplinary employees who understand environmental issues but use business acumen to address them.
The intersection between financial know-how and social responsibility is not really new-just look at the number of CEOs on the boards of nonprofits and charities. But as M.B.A. programs have stepped up, schools serve not only as the nexus between corporate America and students but also as the link between business savvy and the need for social and environmental advocacy. | 3679.txt | 2 |
[
"nonprofit is united with for-profit to make common efforts in environment protection.",
"corporations are in great need of multifaceted organizations to work with companies on environmental issues.",
"nonprofit organizations are switching more attention on environmental business.",
"nonprofit organizations are helping business to be more environmentally friendly through business practices."
] | The case of Environmental Defense implies that _ | The partygoers who gathered on a small farm outside campus were not your typical gaggle of business school students. Sure, some would soon move on to plum jobs at investment banks and oil companies, but instead of traditionally celebrating their success, they opted for a "sellout party." The event was held by students at the University of Michigan Erb Institute, a three-year, dual-degree program between the university's business and natural resources schools. Most of the institute's students are environmental advocates first, business people second, yet see the importance of money in making a difference. They represent a small but growing cadre of M.B.A.-wielding social activists who plan to bring about change, one PowerPoint presentation at a time.
Greg Shopoff, a third-year student at the Erb Institute, studied geology at Colorado College and briefly considered going into environmental law. But he found the legal profession too slow for his tastes and opted for business school. "If you can harness the impact of business for good," he says, "you have the potential for larger-scale change in a shorter period of time." More students have begun thinking like Shopoff, and business schools clearly see the shift. At the Erb Institute, director Tom Lyon notes the program has grown from five new students a year to as many as 25. The sheer number of business school classes like Corporate Social Responsibility and Competitive Environmental Strategy is up across the country, and school officials say students are asking for more conferences, lectures, and workshops on social and environmental stewardship. "This generation has grown up with a much higher global awareness," says Kriss Deiglmeier, director of the Stanford School of Business Center for Social Innovation. "They see what kind of problems we're facing and want to be engaged in solving them."
On the hiring side of the job market, recruiters from both non- and for-profits are looking increasingly for this type of multifaceted talent. In the nonprofit sector, the push makes good business sense. More money is now at stake within mission-based organizations than just a couple of years ago, and nonprofits compete more fiercely with one another for funds and with corporations for government contracts. "A decade ago, nonprofits would not have appreciated as much how useful an M.B.A. would be," says Sharon Oster, director of the Yale School of Management Program on Social Enterprise. "Now there are more opportunities for M.B.A. grads to move into that sector."
Corporations provide the rest of the rising demand for these students, especially as they see that environmental values can help boost the bottom line. Both companies and environmental consulting groups are hiring. Environmental Defense-a nonprofit advocacy group that partnered with FedEx to promote its hybrid electric fleet and also helped McDonald's phase out Styrofoam packaging-actively seeks out multidisciplinary employees who understand environmental issues but use business acumen to address them.
The intersection between financial know-how and social responsibility is not really new-just look at the number of CEOs on the boards of nonprofits and charities. But as M.B.A. programs have stepped up, schools serve not only as the nexus between corporate America and students but also as the link between business savvy and the need for social and environmental advocacy. | 3679.txt | 3 |
[
"business world is turning its attention to integrating business with environmental issues.",
"business corporations can be united with nonprofits in environmental protection.",
"multidisciplinary students are increasingly popular in nonprofits as well as in corporations.",
"there is a trend for business students to making use of business acumen for advocating environmental protection."
] | By this passages, the author tries to show that _ | The partygoers who gathered on a small farm outside campus were not your typical gaggle of business school students. Sure, some would soon move on to plum jobs at investment banks and oil companies, but instead of traditionally celebrating their success, they opted for a "sellout party." The event was held by students at the University of Michigan Erb Institute, a three-year, dual-degree program between the university's business and natural resources schools. Most of the institute's students are environmental advocates first, business people second, yet see the importance of money in making a difference. They represent a small but growing cadre of M.B.A.-wielding social activists who plan to bring about change, one PowerPoint presentation at a time.
Greg Shopoff, a third-year student at the Erb Institute, studied geology at Colorado College and briefly considered going into environmental law. But he found the legal profession too slow for his tastes and opted for business school. "If you can harness the impact of business for good," he says, "you have the potential for larger-scale change in a shorter period of time." More students have begun thinking like Shopoff, and business schools clearly see the shift. At the Erb Institute, director Tom Lyon notes the program has grown from five new students a year to as many as 25. The sheer number of business school classes like Corporate Social Responsibility and Competitive Environmental Strategy is up across the country, and school officials say students are asking for more conferences, lectures, and workshops on social and environmental stewardship. "This generation has grown up with a much higher global awareness," says Kriss Deiglmeier, director of the Stanford School of Business Center for Social Innovation. "They see what kind of problems we're facing and want to be engaged in solving them."
On the hiring side of the job market, recruiters from both non- and for-profits are looking increasingly for this type of multifaceted talent. In the nonprofit sector, the push makes good business sense. More money is now at stake within mission-based organizations than just a couple of years ago, and nonprofits compete more fiercely with one another for funds and with corporations for government contracts. "A decade ago, nonprofits would not have appreciated as much how useful an M.B.A. would be," says Sharon Oster, director of the Yale School of Management Program on Social Enterprise. "Now there are more opportunities for M.B.A. grads to move into that sector."
Corporations provide the rest of the rising demand for these students, especially as they see that environmental values can help boost the bottom line. Both companies and environmental consulting groups are hiring. Environmental Defense-a nonprofit advocacy group that partnered with FedEx to promote its hybrid electric fleet and also helped McDonald's phase out Styrofoam packaging-actively seeks out multidisciplinary employees who understand environmental issues but use business acumen to address them.
The intersection between financial know-how and social responsibility is not really new-just look at the number of CEOs on the boards of nonprofits and charities. But as M.B.A. programs have stepped up, schools serve not only as the nexus between corporate America and students but also as the link between business savvy and the need for social and environmental advocacy. | 3679.txt | 3 |
[
"Methods of food preservation",
"How diet was restricted by the environment",
"The contributions of women to the food supply",
"Difficulties in establishing successful farms"
] | Which aspect of the lives of the Native Americans of the north Pacific Coast does the passage mainly discuss? | The Native American peoples of the north Pacific Coast created a highly complex maritime culture as they invented modes of production unique to their special environment. In addition to their sophisticated technical culture, they also attained one of the most complex social organizations of any nonagricultural people in the world.
In a division of labor similar to that of the hunting peoples in the interior and among foraging peoples throughout the world, the men did most of the fishing, and the women processed the catch. Women also specialized in the gathering of the abundant shellfish that lived closer to shore. They collected oysters, crabs, sea urchins, mussels, abalone, and clams, which they could gather while remaining close to their children. The maritime life harvested by the women not only provided food, but also supplied more of the raw materials for making tools than did fish gathered by the men. Of particular importance for the native tool kit before the introduction of metal was the wide knife made from the larger mussel shells, and a variety of cutting edges that could be made from other marine shells.
The women used their tools to process all of the fish and marine mammals brought in by the men. They cleaned the fish, and dried vast quantities of them for the winter. They sun-dried fish when practical, but in the rainy climate of the coastal area they also used smokehouses to preserve tons of fish and other seafood annually. Each product had its own peculiar characteristics that demanded a particular way of cutting or drying the meat, and each task required its own cutting blades and other utensils.
After drying the fish, the women pounded some of them into fish meal, which was an easily transported food used in soups, stews, or other dishes to provide protein and thickening in the absence of fresh fish or while on long trips. The woman also made a cheese-like substance from a mixture of fish and roe by aging it in storehouses or by burying it in wooden boxes or pits lined with rocks and tree leaves. | 1781.txt | 2 |
[
"comprehensible",
"productive",
"intentional",
"particular"
] | The word "unique" in line 2 is closest in meaning to | The Native American peoples of the north Pacific Coast created a highly complex maritime culture as they invented modes of production unique to their special environment. In addition to their sophisticated technical culture, they also attained one of the most complex social organizations of any nonagricultural people in the world.
In a division of labor similar to that of the hunting peoples in the interior and among foraging peoples throughout the world, the men did most of the fishing, and the women processed the catch. Women also specialized in the gathering of the abundant shellfish that lived closer to shore. They collected oysters, crabs, sea urchins, mussels, abalone, and clams, which they could gather while remaining close to their children. The maritime life harvested by the women not only provided food, but also supplied more of the raw materials for making tools than did fish gathered by the men. Of particular importance for the native tool kit before the introduction of metal was the wide knife made from the larger mussel shells, and a variety of cutting edges that could be made from other marine shells.
The women used their tools to process all of the fish and marine mammals brought in by the men. They cleaned the fish, and dried vast quantities of them for the winter. They sun-dried fish when practical, but in the rainy climate of the coastal area they also used smokehouses to preserve tons of fish and other seafood annually. Each product had its own peculiar characteristics that demanded a particular way of cutting or drying the meat, and each task required its own cutting blades and other utensils.
After drying the fish, the women pounded some of them into fish meal, which was an easily transported food used in soups, stews, or other dishes to provide protein and thickening in the absence of fresh fish or while on long trips. The woman also made a cheese-like substance from a mixture of fish and roe by aging it in storehouses or by burying it in wooden boxes or pits lined with rocks and tree leaves. | 1781.txt | 3 |
[
"achieved",
"modified",
"demanded",
"spread"
] | The word "attained" in line 3 is closest in meaning to | The Native American peoples of the north Pacific Coast created a highly complex maritime culture as they invented modes of production unique to their special environment. In addition to their sophisticated technical culture, they also attained one of the most complex social organizations of any nonagricultural people in the world.
In a division of labor similar to that of the hunting peoples in the interior and among foraging peoples throughout the world, the men did most of the fishing, and the women processed the catch. Women also specialized in the gathering of the abundant shellfish that lived closer to shore. They collected oysters, crabs, sea urchins, mussels, abalone, and clams, which they could gather while remaining close to their children. The maritime life harvested by the women not only provided food, but also supplied more of the raw materials for making tools than did fish gathered by the men. Of particular importance for the native tool kit before the introduction of metal was the wide knife made from the larger mussel shells, and a variety of cutting edges that could be made from other marine shells.
The women used their tools to process all of the fish and marine mammals brought in by the men. They cleaned the fish, and dried vast quantities of them for the winter. They sun-dried fish when practical, but in the rainy climate of the coastal area they also used smokehouses to preserve tons of fish and other seafood annually. Each product had its own peculiar characteristics that demanded a particular way of cutting or drying the meat, and each task required its own cutting blades and other utensils.
After drying the fish, the women pounded some of them into fish meal, which was an easily transported food used in soups, stews, or other dishes to provide protein and thickening in the absence of fresh fish or while on long trips. The woman also made a cheese-like substance from a mixture of fish and roe by aging it in storehouses or by burying it in wooden boxes or pits lined with rocks and tree leaves. | 1781.txt | 0 |
[
"more complex than that of hunters and foragers",
"less efficient than that of hunters and foragers",
"more widespread than that of hunters and foragers",
"better documented than that of hunters and foragers"
] | It can be inferred from paragraph 1 that the social organization of many agricultural peoples is | The Native American peoples of the north Pacific Coast created a highly complex maritime culture as they invented modes of production unique to their special environment. In addition to their sophisticated technical culture, they also attained one of the most complex social organizations of any nonagricultural people in the world.
In a division of labor similar to that of the hunting peoples in the interior and among foraging peoples throughout the world, the men did most of the fishing, and the women processed the catch. Women also specialized in the gathering of the abundant shellfish that lived closer to shore. They collected oysters, crabs, sea urchins, mussels, abalone, and clams, which they could gather while remaining close to their children. The maritime life harvested by the women not only provided food, but also supplied more of the raw materials for making tools than did fish gathered by the men. Of particular importance for the native tool kit before the introduction of metal was the wide knife made from the larger mussel shells, and a variety of cutting edges that could be made from other marine shells.
The women used their tools to process all of the fish and marine mammals brought in by the men. They cleaned the fish, and dried vast quantities of them for the winter. They sun-dried fish when practical, but in the rainy climate of the coastal area they also used smokehouses to preserve tons of fish and other seafood annually. Each product had its own peculiar characteristics that demanded a particular way of cutting or drying the meat, and each task required its own cutting blades and other utensils.
After drying the fish, the women pounded some of them into fish meal, which was an easily transported food used in soups, stews, or other dishes to provide protein and thickening in the absence of fresh fish or while on long trips. The woman also made a cheese-like substance from a mixture of fish and roe by aging it in storehouses or by burying it in wooden boxes or pits lined with rocks and tree leaves. | 1781.txt | 0 |
[
"It was first developed by Native Americans of the north Pacific Coast.",
"It rarely existed among hunting",
"It was a structure that the Native Americans of the north Pacific Coast shared with many other peoples.",
"It provided a form of social organization that was found mainly among coastal peoples."
] | According to the passage , what is true of the "division of labor" mentioned in line 5? | The Native American peoples of the north Pacific Coast created a highly complex maritime culture as they invented modes of production unique to their special environment. In addition to their sophisticated technical culture, they also attained one of the most complex social organizations of any nonagricultural people in the world.
In a division of labor similar to that of the hunting peoples in the interior and among foraging peoples throughout the world, the men did most of the fishing, and the women processed the catch. Women also specialized in the gathering of the abundant shellfish that lived closer to shore. They collected oysters, crabs, sea urchins, mussels, abalone, and clams, which they could gather while remaining close to their children. The maritime life harvested by the women not only provided food, but also supplied more of the raw materials for making tools than did fish gathered by the men. Of particular importance for the native tool kit before the introduction of metal was the wide knife made from the larger mussel shells, and a variety of cutting edges that could be made from other marine shells.
The women used their tools to process all of the fish and marine mammals brought in by the men. They cleaned the fish, and dried vast quantities of them for the winter. They sun-dried fish when practical, but in the rainy climate of the coastal area they also used smokehouses to preserve tons of fish and other seafood annually. Each product had its own peculiar characteristics that demanded a particular way of cutting or drying the meat, and each task required its own cutting blades and other utensils.
After drying the fish, the women pounded some of them into fish meal, which was an easily transported food used in soups, stews, or other dishes to provide protein and thickening in the absence of fresh fish or while on long trips. The woman also made a cheese-like substance from a mixture of fish and roe by aging it in storehouses or by burying it in wooden boxes or pits lined with rocks and tree leaves. | 1781.txt | 2 |
[
"prosperous",
"plentiful",
"acceptable",
"fundamental"
] | The word "abundant" in line 7 is closest in meaning to | The Native American peoples of the north Pacific Coast created a highly complex maritime culture as they invented modes of production unique to their special environment. In addition to their sophisticated technical culture, they also attained one of the most complex social organizations of any nonagricultural people in the world.
In a division of labor similar to that of the hunting peoples in the interior and among foraging peoples throughout the world, the men did most of the fishing, and the women processed the catch. Women also specialized in the gathering of the abundant shellfish that lived closer to shore. They collected oysters, crabs, sea urchins, mussels, abalone, and clams, which they could gather while remaining close to their children. The maritime life harvested by the women not only provided food, but also supplied more of the raw materials for making tools than did fish gathered by the men. Of particular importance for the native tool kit before the introduction of metal was the wide knife made from the larger mussel shells, and a variety of cutting edges that could be made from other marine shells.
The women used their tools to process all of the fish and marine mammals brought in by the men. They cleaned the fish, and dried vast quantities of them for the winter. They sun-dried fish when practical, but in the rainy climate of the coastal area they also used smokehouses to preserve tons of fish and other seafood annually. Each product had its own peculiar characteristics that demanded a particular way of cutting or drying the meat, and each task required its own cutting blades and other utensils.
After drying the fish, the women pounded some of them into fish meal, which was an easily transported food used in soups, stews, or other dishes to provide protein and thickening in the absence of fresh fish or while on long trips. The woman also made a cheese-like substance from a mixture of fish and roe by aging it in storehouses or by burying it in wooden boxes or pits lined with rocks and tree leaves. | 1781.txt | 1 |
[
"were more likely to catch shellfish than other kinds of fish",
"contributed more materials for tool making than the men did",
"sometimes searched for food far inland from the coast",
"prepared and preserved the fish"
] | All of the following are true of the north Pacific coast women EXCEPT that they | The Native American peoples of the north Pacific Coast created a highly complex maritime culture as they invented modes of production unique to their special environment. In addition to their sophisticated technical culture, they also attained one of the most complex social organizations of any nonagricultural people in the world.
In a division of labor similar to that of the hunting peoples in the interior and among foraging peoples throughout the world, the men did most of the fishing, and the women processed the catch. Women also specialized in the gathering of the abundant shellfish that lived closer to shore. They collected oysters, crabs, sea urchins, mussels, abalone, and clams, which they could gather while remaining close to their children. The maritime life harvested by the women not only provided food, but also supplied more of the raw materials for making tools than did fish gathered by the men. Of particular importance for the native tool kit before the introduction of metal was the wide knife made from the larger mussel shells, and a variety of cutting edges that could be made from other marine shells.
The women used their tools to process all of the fish and marine mammals brought in by the men. They cleaned the fish, and dried vast quantities of them for the winter. They sun-dried fish when practical, but in the rainy climate of the coastal area they also used smokehouses to preserve tons of fish and other seafood annually. Each product had its own peculiar characteristics that demanded a particular way of cutting or drying the meat, and each task required its own cutting blades and other utensils.
After drying the fish, the women pounded some of them into fish meal, which was an easily transported food used in soups, stews, or other dishes to provide protein and thickening in the absence of fresh fish or while on long trips. The woman also made a cheese-like substance from a mixture of fish and roe by aging it in storehouses or by burying it in wooden boxes or pits lined with rocks and tree leaves. | 1781.txt | 2 |
[
"women",
"tools",
"mammals",
"men"
] | The word "They" in line 16 refers to | The Native American peoples of the north Pacific Coast created a highly complex maritime culture as they invented modes of production unique to their special environment. In addition to their sophisticated technical culture, they also attained one of the most complex social organizations of any nonagricultural people in the world.
In a division of labor similar to that of the hunting peoples in the interior and among foraging peoples throughout the world, the men did most of the fishing, and the women processed the catch. Women also specialized in the gathering of the abundant shellfish that lived closer to shore. They collected oysters, crabs, sea urchins, mussels, abalone, and clams, which they could gather while remaining close to their children. The maritime life harvested by the women not only provided food, but also supplied more of the raw materials for making tools than did fish gathered by the men. Of particular importance for the native tool kit before the introduction of metal was the wide knife made from the larger mussel shells, and a variety of cutting edges that could be made from other marine shells.
The women used their tools to process all of the fish and marine mammals brought in by the men. They cleaned the fish, and dried vast quantities of them for the winter. They sun-dried fish when practical, but in the rainy climate of the coastal area they also used smokehouses to preserve tons of fish and other seafood annually. Each product had its own peculiar characteristics that demanded a particular way of cutting or drying the meat, and each task required its own cutting blades and other utensils.
After drying the fish, the women pounded some of them into fish meal, which was an easily transported food used in soups, stews, or other dishes to provide protein and thickening in the absence of fresh fish or while on long trips. The woman also made a cheese-like substance from a mixture of fish and roe by aging it in storehouses or by burying it in wooden boxes or pits lined with rocks and tree leaves. | 1781.txt | 0 |
[
"store utensils used in food preparation",
"prevent fish and shellfish from spoiling",
"have a place to store fish and shellfish",
"prepare elaborate meals"
] | The Native Americans of the north Pacific Coast used smokehouses in order to | The Native American peoples of the north Pacific Coast created a highly complex maritime culture as they invented modes of production unique to their special environment. In addition to their sophisticated technical culture, they also attained one of the most complex social organizations of any nonagricultural people in the world.
In a division of labor similar to that of the hunting peoples in the interior and among foraging peoples throughout the world, the men did most of the fishing, and the women processed the catch. Women also specialized in the gathering of the abundant shellfish that lived closer to shore. They collected oysters, crabs, sea urchins, mussels, abalone, and clams, which they could gather while remaining close to their children. The maritime life harvested by the women not only provided food, but also supplied more of the raw materials for making tools than did fish gathered by the men. Of particular importance for the native tool kit before the introduction of metal was the wide knife made from the larger mussel shells, and a variety of cutting edges that could be made from other marine shells.
The women used their tools to process all of the fish and marine mammals brought in by the men. They cleaned the fish, and dried vast quantities of them for the winter. They sun-dried fish when practical, but in the rainy climate of the coastal area they also used smokehouses to preserve tons of fish and other seafood annually. Each product had its own peculiar characteristics that demanded a particular way of cutting or drying the meat, and each task required its own cutting blades and other utensils.
After drying the fish, the women pounded some of them into fish meal, which was an easily transported food used in soups, stews, or other dishes to provide protein and thickening in the absence of fresh fish or while on long trips. The woman also made a cheese-like substance from a mixture of fish and roe by aging it in storehouses or by burying it in wooden boxes or pits lined with rocks and tree leaves. | 1781.txt | 1 |
[
"strange",
"distinctive",
"appealing",
"biological"
] | The wore "peculiar" in line 19 is closest in meaning to | The Native American peoples of the north Pacific Coast created a highly complex maritime culture as they invented modes of production unique to their special environment. In addition to their sophisticated technical culture, they also attained one of the most complex social organizations of any nonagricultural people in the world.
In a division of labor similar to that of the hunting peoples in the interior and among foraging peoples throughout the world, the men did most of the fishing, and the women processed the catch. Women also specialized in the gathering of the abundant shellfish that lived closer to shore. They collected oysters, crabs, sea urchins, mussels, abalone, and clams, which they could gather while remaining close to their children. The maritime life harvested by the women not only provided food, but also supplied more of the raw materials for making tools than did fish gathered by the men. Of particular importance for the native tool kit before the introduction of metal was the wide knife made from the larger mussel shells, and a variety of cutting edges that could be made from other marine shells.
The women used their tools to process all of the fish and marine mammals brought in by the men. They cleaned the fish, and dried vast quantities of them for the winter. They sun-dried fish when practical, but in the rainy climate of the coastal area they also used smokehouses to preserve tons of fish and other seafood annually. Each product had its own peculiar characteristics that demanded a particular way of cutting or drying the meat, and each task required its own cutting blades and other utensils.
After drying the fish, the women pounded some of them into fish meal, which was an easily transported food used in soups, stews, or other dishes to provide protein and thickening in the absence of fresh fish or while on long trips. The woman also made a cheese-like substance from a mixture of fish and roe by aging it in storehouses or by burying it in wooden boxes or pits lined with rocks and tree leaves. | 1781.txt | 1 |
[
"made from fish",
"not actually cheese",
"useful on long journeys",
"made in a short period of time"
] | All of following are true of the cheese-like substance mentioned in paragraph 4 EXCEPT that it was | The Native American peoples of the north Pacific Coast created a highly complex maritime culture as they invented modes of production unique to their special environment. In addition to their sophisticated technical culture, they also attained one of the most complex social organizations of any nonagricultural people in the world.
In a division of labor similar to that of the hunting peoples in the interior and among foraging peoples throughout the world, the men did most of the fishing, and the women processed the catch. Women also specialized in the gathering of the abundant shellfish that lived closer to shore. They collected oysters, crabs, sea urchins, mussels, abalone, and clams, which they could gather while remaining close to their children. The maritime life harvested by the women not only provided food, but also supplied more of the raw materials for making tools than did fish gathered by the men. Of particular importance for the native tool kit before the introduction of metal was the wide knife made from the larger mussel shells, and a variety of cutting edges that could be made from other marine shells.
The women used their tools to process all of the fish and marine mammals brought in by the men. They cleaned the fish, and dried vast quantities of them for the winter. They sun-dried fish when practical, but in the rainy climate of the coastal area they also used smokehouses to preserve tons of fish and other seafood annually. Each product had its own peculiar characteristics that demanded a particular way of cutting or drying the meat, and each task required its own cutting blades and other utensils.
After drying the fish, the women pounded some of them into fish meal, which was an easily transported food used in soups, stews, or other dishes to provide protein and thickening in the absence of fresh fish or while on long trips. The woman also made a cheese-like substance from a mixture of fish and roe by aging it in storehouses or by burying it in wooden boxes or pits lined with rocks and tree leaves. | 1781.txt | 3 |
[
"not as good as it seems",
"at its turning point",
"much better than it seems",
"near to complete recovery"
] | According to the author, the American economic situation is . | Well, no gain without pain, they say. But what about pain without gain? Everywhere you go in America, you hear tales of corporate revival. What is harder to establish is whether the productivity revolution that businessmen assume they are presiding over is for real.
The official statistics are mildly discouraging. They show that, if you lump manufacturing and services together, productivity has grown on average by 1.2% since 1987. That is somewhat faster than the average during the previous decade. And since 1991, productivity has increased by about 2% a year, which is more than twice the 1978-87 average. The trouble is that part of the recent acceleration is due to the usual rebound that occurs at this point in a business cycle, and so is not conclusive evidence of a revival in the underlying trend. There is, as Robert Rubin, the treasury secretary, says, a "disjunction" between the mass of business anecdote that points to a leap in productivity and the picture reflected by the statistics.
Some of this can be easily explained. New ways of organizing the workplace -- all that re-engineering and downsizing -- are only one contribution to the overall productivity of an economy, which is driven by many other factors such as joint investment in equipment and machinery, new technology, and investment in education and training. Moreover, most of the changes that companies make are intended to keep them profitable, and this need not always mean increasing productivity: switching to new markets or improving quality can matter just as much.
Two other explanations are more speculative. First, some of the business restructuring of recent years may have been ineptly done. Second, even if it was well done, it may have spread much less widely than people suppose.
Leonard Schlesinger, a Harvard academic and former chief executive of Au Bong Pain, a rapidly growing chain of bakery cafes, says that much "re-engineering" has been crude. In many cases, he believes, the loss of revenue has been greater than the reductions in cost. His colleague, Michael Beer, says that far too many companies have applied re-engineering in a mechanistic fashion, chopping out costs without giving sufficient thought to long-term profitability. BBDO's Al Rosenshine is blunter. He dismisses a lot of the work of re-engineering consultants as mere rubbish -- "the worst sort of ambulance chasing." | 1077.txt | 0 |
[
"exclude the usual rebound in a business cycle",
"fall short of businessmen's anticipation",
"meet the expectation of business people",
"fail to reflect the true state of economy"
] | The official statistics on productivity growth . | Well, no gain without pain, they say. But what about pain without gain? Everywhere you go in America, you hear tales of corporate revival. What is harder to establish is whether the productivity revolution that businessmen assume they are presiding over is for real.
The official statistics are mildly discouraging. They show that, if you lump manufacturing and services together, productivity has grown on average by 1.2% since 1987. That is somewhat faster than the average during the previous decade. And since 1991, productivity has increased by about 2% a year, which is more than twice the 1978-87 average. The trouble is that part of the recent acceleration is due to the usual rebound that occurs at this point in a business cycle, and so is not conclusive evidence of a revival in the underlying trend. There is, as Robert Rubin, the treasury secretary, says, a "disjunction" between the mass of business anecdote that points to a leap in productivity and the picture reflected by the statistics.
Some of this can be easily explained. New ways of organizing the workplace -- all that re-engineering and downsizing -- are only one contribution to the overall productivity of an economy, which is driven by many other factors such as joint investment in equipment and machinery, new technology, and investment in education and training. Moreover, most of the changes that companies make are intended to keep them profitable, and this need not always mean increasing productivity: switching to new markets or improving quality can matter just as much.
Two other explanations are more speculative. First, some of the business restructuring of recent years may have been ineptly done. Second, even if it was well done, it may have spread much less widely than people suppose.
Leonard Schlesinger, a Harvard academic and former chief executive of Au Bong Pain, a rapidly growing chain of bakery cafes, says that much "re-engineering" has been crude. In many cases, he believes, the loss of revenue has been greater than the reductions in cost. His colleague, Michael Beer, says that far too many companies have applied re-engineering in a mechanistic fashion, chopping out costs without giving sufficient thought to long-term profitability. BBDO's Al Rosenshine is blunter. He dismisses a lot of the work of re-engineering consultants as mere rubbish -- "the worst sort of ambulance chasing." | 1077.txt | 1 |
[
"he questions the truth of \"no gain without pain\"",
"he does not think the productivity revolution works",
"he wonders if the official statistics are misleading",
"he has conclusive evidence for the revival of businesses"
] | The author raises the question "what about pain without gain?" because . | Well, no gain without pain, they say. But what about pain without gain? Everywhere you go in America, you hear tales of corporate revival. What is harder to establish is whether the productivity revolution that businessmen assume they are presiding over is for real.
The official statistics are mildly discouraging. They show that, if you lump manufacturing and services together, productivity has grown on average by 1.2% since 1987. That is somewhat faster than the average during the previous decade. And since 1991, productivity has increased by about 2% a year, which is more than twice the 1978-87 average. The trouble is that part of the recent acceleration is due to the usual rebound that occurs at this point in a business cycle, and so is not conclusive evidence of a revival in the underlying trend. There is, as Robert Rubin, the treasury secretary, says, a "disjunction" between the mass of business anecdote that points to a leap in productivity and the picture reflected by the statistics.
Some of this can be easily explained. New ways of organizing the workplace -- all that re-engineering and downsizing -- are only one contribution to the overall productivity of an economy, which is driven by many other factors such as joint investment in equipment and machinery, new technology, and investment in education and training. Moreover, most of the changes that companies make are intended to keep them profitable, and this need not always mean increasing productivity: switching to new markets or improving quality can matter just as much.
Two other explanations are more speculative. First, some of the business restructuring of recent years may have been ineptly done. Second, even if it was well done, it may have spread much less widely than people suppose.
Leonard Schlesinger, a Harvard academic and former chief executive of Au Bong Pain, a rapidly growing chain of bakery cafes, says that much "re-engineering" has been crude. In many cases, he believes, the loss of revenue has been greater than the reductions in cost. His colleague, Michael Beer, says that far too many companies have applied re-engineering in a mechanistic fashion, chopping out costs without giving sufficient thought to long-term profitability. BBDO's Al Rosenshine is blunter. He dismisses a lot of the work of re-engineering consultants as mere rubbish -- "the worst sort of ambulance chasing." | 1077.txt | 1 |
[
"Radical reforms are essential for the increase of productivity.",
"New ways of organizing workplaces may help to increase productivity.",
"The reduction of costs is not a sure way to gain long-term profitability.",
"The consultants are a bunch of good-for-nothings."
] | Which of the following statements is NOT mentioned in the passage? | Well, no gain without pain, they say. But what about pain without gain? Everywhere you go in America, you hear tales of corporate revival. What is harder to establish is whether the productivity revolution that businessmen assume they are presiding over is for real.
The official statistics are mildly discouraging. They show that, if you lump manufacturing and services together, productivity has grown on average by 1.2% since 1987. That is somewhat faster than the average during the previous decade. And since 1991, productivity has increased by about 2% a year, which is more than twice the 1978-87 average. The trouble is that part of the recent acceleration is due to the usual rebound that occurs at this point in a business cycle, and so is not conclusive evidence of a revival in the underlying trend. There is, as Robert Rubin, the treasury secretary, says, a "disjunction" between the mass of business anecdote that points to a leap in productivity and the picture reflected by the statistics.
Some of this can be easily explained. New ways of organizing the workplace -- all that re-engineering and downsizing -- are only one contribution to the overall productivity of an economy, which is driven by many other factors such as joint investment in equipment and machinery, new technology, and investment in education and training. Moreover, most of the changes that companies make are intended to keep them profitable, and this need not always mean increasing productivity: switching to new markets or improving quality can matter just as much.
Two other explanations are more speculative. First, some of the business restructuring of recent years may have been ineptly done. Second, even if it was well done, it may have spread much less widely than people suppose.
Leonard Schlesinger, a Harvard academic and former chief executive of Au Bong Pain, a rapidly growing chain of bakery cafes, says that much "re-engineering" has been crude. In many cases, he believes, the loss of revenue has been greater than the reductions in cost. His colleague, Michael Beer, says that far too many companies have applied re-engineering in a mechanistic fashion, chopping out costs without giving sufficient thought to long-term profitability. BBDO's Al Rosenshine is blunter. He dismisses a lot of the work of re-engineering consultants as mere rubbish -- "the worst sort of ambulance chasing." | 1077.txt | 0 |
[
"in the early 20th century",
"in the 19th century",
"right after World War I",
"at a time not mentioned in the passage"
] | The story took place _ . | In 1909 an English newspaper offered £ 1,000 to the first man to fly across the English Channel in an aeroplane. Today, modern jets cross it in minutes. But at that time it still seemed a good distance. The race to win the money soon became a race between two men. Both were very colourful.
One was Louis Bleriot. He owned a factory in France that made motor car lamps. He was already well known as a pilot because he had had accidents several times. Some people laughed at him. One man said, "He may not be the first to fly across the Channel but he will certainly be the first to die in an accident!" But Bleriot was really a good and brave pilot. He also had many good ideas about aeroplane design.
The other man was Hubert Latham. He was half French and half English. He took up flying when his doctors told him he had only a year to live. "Oh, well," he said, "if I' m going to die soon, I think I shall have a dangerous and interesting life now." Latham was the first to try the flight across the Channel. Ten kilometres from the French coast, his plane had some trouble. It fell down into the water and began to sink under the water. A boat reached Latham just in time. He was sitting calmly on the wing and was coolly lighting a cigarette . Bleriot took off six days later. He flew into some very bad weather and very low cloud. He somehow got to the English side and landed in a farmer's field. When he did so, a customs officer rushed up to his plane. Planes have changed since then, but customs officers have not. "Have you anything to declare?" The officer demanded. | 815.txt | 0 |
[
"he was unusually brave",
"he was quite rich",
"he had many good ideas about aeroplane design",
"he had had a few accidents"
] | Bleriot was well known as a piton because _ . | In 1909 an English newspaper offered £ 1,000 to the first man to fly across the English Channel in an aeroplane. Today, modern jets cross it in minutes. But at that time it still seemed a good distance. The race to win the money soon became a race between two men. Both were very colourful.
One was Louis Bleriot. He owned a factory in France that made motor car lamps. He was already well known as a pilot because he had had accidents several times. Some people laughed at him. One man said, "He may not be the first to fly across the Channel but he will certainly be the first to die in an accident!" But Bleriot was really a good and brave pilot. He also had many good ideas about aeroplane design.
The other man was Hubert Latham. He was half French and half English. He took up flying when his doctors told him he had only a year to live. "Oh, well," he said, "if I' m going to die soon, I think I shall have a dangerous and interesting life now." Latham was the first to try the flight across the Channel. Ten kilometres from the French coast, his plane had some trouble. It fell down into the water and began to sink under the water. A boat reached Latham just in time. He was sitting calmly on the wing and was coolly lighting a cigarette . Bleriot took off six days later. He flew into some very bad weather and very low cloud. He somehow got to the English side and landed in a farmer's field. When he did so, a customs officer rushed up to his plane. Planes have changed since then, but customs officers have not. "Have you anything to declare?" The officer demanded. | 815.txt | 3 |
[
"a sad one",
"a dangerous one",
"his first one",
"an easy one"
] | The flight for Bleriot was _ . | In 1909 an English newspaper offered £ 1,000 to the first man to fly across the English Channel in an aeroplane. Today, modern jets cross it in minutes. But at that time it still seemed a good distance. The race to win the money soon became a race between two men. Both were very colourful.
One was Louis Bleriot. He owned a factory in France that made motor car lamps. He was already well known as a pilot because he had had accidents several times. Some people laughed at him. One man said, "He may not be the first to fly across the Channel but he will certainly be the first to die in an accident!" But Bleriot was really a good and brave pilot. He also had many good ideas about aeroplane design.
The other man was Hubert Latham. He was half French and half English. He took up flying when his doctors told him he had only a year to live. "Oh, well," he said, "if I' m going to die soon, I think I shall have a dangerous and interesting life now." Latham was the first to try the flight across the Channel. Ten kilometres from the French coast, his plane had some trouble. It fell down into the water and began to sink under the water. A boat reached Latham just in time. He was sitting calmly on the wing and was coolly lighting a cigarette . Bleriot took off six days later. He flew into some very bad weather and very low cloud. He somehow got to the English side and landed in a farmer's field. When he did so, a customs officer rushed up to his plane. Planes have changed since then, but customs officers have not. "Have you anything to declare?" The officer demanded. | 815.txt | 1 |
[
"He thought he could manage it easily.",
"He wanted to be the first one to cross the Channel.",
"He knew he only had a year to live.",
"He had always been interested in flying."
] | Why did Hubert Latham want to fly across the Channel? | In 1909 an English newspaper offered £ 1,000 to the first man to fly across the English Channel in an aeroplane. Today, modern jets cross it in minutes. But at that time it still seemed a good distance. The race to win the money soon became a race between two men. Both were very colourful.
One was Louis Bleriot. He owned a factory in France that made motor car lamps. He was already well known as a pilot because he had had accidents several times. Some people laughed at him. One man said, "He may not be the first to fly across the Channel but he will certainly be the first to die in an accident!" But Bleriot was really a good and brave pilot. He also had many good ideas about aeroplane design.
The other man was Hubert Latham. He was half French and half English. He took up flying when his doctors told him he had only a year to live. "Oh, well," he said, "if I' m going to die soon, I think I shall have a dangerous and interesting life now." Latham was the first to try the flight across the Channel. Ten kilometres from the French coast, his plane had some trouble. It fell down into the water and began to sink under the water. A boat reached Latham just in time. He was sitting calmly on the wing and was coolly lighting a cigarette . Bleriot took off six days later. He flew into some very bad weather and very low cloud. He somehow got to the English side and landed in a farmer's field. When he did so, a customs officer rushed up to his plane. Planes have changed since then, but customs officers have not. "Have you anything to declare?" The officer demanded. | 815.txt | 2 |
[
"Latham became a pilot on the doctor's advice.",
"He was told he could live another year.",
"His plane had some trouble.",
"He was saved by a boat when his plane was sinking."
] | Which of the following is NOT true? | In 1909 an English newspaper offered £ 1,000 to the first man to fly across the English Channel in an aeroplane. Today, modern jets cross it in minutes. But at that time it still seemed a good distance. The race to win the money soon became a race between two men. Both were very colourful.
One was Louis Bleriot. He owned a factory in France that made motor car lamps. He was already well known as a pilot because he had had accidents several times. Some people laughed at him. One man said, "He may not be the first to fly across the Channel but he will certainly be the first to die in an accident!" But Bleriot was really a good and brave pilot. He also had many good ideas about aeroplane design.
The other man was Hubert Latham. He was half French and half English. He took up flying when his doctors told him he had only a year to live. "Oh, well," he said, "if I' m going to die soon, I think I shall have a dangerous and interesting life now." Latham was the first to try the flight across the Channel. Ten kilometres from the French coast, his plane had some trouble. It fell down into the water and began to sink under the water. A boat reached Latham just in time. He was sitting calmly on the wing and was coolly lighting a cigarette . Bleriot took off six days later. He flew into some very bad weather and very low cloud. He somehow got to the English side and landed in a farmer's field. When he did so, a customs officer rushed up to his plane. Planes have changed since then, but customs officers have not. "Have you anything to declare?" The officer demanded. | 815.txt | 0 |
[
"To see if everything was all right with the plane.",
"To make sure that the pilot was not hurt.",
"To ask why the plane had landed in a farmer's field.",
"None of the above."
] | Why did the costumes officer rush to the plane? | In 1909 an English newspaper offered £ 1,000 to the first man to fly across the English Channel in an aeroplane. Today, modern jets cross it in minutes. But at that time it still seemed a good distance. The race to win the money soon became a race between two men. Both were very colourful.
One was Louis Bleriot. He owned a factory in France that made motor car lamps. He was already well known as a pilot because he had had accidents several times. Some people laughed at him. One man said, "He may not be the first to fly across the Channel but he will certainly be the first to die in an accident!" But Bleriot was really a good and brave pilot. He also had many good ideas about aeroplane design.
The other man was Hubert Latham. He was half French and half English. He took up flying when his doctors told him he had only a year to live. "Oh, well," he said, "if I' m going to die soon, I think I shall have a dangerous and interesting life now." Latham was the first to try the flight across the Channel. Ten kilometres from the French coast, his plane had some trouble. It fell down into the water and began to sink under the water. A boat reached Latham just in time. He was sitting calmly on the wing and was coolly lighting a cigarette . Bleriot took off six days later. He flew into some very bad weather and very low cloud. He somehow got to the English side and landed in a farmer's field. When he did so, a customs officer rushed up to his plane. Planes have changed since then, but customs officers have not. "Have you anything to declare?" The officer demanded. | 815.txt | 3 |
[
"\"Do you want any help?\"",
"\"Is there anything wrong?\"",
"\"Have you brought anything on which custom duties must be paid?\"",
"\"Do you have anything to say to the public?\""
] | "Do you have anything to declare?" means _ . | In 1909 an English newspaper offered £ 1,000 to the first man to fly across the English Channel in an aeroplane. Today, modern jets cross it in minutes. But at that time it still seemed a good distance. The race to win the money soon became a race between two men. Both were very colourful.
One was Louis Bleriot. He owned a factory in France that made motor car lamps. He was already well known as a pilot because he had had accidents several times. Some people laughed at him. One man said, "He may not be the first to fly across the Channel but he will certainly be the first to die in an accident!" But Bleriot was really a good and brave pilot. He also had many good ideas about aeroplane design.
The other man was Hubert Latham. He was half French and half English. He took up flying when his doctors told him he had only a year to live. "Oh, well," he said, "if I' m going to die soon, I think I shall have a dangerous and interesting life now." Latham was the first to try the flight across the Channel. Ten kilometres from the French coast, his plane had some trouble. It fell down into the water and began to sink under the water. A boat reached Latham just in time. He was sitting calmly on the wing and was coolly lighting a cigarette . Bleriot took off six days later. He flew into some very bad weather and very low cloud. He somehow got to the English side and landed in a farmer's field. When he did so, a customs officer rushed up to his plane. Planes have changed since then, but customs officers have not. "Have you anything to declare?" The officer demanded. | 815.txt | 2 |
[
"persuade the banks to provide long-term finance",
"rely on their own financial resources",
"borrow large sums of money from friends and relatives",
"depend on the population as a whole for finance"
] | Almost all companies trying to develop new products and creating new jobs have to | Large companies need a way to reach the savings of the public at large. The same problem, on a smaller scale, faces practically every company, trying to develop new products and create new jobs. There can be little prospect of raising the sort of sums needed from friends and people we know, and while banks may agree to provide short-term finance, they are generally unwilling to provide money on a permanent basis for long-term projects. So companies turn to the public, inviting people to lend them money, or take a share in the business in exchange for a share in future profits. This they do by issuing stocks and shares in the business through the Stock Exchange. By doing so, they can put into circulation the savings of individual and institutions, both at home and overseas.
When the saver needs his money back, he does not have to go to the company with whom he originally placed it. Instead, he sells his shares through a stockbroker to some other saver who is seeking to invest his money.
Many of the services needed both by industry and by each of us are provided by the Govern mentor by local authorities. Without hospitals, roads, electricity, telephones, railways, this country could not function. All these require continuous spending on new equipment and new development if they are to serve us properly, requiring more money than is raised through taxes alone. The Government, local authorities, and nationalized industries therefore frequently need to borrow money to finance major capital spending, and they too, come to the Stock Exchange.
There is hardly a man or woman in this country whose job or whose standard of living does not depend on the ability of his or her employers to raise money to finance new development. In one way or another, this new money must come from the savings of the country. The Stocky Exchange exists top rovide a channel through which these savings can reach those who need finance. | 1598.txt | 3 |
[
"raised by the selling of shares in the companies",
"repaid to its original owners as soon as possible",
"raised by putting into circulation of the savings of individual overseas",
"invested in different companies on the Stock Exchange"
] | The money, which enables these companies to go ahead with their projects, is | Large companies need a way to reach the savings of the public at large. The same problem, on a smaller scale, faces practically every company, trying to develop new products and create new jobs. There can be little prospect of raising the sort of sums needed from friends and people we know, and while banks may agree to provide short-term finance, they are generally unwilling to provide money on a permanent basis for long-term projects. So companies turn to the public, inviting people to lend them money, or take a share in the business in exchange for a share in future profits. This they do by issuing stocks and shares in the business through the Stock Exchange. By doing so, they can put into circulation the savings of individual and institutions, both at home and overseas.
When the saver needs his money back, he does not have to go to the company with whom he originally placed it. Instead, he sells his shares through a stockbroker to some other saver who is seeking to invest his money.
Many of the services needed both by industry and by each of us are provided by the Govern mentor by local authorities. Without hospitals, roads, electricity, telephones, railways, this country could not function. All these require continuous spending on new equipment and new development if they are to serve us properly, requiring more money than is raised through taxes alone. The Government, local authorities, and nationalized industries therefore frequently need to borrow money to finance major capital spending, and they too, come to the Stock Exchange.
There is hardly a man or woman in this country whose job or whose standard of living does not depend on the ability of his or her employers to raise money to finance new development. In one way or another, this new money must come from the savings of the country. The Stocky Exchange exists top rovide a channel through which these savings can reach those who need finance. | 1598.txt | 0 |
[
"to make certain everybody saves money",
"to borrow as much money as they wish",
"to raise money to finance new developments",
"to make certain everybody lends money to them"
] | The Stock Exchange makes it possible for the government, local authorities and nationalized industries | Large companies need a way to reach the savings of the public at large. The same problem, on a smaller scale, faces practically every company, trying to develop new products and create new jobs. There can be little prospect of raising the sort of sums needed from friends and people we know, and while banks may agree to provide short-term finance, they are generally unwilling to provide money on a permanent basis for long-term projects. So companies turn to the public, inviting people to lend them money, or take a share in the business in exchange for a share in future profits. This they do by issuing stocks and shares in the business through the Stock Exchange. By doing so, they can put into circulation the savings of individual and institutions, both at home and overseas.
When the saver needs his money back, he does not have to go to the company with whom he originally placed it. Instead, he sells his shares through a stockbroker to some other saver who is seeking to invest his money.
Many of the services needed both by industry and by each of us are provided by the Govern mentor by local authorities. Without hospitals, roads, electricity, telephones, railways, this country could not function. All these require continuous spending on new equipment and new development if they are to serve us properly, requiring more money than is raised through taxes alone. The Government, local authorities, and nationalized industries therefore frequently need to borrow money to finance major capital spending, and they too, come to the Stock Exchange.
There is hardly a man or woman in this country whose job or whose standard of living does not depend on the ability of his or her employers to raise money to finance new development. In one way or another, this new money must come from the savings of the country. The Stocky Exchange exists top rovide a channel through which these savings can reach those who need finance. | 1598.txt | 2 |
[
"run by the Government or our local authorities",
"in constant need of financial support",
"unable to meet the needs of the populations",
"financed wholly by rates and taxes"
] | All the essential services on which we depend are | Large companies need a way to reach the savings of the public at large. The same problem, on a smaller scale, faces practically every company, trying to develop new products and create new jobs. There can be little prospect of raising the sort of sums needed from friends and people we know, and while banks may agree to provide short-term finance, they are generally unwilling to provide money on a permanent basis for long-term projects. So companies turn to the public, inviting people to lend them money, or take a share in the business in exchange for a share in future profits. This they do by issuing stocks and shares in the business through the Stock Exchange. By doing so, they can put into circulation the savings of individual and institutions, both at home and overseas.
When the saver needs his money back, he does not have to go to the company with whom he originally placed it. Instead, he sells his shares through a stockbroker to some other saver who is seeking to invest his money.
Many of the services needed both by industry and by each of us are provided by the Govern mentor by local authorities. Without hospitals, roads, electricity, telephones, railways, this country could not function. All these require continuous spending on new equipment and new development if they are to serve us properly, requiring more money than is raised through taxes alone. The Government, local authorities, and nationalized industries therefore frequently need to borrow money to finance major capital spending, and they too, come to the Stock Exchange.
There is hardly a man or woman in this country whose job or whose standard of living does not depend on the ability of his or her employers to raise money to finance new development. In one way or another, this new money must come from the savings of the country. The Stocky Exchange exists top rovide a channel through which these savings can reach those who need finance. | 1598.txt | 1 |
[
"transfer their money to a more successful company",
"have to borrow money from other people",
"put their shares in the company back on the market",
"go to the company to take it back"
] | When the savers want their money back they | Large companies need a way to reach the savings of the public at large. The same problem, on a smaller scale, faces practically every company, trying to develop new products and create new jobs. There can be little prospect of raising the sort of sums needed from friends and people we know, and while banks may agree to provide short-term finance, they are generally unwilling to provide money on a permanent basis for long-term projects. So companies turn to the public, inviting people to lend them money, or take a share in the business in exchange for a share in future profits. This they do by issuing stocks and shares in the business through the Stock Exchange. By doing so, they can put into circulation the savings of individual and institutions, both at home and overseas.
When the saver needs his money back, he does not have to go to the company with whom he originally placed it. Instead, he sells his shares through a stockbroker to some other saver who is seeking to invest his money.
Many of the services needed both by industry and by each of us are provided by the Govern mentor by local authorities. Without hospitals, roads, electricity, telephones, railways, this country could not function. All these require continuous spending on new equipment and new development if they are to serve us properly, requiring more money than is raised through taxes alone. The Government, local authorities, and nationalized industries therefore frequently need to borrow money to finance major capital spending, and they too, come to the Stock Exchange.
There is hardly a man or woman in this country whose job or whose standard of living does not depend on the ability of his or her employers to raise money to finance new development. In one way or another, this new money must come from the savings of the country. The Stocky Exchange exists top rovide a channel through which these savings can reach those who need finance. | 1598.txt | 2 |
[
"explain the French government's emphasis on quality products",
"discuss Charles Deschanel's contribution to the French industrial development",
"compare the quality of French goods with that of foreign goods",
"show French workmen's enthusiasm to seek well-paid jobs in foreign countries"
] | The purpose of the passage is to_ . | More attention was paid to the quality of production in France at the time of Rene Coty. Charles Deschanel was then the financial minister. He stressed that workmanship and quality were more important than quantity for industrial production. It would be necessary to produce quality goods for the international markets to compete with those produced in other countries. The French economy needed a larger share of international market to balance its import and export trade.
French industrial and agricultural production was still inadequate to meet the immediate needs of the people, let alone long-ranged developments. Essential imports had stretched the national credit to the breaking point. Rents were tightly controlled, but the extreme inflation affected general population most severely through the cost of food. Food costs took as much as 80 percent of the worker's income. Wages, it is true, had risen. Extensive family allowances and benefits were paid by the state, and there was fulltime and overtime employment. Taken together, these factors enabled the working class to exist but allowed them no sense of security. In this discouraging situation, workmen were willing to work overseas for higher wages.
The government was unwilling to let workers leave the country. It was feared that migration of workers would reduce the labor force. The lack of qualified workers might hinder the improvement in the quality of industrial products produced. Qualified workers employed abroad would only increase the quantity of quality goods produced in foreign countries. Also the quantity of quality goods produced in France would not be able to increase as part of its ualified labor force moved to other countries. | 1774.txt | 0 |
[
"France was still at the first stage of industrial development",
"French workers were better paid than the workers in any other European countries",
"the unemployment rate in France was comparatively higher than that in other European countries",
"French workers were able to live better with the increase in their wages"
] | It can be inferred from the passage that at the time of Rene Coty . | More attention was paid to the quality of production in France at the time of Rene Coty. Charles Deschanel was then the financial minister. He stressed that workmanship and quality were more important than quantity for industrial production. It would be necessary to produce quality goods for the international markets to compete with those produced in other countries. The French economy needed a larger share of international market to balance its import and export trade.
French industrial and agricultural production was still inadequate to meet the immediate needs of the people, let alone long-ranged developments. Essential imports had stretched the national credit to the breaking point. Rents were tightly controlled, but the extreme inflation affected general population most severely through the cost of food. Food costs took as much as 80 percent of the worker's income. Wages, it is true, had risen. Extensive family allowances and benefits were paid by the state, and there was fulltime and overtime employment. Taken together, these factors enabled the working class to exist but allowed them no sense of security. In this discouraging situation, workmen were willing to work overseas for higher wages.
The government was unwilling to let workers leave the country. It was feared that migration of workers would reduce the labor force. The lack of qualified workers might hinder the improvement in the quality of industrial products produced. Qualified workers employed abroad would only increase the quantity of quality goods produced in foreign countries. Also the quantity of quality goods produced in France would not be able to increase as part of its ualified labor force moved to other countries. | 1774.txt | 0 |
[
"France had a very large share of international market",
"the import and export trade in France was making a successful advance",
"demand and supply in France was barely balanced",
"France was experiencing economic depression"
] | It is implied in the passage that at that time_ . | More attention was paid to the quality of production in France at the time of Rene Coty. Charles Deschanel was then the financial minister. He stressed that workmanship and quality were more important than quantity for industrial production. It would be necessary to produce quality goods for the international markets to compete with those produced in other countries. The French economy needed a larger share of international market to balance its import and export trade.
French industrial and agricultural production was still inadequate to meet the immediate needs of the people, let alone long-ranged developments. Essential imports had stretched the national credit to the breaking point. Rents were tightly controlled, but the extreme inflation affected general population most severely through the cost of food. Food costs took as much as 80 percent of the worker's income. Wages, it is true, had risen. Extensive family allowances and benefits were paid by the state, and there was fulltime and overtime employment. Taken together, these factors enabled the working class to exist but allowed them no sense of security. In this discouraging situation, workmen were willing to work overseas for higher wages.
The government was unwilling to let workers leave the country. It was feared that migration of workers would reduce the labor force. The lack of qualified workers might hinder the improvement in the quality of industrial products produced. Qualified workers employed abroad would only increase the quantity of quality goods produced in foreign countries. Also the quantity of quality goods produced in France would not be able to increase as part of its ualified labor force moved to other countries. | 1774.txt | 3 |
[
"Eighty percent increase in the prices of consumer goods.",
"High cost of food.",
"High rents for houses.",
"Lack of agricultural products."
] | Which of the following is the best indicator of the extreme inflation in France? | More attention was paid to the quality of production in France at the time of Rene Coty. Charles Deschanel was then the financial minister. He stressed that workmanship and quality were more important than quantity for industrial production. It would be necessary to produce quality goods for the international markets to compete with those produced in other countries. The French economy needed a larger share of international market to balance its import and export trade.
French industrial and agricultural production was still inadequate to meet the immediate needs of the people, let alone long-ranged developments. Essential imports had stretched the national credit to the breaking point. Rents were tightly controlled, but the extreme inflation affected general population most severely through the cost of food. Food costs took as much as 80 percent of the worker's income. Wages, it is true, had risen. Extensive family allowances and benefits were paid by the state, and there was fulltime and overtime employment. Taken together, these factors enabled the working class to exist but allowed them no sense of security. In this discouraging situation, workmen were willing to work overseas for higher wages.
The government was unwilling to let workers leave the country. It was feared that migration of workers would reduce the labor force. The lack of qualified workers might hinder the improvement in the quality of industrial products produced. Qualified workers employed abroad would only increase the quantity of quality goods produced in foreign countries. Also the quantity of quality goods produced in France would not be able to increase as part of its ualified labor force moved to other countries. | 1774.txt | 1 |
[
"Rents in France were tightly controlled.",
"France was flooding the international market with inferior products.",
"French workers were prohibited from going abroad to find jobs.",
"The migration of French workers would hinder the improvement of quality in industrial production."
] | Which of the following is NOT mentioned in the passage? | More attention was paid to the quality of production in France at the time of Rene Coty. Charles Deschanel was then the financial minister. He stressed that workmanship and quality were more important than quantity for industrial production. It would be necessary to produce quality goods for the international markets to compete with those produced in other countries. The French economy needed a larger share of international market to balance its import and export trade.
French industrial and agricultural production was still inadequate to meet the immediate needs of the people, let alone long-ranged developments. Essential imports had stretched the national credit to the breaking point. Rents were tightly controlled, but the extreme inflation affected general population most severely through the cost of food. Food costs took as much as 80 percent of the worker's income. Wages, it is true, had risen. Extensive family allowances and benefits were paid by the state, and there was fulltime and overtime employment. Taken together, these factors enabled the working class to exist but allowed them no sense of security. In this discouraging situation, workmen were willing to work overseas for higher wages.
The government was unwilling to let workers leave the country. It was feared that migration of workers would reduce the labor force. The lack of qualified workers might hinder the improvement in the quality of industrial products produced. Qualified workers employed abroad would only increase the quantity of quality goods produced in foreign countries. Also the quantity of quality goods produced in France would not be able to increase as part of its ualified labor force moved to other countries. | 1774.txt | 1 |
[
"self-respect",
"financial rewards",
"advertising ability",
"friendly relationship"
] | According to the passage, the positive action in the example contributes to our _ . | Do you want to live with a strong sense of peacefulness, happiness, goodness, and self- respect? The collection of happiness actions broadly categorized as "honor" help you create this life of good feelings.
Here's an example to show how honorable actions create happiness.
Say a store clerk fails to charge us for an item. If we keep silent, and profit from the clerk's mistake, we would drive home with a sense of sneaky excitement. Later we might tell our family or friends about our good fortune. On the other hand, if we tell the clerk about the uncharged item, the clerk would be grateful and thank us for our honesty. We would leave the store with a quiet sense of honor that we might never share with another soul.
Then, what is it to do with our sense of happiness?
In the first case, where we don't tell the clerk, a couple of things would happen. Deep down inside we would know ourselves as a type of thief. In the process, we would lose some peace of mind and self-respect. We would also demonstrate that we cannot lie trusted, since we advertise our dishonor by telling our family and friends. We damage our own reputations by telling others. In contrast, bringing the error to the clerk's attention causes different things to happen. Immediately the clerk knows us to be honorable. Upon leaving the store, we feel honorable and our self-respect is increased. Whenever we take honorable action we gain the deep internal rewards of goodness and a sense of nobility.
There is a beautiful positive cycle that is created by living a life of honorable actions. Honorable thoughts lead to honorable actions. Honorable actions lead us to a happier existence. And it's easy to think and act honorably again when we're happy. While the positive cycle can be difficult to start, once it's started, it's easy to continue. Keeping on doing good deeds brings us peace of mind, which is important for our happiness. | 3398.txt | 0 |
[
"lying",
"stealing",
"cheating",
"advertising"
] | The author thinks that keeping silent about the uncharged item is equal to _ . | Do you want to live with a strong sense of peacefulness, happiness, goodness, and self- respect? The collection of happiness actions broadly categorized as "honor" help you create this life of good feelings.
Here's an example to show how honorable actions create happiness.
Say a store clerk fails to charge us for an item. If we keep silent, and profit from the clerk's mistake, we would drive home with a sense of sneaky excitement. Later we might tell our family or friends about our good fortune. On the other hand, if we tell the clerk about the uncharged item, the clerk would be grateful and thank us for our honesty. We would leave the store with a quiet sense of honor that we might never share with another soul.
Then, what is it to do with our sense of happiness?
In the first case, where we don't tell the clerk, a couple of things would happen. Deep down inside we would know ourselves as a type of thief. In the process, we would lose some peace of mind and self-respect. We would also demonstrate that we cannot lie trusted, since we advertise our dishonor by telling our family and friends. We damage our own reputations by telling others. In contrast, bringing the error to the clerk's attention causes different things to happen. Immediately the clerk knows us to be honorable. Upon leaving the store, we feel honorable and our self-respect is increased. Whenever we take honorable action we gain the deep internal rewards of goodness and a sense of nobility.
There is a beautiful positive cycle that is created by living a life of honorable actions. Honorable thoughts lead to honorable actions. Honorable actions lead us to a happier existence. And it's easy to think and act honorably again when we're happy. While the positive cycle can be difficult to start, once it's started, it's easy to continue. Keeping on doing good deeds brings us peace of mind, which is important for our happiness. | 3398.txt | 1 |
[
"telling the truth to the clerk",
"offering advice to the clerk",
"asking the clerk to be more attentive",
"reminding the clerk of the charged item"
] | The phrase "bringing the error to the clerk's attention" (in para. 5) means _ . | Do you want to live with a strong sense of peacefulness, happiness, goodness, and self- respect? The collection of happiness actions broadly categorized as "honor" help you create this life of good feelings.
Here's an example to show how honorable actions create happiness.
Say a store clerk fails to charge us for an item. If we keep silent, and profit from the clerk's mistake, we would drive home with a sense of sneaky excitement. Later we might tell our family or friends about our good fortune. On the other hand, if we tell the clerk about the uncharged item, the clerk would be grateful and thank us for our honesty. We would leave the store with a quiet sense of honor that we might never share with another soul.
Then, what is it to do with our sense of happiness?
In the first case, where we don't tell the clerk, a couple of things would happen. Deep down inside we would know ourselves as a type of thief. In the process, we would lose some peace of mind and self-respect. We would also demonstrate that we cannot lie trusted, since we advertise our dishonor by telling our family and friends. We damage our own reputations by telling others. In contrast, bringing the error to the clerk's attention causes different things to happen. Immediately the clerk knows us to be honorable. Upon leaving the store, we feel honorable and our self-respect is increased. Whenever we take honorable action we gain the deep internal rewards of goodness and a sense of nobility.
There is a beautiful positive cycle that is created by living a life of honorable actions. Honorable thoughts lead to honorable actions. Honorable actions lead us to a happier existence. And it's easy to think and act honorably again when we're happy. While the positive cycle can be difficult to start, once it's started, it's easy to continue. Keeping on doing good deeds brings us peace of mind, which is important for our happiness. | 3398.txt | 0 |
[
"We'll be very excited.",
"We'll feel unfortunate.",
"We'll have a sense of honor.",
"We'll feel sorry for the clerk."
] | How will we feel if we let the clerk know her mistake? | Do you want to live with a strong sense of peacefulness, happiness, goodness, and self- respect? The collection of happiness actions broadly categorized as "honor" help you create this life of good feelings.
Here's an example to show how honorable actions create happiness.
Say a store clerk fails to charge us for an item. If we keep silent, and profit from the clerk's mistake, we would drive home with a sense of sneaky excitement. Later we might tell our family or friends about our good fortune. On the other hand, if we tell the clerk about the uncharged item, the clerk would be grateful and thank us for our honesty. We would leave the store with a quiet sense of honor that we might never share with another soul.
Then, what is it to do with our sense of happiness?
In the first case, where we don't tell the clerk, a couple of things would happen. Deep down inside we would know ourselves as a type of thief. In the process, we would lose some peace of mind and self-respect. We would also demonstrate that we cannot lie trusted, since we advertise our dishonor by telling our family and friends. We damage our own reputations by telling others. In contrast, bringing the error to the clerk's attention causes different things to happen. Immediately the clerk knows us to be honorable. Upon leaving the store, we feel honorable and our self-respect is increased. Whenever we take honorable action we gain the deep internal rewards of goodness and a sense of nobility.
There is a beautiful positive cycle that is created by living a life of honorable actions. Honorable thoughts lead to honorable actions. Honorable actions lead us to a happier existence. And it's easy to think and act honorably again when we're happy. While the positive cycle can be difficult to start, once it's started, it's easy to continue. Keeping on doing good deeds brings us peace of mind, which is important for our happiness. | 3398.txt | 2 |
[
"How to Live Truthfully",
"Importance of Peacefulness",
"Ways of Gaining Self-respect",
"Happiness through Honorable Actions"
] | Which of the following can be the best title of this passage? | Do you want to live with a strong sense of peacefulness, happiness, goodness, and self- respect? The collection of happiness actions broadly categorized as "honor" help you create this life of good feelings.
Here's an example to show how honorable actions create happiness.
Say a store clerk fails to charge us for an item. If we keep silent, and profit from the clerk's mistake, we would drive home with a sense of sneaky excitement. Later we might tell our family or friends about our good fortune. On the other hand, if we tell the clerk about the uncharged item, the clerk would be grateful and thank us for our honesty. We would leave the store with a quiet sense of honor that we might never share with another soul.
Then, what is it to do with our sense of happiness?
In the first case, where we don't tell the clerk, a couple of things would happen. Deep down inside we would know ourselves as a type of thief. In the process, we would lose some peace of mind and self-respect. We would also demonstrate that we cannot lie trusted, since we advertise our dishonor by telling our family and friends. We damage our own reputations by telling others. In contrast, bringing the error to the clerk's attention causes different things to happen. Immediately the clerk knows us to be honorable. Upon leaving the store, we feel honorable and our self-respect is increased. Whenever we take honorable action we gain the deep internal rewards of goodness and a sense of nobility.
There is a beautiful positive cycle that is created by living a life of honorable actions. Honorable thoughts lead to honorable actions. Honorable actions lead us to a happier existence. And it's easy to think and act honorably again when we're happy. While the positive cycle can be difficult to start, once it's started, it's easy to continue. Keeping on doing good deeds brings us peace of mind, which is important for our happiness. | 3398.txt | 3 |
[
"Crude oil is found below land and water.",
"Crude oil is always found a few hundred feet below the surface.",
"Pumping and pressure force crude oil to the surface.",
"A variety of petroleum products is obtained from crude oil."
] | Which of the following is NOT TRUE? | Petroleum products, such as gasoline, kerosene, home heating oil, residual fuel oil, and lubricating oils, come from one source-crude oil found below the earth's surface, as well as under large bodies of water, from a few hundred feet below the surface to as deep as 25,000 feet into the earth's interior. Sometimes crude oil is secured by drilling a hole through the earth, but more dry holes are drilled than those producing oil. Pressure at the source or pumping forces crude oil to the surface.
Crude oil wells flow at varying rates, from ten to thousands of barrels per hour. Petroleum products are always measured in 42-gallon barrels.
Petroleum products vary greatly in physical appearance: thin, thick, transparent or opaque, but their chemical composition is made up of only two elements; carbon and hydrogen, which form compounds called hydrocarbons. Other chemical elements found in union with the hydrocarbons are few and are classified as impurities. Trace elements are also found, but these are of such minute quantities that they are disregarded. The combination of carbon and hydrogen forms many thousands of compounds which are possible because of the various positions and joinings of these two atoms in the hydrocarbon molecule.
The various petroleum products are refined from the crude oil by heating and condensing the vapors. These products are the so-called light oils, such as gasoline, kerosene, and distillate oil. The residue remaining after the light oils are distilled is known as heavy or residual fuel oil and is used mostly for burning under boilers. Additional complicated refining processes rearrange the chemical structure of the hydrocarbons to produce other products, some of which are used to upgrade and increase the octane rating of various types of gasolines. | 1459.txt | 1 |
[
"the petroleum products vary greatly in physical appearance",
"complicated refining processes rearrange the chemical structure",
"the two atoms in the molecule assume many positions",
"the pressure needed to force it to the surface causes molecular transformation"
] | Many thousands of hydrocarbon compounds are possible because_ . | Petroleum products, such as gasoline, kerosene, home heating oil, residual fuel oil, and lubricating oils, come from one source-crude oil found below the earth's surface, as well as under large bodies of water, from a few hundred feet below the surface to as deep as 25,000 feet into the earth's interior. Sometimes crude oil is secured by drilling a hole through the earth, but more dry holes are drilled than those producing oil. Pressure at the source or pumping forces crude oil to the surface.
Crude oil wells flow at varying rates, from ten to thousands of barrels per hour. Petroleum products are always measured in 42-gallon barrels.
Petroleum products vary greatly in physical appearance: thin, thick, transparent or opaque, but their chemical composition is made up of only two elements; carbon and hydrogen, which form compounds called hydrocarbons. Other chemical elements found in union with the hydrocarbons are few and are classified as impurities. Trace elements are also found, but these are of such minute quantities that they are disregarded. The combination of carbon and hydrogen forms many thousands of compounds which are possible because of the various positions and joinings of these two atoms in the hydrocarbon molecule.
The various petroleum products are refined from the crude oil by heating and condensing the vapors. These products are the so-called light oils, such as gasoline, kerosene, and distillate oil. The residue remaining after the light oils are distilled is known as heavy or residual fuel oil and is used mostly for burning under boilers. Additional complicated refining processes rearrange the chemical structure of the hydrocarbons to produce other products, some of which are used to upgrade and increase the octane rating of various types of gasolines. | 1459.txt | 2 |
[
"The various petroleum products are produced by filtration.",
"Heating and condensation produce the various products.",
"Chemical separation is used to produce the various products.",
"Mechanical means such as the centrifuge are used to produce the various products."
] | Which of the following is TRUE? | Petroleum products, such as gasoline, kerosene, home heating oil, residual fuel oil, and lubricating oils, come from one source-crude oil found below the earth's surface, as well as under large bodies of water, from a few hundred feet below the surface to as deep as 25,000 feet into the earth's interior. Sometimes crude oil is secured by drilling a hole through the earth, but more dry holes are drilled than those producing oil. Pressure at the source or pumping forces crude oil to the surface.
Crude oil wells flow at varying rates, from ten to thousands of barrels per hour. Petroleum products are always measured in 42-gallon barrels.
Petroleum products vary greatly in physical appearance: thin, thick, transparent or opaque, but their chemical composition is made up of only two elements; carbon and hydrogen, which form compounds called hydrocarbons. Other chemical elements found in union with the hydrocarbons are few and are classified as impurities. Trace elements are also found, but these are of such minute quantities that they are disregarded. The combination of carbon and hydrogen forms many thousands of compounds which are possible because of the various positions and joinings of these two atoms in the hydrocarbon molecule.
The various petroleum products are refined from the crude oil by heating and condensing the vapors. These products are the so-called light oils, such as gasoline, kerosene, and distillate oil. The residue remaining after the light oils are distilled is known as heavy or residual fuel oil and is used mostly for burning under boilers. Additional complicated refining processes rearrange the chemical structure of the hydrocarbons to produce other products, some of which are used to upgrade and increase the octane rating of various types of gasolines. | 1459.txt | 1 |
[
"expansion of the hydrocarbons",
"pressure and pumping",
"vacuum created in the drilling pipe",
"expansion and contraction of the earth's surface"
] | Crude oil is brought to the surface by_ . | Petroleum products, such as gasoline, kerosene, home heating oil, residual fuel oil, and lubricating oils, come from one source-crude oil found below the earth's surface, as well as under large bodies of water, from a few hundred feet below the surface to as deep as 25,000 feet into the earth's interior. Sometimes crude oil is secured by drilling a hole through the earth, but more dry holes are drilled than those producing oil. Pressure at the source or pumping forces crude oil to the surface.
Crude oil wells flow at varying rates, from ten to thousands of barrels per hour. Petroleum products are always measured in 42-gallon barrels.
Petroleum products vary greatly in physical appearance: thin, thick, transparent or opaque, but their chemical composition is made up of only two elements; carbon and hydrogen, which form compounds called hydrocarbons. Other chemical elements found in union with the hydrocarbons are few and are classified as impurities. Trace elements are also found, but these are of such minute quantities that they are disregarded. The combination of carbon and hydrogen forms many thousands of compounds which are possible because of the various positions and joinings of these two atoms in the hydrocarbon molecule.
The various petroleum products are refined from the crude oil by heating and condensing the vapors. These products are the so-called light oils, such as gasoline, kerosene, and distillate oil. The residue remaining after the light oils are distilled is known as heavy or residual fuel oil and is used mostly for burning under boilers. Additional complicated refining processes rearrange the chemical structure of the hydrocarbons to produce other products, some of which are used to upgrade and increase the octane rating of various types of gasolines. | 1459.txt | 1 |
[
"distillate oil",
"gasoline",
"lubricating oil",
"kerosene"
] | Which of the following is not listed as a light oil? | Petroleum products, such as gasoline, kerosene, home heating oil, residual fuel oil, and lubricating oils, come from one source-crude oil found below the earth's surface, as well as under large bodies of water, from a few hundred feet below the surface to as deep as 25,000 feet into the earth's interior. Sometimes crude oil is secured by drilling a hole through the earth, but more dry holes are drilled than those producing oil. Pressure at the source or pumping forces crude oil to the surface.
Crude oil wells flow at varying rates, from ten to thousands of barrels per hour. Petroleum products are always measured in 42-gallon barrels.
Petroleum products vary greatly in physical appearance: thin, thick, transparent or opaque, but their chemical composition is made up of only two elements; carbon and hydrogen, which form compounds called hydrocarbons. Other chemical elements found in union with the hydrocarbons are few and are classified as impurities. Trace elements are also found, but these are of such minute quantities that they are disregarded. The combination of carbon and hydrogen forms many thousands of compounds which are possible because of the various positions and joinings of these two atoms in the hydrocarbon molecule.
The various petroleum products are refined from the crude oil by heating and condensing the vapors. These products are the so-called light oils, such as gasoline, kerosene, and distillate oil. The residue remaining after the light oils are distilled is known as heavy or residual fuel oil and is used mostly for burning under boilers. Additional complicated refining processes rearrange the chemical structure of the hydrocarbons to produce other products, some of which are used to upgrade and increase the octane rating of various types of gasolines. | 1459.txt | 2 |
[
"An outline for future research",
"An expanded definition of commonly misunderstood terms",
"An analysis of a dispute between two theorists",
"A discussion of research findings in an ongoing inquiry"
] | Which of the following best describes the passage as a whole? | The age at which young children begin to make moral discriminations about harmful actions committed against themselves or others has been the focus of recent research into the moral development of children. Until recently, child psychologists supported pioneer developmentalist Jean. Piaget in his hypothesis that because of their immaturity, children under age seven do not take into account the inten- tions of a person committing accidental or deliberate harm, but rather simply assign punishment for transgressions on the basis of the magnitude of the negative consequences caused. According to Piaget, children under age seven occupy the first stage of moral development, which is characterized by moral absolutism (rules made by authorities must be obeyed) and imminent justice (if rules are broken, punishment will be meted out). Until young children mature, their moral judgments are based entirely on the effect rather than the cause of a transgression. However, in recent research, Keasey found that six- year-old children not only distinguish between accidental and intentional harm, but also judge intentional harm as naughtier, regardless of the amount of damage produced. Both of these findings seem to indicate that children, at an earlier age than Piaget claimed, advance into the second stage of moral development, moral autonomy, in which they accept social rules but view them as more arbitrary than do children in the first stage. Keasey's research raises two key questions for develop- mental psychologists about children under age seven: do they recognize justifications for harmful actions, and do they make distinctions between harmful acts that are preventable and those acts that have unforeseen harmful con- sequences? Studies indicate that justifications excusing harmful actions might include public duty,selfdefense, and provocation. For example, Nesdale and Rule concluded that children were capable of considering whether or not an aggressor's action was justified by public duty: five year olds reacted very differently to "Bonnie wrecks Ann's pretend house" depending on whether Bonnie did it "so somebody won't fall over it" or because Bonnie wanted "to make Ann feel bad." Thus, a child of five begins to under- stand that certain harmful actions, though intentional, can be justified; the constraints of moral absolutism no longer solely guide their judgments. Psychologists have determined that during kindergarten children learn to make subtle distinctions involving harm. Darley observed that among acts involving unintentional harm, six-year-old children just entering kindergarten could not differentiate between foreseeable, and thus preventable, harm and unforeseeable harm for which the perpetrator cannot be blamed. Seven months later, however, Darley found that these same children could make both distinc- tions, thus demonstrating that they had become morally autonomous. | 1932.txt | 3 |
[
"Differentiating between foreseeable and unforeseeable harm",
"Identifying with the perpetrator of a harmful action",
"Justifying harmful actions that result from provocation",
"Evaluating the magnitude of negative consequences resulting from the breaking of rules"
] | According to the passage, Darley found that after seven months of kindergarten six year olds acquired which of the following abilities? | The age at which young children begin to make moral discriminations about harmful actions committed against themselves or others has been the focus of recent research into the moral development of children. Until recently, child psychologists supported pioneer developmentalist Jean. Piaget in his hypothesis that because of their immaturity, children under age seven do not take into account the inten- tions of a person committing accidental or deliberate harm, but rather simply assign punishment for transgressions on the basis of the magnitude of the negative consequences caused. According to Piaget, children under age seven occupy the first stage of moral development, which is characterized by moral absolutism (rules made by authorities must be obeyed) and imminent justice (if rules are broken, punishment will be meted out). Until young children mature, their moral judgments are based entirely on the effect rather than the cause of a transgression. However, in recent research, Keasey found that six- year-old children not only distinguish between accidental and intentional harm, but also judge intentional harm as naughtier, regardless of the amount of damage produced. Both of these findings seem to indicate that children, at an earlier age than Piaget claimed, advance into the second stage of moral development, moral autonomy, in which they accept social rules but view them as more arbitrary than do children in the first stage. Keasey's research raises two key questions for develop- mental psychologists about children under age seven: do they recognize justifications for harmful actions, and do they make distinctions between harmful acts that are preventable and those acts that have unforeseen harmful con- sequences? Studies indicate that justifications excusing harmful actions might include public duty,selfdefense, and provocation. For example, Nesdale and Rule concluded that children were capable of considering whether or not an aggressor's action was justified by public duty: five year olds reacted very differently to "Bonnie wrecks Ann's pretend house" depending on whether Bonnie did it "so somebody won't fall over it" or because Bonnie wanted "to make Ann feel bad." Thus, a child of five begins to under- stand that certain harmful actions, though intentional, can be justified; the constraints of moral absolutism no longer solely guide their judgments. Psychologists have determined that during kindergarten children learn to make subtle distinctions involving harm. Darley observed that among acts involving unintentional harm, six-year-old children just entering kindergarten could not differentiate between foreseeable, and thus preventable, harm and unforeseeable harm for which the perpetrator cannot be blamed. Seven months later, however, Darley found that these same children could make both distinc- tions, thus demonstrating that they had become morally autonomous. | 1932.txt | 0 |
[
"The kinds of excuses children give for harmful acts they commit",
"The age at which children begin to discriminate between intentional and unintentional harm",
"The intentions children have in perpetrating harm",
"The circumstances under which children punish harmful acts"
] | According to the passage, Piaget and Keasey would not have agreed on which of the following points? | The age at which young children begin to make moral discriminations about harmful actions committed against themselves or others has been the focus of recent research into the moral development of children. Until recently, child psychologists supported pioneer developmentalist Jean. Piaget in his hypothesis that because of their immaturity, children under age seven do not take into account the inten- tions of a person committing accidental or deliberate harm, but rather simply assign punishment for transgressions on the basis of the magnitude of the negative consequences caused. According to Piaget, children under age seven occupy the first stage of moral development, which is characterized by moral absolutism (rules made by authorities must be obeyed) and imminent justice (if rules are broken, punishment will be meted out). Until young children mature, their moral judgments are based entirely on the effect rather than the cause of a transgression. However, in recent research, Keasey found that six- year-old children not only distinguish between accidental and intentional harm, but also judge intentional harm as naughtier, regardless of the amount of damage produced. Both of these findings seem to indicate that children, at an earlier age than Piaget claimed, advance into the second stage of moral development, moral autonomy, in which they accept social rules but view them as more arbitrary than do children in the first stage. Keasey's research raises two key questions for develop- mental psychologists about children under age seven: do they recognize justifications for harmful actions, and do they make distinctions between harmful acts that are preventable and those acts that have unforeseen harmful con- sequences? Studies indicate that justifications excusing harmful actions might include public duty,selfdefense, and provocation. For example, Nesdale and Rule concluded that children were capable of considering whether or not an aggressor's action was justified by public duty: five year olds reacted very differently to "Bonnie wrecks Ann's pretend house" depending on whether Bonnie did it "so somebody won't fall over it" or because Bonnie wanted "to make Ann feel bad." Thus, a child of five begins to under- stand that certain harmful actions, though intentional, can be justified; the constraints of moral absolutism no longer solely guide their judgments. Psychologists have determined that during kindergarten children learn to make subtle distinctions involving harm. Darley observed that among acts involving unintentional harm, six-year-old children just entering kindergarten could not differentiate between foreseeable, and thus preventable, harm and unforeseeable harm for which the perpetrator cannot be blamed. Seven months later, however, Darley found that these same children could make both distinc- tions, thus demonstrating that they had become morally autonomous. | 1932.txt | 1 |
[
"They have the ability to make autonomous moral judgments.",
"They regard moral absolutism as a threat to their moral autonomy.",
"They do not understand the concept of public duty.",
"They accept moral judgment made by their peers more easily than do older children."
] | According to the passage, Keasey's findings support which of the following conclusions about six-year-old children? | The age at which young children begin to make moral discriminations about harmful actions committed against themselves or others has been the focus of recent research into the moral development of children. Until recently, child psychologists supported pioneer developmentalist Jean. Piaget in his hypothesis that because of their immaturity, children under age seven do not take into account the inten- tions of a person committing accidental or deliberate harm, but rather simply assign punishment for transgressions on the basis of the magnitude of the negative consequences caused. According to Piaget, children under age seven occupy the first stage of moral development, which is characterized by moral absolutism (rules made by authorities must be obeyed) and imminent justice (if rules are broken, punishment will be meted out). Until young children mature, their moral judgments are based entirely on the effect rather than the cause of a transgression. However, in recent research, Keasey found that six- year-old children not only distinguish between accidental and intentional harm, but also judge intentional harm as naughtier, regardless of the amount of damage produced. Both of these findings seem to indicate that children, at an earlier age than Piaget claimed, advance into the second stage of moral development, moral autonomy, in which they accept social rules but view them as more arbitrary than do children in the first stage. Keasey's research raises two key questions for develop- mental psychologists about children under age seven: do they recognize justifications for harmful actions, and do they make distinctions between harmful acts that are preventable and those acts that have unforeseen harmful con- sequences? Studies indicate that justifications excusing harmful actions might include public duty,selfdefense, and provocation. For example, Nesdale and Rule concluded that children were capable of considering whether or not an aggressor's action was justified by public duty: five year olds reacted very differently to "Bonnie wrecks Ann's pretend house" depending on whether Bonnie did it "so somebody won't fall over it" or because Bonnie wanted "to make Ann feel bad." Thus, a child of five begins to under- stand that certain harmful actions, though intentional, can be justified; the constraints of moral absolutism no longer solely guide their judgments. Psychologists have determined that during kindergarten children learn to make subtle distinctions involving harm. Darley observed that among acts involving unintentional harm, six-year-old children just entering kindergarten could not differentiate between foreseeable, and thus preventable, harm and unforeseeable harm for which the perpetrator cannot be blamed. Seven months later, however, Darley found that these same children could make both distinc- tions, thus demonstrating that they had become morally autonomous. | 1932.txt | 0 |
[
"The severity of the assigned punishment is deter- mined by the perceived magnitude of negative consequences more than by any other factor.",
"The punishment is to be administered immediately following the transgression.",
"The children assign punishment less arbitrarily than they do when they reach the age of moral autonomy.",
"The punishment for acts of unintentional harm is less severe than it is for acts involving accidental harm."
] | It can be inferred form the passage that Piaget would be likely to agree with which of the following statements about the punishment that children under seven assign to wrongdoing? | The age at which young children begin to make moral discriminations about harmful actions committed against themselves or others has been the focus of recent research into the moral development of children. Until recently, child psychologists supported pioneer developmentalist Jean. Piaget in his hypothesis that because of their immaturity, children under age seven do not take into account the inten- tions of a person committing accidental or deliberate harm, but rather simply assign punishment for transgressions on the basis of the magnitude of the negative consequences caused. According to Piaget, children under age seven occupy the first stage of moral development, which is characterized by moral absolutism (rules made by authorities must be obeyed) and imminent justice (if rules are broken, punishment will be meted out). Until young children mature, their moral judgments are based entirely on the effect rather than the cause of a transgression. However, in recent research, Keasey found that six- year-old children not only distinguish between accidental and intentional harm, but also judge intentional harm as naughtier, regardless of the amount of damage produced. Both of these findings seem to indicate that children, at an earlier age than Piaget claimed, advance into the second stage of moral development, moral autonomy, in which they accept social rules but view them as more arbitrary than do children in the first stage. Keasey's research raises two key questions for develop- mental psychologists about children under age seven: do they recognize justifications for harmful actions, and do they make distinctions between harmful acts that are preventable and those acts that have unforeseen harmful con- sequences? Studies indicate that justifications excusing harmful actions might include public duty,selfdefense, and provocation. For example, Nesdale and Rule concluded that children were capable of considering whether or not an aggressor's action was justified by public duty: five year olds reacted very differently to "Bonnie wrecks Ann's pretend house" depending on whether Bonnie did it "so somebody won't fall over it" or because Bonnie wanted "to make Ann feel bad." Thus, a child of five begins to under- stand that certain harmful actions, though intentional, can be justified; the constraints of moral absolutism no longer solely guide their judgments. Psychologists have determined that during kindergarten children learn to make subtle distinctions involving harm. Darley observed that among acts involving unintentional harm, six-year-old children just entering kindergarten could not differentiate between foreseeable, and thus preventable, harm and unforeseeable harm for which the perpetrator cannot be blamed. Seven months later, however, Darley found that these same children could make both distinc- tions, thus demonstrating that they had become morally autonomous. | 1932.txt | 0 |
[
"Their reactions to intentional and accidental harm determine the severity of the punishments they assign.",
"They, as perpetrators of harmful acts, disregard the feelings of the children they harm.",
"They take into account the motivations of actions when judging the behavior of other children",
"They view public duty as a justification for acci- dental, but not intentional, harm."
] | According to the passage, the research of Nesdale and Rule suggests which of the following about five-year- old children? | The age at which young children begin to make moral discriminations about harmful actions committed against themselves or others has been the focus of recent research into the moral development of children. Until recently, child psychologists supported pioneer developmentalist Jean. Piaget in his hypothesis that because of their immaturity, children under age seven do not take into account the inten- tions of a person committing accidental or deliberate harm, but rather simply assign punishment for transgressions on the basis of the magnitude of the negative consequences caused. According to Piaget, children under age seven occupy the first stage of moral development, which is characterized by moral absolutism (rules made by authorities must be obeyed) and imminent justice (if rules are broken, punishment will be meted out). Until young children mature, their moral judgments are based entirely on the effect rather than the cause of a transgression. However, in recent research, Keasey found that six- year-old children not only distinguish between accidental and intentional harm, but also judge intentional harm as naughtier, regardless of the amount of damage produced. Both of these findings seem to indicate that children, at an earlier age than Piaget claimed, advance into the second stage of moral development, moral autonomy, in which they accept social rules but view them as more arbitrary than do children in the first stage. Keasey's research raises two key questions for develop- mental psychologists about children under age seven: do they recognize justifications for harmful actions, and do they make distinctions between harmful acts that are preventable and those acts that have unforeseen harmful con- sequences? Studies indicate that justifications excusing harmful actions might include public duty,selfdefense, and provocation. For example, Nesdale and Rule concluded that children were capable of considering whether or not an aggressor's action was justified by public duty: five year olds reacted very differently to "Bonnie wrecks Ann's pretend house" depending on whether Bonnie did it "so somebody won't fall over it" or because Bonnie wanted "to make Ann feel bad." Thus, a child of five begins to under- stand that certain harmful actions, though intentional, can be justified; the constraints of moral absolutism no longer solely guide their judgments. Psychologists have determined that during kindergarten children learn to make subtle distinctions involving harm. Darley observed that among acts involving unintentional harm, six-year-old children just entering kindergarten could not differentiate between foreseeable, and thus preventable, harm and unforeseeable harm for which the perpetrator cannot be blamed. Seven months later, however, Darley found that these same children could make both distinc- tions, thus demonstrating that they had become morally autonomous. | 1932.txt | 2 |
[
"To be satisfied with one's job.",
"To earn a lot of money.",
"To work for big companies.",
"To gain a college degree."
] | What will probably bring about overall happiness? | The factors that add up to a happy life for most people are not what we typically hear about. Things like earning a master's degree don't make people happy over an extended period of time. Rather, the key to happiness, and the difference between happy and unhappy Americans, is a lifethat reflects values and practices like, hard work, marriage, charity, and freedom.
Work
When more than 1,000 people across the country were asked in 2002, "If you were to get enough money to live comfortably for the rest of your life, would you stop working?"fewer than a third of the Americans answered yes.
Contrary to widely held opinion, most Americans like or even love their work. In 2002 an amazing 89 percent of workers said they were very satisfied or somewhat satisfied with their jobs. This isn't true just for those with high-paying, highly skilled jobs but for all workers across the country. And the percentage is almost exactly the same among those with and without college
degrees and among those working for private companies, nonprofit organizations, and the government.
For most Americans, job satisfaction is nearly equivalent to life satisfaction. Among those people who say they are very happy in their lives, 95 percent are also satisfied with their jobs. Furthermore, job satisfaction would seem to be causing overall happiness, not the other wayaround.
Marriage & Family
In 2004, 42 percent of married Americans said they were very happy. Just 23 percent of
never-married people said this. Overall, married people were six times more likely lo say that they were very happy than to report that they were not too happy. And generally speaking, married women say they're happy more often than married men.
Marriage isn't just associated with happiness --it brings happiness, at least for a lot of us. One 2003 study that followed 24,000 people for more than a decade documented a significant increase in happiness after people married. For some, the happiness increase wore off in a few years, and they ended up back at their premarriage happiness levels. But for others, it lasted as long as a lifetime.
What about having kids? While children, on their own, don't appear to raise the happiness level (they actually tend to slightly lower the happiness of a marriage), studies suggest that children arc
almost always part of an overall lifestyle of happiness, which is likely to include such things as marriage and religion.
Charity
We've all heard that money doesn't buy happiness, and that's certainly true. Bu t there is one way to get it: Give money away.
The evidence is clear that gifts to charitable organizations and other worthy causes bring substantial life satisfaction to the givers. If you want $50 in authentic happiness today Just donate it to a favorite charity.
People who give money to charity are 43 percent more likely than nongivers to say they're very happy. V olunteers are 42 percent more likely to be very happy than nonvolunteers.It doesn't matter whether the gifts of money go to churches or concerts; religious giving and unreligious giving leave people equally happy, and far happier than people who don't give. Even donating blood, an especially personal kind of giving, improves our attitude. Fundamentally, the more people give, the happier they get.
Freedom
In fact, freedom and happiness are intimately related: People who consider themselves free are a lot happier than those who don't. In 2000 the General Social Survey revealed that people whopersonally feel "completely free" or "very free" were twice as like ly as those who don't to say they're very happy about their lives.
Not all types of freedom are the same in terms of happiness, however. Researchers have shown that economic freedom brings happiness, as does political and religious freedom. On the other hand, moral freedom ----a lack of constraints on behavior ----does not. People who feel they have unlimited moral choices in their lives when it comes to matters of sex or drugs, for example, tend to be unhappier than those who do not feel they have so many choices in life.
Lessons for America
The data tell us that what matters most for happiness is not having a lot ofthings but having healthy values. Without these values,our jobs and our economy will bring us joyless riches. The facts can help remind us of what we should be paying attention to, as individuals and as families, if we want to be happy. Our happiness is simply too important to us -- and to America -- to do anything less. | 2343.txt | 0 |
[
"are probably under greater pressure",
"are more inclined to feel they are happy",
"are less likely to state they arc happy",
"are contributing more to the family"
] | Generally, men in marriage _ than women in marriage. | The factors that add up to a happy life for most people are not what we typically hear about. Things like earning a master's degree don't make people happy over an extended period of time. Rather, the key to happiness, and the difference between happy and unhappy Americans, is a lifethat reflects values and practices like, hard work, marriage, charity, and freedom.
Work
When more than 1,000 people across the country were asked in 2002, "If you were to get enough money to live comfortably for the rest of your life, would you stop working?"fewer than a third of the Americans answered yes.
Contrary to widely held opinion, most Americans like or even love their work. In 2002 an amazing 89 percent of workers said they were very satisfied or somewhat satisfied with their jobs. This isn't true just for those with high-paying, highly skilled jobs but for all workers across the country. And the percentage is almost exactly the same among those with and without college
degrees and among those working for private companies, nonprofit organizations, and the government.
For most Americans, job satisfaction is nearly equivalent to life satisfaction. Among those people who say they are very happy in their lives, 95 percent are also satisfied with their jobs. Furthermore, job satisfaction would seem to be causing overall happiness, not the other wayaround.
Marriage & Family
In 2004, 42 percent of married Americans said they were very happy. Just 23 percent of
never-married people said this. Overall, married people were six times more likely lo say that they were very happy than to report that they were not too happy. And generally speaking, married women say they're happy more often than married men.
Marriage isn't just associated with happiness --it brings happiness, at least for a lot of us. One 2003 study that followed 24,000 people for more than a decade documented a significant increase in happiness after people married. For some, the happiness increase wore off in a few years, and they ended up back at their premarriage happiness levels. But for others, it lasted as long as a lifetime.
What about having kids? While children, on their own, don't appear to raise the happiness level (they actually tend to slightly lower the happiness of a marriage), studies suggest that children arc
almost always part of an overall lifestyle of happiness, which is likely to include such things as marriage and religion.
Charity
We've all heard that money doesn't buy happiness, and that's certainly true. Bu t there is one way to get it: Give money away.
The evidence is clear that gifts to charitable organizations and other worthy causes bring substantial life satisfaction to the givers. If you want $50 in authentic happiness today Just donate it to a favorite charity.
People who give money to charity are 43 percent more likely than nongivers to say they're very happy. V olunteers are 42 percent more likely to be very happy than nonvolunteers.It doesn't matter whether the gifts of money go to churches or concerts; religious giving and unreligious giving leave people equally happy, and far happier than people who don't give. Even donating blood, an especially personal kind of giving, improves our attitude. Fundamentally, the more people give, the happier they get.
Freedom
In fact, freedom and happiness are intimately related: People who consider themselves free are a lot happier than those who don't. In 2000 the General Social Survey revealed that people whopersonally feel "completely free" or "very free" were twice as like ly as those who don't to say they're very happy about their lives.
Not all types of freedom are the same in terms of happiness, however. Researchers have shown that economic freedom brings happiness, as does political and religious freedom. On the other hand, moral freedom ----a lack of constraints on behavior ----does not. People who feel they have unlimited moral choices in their lives when it comes to matters of sex or drugs, for example, tend to be unhappier than those who do not feel they have so many choices in life.
Lessons for America
The data tell us that what matters most for happiness is not having a lot ofthings but having healthy values. Without these values,our jobs and our economy will bring us joyless riches. The facts can help remind us of what we should be paying attention to, as individuals and as families, if we want to be happy. Our happiness is simply too important to us -- and to America -- to do anything less. | 2343.txt | 2 |
[
"Buy anything you want.",
"Give your money away.",
"Pay to listen to a concert.",
"Own a large amount of it."
] | According to the author, in what way can money bring happiness? | The factors that add up to a happy life for most people are not what we typically hear about. Things like earning a master's degree don't make people happy over an extended period of time. Rather, the key to happiness, and the difference between happy and unhappy Americans, is a lifethat reflects values and practices like, hard work, marriage, charity, and freedom.
Work
When more than 1,000 people across the country were asked in 2002, "If you were to get enough money to live comfortably for the rest of your life, would you stop working?"fewer than a third of the Americans answered yes.
Contrary to widely held opinion, most Americans like or even love their work. In 2002 an amazing 89 percent of workers said they were very satisfied or somewhat satisfied with their jobs. This isn't true just for those with high-paying, highly skilled jobs but for all workers across the country. And the percentage is almost exactly the same among those with and without college
degrees and among those working for private companies, nonprofit organizations, and the government.
For most Americans, job satisfaction is nearly equivalent to life satisfaction. Among those people who say they are very happy in their lives, 95 percent are also satisfied with their jobs. Furthermore, job satisfaction would seem to be causing overall happiness, not the other wayaround.
Marriage & Family
In 2004, 42 percent of married Americans said they were very happy. Just 23 percent of
never-married people said this. Overall, married people were six times more likely lo say that they were very happy than to report that they were not too happy. And generally speaking, married women say they're happy more often than married men.
Marriage isn't just associated with happiness --it brings happiness, at least for a lot of us. One 2003 study that followed 24,000 people for more than a decade documented a significant increase in happiness after people married. For some, the happiness increase wore off in a few years, and they ended up back at their premarriage happiness levels. But for others, it lasted as long as a lifetime.
What about having kids? While children, on their own, don't appear to raise the happiness level (they actually tend to slightly lower the happiness of a marriage), studies suggest that children arc
almost always part of an overall lifestyle of happiness, which is likely to include such things as marriage and religion.
Charity
We've all heard that money doesn't buy happiness, and that's certainly true. Bu t there is one way to get it: Give money away.
The evidence is clear that gifts to charitable organizations and other worthy causes bring substantial life satisfaction to the givers. If you want $50 in authentic happiness today Just donate it to a favorite charity.
People who give money to charity are 43 percent more likely than nongivers to say they're very happy. V olunteers are 42 percent more likely to be very happy than nonvolunteers.It doesn't matter whether the gifts of money go to churches or concerts; religious giving and unreligious giving leave people equally happy, and far happier than people who don't give. Even donating blood, an especially personal kind of giving, improves our attitude. Fundamentally, the more people give, the happier they get.
Freedom
In fact, freedom and happiness are intimately related: People who consider themselves free are a lot happier than those who don't. In 2000 the General Social Survey revealed that people whopersonally feel "completely free" or "very free" were twice as like ly as those who don't to say they're very happy about their lives.
Not all types of freedom are the same in terms of happiness, however. Researchers have shown that economic freedom brings happiness, as does political and religious freedom. On the other hand, moral freedom ----a lack of constraints on behavior ----does not. People who feel they have unlimited moral choices in their lives when it comes to matters of sex or drugs, for example, tend to be unhappier than those who do not feel they have so many choices in life.
Lessons for America
The data tell us that what matters most for happiness is not having a lot ofthings but having healthy values. Without these values,our jobs and our economy will bring us joyless riches. The facts can help remind us of what we should be paying attention to, as individuals and as families, if we want to be happy. Our happiness is simply too important to us -- and to America -- to do anything less. | 2343.txt | 1 |
[
"Religious freedom.",
"Economic freedom.",
"Political freedom.",
"Moral freedom."
] | What rarely brings in happiness? | The factors that add up to a happy life for most people are not what we typically hear about. Things like earning a master's degree don't make people happy over an extended period of time. Rather, the key to happiness, and the difference between happy and unhappy Americans, is a lifethat reflects values and practices like, hard work, marriage, charity, and freedom.
Work
When more than 1,000 people across the country were asked in 2002, "If you were to get enough money to live comfortably for the rest of your life, would you stop working?"fewer than a third of the Americans answered yes.
Contrary to widely held opinion, most Americans like or even love their work. In 2002 an amazing 89 percent of workers said they were very satisfied or somewhat satisfied with their jobs. This isn't true just for those with high-paying, highly skilled jobs but for all workers across the country. And the percentage is almost exactly the same among those with and without college
degrees and among those working for private companies, nonprofit organizations, and the government.
For most Americans, job satisfaction is nearly equivalent to life satisfaction. Among those people who say they are very happy in their lives, 95 percent are also satisfied with their jobs. Furthermore, job satisfaction would seem to be causing overall happiness, not the other wayaround.
Marriage & Family
In 2004, 42 percent of married Americans said they were very happy. Just 23 percent of
never-married people said this. Overall, married people were six times more likely lo say that they were very happy than to report that they were not too happy. And generally speaking, married women say they're happy more often than married men.
Marriage isn't just associated with happiness --it brings happiness, at least for a lot of us. One 2003 study that followed 24,000 people for more than a decade documented a significant increase in happiness after people married. For some, the happiness increase wore off in a few years, and they ended up back at their premarriage happiness levels. But for others, it lasted as long as a lifetime.
What about having kids? While children, on their own, don't appear to raise the happiness level (they actually tend to slightly lower the happiness of a marriage), studies suggest that children arc
almost always part of an overall lifestyle of happiness, which is likely to include such things as marriage and religion.
Charity
We've all heard that money doesn't buy happiness, and that's certainly true. Bu t there is one way to get it: Give money away.
The evidence is clear that gifts to charitable organizations and other worthy causes bring substantial life satisfaction to the givers. If you want $50 in authentic happiness today Just donate it to a favorite charity.
People who give money to charity are 43 percent more likely than nongivers to say they're very happy. V olunteers are 42 percent more likely to be very happy than nonvolunteers.It doesn't matter whether the gifts of money go to churches or concerts; religious giving and unreligious giving leave people equally happy, and far happier than people who don't give. Even donating blood, an especially personal kind of giving, improves our attitude. Fundamentally, the more people give, the happier they get.
Freedom
In fact, freedom and happiness are intimately related: People who consider themselves free are a lot happier than those who don't. In 2000 the General Social Survey revealed that people whopersonally feel "completely free" or "very free" were twice as like ly as those who don't to say they're very happy about their lives.
Not all types of freedom are the same in terms of happiness, however. Researchers have shown that economic freedom brings happiness, as does political and religious freedom. On the other hand, moral freedom ----a lack of constraints on behavior ----does not. People who feel they have unlimited moral choices in their lives when it comes to matters of sex or drugs, for example, tend to be unhappier than those who do not feel they have so many choices in life.
Lessons for America
The data tell us that what matters most for happiness is not having a lot ofthings but having healthy values. Without these values,our jobs and our economy will bring us joyless riches. The facts can help remind us of what we should be paying attention to, as individuals and as families, if we want to be happy. Our happiness is simply too important to us -- and to America -- to do anything less. | 2343.txt | 3 |
[
"Paragraph 2 shows how the problemdiscussed in paragraph 1 arose.",
"Paragraph 2 explains how the problempresented in paragraph 1 came to be solved.",
"Paragraph 2 provides a more technicaldiscussion of the problem introduced in paragraph 1.",
"Paragraph 2 shows why theproblem discussed in paragraph 1 was especially important to solve."
] | Which of the following best describes therelation of paragraph 2 to paragraph 1? | In Britain one of the most dramatic changes of the Industrial Revolution was the harnessing of power. Until the reign of George Ⅲ(1760-1820), available sources of power for work and travel had not increased since the Middle Ages. There were three sources of power: animal or human muscles; the wind, operating on sail or windmill; and running water. Only the last of these was suited at all to the continuous operating of machines, and although waterpower abounded in Lancashire and Scotland and ran grain mills as well as textile mills, it had one great disadvantage: streams flowed where nature intended them to, and water-driven factories had to be located on their banks whether or not the location was desirable for other reasons. Furthermore, even the most reliable waterpower varied with the seasons and disappeared in a drought. The new age of machinery, in short, could not have been born without a new source of both movable and constant power.
The source had long been known but not exploited. Early in the eighteenth century, a pump had come into use in which expanding steam raised a piston in a cylinder, and atmospheric pressure brought it down again when the steam condensed inside the cylinder to form a vacuum. This "atmospheric engine," invented by Thomas Savery and vastly improved by his partner, Thomas Newcomen, embodied revolutionary principles, but it was so slow and wasteful of fuel that it could not be employed outside the coal mines for which it had been designed. In the 1760s, James Watt perfected a separate condenser for the steam, so that the cylinder did not have to be cooled at every stroke; then he devised a way to make the piston turn a wheel and thus convert reciprocating (back and forth) motion into rotary motion. He thereby transformed an inefficient pump of limited use into a steam engine of a thousand uses. The final step came when steam was introduced into the cylinder to drive the piston backward as well as forward, thereby increasing the speed of the engine and cutting its fuel consumption.
Watt's steam engine soon showed what it could do. It liberated industry from dependence on running water. The engine eliminated water in the mines by driving efficient pumps, which made possible deeper and deeper mining. The ready availability of coal inspired William Murdoch during the 1790s to develop the first new form of nighttime illumination to be discovered in a millennium and a half. Coal gas rivaled smoky oil lamps and flickering candles, and early in the new century, well-to-do Londoners grew accustomed to gaslit houses and even streets. Iron manufacturers, which had starved for fuel while depending on charcoal, also benefited from ever-increasing supplies of coal: blast furnaces with steam-powered bellows turned out more iron and steel for the new machinery. Steam became the motive force of the Industrial Revolution as coal and iron ore were the raw materials.
By 1800 more than a thousand steam engines were in use in the British Isles, and Britain retained a virtual monopoly on steam engine production until the 1830s. Steam power did not merely spin cotton and roll iron; early in the new century, it also multiplied ten times over the amount of paper that a single worker could produce in a day. At the same time, operators of the first printing presses run by steam rather than by hand found it possible to produce a thousand pages in an hour rather than thirty. Steam also promised to eliminate a transportation problem not fully solved by either canal boats or turnpikes. Boats could carry heavy weights, but canals could not cross hilly terrain; turnpikes could cross the hills, but the roadbeds could not stand up under great weights. These problems needed still another solution, and the ingredients for it lay close at hand. In some industrial regions, heavily laden wagons, with flanged wheels, were being hauled by horses along metal rails; and the stationary steam engine was puffing in the factory and mine. Another generation passed before inventors succeeded in combining these ingredients, by putting the engine on wheels and the wheels on the rails, so as to provide a machine to take the place of the horse. Thus the railroad age sprang from what had already happened in the eighteenth century. | 1124.txt | 1 |
[
"utilized",
"recognized",
"examined",
"fully understood"
] | The word "exploited"in the passage(paragraph 2) is closest in meaning to | In Britain one of the most dramatic changes of the Industrial Revolution was the harnessing of power. Until the reign of George Ⅲ(1760-1820), available sources of power for work and travel had not increased since the Middle Ages. There were three sources of power: animal or human muscles; the wind, operating on sail or windmill; and running water. Only the last of these was suited at all to the continuous operating of machines, and although waterpower abounded in Lancashire and Scotland and ran grain mills as well as textile mills, it had one great disadvantage: streams flowed where nature intended them to, and water-driven factories had to be located on their banks whether or not the location was desirable for other reasons. Furthermore, even the most reliable waterpower varied with the seasons and disappeared in a drought. The new age of machinery, in short, could not have been born without a new source of both movable and constant power.
The source had long been known but not exploited. Early in the eighteenth century, a pump had come into use in which expanding steam raised a piston in a cylinder, and atmospheric pressure brought it down again when the steam condensed inside the cylinder to form a vacuum. This "atmospheric engine," invented by Thomas Savery and vastly improved by his partner, Thomas Newcomen, embodied revolutionary principles, but it was so slow and wasteful of fuel that it could not be employed outside the coal mines for which it had been designed. In the 1760s, James Watt perfected a separate condenser for the steam, so that the cylinder did not have to be cooled at every stroke; then he devised a way to make the piston turn a wheel and thus convert reciprocating (back and forth) motion into rotary motion. He thereby transformed an inefficient pump of limited use into a steam engine of a thousand uses. The final step came when steam was introduced into the cylinder to drive the piston backward as well as forward, thereby increasing the speed of the engine and cutting its fuel consumption.
Watt's steam engine soon showed what it could do. It liberated industry from dependence on running water. The engine eliminated water in the mines by driving efficient pumps, which made possible deeper and deeper mining. The ready availability of coal inspired William Murdoch during the 1790s to develop the first new form of nighttime illumination to be discovered in a millennium and a half. Coal gas rivaled smoky oil lamps and flickering candles, and early in the new century, well-to-do Londoners grew accustomed to gaslit houses and even streets. Iron manufacturers, which had starved for fuel while depending on charcoal, also benefited from ever-increasing supplies of coal: blast furnaces with steam-powered bellows turned out more iron and steel for the new machinery. Steam became the motive force of the Industrial Revolution as coal and iron ore were the raw materials.
By 1800 more than a thousand steam engines were in use in the British Isles, and Britain retained a virtual monopoly on steam engine production until the 1830s. Steam power did not merely spin cotton and roll iron; early in the new century, it also multiplied ten times over the amount of paper that a single worker could produce in a day. At the same time, operators of the first printing presses run by steam rather than by hand found it possible to produce a thousand pages in an hour rather than thirty. Steam also promised to eliminate a transportation problem not fully solved by either canal boats or turnpikes. Boats could carry heavy weights, but canals could not cross hilly terrain; turnpikes could cross the hills, but the roadbeds could not stand up under great weights. These problems needed still another solution, and the ingredients for it lay close at hand. In some industrial regions, heavily laden wagons, with flanged wheels, were being hauled by horses along metal rails; and the stationary steam engine was puffing in the factory and mine. Another generation passed before inventors succeeded in combining these ingredients, by putting the engine on wheels and the wheels on the rails, so as to provide a machine to take the place of the horse. Thus the railroad age sprang from what had already happened in the eighteenth century. | 1124.txt | 0 |
[
"quickly",
"ultimately",
"greatly",
"initially"
] | The word "vastly"in the passage(paragraph 2) is closet in meaning to | In Britain one of the most dramatic changes of the Industrial Revolution was the harnessing of power. Until the reign of George Ⅲ(1760-1820), available sources of power for work and travel had not increased since the Middle Ages. There were three sources of power: animal or human muscles; the wind, operating on sail or windmill; and running water. Only the last of these was suited at all to the continuous operating of machines, and although waterpower abounded in Lancashire and Scotland and ran grain mills as well as textile mills, it had one great disadvantage: streams flowed where nature intended them to, and water-driven factories had to be located on their banks whether or not the location was desirable for other reasons. Furthermore, even the most reliable waterpower varied with the seasons and disappeared in a drought. The new age of machinery, in short, could not have been born without a new source of both movable and constant power.
The source had long been known but not exploited. Early in the eighteenth century, a pump had come into use in which expanding steam raised a piston in a cylinder, and atmospheric pressure brought it down again when the steam condensed inside the cylinder to form a vacuum. This "atmospheric engine," invented by Thomas Savery and vastly improved by his partner, Thomas Newcomen, embodied revolutionary principles, but it was so slow and wasteful of fuel that it could not be employed outside the coal mines for which it had been designed. In the 1760s, James Watt perfected a separate condenser for the steam, so that the cylinder did not have to be cooled at every stroke; then he devised a way to make the piston turn a wheel and thus convert reciprocating (back and forth) motion into rotary motion. He thereby transformed an inefficient pump of limited use into a steam engine of a thousand uses. The final step came when steam was introduced into the cylinder to drive the piston backward as well as forward, thereby increasing the speed of the engine and cutting its fuel consumption.
Watt's steam engine soon showed what it could do. It liberated industry from dependence on running water. The engine eliminated water in the mines by driving efficient pumps, which made possible deeper and deeper mining. The ready availability of coal inspired William Murdoch during the 1790s to develop the first new form of nighttime illumination to be discovered in a millennium and a half. Coal gas rivaled smoky oil lamps and flickering candles, and early in the new century, well-to-do Londoners grew accustomed to gaslit houses and even streets. Iron manufacturers, which had starved for fuel while depending on charcoal, also benefited from ever-increasing supplies of coal: blast furnaces with steam-powered bellows turned out more iron and steel for the new machinery. Steam became the motive force of the Industrial Revolution as coal and iron ore were the raw materials.
By 1800 more than a thousand steam engines were in use in the British Isles, and Britain retained a virtual monopoly on steam engine production until the 1830s. Steam power did not merely spin cotton and roll iron; early in the new century, it also multiplied ten times over the amount of paper that a single worker could produce in a day. At the same time, operators of the first printing presses run by steam rather than by hand found it possible to produce a thousand pages in an hour rather than thirty. Steam also promised to eliminate a transportation problem not fully solved by either canal boats or turnpikes. Boats could carry heavy weights, but canals could not cross hilly terrain; turnpikes could cross the hills, but the roadbeds could not stand up under great weights. These problems needed still another solution, and the ingredients for it lay close at hand. In some industrial regions, heavily laden wagons, with flanged wheels, were being hauled by horses along metal rails; and the stationary steam engine was puffing in the factory and mine. Another generation passed before inventors succeeded in combining these ingredients, by putting the engine on wheels and the wheels on the rails, so as to provide a machine to take the place of the horse. Thus the railroad age sprang from what had already happened in the eighteenth century. | 1124.txt | 2 |
[
"it had been designed to be used in coalmines",
"the cylinder had to cool between eachstroke",
"it made use of expanding steam to raisethe piston in its cylinder",
"it could be operated only when a largesupply of fuel was available"
] | According to paragraph 2, the"atmospheric engine" was slow because | In Britain one of the most dramatic changes of the Industrial Revolution was the harnessing of power. Until the reign of George Ⅲ(1760-1820), available sources of power for work and travel had not increased since the Middle Ages. There were three sources of power: animal or human muscles; the wind, operating on sail or windmill; and running water. Only the last of these was suited at all to the continuous operating of machines, and although waterpower abounded in Lancashire and Scotland and ran grain mills as well as textile mills, it had one great disadvantage: streams flowed where nature intended them to, and water-driven factories had to be located on their banks whether or not the location was desirable for other reasons. Furthermore, even the most reliable waterpower varied with the seasons and disappeared in a drought. The new age of machinery, in short, could not have been born without a new source of both movable and constant power.
The source had long been known but not exploited. Early in the eighteenth century, a pump had come into use in which expanding steam raised a piston in a cylinder, and atmospheric pressure brought it down again when the steam condensed inside the cylinder to form a vacuum. This "atmospheric engine," invented by Thomas Savery and vastly improved by his partner, Thomas Newcomen, embodied revolutionary principles, but it was so slow and wasteful of fuel that it could not be employed outside the coal mines for which it had been designed. In the 1760s, James Watt perfected a separate condenser for the steam, so that the cylinder did not have to be cooled at every stroke; then he devised a way to make the piston turn a wheel and thus convert reciprocating (back and forth) motion into rotary motion. He thereby transformed an inefficient pump of limited use into a steam engine of a thousand uses. The final step came when steam was introduced into the cylinder to drive the piston backward as well as forward, thereby increasing the speed of the engine and cutting its fuel consumption.
Watt's steam engine soon showed what it could do. It liberated industry from dependence on running water. The engine eliminated water in the mines by driving efficient pumps, which made possible deeper and deeper mining. The ready availability of coal inspired William Murdoch during the 1790s to develop the first new form of nighttime illumination to be discovered in a millennium and a half. Coal gas rivaled smoky oil lamps and flickering candles, and early in the new century, well-to-do Londoners grew accustomed to gaslit houses and even streets. Iron manufacturers, which had starved for fuel while depending on charcoal, also benefited from ever-increasing supplies of coal: blast furnaces with steam-powered bellows turned out more iron and steel for the new machinery. Steam became the motive force of the Industrial Revolution as coal and iron ore were the raw materials.
By 1800 more than a thousand steam engines were in use in the British Isles, and Britain retained a virtual monopoly on steam engine production until the 1830s. Steam power did not merely spin cotton and roll iron; early in the new century, it also multiplied ten times over the amount of paper that a single worker could produce in a day. At the same time, operators of the first printing presses run by steam rather than by hand found it possible to produce a thousand pages in an hour rather than thirty. Steam also promised to eliminate a transportation problem not fully solved by either canal boats or turnpikes. Boats could carry heavy weights, but canals could not cross hilly terrain; turnpikes could cross the hills, but the roadbeds could not stand up under great weights. These problems needed still another solution, and the ingredients for it lay close at hand. In some industrial regions, heavily laden wagons, with flanged wheels, were being hauled by horses along metal rails; and the stationary steam engine was puffing in the factory and mine. Another generation passed before inventors succeeded in combining these ingredients, by putting the engine on wheels and the wheels on the rails, so as to provide a machine to take the place of the horse. Thus the railroad age sprang from what had already happened in the eighteenth century. | 1124.txt | 1 |
[
"It used steam to move a piston in acylinder.",
"It worked with greater speed.",
"It was more efficient in its use of fuel.",
"It could be used in many different ways."
] | According to paragraph 2, Watt's steamengine differed from earlier steam engines in each of the following waysEXCEPT: | In Britain one of the most dramatic changes of the Industrial Revolution was the harnessing of power. Until the reign of George Ⅲ(1760-1820), available sources of power for work and travel had not increased since the Middle Ages. There were three sources of power: animal or human muscles; the wind, operating on sail or windmill; and running water. Only the last of these was suited at all to the continuous operating of machines, and although waterpower abounded in Lancashire and Scotland and ran grain mills as well as textile mills, it had one great disadvantage: streams flowed where nature intended them to, and water-driven factories had to be located on their banks whether or not the location was desirable for other reasons. Furthermore, even the most reliable waterpower varied with the seasons and disappeared in a drought. The new age of machinery, in short, could not have been born without a new source of both movable and constant power.
The source had long been known but not exploited. Early in the eighteenth century, a pump had come into use in which expanding steam raised a piston in a cylinder, and atmospheric pressure brought it down again when the steam condensed inside the cylinder to form a vacuum. This "atmospheric engine," invented by Thomas Savery and vastly improved by his partner, Thomas Newcomen, embodied revolutionary principles, but it was so slow and wasteful of fuel that it could not be employed outside the coal mines for which it had been designed. In the 1760s, James Watt perfected a separate condenser for the steam, so that the cylinder did not have to be cooled at every stroke; then he devised a way to make the piston turn a wheel and thus convert reciprocating (back and forth) motion into rotary motion. He thereby transformed an inefficient pump of limited use into a steam engine of a thousand uses. The final step came when steam was introduced into the cylinder to drive the piston backward as well as forward, thereby increasing the speed of the engine and cutting its fuel consumption.
Watt's steam engine soon showed what it could do. It liberated industry from dependence on running water. The engine eliminated water in the mines by driving efficient pumps, which made possible deeper and deeper mining. The ready availability of coal inspired William Murdoch during the 1790s to develop the first new form of nighttime illumination to be discovered in a millennium and a half. Coal gas rivaled smoky oil lamps and flickering candles, and early in the new century, well-to-do Londoners grew accustomed to gaslit houses and even streets. Iron manufacturers, which had starved for fuel while depending on charcoal, also benefited from ever-increasing supplies of coal: blast furnaces with steam-powered bellows turned out more iron and steel for the new machinery. Steam became the motive force of the Industrial Revolution as coal and iron ore were the raw materials.
By 1800 more than a thousand steam engines were in use in the British Isles, and Britain retained a virtual monopoly on steam engine production until the 1830s. Steam power did not merely spin cotton and roll iron; early in the new century, it also multiplied ten times over the amount of paper that a single worker could produce in a day. At the same time, operators of the first printing presses run by steam rather than by hand found it possible to produce a thousand pages in an hour rather than thirty. Steam also promised to eliminate a transportation problem not fully solved by either canal boats or turnpikes. Boats could carry heavy weights, but canals could not cross hilly terrain; turnpikes could cross the hills, but the roadbeds could not stand up under great weights. These problems needed still another solution, and the ingredients for it lay close at hand. In some industrial regions, heavily laden wagons, with flanged wheels, were being hauled by horses along metal rails; and the stationary steam engine was puffing in the factory and mine. Another generation passed before inventors succeeded in combining these ingredients, by putting the engine on wheels and the wheels on the rails, so as to provide a machine to take the place of the horse. Thus the railroad age sprang from what had already happened in the eighteenth century. | 1124.txt | 0 |
[
"indicate one of the importantdevelopments made possible by the introduction of Watt's steam engine",
"make the point that Watt's steam enginewas not the only invention of importance to the Industrial Revolution",
"illustrate how important coal was as araw material for the Industrial Revolution",
"provide an example of anothereighteenth-century invention that used steam as a power source"
] | In paragraph 3, the author mentionsWilliam Murdoch's invention of a new form of night time illumination inorder to | In Britain one of the most dramatic changes of the Industrial Revolution was the harnessing of power. Until the reign of George Ⅲ(1760-1820), available sources of power for work and travel had not increased since the Middle Ages. There were three sources of power: animal or human muscles; the wind, operating on sail or windmill; and running water. Only the last of these was suited at all to the continuous operating of machines, and although waterpower abounded in Lancashire and Scotland and ran grain mills as well as textile mills, it had one great disadvantage: streams flowed where nature intended them to, and water-driven factories had to be located on their banks whether or not the location was desirable for other reasons. Furthermore, even the most reliable waterpower varied with the seasons and disappeared in a drought. The new age of machinery, in short, could not have been born without a new source of both movable and constant power.
The source had long been known but not exploited. Early in the eighteenth century, a pump had come into use in which expanding steam raised a piston in a cylinder, and atmospheric pressure brought it down again when the steam condensed inside the cylinder to form a vacuum. This "atmospheric engine," invented by Thomas Savery and vastly improved by his partner, Thomas Newcomen, embodied revolutionary principles, but it was so slow and wasteful of fuel that it could not be employed outside the coal mines for which it had been designed. In the 1760s, James Watt perfected a separate condenser for the steam, so that the cylinder did not have to be cooled at every stroke; then he devised a way to make the piston turn a wheel and thus convert reciprocating (back and forth) motion into rotary motion. He thereby transformed an inefficient pump of limited use into a steam engine of a thousand uses. The final step came when steam was introduced into the cylinder to drive the piston backward as well as forward, thereby increasing the speed of the engine and cutting its fuel consumption.
Watt's steam engine soon showed what it could do. It liberated industry from dependence on running water. The engine eliminated water in the mines by driving efficient pumps, which made possible deeper and deeper mining. The ready availability of coal inspired William Murdoch during the 1790s to develop the first new form of nighttime illumination to be discovered in a millennium and a half. Coal gas rivaled smoky oil lamps and flickering candles, and early in the new century, well-to-do Londoners grew accustomed to gaslit houses and even streets. Iron manufacturers, which had starved for fuel while depending on charcoal, also benefited from ever-increasing supplies of coal: blast furnaces with steam-powered bellows turned out more iron and steel for the new machinery. Steam became the motive force of the Industrial Revolution as coal and iron ore were the raw materials.
By 1800 more than a thousand steam engines were in use in the British Isles, and Britain retained a virtual monopoly on steam engine production until the 1830s. Steam power did not merely spin cotton and roll iron; early in the new century, it also multiplied ten times over the amount of paper that a single worker could produce in a day. At the same time, operators of the first printing presses run by steam rather than by hand found it possible to produce a thousand pages in an hour rather than thirty. Steam also promised to eliminate a transportation problem not fully solved by either canal boats or turnpikes. Boats could carry heavy weights, but canals could not cross hilly terrain; turnpikes could cross the hills, but the roadbeds could not stand up under great weights. These problems needed still another solution, and the ingredients for it lay close at hand. In some industrial regions, heavily laden wagons, with flanged wheels, were being hauled by horses along metal rails; and the stationary steam engine was puffing in the factory and mine. Another generation passed before inventors succeeded in combining these ingredients, by putting the engine on wheels and the wheels on the rails, so as to provide a machine to take the place of the horse. Thus the railroad age sprang from what had already happened in the eighteenth century. | 1124.txt | 0 |
[
"began to prefer",
"wanted to have",
"became used to",
"insisted on"
] | The phrase "grewaccustomed to" in thepassage (paragraph 3) is closest in meaning to | In Britain one of the most dramatic changes of the Industrial Revolution was the harnessing of power. Until the reign of George Ⅲ(1760-1820), available sources of power for work and travel had not increased since the Middle Ages. There were three sources of power: animal or human muscles; the wind, operating on sail or windmill; and running water. Only the last of these was suited at all to the continuous operating of machines, and although waterpower abounded in Lancashire and Scotland and ran grain mills as well as textile mills, it had one great disadvantage: streams flowed where nature intended them to, and water-driven factories had to be located on their banks whether or not the location was desirable for other reasons. Furthermore, even the most reliable waterpower varied with the seasons and disappeared in a drought. The new age of machinery, in short, could not have been born without a new source of both movable and constant power.
The source had long been known but not exploited. Early in the eighteenth century, a pump had come into use in which expanding steam raised a piston in a cylinder, and atmospheric pressure brought it down again when the steam condensed inside the cylinder to form a vacuum. This "atmospheric engine," invented by Thomas Savery and vastly improved by his partner, Thomas Newcomen, embodied revolutionary principles, but it was so slow and wasteful of fuel that it could not be employed outside the coal mines for which it had been designed. In the 1760s, James Watt perfected a separate condenser for the steam, so that the cylinder did not have to be cooled at every stroke; then he devised a way to make the piston turn a wheel and thus convert reciprocating (back and forth) motion into rotary motion. He thereby transformed an inefficient pump of limited use into a steam engine of a thousand uses. The final step came when steam was introduced into the cylinder to drive the piston backward as well as forward, thereby increasing the speed of the engine and cutting its fuel consumption.
Watt's steam engine soon showed what it could do. It liberated industry from dependence on running water. The engine eliminated water in the mines by driving efficient pumps, which made possible deeper and deeper mining. The ready availability of coal inspired William Murdoch during the 1790s to develop the first new form of nighttime illumination to be discovered in a millennium and a half. Coal gas rivaled smoky oil lamps and flickering candles, and early in the new century, well-to-do Londoners grew accustomed to gaslit houses and even streets. Iron manufacturers, which had starved for fuel while depending on charcoal, also benefited from ever-increasing supplies of coal: blast furnaces with steam-powered bellows turned out more iron and steel for the new machinery. Steam became the motive force of the Industrial Revolution as coal and iron ore were the raw materials.
By 1800 more than a thousand steam engines were in use in the British Isles, and Britain retained a virtual monopoly on steam engine production until the 1830s. Steam power did not merely spin cotton and roll iron; early in the new century, it also multiplied ten times over the amount of paper that a single worker could produce in a day. At the same time, operators of the first printing presses run by steam rather than by hand found it possible to produce a thousand pages in an hour rather than thirty. Steam also promised to eliminate a transportation problem not fully solved by either canal boats or turnpikes. Boats could carry heavy weights, but canals could not cross hilly terrain; turnpikes could cross the hills, but the roadbeds could not stand up under great weights. These problems needed still another solution, and the ingredients for it lay close at hand. In some industrial regions, heavily laden wagons, with flanged wheels, were being hauled by horses along metal rails; and the stationary steam engine was puffing in the factory and mine. Another generation passed before inventors succeeded in combining these ingredients, by putting the engine on wheels and the wheels on the rails, so as to provide a machine to take the place of the horse. Thus the railroad age sprang from what had already happened in the eighteenth century. | 1124.txt | 2 |
[
"gained",
"established",
"profited from",
"maintained"
] | The word "retained"in the passage(paragraph 4) is closest in meaning to | In Britain one of the most dramatic changes of the Industrial Revolution was the harnessing of power. Until the reign of George Ⅲ(1760-1820), available sources of power for work and travel had not increased since the Middle Ages. There were three sources of power: animal or human muscles; the wind, operating on sail or windmill; and running water. Only the last of these was suited at all to the continuous operating of machines, and although waterpower abounded in Lancashire and Scotland and ran grain mills as well as textile mills, it had one great disadvantage: streams flowed where nature intended them to, and water-driven factories had to be located on their banks whether or not the location was desirable for other reasons. Furthermore, even the most reliable waterpower varied with the seasons and disappeared in a drought. The new age of machinery, in short, could not have been born without a new source of both movable and constant power.
The source had long been known but not exploited. Early in the eighteenth century, a pump had come into use in which expanding steam raised a piston in a cylinder, and atmospheric pressure brought it down again when the steam condensed inside the cylinder to form a vacuum. This "atmospheric engine," invented by Thomas Savery and vastly improved by his partner, Thomas Newcomen, embodied revolutionary principles, but it was so slow and wasteful of fuel that it could not be employed outside the coal mines for which it had been designed. In the 1760s, James Watt perfected a separate condenser for the steam, so that the cylinder did not have to be cooled at every stroke; then he devised a way to make the piston turn a wheel and thus convert reciprocating (back and forth) motion into rotary motion. He thereby transformed an inefficient pump of limited use into a steam engine of a thousand uses. The final step came when steam was introduced into the cylinder to drive the piston backward as well as forward, thereby increasing the speed of the engine and cutting its fuel consumption.
Watt's steam engine soon showed what it could do. It liberated industry from dependence on running water. The engine eliminated water in the mines by driving efficient pumps, which made possible deeper and deeper mining. The ready availability of coal inspired William Murdoch during the 1790s to develop the first new form of nighttime illumination to be discovered in a millennium and a half. Coal gas rivaled smoky oil lamps and flickering candles, and early in the new century, well-to-do Londoners grew accustomed to gaslit houses and even streets. Iron manufacturers, which had starved for fuel while depending on charcoal, also benefited from ever-increasing supplies of coal: blast furnaces with steam-powered bellows turned out more iron and steel for the new machinery. Steam became the motive force of the Industrial Revolution as coal and iron ore were the raw materials.
By 1800 more than a thousand steam engines were in use in the British Isles, and Britain retained a virtual monopoly on steam engine production until the 1830s. Steam power did not merely spin cotton and roll iron; early in the new century, it also multiplied ten times over the amount of paper that a single worker could produce in a day. At the same time, operators of the first printing presses run by steam rather than by hand found it possible to produce a thousand pages in an hour rather than thirty. Steam also promised to eliminate a transportation problem not fully solved by either canal boats or turnpikes. Boats could carry heavy weights, but canals could not cross hilly terrain; turnpikes could cross the hills, but the roadbeds could not stand up under great weights. These problems needed still another solution, and the ingredients for it lay close at hand. In some industrial regions, heavily laden wagons, with flanged wheels, were being hauled by horses along metal rails; and the stationary steam engine was puffing in the factory and mine. Another generation passed before inventors succeeded in combining these ingredients, by putting the engine on wheels and the wheels on the rails, so as to provide a machine to take the place of the horse. Thus the railroad age sprang from what had already happened in the eighteenth century. | 1124.txt | 3 |
[
"They were used for the production ofpaper but not for printing.",
"By 1800, significant numbers of them wereproduced outside of Britain.",
"They were used in factories before theywere used to power trains.",
"They were used in the construction ofcanals and turnpikes."
] | According to paragraph 4, which of the following statements about steam engines is true? | In Britain one of the most dramatic changes of the Industrial Revolution was the harnessing of power. Until the reign of George Ⅲ(1760-1820), available sources of power for work and travel had not increased since the Middle Ages. There were three sources of power: animal or human muscles; the wind, operating on sail or windmill; and running water. Only the last of these was suited at all to the continuous operating of machines, and although waterpower abounded in Lancashire and Scotland and ran grain mills as well as textile mills, it had one great disadvantage: streams flowed where nature intended them to, and water-driven factories had to be located on their banks whether or not the location was desirable for other reasons. Furthermore, even the most reliable waterpower varied with the seasons and disappeared in a drought. The new age of machinery, in short, could not have been born without a new source of both movable and constant power.
The source had long been known but not exploited. Early in the eighteenth century, a pump had come into use in which expanding steam raised a piston in a cylinder, and atmospheric pressure brought it down again when the steam condensed inside the cylinder to form a vacuum. This "atmospheric engine," invented by Thomas Savery and vastly improved by his partner, Thomas Newcomen, embodied revolutionary principles, but it was so slow and wasteful of fuel that it could not be employed outside the coal mines for which it had been designed. In the 1760s, James Watt perfected a separate condenser for the steam, so that the cylinder did not have to be cooled at every stroke; then he devised a way to make the piston turn a wheel and thus convert reciprocating (back and forth) motion into rotary motion. He thereby transformed an inefficient pump of limited use into a steam engine of a thousand uses. The final step came when steam was introduced into the cylinder to drive the piston backward as well as forward, thereby increasing the speed of the engine and cutting its fuel consumption.
Watt's steam engine soon showed what it could do. It liberated industry from dependence on running water. The engine eliminated water in the mines by driving efficient pumps, which made possible deeper and deeper mining. The ready availability of coal inspired William Murdoch during the 1790s to develop the first new form of nighttime illumination to be discovered in a millennium and a half. Coal gas rivaled smoky oil lamps and flickering candles, and early in the new century, well-to-do Londoners grew accustomed to gaslit houses and even streets. Iron manufacturers, which had starved for fuel while depending on charcoal, also benefited from ever-increasing supplies of coal: blast furnaces with steam-powered bellows turned out more iron and steel for the new machinery. Steam became the motive force of the Industrial Revolution as coal and iron ore were the raw materials.
By 1800 more than a thousand steam engines were in use in the British Isles, and Britain retained a virtual monopoly on steam engine production until the 1830s. Steam power did not merely spin cotton and roll iron; early in the new century, it also multiplied ten times over the amount of paper that a single worker could produce in a day. At the same time, operators of the first printing presses run by steam rather than by hand found it possible to produce a thousand pages in an hour rather than thirty. Steam also promised to eliminate a transportation problem not fully solved by either canal boats or turnpikes. Boats could carry heavy weights, but canals could not cross hilly terrain; turnpikes could cross the hills, but the roadbeds could not stand up under great weights. These problems needed still another solution, and the ingredients for it lay close at hand. In some industrial regions, heavily laden wagons, with flanged wheels, were being hauled by horses along metal rails; and the stationary steam engine was puffing in the factory and mine. Another generation passed before inventors succeeded in combining these ingredients, by putting the engine on wheels and the wheels on the rails, so as to provide a machine to take the place of the horse. Thus the railroad age sprang from what had already happened in the eighteenth century. | 1124.txt | 2 |
[
"Turnpikes and canals",
"Stationary steam engines and wagons withflanged wheels",
"Metal rails in roadbeds and wagonscapable of carrying heavy loads",
"Canal boats and heavily laden wagons"
] | According to paragraph 4, providing amachine to take the place of thehorse involved combining which two previouslyseparate ingredients? | In Britain one of the most dramatic changes of the Industrial Revolution was the harnessing of power. Until the reign of George Ⅲ(1760-1820), available sources of power for work and travel had not increased since the Middle Ages. There were three sources of power: animal or human muscles; the wind, operating on sail or windmill; and running water. Only the last of these was suited at all to the continuous operating of machines, and although waterpower abounded in Lancashire and Scotland and ran grain mills as well as textile mills, it had one great disadvantage: streams flowed where nature intended them to, and water-driven factories had to be located on their banks whether or not the location was desirable for other reasons. Furthermore, even the most reliable waterpower varied with the seasons and disappeared in a drought. The new age of machinery, in short, could not have been born without a new source of both movable and constant power.
The source had long been known but not exploited. Early in the eighteenth century, a pump had come into use in which expanding steam raised a piston in a cylinder, and atmospheric pressure brought it down again when the steam condensed inside the cylinder to form a vacuum. This "atmospheric engine," invented by Thomas Savery and vastly improved by his partner, Thomas Newcomen, embodied revolutionary principles, but it was so slow and wasteful of fuel that it could not be employed outside the coal mines for which it had been designed. In the 1760s, James Watt perfected a separate condenser for the steam, so that the cylinder did not have to be cooled at every stroke; then he devised a way to make the piston turn a wheel and thus convert reciprocating (back and forth) motion into rotary motion. He thereby transformed an inefficient pump of limited use into a steam engine of a thousand uses. The final step came when steam was introduced into the cylinder to drive the piston backward as well as forward, thereby increasing the speed of the engine and cutting its fuel consumption.
Watt's steam engine soon showed what it could do. It liberated industry from dependence on running water. The engine eliminated water in the mines by driving efficient pumps, which made possible deeper and deeper mining. The ready availability of coal inspired William Murdoch during the 1790s to develop the first new form of nighttime illumination to be discovered in a millennium and a half. Coal gas rivaled smoky oil lamps and flickering candles, and early in the new century, well-to-do Londoners grew accustomed to gaslit houses and even streets. Iron manufacturers, which had starved for fuel while depending on charcoal, also benefited from ever-increasing supplies of coal: blast furnaces with steam-powered bellows turned out more iron and steel for the new machinery. Steam became the motive force of the Industrial Revolution as coal and iron ore were the raw materials.
By 1800 more than a thousand steam engines were in use in the British Isles, and Britain retained a virtual monopoly on steam engine production until the 1830s. Steam power did not merely spin cotton and roll iron; early in the new century, it also multiplied ten times over the amount of paper that a single worker could produce in a day. At the same time, operators of the first printing presses run by steam rather than by hand found it possible to produce a thousand pages in an hour rather than thirty. Steam also promised to eliminate a transportation problem not fully solved by either canal boats or turnpikes. Boats could carry heavy weights, but canals could not cross hilly terrain; turnpikes could cross the hills, but the roadbeds could not stand up under great weights. These problems needed still another solution, and the ingredients for it lay close at hand. In some industrial regions, heavily laden wagons, with flanged wheels, were being hauled by horses along metal rails; and the stationary steam engine was puffing in the factory and mine. Another generation passed before inventors succeeded in combining these ingredients, by putting the engine on wheels and the wheels on the rails, so as to provide a machine to take the place of the horse. Thus the railroad age sprang from what had already happened in the eighteenth century. | 1124.txt | 1 |
[
"Students are not able to apply prior knowledge to new problems.",
"College students are no better than fifth graders in memorizing facts.",
"Education has not paid enough attention to major environmental issues.",
"Education has failed to lead students to think about major scientific ideas."
] | What is traditional educators' interpretation of the research outcome mentioned in the first paragraph ? | More than a decade ago, cognitive scientists John Bransford and Daniel Schwartz, both then atVanderbilt University, found that what distinguished young adults from children was not the ability toretain facts or apply prior knowledge to a new situation but a quality they called "preparation for futurelearning." The researchers asked fifth graders and college students to create a recovery plan to protectbald eagles from extinction. Shockingly, the two groups came up with plans of similar quality(although the college students had better spelling skills ). From the standpoint of a traditionaleducator, this outcome indicated that schooling had failed to help students think about ecosystems andextinction, major scientific ideas.
The researchers decided to go deeper, however.They asked both groups to generate questionsabout important issues needed to create recovery plans.On this task, they found large differences.College students focused on critical issues of interdependence between eagles and their hab/tats .Fifth graders tended to focus on features of individual eagles ( "How big are they?" and "What dothey eat?" ).The college students had cultivated the ability to ask questions, the cornerstone of criticalthinking.They had learned how to learn.
Museums and other institutions of informal learning may be better suited to teach this skill than elementary and secondary schools.At the Exploratorium in San Francisco, we recently studied howlearning to ask good questions can affect the quality of people's scientific inquiry.We found that when we taught participants to ask "What if?" and "How can?" questions that nobody present would knowthe answer to and that would spark exploration, they engaged in better inquiry at the next exhibit--asking more questions, performing more experiments and making better interpretations of their results.Specifically, their questions became more comprehensive at the new exhibit.Rather than merely askingabout something they wanted to try, they tended to include both cause and effect in their question.Asking juicy questions appears to be a transferable skill for deepening collaborative inquiry into thescience content found in exhibits.
This type of learning is not confined to museums or institutional settings.Informal learningenvironments tolerate failure better than schools.Perhaps many teachers have too little time to allowstudents to form and pursue their own questions and too much ground to cover in the curriculum.Butpeople must acquire this skill somewhere.Our society depends on them being able to make criticaldecisions about their own medical treatment, say, or what we must do about global energy needs anddemands.For that, we have a robust informal learning system that gives no grades, takes all comers,and is available even on holidays and weekends. | 1615.txt | 3 |
[
"They have learned to think critically.",
"They are concerned about social issues.",
"They are curious about specific features.",
"They have learned to work independently."
] | In what way are college students different from children? | More than a decade ago, cognitive scientists John Bransford and Daniel Schwartz, both then atVanderbilt University, found that what distinguished young adults from children was not the ability toretain facts or apply prior knowledge to a new situation but a quality they called "preparation for futurelearning." The researchers asked fifth graders and college students to create a recovery plan to protectbald eagles from extinction. Shockingly, the two groups came up with plans of similar quality(although the college students had better spelling skills ). From the standpoint of a traditionaleducator, this outcome indicated that schooling had failed to help students think about ecosystems andextinction, major scientific ideas.
The researchers decided to go deeper, however.They asked both groups to generate questionsabout important issues needed to create recovery plans.On this task, they found large differences.College students focused on critical issues of interdependence between eagles and their hab/tats .Fifth graders tended to focus on features of individual eagles ( "How big are they?" and "What dothey eat?" ).The college students had cultivated the ability to ask questions, the cornerstone of criticalthinking.They had learned how to learn.
Museums and other institutions of informal learning may be better suited to teach this skill than elementary and secondary schools.At the Exploratorium in San Francisco, we recently studied howlearning to ask good questions can affect the quality of people's scientific inquiry.We found that when we taught participants to ask "What if?" and "How can?" questions that nobody present would knowthe answer to and that would spark exploration, they engaged in better inquiry at the next exhibit--asking more questions, performing more experiments and making better interpretations of their results.Specifically, their questions became more comprehensive at the new exhibit.Rather than merely askingabout something they wanted to try, they tended to include both cause and effect in their question.Asking juicy questions appears to be a transferable skill for deepening collaborative inquiry into thescience content found in exhibits.
This type of learning is not confined to museums or institutional settings.Informal learningenvironments tolerate failure better than schools.Perhaps many teachers have too little time to allowstudents to form and pursue their own questions and too much ground to cover in the curriculum.Butpeople must acquire this skill somewhere.Our society depends on them being able to make criticaldecisions about their own medical treatment, say, or what we must do about global energy needs anddemands.For that, we have a robust informal learning system that gives no grades, takes all comers,and is available even on holidays and weekends. | 1615.txt | 0 |
[
"It arouses students' interest in things around them.",
"It cultivates students' ability to make scientific inquiries.",
"It trains students' ability to design scientific experiments.",
"It helps students realize not every question has an answer."
] | What is the benefit of asking questions with no ready answers? | More than a decade ago, cognitive scientists John Bransford and Daniel Schwartz, both then atVanderbilt University, found that what distinguished young adults from children was not the ability toretain facts or apply prior knowledge to a new situation but a quality they called "preparation for futurelearning." The researchers asked fifth graders and college students to create a recovery plan to protectbald eagles from extinction. Shockingly, the two groups came up with plans of similar quality(although the college students had better spelling skills ). From the standpoint of a traditionaleducator, this outcome indicated that schooling had failed to help students think about ecosystems andextinction, major scientific ideas.
The researchers decided to go deeper, however.They asked both groups to generate questionsabout important issues needed to create recovery plans.On this task, they found large differences.College students focused on critical issues of interdependence between eagles and their hab/tats .Fifth graders tended to focus on features of individual eagles ( "How big are they?" and "What dothey eat?" ).The college students had cultivated the ability to ask questions, the cornerstone of criticalthinking.They had learned how to learn.
Museums and other institutions of informal learning may be better suited to teach this skill than elementary and secondary schools.At the Exploratorium in San Francisco, we recently studied howlearning to ask good questions can affect the quality of people's scientific inquiry.We found that when we taught participants to ask "What if?" and "How can?" questions that nobody present would knowthe answer to and that would spark exploration, they engaged in better inquiry at the next exhibit--asking more questions, performing more experiments and making better interpretations of their results.Specifically, their questions became more comprehensive at the new exhibit.Rather than merely askingabout something they wanted to try, they tended to include both cause and effect in their question.Asking juicy questions appears to be a transferable skill for deepening collaborative inquiry into thescience content found in exhibits.
This type of learning is not confined to museums or institutional settings.Informal learningenvironments tolerate failure better than schools.Perhaps many teachers have too little time to allowstudents to form and pursue their own questions and too much ground to cover in the curriculum.Butpeople must acquire this skill somewhere.Our society depends on them being able to make criticaldecisions about their own medical treatment, say, or what we must do about global energy needs anddemands.For that, we have a robust informal learning system that gives no grades, takes all comers,and is available even on holidays and weekends. | 1615.txt | 1 |
[
"It allows for failures.",
"It is entertaining.",
"It charges no tuition.",
"It meets practical needs."
] | What is said to be the advantage of informal learning? | More than a decade ago, cognitive scientists John Bransford and Daniel Schwartz, both then atVanderbilt University, found that what distinguished young adults from children was not the ability toretain facts or apply prior knowledge to a new situation but a quality they called "preparation for futurelearning." The researchers asked fifth graders and college students to create a recovery plan to protectbald eagles from extinction. Shockingly, the two groups came up with plans of similar quality(although the college students had better spelling skills ). From the standpoint of a traditionaleducator, this outcome indicated that schooling had failed to help students think about ecosystems andextinction, major scientific ideas.
The researchers decided to go deeper, however.They asked both groups to generate questionsabout important issues needed to create recovery plans.On this task, they found large differences.College students focused on critical issues of interdependence between eagles and their hab/tats .Fifth graders tended to focus on features of individual eagles ( "How big are they?" and "What dothey eat?" ).The college students had cultivated the ability to ask questions, the cornerstone of criticalthinking.They had learned how to learn.
Museums and other institutions of informal learning may be better suited to teach this skill than elementary and secondary schools.At the Exploratorium in San Francisco, we recently studied howlearning to ask good questions can affect the quality of people's scientific inquiry.We found that when we taught participants to ask "What if?" and "How can?" questions that nobody present would knowthe answer to and that would spark exploration, they engaged in better inquiry at the next exhibit--asking more questions, performing more experiments and making better interpretations of their results.Specifically, their questions became more comprehensive at the new exhibit.Rather than merely askingabout something they wanted to try, they tended to include both cause and effect in their question.Asking juicy questions appears to be a transferable skill for deepening collaborative inquiry into thescience content found in exhibits.
This type of learning is not confined to museums or institutional settings.Informal learningenvironments tolerate failure better than schools.Perhaps many teachers have too little time to allowstudents to form and pursue their own questions and too much ground to cover in the curriculum.Butpeople must acquire this skill somewhere.Our society depends on them being able to make criticaldecisions about their own medical treatment, say, or what we must do about global energy needs anddemands.For that, we have a robust informal learning system that gives no grades, takes all comers,and is available even on holidays and weekends. | 1615.txt | 0 |
[
"Train students to think about global issues.",
"Design more interactive classroom activities.",
"Make full use of informal learning resources.",
"Include collaborative inquiry in the curriculum."
] | What does the author seem to encourage educators to do at the end of the passage? | More than a decade ago, cognitive scientists John Bransford and Daniel Schwartz, both then atVanderbilt University, found that what distinguished young adults from children was not the ability toretain facts or apply prior knowledge to a new situation but a quality they called "preparation for futurelearning." The researchers asked fifth graders and college students to create a recovery plan to protectbald eagles from extinction. Shockingly, the two groups came up with plans of similar quality(although the college students had better spelling skills ). From the standpoint of a traditionaleducator, this outcome indicated that schooling had failed to help students think about ecosystems andextinction, major scientific ideas.
The researchers decided to go deeper, however.They asked both groups to generate questionsabout important issues needed to create recovery plans.On this task, they found large differences.College students focused on critical issues of interdependence between eagles and their hab/tats .Fifth graders tended to focus on features of individual eagles ( "How big are they?" and "What dothey eat?" ).The college students had cultivated the ability to ask questions, the cornerstone of criticalthinking.They had learned how to learn.
Museums and other institutions of informal learning may be better suited to teach this skill than elementary and secondary schools.At the Exploratorium in San Francisco, we recently studied howlearning to ask good questions can affect the quality of people's scientific inquiry.We found that when we taught participants to ask "What if?" and "How can?" questions that nobody present would knowthe answer to and that would spark exploration, they engaged in better inquiry at the next exhibit--asking more questions, performing more experiments and making better interpretations of their results.Specifically, their questions became more comprehensive at the new exhibit.Rather than merely askingabout something they wanted to try, they tended to include both cause and effect in their question.Asking juicy questions appears to be a transferable skill for deepening collaborative inquiry into thescience content found in exhibits.
This type of learning is not confined to museums or institutional settings.Informal learningenvironments tolerate failure better than schools.Perhaps many teachers have too little time to allowstudents to form and pursue their own questions and too much ground to cover in the curriculum.Butpeople must acquire this skill somewhere.Our society depends on them being able to make criticaldecisions about their own medical treatment, say, or what we must do about global energy needs anddemands.For that, we have a robust informal learning system that gives no grades, takes all comers,and is available even on holidays and weekends. | 1615.txt | 2 |
[
"New fashions in clothes reflect the qualities of women.",
"New fashions in clothing are created solely for commercial exploitation of women.",
"The top designers seem to have the right to creating new fashion.",
"Men have the basic quality of reliability."
] | The main idea of this passage is | Women and Fashions
Whenever you see an old film, even one made as little as ten years ago, you cannot help being struck by the appearance of the women taking part. Their hair-styles and make-up look dated; their skirts look either too long or too short; their general appearance is, in fact, slightly ludicrous. The men taking part in the film, on the other hand, are clearly recognizable. There is nothing about their appearance to suggest that they belong to an entirely different age.
This illusion is created by changing fashions. Over the year, the great majority of men have successfully resisted all attempts to make them change their style of dress. The same cannot be said for women. Each year a few so- called top designers in Paris or London lay down the law and women the whole world over rush to obey. The decrees of the designers are unpredictable and dictatorial. This year, they decide in their arbitrary fashion, skirts will be short and waists will be high; zips are in and buttons are out. Next year the law is reversed and far from taking exception, no one is even mildly surprised.
If women are mercilessly exploited year after year, they have only themselves to blame. Because they shudder at the thought of being seen in public in clothes that are out of fashion, they are annually black-mailed by the designers and the big stores. Clothes, which have been worn, only a few times have to be discarded because of the dictates of fashion. When you come to think of it, only a women is capable of standing in front of a wardrobe packed full of clothes and announcing sadly that she has nothing to wear.
Changing fashions are nothing more than the deliberate creation of waste. Many women squander vast sums of money each year to replace clothes that have hardly been worn. Women, who cannot afford to discard clothing in this way, waste hours of their time altering the dresses they have. Hemlimes are taken up or let down; waist-lines are taken in or let out; neck-lines are lowered or raised, and so on.
No one can claim that the fashion industry contributes anything really important to society. Fashion designers are rarely concerned with vital things like warmth, comfort and durability. They are only interested in outward appearance and they take advantage of the fact that women will put up with any amount of discomfort, providing they look right. There can hardly be a man who hasn't at some time in his life smiled at the sight of a woman shivering in a flimsy dress on a wintry day, or delicately picking her way through deep snow in dainty shoes.
When comparing men and women in the matter of fashion, the conclusions to be drawn are obvious. Do the constantly changing fashions of women's clothes, one wonders, reflect basic qualities of fickleness and instability? Men are too sensible to let themselves be bullied by fashion designers. Do their unchanging styles of dress reflect basic qualities of stability and reliability? That is for you to decide. | 246.txt | 1 |
[
"Because they want their appearance in the fashion.",
"Because the top designers want them to follow the fashion.",
"Because the top designers want them to make fashion.",
"Because the top designers want them to lead the fashion."
] | Why do the general appearance of actresses look ludicrous? | Women and Fashions
Whenever you see an old film, even one made as little as ten years ago, you cannot help being struck by the appearance of the women taking part. Their hair-styles and make-up look dated; their skirts look either too long or too short; their general appearance is, in fact, slightly ludicrous. The men taking part in the film, on the other hand, are clearly recognizable. There is nothing about their appearance to suggest that they belong to an entirely different age.
This illusion is created by changing fashions. Over the year, the great majority of men have successfully resisted all attempts to make them change their style of dress. The same cannot be said for women. Each year a few so- called top designers in Paris or London lay down the law and women the whole world over rush to obey. The decrees of the designers are unpredictable and dictatorial. This year, they decide in their arbitrary fashion, skirts will be short and waists will be high; zips are in and buttons are out. Next year the law is reversed and far from taking exception, no one is even mildly surprised.
If women are mercilessly exploited year after year, they have only themselves to blame. Because they shudder at the thought of being seen in public in clothes that are out of fashion, they are annually black-mailed by the designers and the big stores. Clothes, which have been worn, only a few times have to be discarded because of the dictates of fashion. When you come to think of it, only a women is capable of standing in front of a wardrobe packed full of clothes and announcing sadly that she has nothing to wear.
Changing fashions are nothing more than the deliberate creation of waste. Many women squander vast sums of money each year to replace clothes that have hardly been worn. Women, who cannot afford to discard clothing in this way, waste hours of their time altering the dresses they have. Hemlimes are taken up or let down; waist-lines are taken in or let out; neck-lines are lowered or raised, and so on.
No one can claim that the fashion industry contributes anything really important to society. Fashion designers are rarely concerned with vital things like warmth, comfort and durability. They are only interested in outward appearance and they take advantage of the fact that women will put up with any amount of discomfort, providing they look right. There can hardly be a man who hasn't at some time in his life smiled at the sight of a woman shivering in a flimsy dress on a wintry day, or delicately picking her way through deep snow in dainty shoes.
When comparing men and women in the matter of fashion, the conclusions to be drawn are obvious. Do the constantly changing fashions of women's clothes, one wonders, reflect basic qualities of fickleness and instability? Men are too sensible to let themselves be bullied by fashion designers. Do their unchanging styles of dress reflect basic qualities of stability and reliability? That is for you to decide. | 246.txt | 3 |
[
"They love new fashion.",
"They love new clothes.",
"They want to look beautiful.",
"They are too vain."
] | Why are women mercilessly exploited by the fashion designers? | Women and Fashions
Whenever you see an old film, even one made as little as ten years ago, you cannot help being struck by the appearance of the women taking part. Their hair-styles and make-up look dated; their skirts look either too long or too short; their general appearance is, in fact, slightly ludicrous. The men taking part in the film, on the other hand, are clearly recognizable. There is nothing about their appearance to suggest that they belong to an entirely different age.
This illusion is created by changing fashions. Over the year, the great majority of men have successfully resisted all attempts to make them change their style of dress. The same cannot be said for women. Each year a few so- called top designers in Paris or London lay down the law and women the whole world over rush to obey. The decrees of the designers are unpredictable and dictatorial. This year, they decide in their arbitrary fashion, skirts will be short and waists will be high; zips are in and buttons are out. Next year the law is reversed and far from taking exception, no one is even mildly surprised.
If women are mercilessly exploited year after year, they have only themselves to blame. Because they shudder at the thought of being seen in public in clothes that are out of fashion, they are annually black-mailed by the designers and the big stores. Clothes, which have been worn, only a few times have to be discarded because of the dictates of fashion. When you come to think of it, only a women is capable of standing in front of a wardrobe packed full of clothes and announcing sadly that she has nothing to wear.
Changing fashions are nothing more than the deliberate creation of waste. Many women squander vast sums of money each year to replace clothes that have hardly been worn. Women, who cannot afford to discard clothing in this way, waste hours of their time altering the dresses they have. Hemlimes are taken up or let down; waist-lines are taken in or let out; neck-lines are lowered or raised, and so on.
No one can claim that the fashion industry contributes anything really important to society. Fashion designers are rarely concerned with vital things like warmth, comfort and durability. They are only interested in outward appearance and they take advantage of the fact that women will put up with any amount of discomfort, providing they look right. There can hardly be a man who hasn't at some time in his life smiled at the sight of a woman shivering in a flimsy dress on a wintry day, or delicately picking her way through deep snow in dainty shoes.
When comparing men and women in the matter of fashion, the conclusions to be drawn are obvious. Do the constantly changing fashions of women's clothes, one wonders, reflect basic qualities of fickleness and instability? Men are too sensible to let themselves be bullied by fashion designers. Do their unchanging styles of dress reflect basic qualities of stability and reliability? That is for you to decide. | 246.txt | 3 |
[
"Outward appearance.",
"Comfort.",
"Beauty.",
"Durability."
] | What are fashion designers interested in? | Women and Fashions
Whenever you see an old film, even one made as little as ten years ago, you cannot help being struck by the appearance of the women taking part. Their hair-styles and make-up look dated; their skirts look either too long or too short; their general appearance is, in fact, slightly ludicrous. The men taking part in the film, on the other hand, are clearly recognizable. There is nothing about their appearance to suggest that they belong to an entirely different age.
This illusion is created by changing fashions. Over the year, the great majority of men have successfully resisted all attempts to make them change their style of dress. The same cannot be said for women. Each year a few so- called top designers in Paris or London lay down the law and women the whole world over rush to obey. The decrees of the designers are unpredictable and dictatorial. This year, they decide in their arbitrary fashion, skirts will be short and waists will be high; zips are in and buttons are out. Next year the law is reversed and far from taking exception, no one is even mildly surprised.
If women are mercilessly exploited year after year, they have only themselves to blame. Because they shudder at the thought of being seen in public in clothes that are out of fashion, they are annually black-mailed by the designers and the big stores. Clothes, which have been worn, only a few times have to be discarded because of the dictates of fashion. When you come to think of it, only a women is capable of standing in front of a wardrobe packed full of clothes and announcing sadly that she has nothing to wear.
Changing fashions are nothing more than the deliberate creation of waste. Many women squander vast sums of money each year to replace clothes that have hardly been worn. Women, who cannot afford to discard clothing in this way, waste hours of their time altering the dresses they have. Hemlimes are taken up or let down; waist-lines are taken in or let out; neck-lines are lowered or raised, and so on.
No one can claim that the fashion industry contributes anything really important to society. Fashion designers are rarely concerned with vital things like warmth, comfort and durability. They are only interested in outward appearance and they take advantage of the fact that women will put up with any amount of discomfort, providing they look right. There can hardly be a man who hasn't at some time in his life smiled at the sight of a woman shivering in a flimsy dress on a wintry day, or delicately picking her way through deep snow in dainty shoes.
When comparing men and women in the matter of fashion, the conclusions to be drawn are obvious. Do the constantly changing fashions of women's clothes, one wonders, reflect basic qualities of fickleness and instability? Men are too sensible to let themselves be bullied by fashion designers. Do their unchanging styles of dress reflect basic qualities of stability and reliability? That is for you to decide. | 246.txt | 0 |
[
"All species of bats in North America are dying.",
"Scientists already know the cause of the deaths of bats.",
"There are many possible causes of the deaths of bats.",
"The bat deaths are a serious problem."
] | What is the main idea of this passage? | First it was bees. Now it is bats. Biologists in America are working hard to discover the cause of the mysterious deaths of tens of thousands of bats in the northeastern part of the country. Most of the bats affected are the common little brown bats ( M/otis Lucifugus), but other species, such as the long-eared bat, the small-footed bat, the eastern pipistrelle, and the Indiana bat have also been affected. In some caves, more than 90 percent of the bat populations have died.
One possibility is disease. A white fungus known as fusarium has been found on the noses of both living and dead bats. However, scientists don't know if the fungus is the primary cause of death, a secondary cause of death, or not a cause at all, but the result of some other conditions.
Another possible cause is a lack of food. For example, bats typically eat a large number of moths , and in some states such as New York, the number of moths has been declining in recent years. If bats can't eat enough food, they starve to death. till other scientists believe that global warming is to blame. Warmer temperatures in recent years have been waking up hibernating bats earlier than usual. If bats break their hibernation at the wrong time, they might not find their expected food sources. The weather might also turn cold again and weaken or kill the bats. Scientists might not agree on the causes of the bat die-off, but they do agree on the consequences. Bats are an important predator of mosquitoes; a single brown bat can eat l,000 or more insects in an hour. They also eat beetles and other insects that damage plant crops. If there aren't enough bats, damage will be great from the insects they eat.
While bats live a long time for their size - the little brown bat can live for more than 30 years - a female bat has only one baby per year, so bat populations grow slowly. Many bat species in the United States are already protected or endangered.
How can you help? Do not disturb sleeping or nesting bats. If you discover bats that seem to be sick or that are dead, contact your local Fish & Wildlife Department with the details. However,be careful not to touch the animals. | 1245.txt | 3 |
[
"The first article on the website is about bees.",
"Bees usually die before bats.",
"It was bees that caused the deaths of bats.",
"Bees have been dying mysteriously."
] | What does the first sentence in Paragraph l mean? | First it was bees. Now it is bats. Biologists in America are working hard to discover the cause of the mysterious deaths of tens of thousands of bats in the northeastern part of the country. Most of the bats affected are the common little brown bats ( M/otis Lucifugus), but other species, such as the long-eared bat, the small-footed bat, the eastern pipistrelle, and the Indiana bat have also been affected. In some caves, more than 90 percent of the bat populations have died.
One possibility is disease. A white fungus known as fusarium has been found on the noses of both living and dead bats. However, scientists don't know if the fungus is the primary cause of death, a secondary cause of death, or not a cause at all, but the result of some other conditions.
Another possible cause is a lack of food. For example, bats typically eat a large number of moths , and in some states such as New York, the number of moths has been declining in recent years. If bats can't eat enough food, they starve to death. till other scientists believe that global warming is to blame. Warmer temperatures in recent years have been waking up hibernating bats earlier than usual. If bats break their hibernation at the wrong time, they might not find their expected food sources. The weather might also turn cold again and weaken or kill the bats. Scientists might not agree on the causes of the bat die-off, but they do agree on the consequences. Bats are an important predator of mosquitoes; a single brown bat can eat l,000 or more insects in an hour. They also eat beetles and other insects that damage plant crops. If there aren't enough bats, damage will be great from the insects they eat.
While bats live a long time for their size - the little brown bat can live for more than 30 years - a female bat has only one baby per year, so bat populations grow slowly. Many bat species in the United States are already protected or endangered.
How can you help? Do not disturb sleeping or nesting bats. If you discover bats that seem to be sick or that are dead, contact your local Fish & Wildlife Department with the details. However,be careful not to touch the animals. | 1245.txt | 0 |
[
"a kind of fungus.",
"an area in the U. S",
"a kind of bat.",
"a special cave."
] | The word "pipistrelle" in Paragraph l refers to | First it was bees. Now it is bats. Biologists in America are working hard to discover the cause of the mysterious deaths of tens of thousands of bats in the northeastern part of the country. Most of the bats affected are the common little brown bats ( M/otis Lucifugus), but other species, such as the long-eared bat, the small-footed bat, the eastern pipistrelle, and the Indiana bat have also been affected. In some caves, more than 90 percent of the bat populations have died.
One possibility is disease. A white fungus known as fusarium has been found on the noses of both living and dead bats. However, scientists don't know if the fungus is the primary cause of death, a secondary cause of death, or not a cause at all, but the result of some other conditions.
Another possible cause is a lack of food. For example, bats typically eat a large number of moths , and in some states such as New York, the number of moths has been declining in recent years. If bats can't eat enough food, they starve to death. till other scientists believe that global warming is to blame. Warmer temperatures in recent years have been waking up hibernating bats earlier than usual. If bats break their hibernation at the wrong time, they might not find their expected food sources. The weather might also turn cold again and weaken or kill the bats. Scientists might not agree on the causes of the bat die-off, but they do agree on the consequences. Bats are an important predator of mosquitoes; a single brown bat can eat l,000 or more insects in an hour. They also eat beetles and other insects that damage plant crops. If there aren't enough bats, damage will be great from the insects they eat.
While bats live a long time for their size - the little brown bat can live for more than 30 years - a female bat has only one baby per year, so bat populations grow slowly. Many bat species in the United States are already protected or endangered.
How can you help? Do not disturb sleeping or nesting bats. If you discover bats that seem to be sick or that are dead, contact your local Fish & Wildlife Department with the details. However,be careful not to touch the animals. | 1245.txt | 3 |
[
"insects that bats eat.",
"diseases that kill bats.",
"animals that have diseases.",
"bat species that are starving to death"
] | The "moths" in Paragraph 3 are taken as an example of | First it was bees. Now it is bats. Biologists in America are working hard to discover the cause of the mysterious deaths of tens of thousands of bats in the northeastern part of the country. Most of the bats affected are the common little brown bats ( M/otis Lucifugus), but other species, such as the long-eared bat, the small-footed bat, the eastern pipistrelle, and the Indiana bat have also been affected. In some caves, more than 90 percent of the bat populations have died.
One possibility is disease. A white fungus known as fusarium has been found on the noses of both living and dead bats. However, scientists don't know if the fungus is the primary cause of death, a secondary cause of death, or not a cause at all, but the result of some other conditions.
Another possible cause is a lack of food. For example, bats typically eat a large number of moths , and in some states such as New York, the number of moths has been declining in recent years. If bats can't eat enough food, they starve to death. till other scientists believe that global warming is to blame. Warmer temperatures in recent years have been waking up hibernating bats earlier than usual. If bats break their hibernation at the wrong time, they might not find their expected food sources. The weather might also turn cold again and weaken or kill the bats. Scientists might not agree on the causes of the bat die-off, but they do agree on the consequences. Bats are an important predator of mosquitoes; a single brown bat can eat l,000 or more insects in an hour. They also eat beetles and other insects that damage plant crops. If there aren't enough bats, damage will be great from the insects they eat.
While bats live a long time for their size - the little brown bat can live for more than 30 years - a female bat has only one baby per year, so bat populations grow slowly. Many bat species in the United States are already protected or endangered.
How can you help? Do not disturb sleeping or nesting bats. If you discover bats that seem to be sick or that are dead, contact your local Fish & Wildlife Department with the details. However,be careful not to touch the animals. | 1245.txt | 3 |
[
"To tell the public how to help bats.",
"To get people to stop killing bats.",
"To hire workers for the Fish & Wildlife Department",
"To ask people not to touch dead bats."
] | What is the purpose of the last paragraph? | First it was bees. Now it is bats. Biologists in America are working hard to discover the cause of the mysterious deaths of tens of thousands of bats in the northeastern part of the country. Most of the bats affected are the common little brown bats ( M/otis Lucifugus), but other species, such as the long-eared bat, the small-footed bat, the eastern pipistrelle, and the Indiana bat have also been affected. In some caves, more than 90 percent of the bat populations have died.
One possibility is disease. A white fungus known as fusarium has been found on the noses of both living and dead bats. However, scientists don't know if the fungus is the primary cause of death, a secondary cause of death, or not a cause at all, but the result of some other conditions.
Another possible cause is a lack of food. For example, bats typically eat a large number of moths , and in some states such as New York, the number of moths has been declining in recent years. If bats can't eat enough food, they starve to death. till other scientists believe that global warming is to blame. Warmer temperatures in recent years have been waking up hibernating bats earlier than usual. If bats break their hibernation at the wrong time, they might not find their expected food sources. The weather might also turn cold again and weaken or kill the bats. Scientists might not agree on the causes of the bat die-off, but they do agree on the consequences. Bats are an important predator of mosquitoes; a single brown bat can eat l,000 or more insects in an hour. They also eat beetles and other insects that damage plant crops. If there aren't enough bats, damage will be great from the insects they eat.
While bats live a long time for their size - the little brown bat can live for more than 30 years - a female bat has only one baby per year, so bat populations grow slowly. Many bat species in the United States are already protected or endangered.
How can you help? Do not disturb sleeping or nesting bats. If you discover bats that seem to be sick or that are dead, contact your local Fish & Wildlife Department with the details. However,be careful not to touch the animals. | 1245.txt | 3 |
[
"They do not have a regular shape.",
"They are formed where glaciers meet the ocean.",
"Most of their mass is above the sea surface.",
"Waves and tides cause them to break off glaciers."
] | According to paragraph 1, all of the following are true of icebergs EXCEPT: | Icebergs are massive blocks of ice, irregular in shape; they float with only about 12 percent of their mass above the sea surface. They are formed by glaciers-large rivers of ice that begin inland in the snows of Greenland, Antarctica, and Alaska-and move slowly toward the sea. The forward movement, the melting at the base of the glacier where it meets the ocean, and waves and tidal action cause blocks of ice to break off and float out to sea.
Icebergs are ordinarily blue to white, although they sometimes appear dark or opaque because they carry gravel and bits of rock. They may change color with changing light conditions and cloud cover, glowing pink or gold in the morning or evening light, but this color change is generally related to the low angle of the Sun above the horizon. However, travelers to Antarctica have repeatedly reported seeing green icebergs in the Weddell Sea and, more commonly, close to the Amery Ice Shelf in East Antarctica.
One explanation for green icebergs attributes their color to an optical illusion when blue ice is illuminated by a near-horizon red Sun, but green icebergs stand out among white and blue icebergs under a great variety of light conditions. Another suggestion is that the color might be related to ice with high levels of metallic compounds, including copper and iron. Recent expeditions have taken ice samples from green icebergs and ice cores-vertical, cylindrical ice samples reaching down to great depths-from the glacial ice shelves along the Antarctic continent. Analyses of these cores and samples provide a different solution to the problem.
The ice shelf cores, with a total length of 215 meters (705 feet), were long enough to penetrate through glacial ice-which is formed from the compaction of snow and contains air bubbles-and to continue into the clear, bubble-free ice formed from seawater that freezes onto the bottom of the glacial ice. The properties of this clear sea ice were very similar to the ice from the green iceberg. The scientists concluded that green icebergs form when a two-layer block of shelf ice breaks away and capsizes (turns upside down), exposing the bubble-free shelf ice that was formed from seawater.
A green iceberg that stranded just west of the Amery Ice Shelf showed two distinct layers: bubbly blue-white ice and bubble-free green ice separated by a one-meter- long ice layer containing sediments. The green ice portion was textured by seawater erosion. Where cracks were present, the color was light green because of light scattering; where no cracks were present, the color was dark green. No air bubbles were present in the green ice, suggesting that the ice was not formed from the compression of snow but instead from the freezing of seawater. Large concentrations of single-celled organisms with green pigments (coloring substances) occur along the edges of the ice shelves in this region, and the seawater is rich in their decomposing organic material. The green iceberg did not contain large amounts of particles from these organisms, but the ice had accumulated dissolved organic matter from the seawater. It appears that unlike salt, dissolved organic substances are not excluded from the ice in the freezing process. Analysis shows that the dissolved organic material absorbs enough blue wavelengths from solar light to make the ice appear green.
Chemical evidence shows that platelets (minute flat portions) of ice form in the water and then accrete and stick to the bottom of the ice shelf to form a slush (partially melted snow). The slush is compacted by an unknown mechanism, and solid, bubblefree ice is formed from water high in soluble organic substances. When an iceberg separates from the ice shelf and capsizes, the green ice is exposed.
The Amery Ice Shelf appears to be uniquely suited to the production of green icebergs. Once detached from the ice shelf, these bergs drift in the currents and wind systems surrounding Antarctica and can be found scattered among Antarctica's less colorful icebergs. | 1632.txt | 2 |
[
"A heavy cloud cover",
"The presence of gravel or bits of rock",
"The low angle of the Sun above the horizon",
"The presence of large cracks in their surface"
] | According to paragraph 2, what causes icebergs to sometimes appear dark or opaque? | Icebergs are massive blocks of ice, irregular in shape; they float with only about 12 percent of their mass above the sea surface. They are formed by glaciers-large rivers of ice that begin inland in the snows of Greenland, Antarctica, and Alaska-and move slowly toward the sea. The forward movement, the melting at the base of the glacier where it meets the ocean, and waves and tidal action cause blocks of ice to break off and float out to sea.
Icebergs are ordinarily blue to white, although they sometimes appear dark or opaque because they carry gravel and bits of rock. They may change color with changing light conditions and cloud cover, glowing pink or gold in the morning or evening light, but this color change is generally related to the low angle of the Sun above the horizon. However, travelers to Antarctica have repeatedly reported seeing green icebergs in the Weddell Sea and, more commonly, close to the Amery Ice Shelf in East Antarctica.
One explanation for green icebergs attributes their color to an optical illusion when blue ice is illuminated by a near-horizon red Sun, but green icebergs stand out among white and blue icebergs under a great variety of light conditions. Another suggestion is that the color might be related to ice with high levels of metallic compounds, including copper and iron. Recent expeditions have taken ice samples from green icebergs and ice cores-vertical, cylindrical ice samples reaching down to great depths-from the glacial ice shelves along the Antarctic continent. Analyses of these cores and samples provide a different solution to the problem.
The ice shelf cores, with a total length of 215 meters (705 feet), were long enough to penetrate through glacial ice-which is formed from the compaction of snow and contains air bubbles-and to continue into the clear, bubble-free ice formed from seawater that freezes onto the bottom of the glacial ice. The properties of this clear sea ice were very similar to the ice from the green iceberg. The scientists concluded that green icebergs form when a two-layer block of shelf ice breaks away and capsizes (turns upside down), exposing the bubble-free shelf ice that was formed from seawater.
A green iceberg that stranded just west of the Amery Ice Shelf showed two distinct layers: bubbly blue-white ice and bubble-free green ice separated by a one-meter- long ice layer containing sediments. The green ice portion was textured by seawater erosion. Where cracks were present, the color was light green because of light scattering; where no cracks were present, the color was dark green. No air bubbles were present in the green ice, suggesting that the ice was not formed from the compression of snow but instead from the freezing of seawater. Large concentrations of single-celled organisms with green pigments (coloring substances) occur along the edges of the ice shelves in this region, and the seawater is rich in their decomposing organic material. The green iceberg did not contain large amounts of particles from these organisms, but the ice had accumulated dissolved organic matter from the seawater. It appears that unlike salt, dissolved organic substances are not excluded from the ice in the freezing process. Analysis shows that the dissolved organic material absorbs enough blue wavelengths from solar light to make the ice appear green.
Chemical evidence shows that platelets (minute flat portions) of ice form in the water and then accrete and stick to the bottom of the ice shelf to form a slush (partially melted snow). The slush is compacted by an unknown mechanism, and solid, bubblefree ice is formed from water high in soluble organic substances. When an iceberg separates from the ice shelf and capsizes, the green ice is exposed.
The Amery Ice Shelf appears to be uniquely suited to the production of green icebergs. Once detached from the ice shelf, these bergs drift in the currents and wind systems surrounding Antarctica and can be found scattered among Antarctica's less colorful icebergs. | 1632.txt | 1 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.