option
sequence | question
stringlengths 11
354
| article
stringlengths 231
6.74k
| id
stringlengths 5
8
| label
int64 0
3
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
[
"early starters can learn to speak within only six months",
"children show a strong desire to communicate by making noises",
"imitation plays an important role in learning to speak",
"children have various difficulties in learning to speak"
] | From the passage we learn that ________. | It is everyone agrees, a huge task that the child performs when he learns to speak, and the fact that he does so in so short a period of time challenges explanation.
Language learning begins with listening. Individual children vary greatly in the amount of listening they do before they start speaking, and late starters are often long listeners. Most children will "obey" spoken instructions some time before they can speak, though the word obey is hardly accurate as a description of the eager and delighted cooperation usually shown by the child. Before they can speak, many children will also ask questions by gesture and by making questioning noises.
Any attempt to trace the development from the noises babies make to their first spoken words leads to considerable difficulties. It is agreed that they enjoy making noises, and that during the first few months one or two noises sort themselves out as particularly indicative of delight, distress, sociability, and so on. But since these cannot be said to show the baby's intention to communicate, they can hardly be regarded as early forms of language. It is agreed, too, that from about three months they play with sounds for enjoyments, and that by six months they are able to add new sounds to their repertoire . This self-imitation leads on to deliberate imitation of sounds made or words spoken to them by other people. The problem then arises as to the point at which one can say that these imitations can be considered as speech. | 4023.txt | 2 |
[
"How Babies Learn to Speak",
"Early Forms of Language",
"A Huge Task for Children",
"Noise Making and Language Learning"
] | The best title for this passage would be ________. | It is everyone agrees, a huge task that the child performs when he learns to speak, and the fact that he does so in so short a period of time challenges explanation.
Language learning begins with listening. Individual children vary greatly in the amount of listening they do before they start speaking, and late starters are often long listeners. Most children will "obey" spoken instructions some time before they can speak, though the word obey is hardly accurate as a description of the eager and delighted cooperation usually shown by the child. Before they can speak, many children will also ask questions by gesture and by making questioning noises.
Any attempt to trace the development from the noises babies make to their first spoken words leads to considerable difficulties. It is agreed that they enjoy making noises, and that during the first few months one or two noises sort themselves out as particularly indicative of delight, distress, sociability, and so on. But since these cannot be said to show the baby's intention to communicate, they can hardly be regarded as early forms of language. It is agreed, too, that from about three months they play with sounds for enjoyments, and that by six months they are able to add new sounds to their repertoire . This self-imitation leads on to deliberate imitation of sounds made or words spoken to them by other people. The problem then arises as to the point at which one can say that these imitations can be considered as speech. | 4023.txt | 0 |
[
"the government greatly encouraged peasants",
"rains favored the growth of cotton",
"Chad gained independence in the previous year",
"Both A.and B."
] | In 1960-1961, Chad had a good harvest of cotton because. | In 1960-1961, Chad harvested 9800 tons of cotton seed for the first time in its history, and put out the flag a little too soon. The efforts of the authorities to get the peasants back to work, as they had slacked off a great deal the previous year during independence celebrations, largely contributed to it. Also, rains were well spaced, and continued through the whole month of October. If the 1961-1962 total is back to the region of 45000 tons, it is mostly because efforts slackened again and sowing was started too late.
The average date of sowing is about July 1st. If this date is simply moved up fifteen or twenty days, 30000 to 60000 tons of cotton are gained, depending on the year. The peasant in Chad sows his millet (СÃ×) first, and it is hard to criticize this instinctive priority given to his daily bread. An essential reason for his lateness with sowing cotton is that at the time when he should leave to prepare the fields he has just barely sold the cotton of the previous season. The work required to sow, in great heat, is psychologically far more difficult if one's pockets are full of money. The date of cotton sales should therefore be moved forward as much as possible, and purchases of equipment and draught animals encouraged.
Peasants should also be encouraged to save money, to help them through the difficult period between harvests. If necessary they should be forced to do so, by having the payments for cotton given to them in installments . The last payment would be made after proof that the peasant has planted before the deadline, the date being advanced to the end of June. Those who have done so would receive extra money whereas the last planters would not receive their last payment until later.
Only the first steps are hard, because once work has started the peasants continue willingly on their way. Educational campaigns among the peasants will play an essential role in this basic advance, early sowing, on which all the others depend. It is not a matter of controlling the peasants. Each peasant will remain master of his fields. One could, however, suggest the need for the time being of kind but firm rule, which, as long as it cannot be realized by the people, should at least be for the people. | 1157.txt | 3 |
[
"on June 15th",
"on July 15th",
"on July 1st",
"on July 20th"
] | We learn from the passage that the date of sowing cotton is usually. | In 1960-1961, Chad harvested 9800 tons of cotton seed for the first time in its history, and put out the flag a little too soon. The efforts of the authorities to get the peasants back to work, as they had slacked off a great deal the previous year during independence celebrations, largely contributed to it. Also, rains were well spaced, and continued through the whole month of October. If the 1961-1962 total is back to the region of 45000 tons, it is mostly because efforts slackened again and sowing was started too late.
The average date of sowing is about July 1st. If this date is simply moved up fifteen or twenty days, 30000 to 60000 tons of cotton are gained, depending on the year. The peasant in Chad sows his millet (СÃ×) first, and it is hard to criticize this instinctive priority given to his daily bread. An essential reason for his lateness with sowing cotton is that at the time when he should leave to prepare the fields he has just barely sold the cotton of the previous season. The work required to sow, in great heat, is psychologically far more difficult if one's pockets are full of money. The date of cotton sales should therefore be moved forward as much as possible, and purchases of equipment and draught animals encouraged.
Peasants should also be encouraged to save money, to help them through the difficult period between harvests. If necessary they should be forced to do so, by having the payments for cotton given to them in installments . The last payment would be made after proof that the peasant has planted before the deadline, the date being advanced to the end of June. Those who have done so would receive extra money whereas the last planters would not receive their last payment until later.
Only the first steps are hard, because once work has started the peasants continue willingly on their way. Educational campaigns among the peasants will play an essential role in this basic advance, early sowing, on which all the others depend. It is not a matter of controlling the peasants. Each peasant will remain master of his fields. One could, however, suggest the need for the time being of kind but firm rule, which, as long as it cannot be realized by the people, should at least be for the people. | 1157.txt | 2 |
[
"breakfast",
"bread and butter",
"rice",
"millet"
] | As used in the third sentence of the second paragraph,daily breadrefers to. | In 1960-1961, Chad harvested 9800 tons of cotton seed for the first time in its history, and put out the flag a little too soon. The efforts of the authorities to get the peasants back to work, as they had slacked off a great deal the previous year during independence celebrations, largely contributed to it. Also, rains were well spaced, and continued through the whole month of October. If the 1961-1962 total is back to the region of 45000 tons, it is mostly because efforts slackened again and sowing was started too late.
The average date of sowing is about July 1st. If this date is simply moved up fifteen or twenty days, 30000 to 60000 tons of cotton are gained, depending on the year. The peasant in Chad sows his millet (СÃ×) first, and it is hard to criticize this instinctive priority given to his daily bread. An essential reason for his lateness with sowing cotton is that at the time when he should leave to prepare the fields he has just barely sold the cotton of the previous season. The work required to sow, in great heat, is psychologically far more difficult if one's pockets are full of money. The date of cotton sales should therefore be moved forward as much as possible, and purchases of equipment and draught animals encouraged.
Peasants should also be encouraged to save money, to help them through the difficult period between harvests. If necessary they should be forced to do so, by having the payments for cotton given to them in installments . The last payment would be made after proof that the peasant has planted before the deadline, the date being advanced to the end of June. Those who have done so would receive extra money whereas the last planters would not receive their last payment until later.
Only the first steps are hard, because once work has started the peasants continue willingly on their way. Educational campaigns among the peasants will play an essential role in this basic advance, early sowing, on which all the others depend. It is not a matter of controlling the peasants. Each peasant will remain master of his fields. One could, however, suggest the need for the time being of kind but firm rule, which, as long as it cannot be realized by the people, should at least be for the people. | 1157.txt | 3 |
[
"sell cotton in advance",
"be encouraged to save money",
"sow cotton in time",
"plant millet first"
] | In order to help them through the difficult time between harvests the peasants have to. | In 1960-1961, Chad harvested 9800 tons of cotton seed for the first time in its history, and put out the flag a little too soon. The efforts of the authorities to get the peasants back to work, as they had slacked off a great deal the previous year during independence celebrations, largely contributed to it. Also, rains were well spaced, and continued through the whole month of October. If the 1961-1962 total is back to the region of 45000 tons, it is mostly because efforts slackened again and sowing was started too late.
The average date of sowing is about July 1st. If this date is simply moved up fifteen or twenty days, 30000 to 60000 tons of cotton are gained, depending on the year. The peasant in Chad sows his millet (СÃ×) first, and it is hard to criticize this instinctive priority given to his daily bread. An essential reason for his lateness with sowing cotton is that at the time when he should leave to prepare the fields he has just barely sold the cotton of the previous season. The work required to sow, in great heat, is psychologically far more difficult if one's pockets are full of money. The date of cotton sales should therefore be moved forward as much as possible, and purchases of equipment and draught animals encouraged.
Peasants should also be encouraged to save money, to help them through the difficult period between harvests. If necessary they should be forced to do so, by having the payments for cotton given to them in installments . The last payment would be made after proof that the peasant has planted before the deadline, the date being advanced to the end of June. Those who have done so would receive extra money whereas the last planters would not receive their last payment until later.
Only the first steps are hard, because once work has started the peasants continue willingly on their way. Educational campaigns among the peasants will play an essential role in this basic advance, early sowing, on which all the others depend. It is not a matter of controlling the peasants. Each peasant will remain master of his fields. One could, however, suggest the need for the time being of kind but firm rule, which, as long as it cannot be realized by the people, should at least be for the people. | 1157.txt | 1 |
[
"Educational campaigns are very important to early sowing.",
"Of all the advances that the writer hopes for, early sowing is the most important.",
"Peasants should remain the masters of their fields.",
"Government might as well make good and firm rule for peasa"
] | Which of the following is NOT true? | In 1960-1961, Chad harvested 9800 tons of cotton seed for the first time in its history, and put out the flag a little too soon. The efforts of the authorities to get the peasants back to work, as they had slacked off a great deal the previous year during independence celebrations, largely contributed to it. Also, rains were well spaced, and continued through the whole month of October. If the 1961-1962 total is back to the region of 45000 tons, it is mostly because efforts slackened again and sowing was started too late.
The average date of sowing is about July 1st. If this date is simply moved up fifteen or twenty days, 30000 to 60000 tons of cotton are gained, depending on the year. The peasant in Chad sows his millet (СÃ×) first, and it is hard to criticize this instinctive priority given to his daily bread. An essential reason for his lateness with sowing cotton is that at the time when he should leave to prepare the fields he has just barely sold the cotton of the previous season. The work required to sow, in great heat, is psychologically far more difficult if one's pockets are full of money. The date of cotton sales should therefore be moved forward as much as possible, and purchases of equipment and draught animals encouraged.
Peasants should also be encouraged to save money, to help them through the difficult period between harvests. If necessary they should be forced to do so, by having the payments for cotton given to them in installments . The last payment would be made after proof that the peasant has planted before the deadline, the date being advanced to the end of June. Those who have done so would receive extra money whereas the last planters would not receive their last payment until later.
Only the first steps are hard, because once work has started the peasants continue willingly on their way. Educational campaigns among the peasants will play an essential role in this basic advance, early sowing, on which all the others depend. It is not a matter of controlling the peasants. Each peasant will remain master of his fields. One could, however, suggest the need for the time being of kind but firm rule, which, as long as it cannot be realized by the people, should at least be for the people. | 1157.txt | 1 |
[
"They are the real experts in producing it.",
"They have been a source of it.",
"They have been used to produce it.",
"They have been using it for billions of years."
] | How do plants relate to solar energy? | Using the power of the sun is nothing new. People have had solar-powered calculators and buildings with solar panels for decades. But plants are the real experts. They've been using sunlight as an energy source for billions of years.
Cells in the green leaves of plants work like tiny factories to convert sunlight, carbon dioxide, and water into sugars and starches( ), stored energy that the plants can use. This conversion process is called photosynthesis ( ) . Unfortunately, unless you're a plant, it's difficult and expensive to convert sunlight into storable energy. That's why scientists are taking a closer look at exactly how plants do it.
Some scientists are trying to get plants, or biological cells that act like plants, to work as very small photosynthesis power stations. For example, Maria Ghirardi of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Golden, Colo, is working with green algae . She's trying to trick them into producing hydrogen instead of sugars when they perform photosynthesis. Once the researchers can get the algae working efficiently, the hydrogen that they produce could be used to power fuel cells in cars or to generate electricity.
The algae are grown in narrow-necked glass bottles to produce hydrogen in the lab. During photosynthesis, plants normally make sugars or starches. "But under certain conditions, a lot of algae are able to use the sunlight energy not to store starch, but to make hydrogen," Ghirardi says.
For example, algae will produce hydrogen in an airfree environment. It's the oxygen in the air that prevents algae from making hydrogen most of the time.
Working in an airfree environment, however, is difficult. It's not a practical way to produce cheap energy. But Ghirardi and her colleagues have discovered that by removing a chemical called sulfate ( ) from the environment that the algae grow in, they will make hydrogen instead of sugars, even when air is present.
Unfortunately, removing the sulfate also makes the algae's cells work very slowly, and not much hydrogen is produced. Still, the researchers see this as a first step in their goal to produce hydrogen efficiently from algae. With more work, they may be able to speed the cells' activity and produce larger quantities of hydrogen.
The researchers hope that algae will one day be an easy-to-use fuel source. The organisms are cheap to get and to feed, Ghirardi says, and they can grow almost anywhere: "You can grow them in a reactor, in a pond. You can grow them in the ocean. There's a lot of flexibility in how you can use these organisms." | 1282.txt | 3 |
[
"improve the efficiency of it",
"turn plant sugars to a new form of energy",
"make green plants a new source of energy",
"get more sugars and starches from plants"
] | Scientists study how photosynthesis works because they want to _ . | Using the power of the sun is nothing new. People have had solar-powered calculators and buildings with solar panels for decades. But plants are the real experts. They've been using sunlight as an energy source for billions of years.
Cells in the green leaves of plants work like tiny factories to convert sunlight, carbon dioxide, and water into sugars and starches( ), stored energy that the plants can use. This conversion process is called photosynthesis ( ) . Unfortunately, unless you're a plant, it's difficult and expensive to convert sunlight into storable energy. That's why scientists are taking a closer look at exactly how plants do it.
Some scientists are trying to get plants, or biological cells that act like plants, to work as very small photosynthesis power stations. For example, Maria Ghirardi of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Golden, Colo, is working with green algae . She's trying to trick them into producing hydrogen instead of sugars when they perform photosynthesis. Once the researchers can get the algae working efficiently, the hydrogen that they produce could be used to power fuel cells in cars or to generate electricity.
The algae are grown in narrow-necked glass bottles to produce hydrogen in the lab. During photosynthesis, plants normally make sugars or starches. "But under certain conditions, a lot of algae are able to use the sunlight energy not to store starch, but to make hydrogen," Ghirardi says.
For example, algae will produce hydrogen in an airfree environment. It's the oxygen in the air that prevents algae from making hydrogen most of the time.
Working in an airfree environment, however, is difficult. It's not a practical way to produce cheap energy. But Ghirardi and her colleagues have discovered that by removing a chemical called sulfate ( ) from the environment that the algae grow in, they will make hydrogen instead of sugars, even when air is present.
Unfortunately, removing the sulfate also makes the algae's cells work very slowly, and not much hydrogen is produced. Still, the researchers see this as a first step in their goal to produce hydrogen efficiently from algae. With more work, they may be able to speed the cells' activity and produce larger quantities of hydrogen.
The researchers hope that algae will one day be an easy-to-use fuel source. The organisms are cheap to get and to feed, Ghirardi says, and they can grow almost anywhere: "You can grow them in a reactor, in a pond. You can grow them in the ocean. There's a lot of flexibility in how you can use these organisms." | 1282.txt | 2 |
[
"they are grown in narrow-necked bottles",
"there is enough oxygen in the air",
"enough starches is stored",
"there is no oxygen in the air"
] | Algae are able to use solar energy to produce hydrogen when_ . | Using the power of the sun is nothing new. People have had solar-powered calculators and buildings with solar panels for decades. But plants are the real experts. They've been using sunlight as an energy source for billions of years.
Cells in the green leaves of plants work like tiny factories to convert sunlight, carbon dioxide, and water into sugars and starches( ), stored energy that the plants can use. This conversion process is called photosynthesis ( ) . Unfortunately, unless you're a plant, it's difficult and expensive to convert sunlight into storable energy. That's why scientists are taking a closer look at exactly how plants do it.
Some scientists are trying to get plants, or biological cells that act like plants, to work as very small photosynthesis power stations. For example, Maria Ghirardi of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Golden, Colo, is working with green algae . She's trying to trick them into producing hydrogen instead of sugars when they perform photosynthesis. Once the researchers can get the algae working efficiently, the hydrogen that they produce could be used to power fuel cells in cars or to generate electricity.
The algae are grown in narrow-necked glass bottles to produce hydrogen in the lab. During photosynthesis, plants normally make sugars or starches. "But under certain conditions, a lot of algae are able to use the sunlight energy not to store starch, but to make hydrogen," Ghirardi says.
For example, algae will produce hydrogen in an airfree environment. It's the oxygen in the air that prevents algae from making hydrogen most of the time.
Working in an airfree environment, however, is difficult. It's not a practical way to produce cheap energy. But Ghirardi and her colleagues have discovered that by removing a chemical called sulfate ( ) from the environment that the algae grow in, they will make hydrogen instead of sugars, even when air is present.
Unfortunately, removing the sulfate also makes the algae's cells work very slowly, and not much hydrogen is produced. Still, the researchers see this as a first step in their goal to produce hydrogen efficiently from algae. With more work, they may be able to speed the cells' activity and produce larger quantities of hydrogen.
The researchers hope that algae will one day be an easy-to-use fuel source. The organisms are cheap to get and to feed, Ghirardi says, and they can grow almost anywhere: "You can grow them in a reactor, in a pond. You can grow them in the ocean. There's a lot of flexibility in how you can use these organisms." | 1282.txt | 3 |
[
"removing the sulfate slows down hydrogen production",
"it is hard to create an airfree environment",
"it is expensive to remove the sulfate from the environment",
"the algae's cells work slowly if there is no oxygen in the air"
] | Researchers find it difficult to make algae produce hydrogen efficiently because _ . | Using the power of the sun is nothing new. People have had solar-powered calculators and buildings with solar panels for decades. But plants are the real experts. They've been using sunlight as an energy source for billions of years.
Cells in the green leaves of plants work like tiny factories to convert sunlight, carbon dioxide, and water into sugars and starches( ), stored energy that the plants can use. This conversion process is called photosynthesis ( ) . Unfortunately, unless you're a plant, it's difficult and expensive to convert sunlight into storable energy. That's why scientists are taking a closer look at exactly how plants do it.
Some scientists are trying to get plants, or biological cells that act like plants, to work as very small photosynthesis power stations. For example, Maria Ghirardi of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Golden, Colo, is working with green algae . She's trying to trick them into producing hydrogen instead of sugars when they perform photosynthesis. Once the researchers can get the algae working efficiently, the hydrogen that they produce could be used to power fuel cells in cars or to generate electricity.
The algae are grown in narrow-necked glass bottles to produce hydrogen in the lab. During photosynthesis, plants normally make sugars or starches. "But under certain conditions, a lot of algae are able to use the sunlight energy not to store starch, but to make hydrogen," Ghirardi says.
For example, algae will produce hydrogen in an airfree environment. It's the oxygen in the air that prevents algae from making hydrogen most of the time.
Working in an airfree environment, however, is difficult. It's not a practical way to produce cheap energy. But Ghirardi and her colleagues have discovered that by removing a chemical called sulfate ( ) from the environment that the algae grow in, they will make hydrogen instead of sugars, even when air is present.
Unfortunately, removing the sulfate also makes the algae's cells work very slowly, and not much hydrogen is produced. Still, the researchers see this as a first step in their goal to produce hydrogen efficiently from algae. With more work, they may be able to speed the cells' activity and produce larger quantities of hydrogen.
The researchers hope that algae will one day be an easy-to-use fuel source. The organisms are cheap to get and to feed, Ghirardi says, and they can grow almost anywhere: "You can grow them in a reactor, in a pond. You can grow them in the ocean. There's a lot of flexibility in how you can use these organisms." | 1282.txt | 0 |
[
"They grow faster in a reactor.",
"They will be planted everywhere.",
"They are cheap to eat.",
"They can be a good energy source."
] | What does Ghirardi say about algae? | Using the power of the sun is nothing new. People have had solar-powered calculators and buildings with solar panels for decades. But plants are the real experts. They've been using sunlight as an energy source for billions of years.
Cells in the green leaves of plants work like tiny factories to convert sunlight, carbon dioxide, and water into sugars and starches( ), stored energy that the plants can use. This conversion process is called photosynthesis ( ) . Unfortunately, unless you're a plant, it's difficult and expensive to convert sunlight into storable energy. That's why scientists are taking a closer look at exactly how plants do it.
Some scientists are trying to get plants, or biological cells that act like plants, to work as very small photosynthesis power stations. For example, Maria Ghirardi of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Golden, Colo, is working with green algae . She's trying to trick them into producing hydrogen instead of sugars when they perform photosynthesis. Once the researchers can get the algae working efficiently, the hydrogen that they produce could be used to power fuel cells in cars or to generate electricity.
The algae are grown in narrow-necked glass bottles to produce hydrogen in the lab. During photosynthesis, plants normally make sugars or starches. "But under certain conditions, a lot of algae are able to use the sunlight energy not to store starch, but to make hydrogen," Ghirardi says.
For example, algae will produce hydrogen in an airfree environment. It's the oxygen in the air that prevents algae from making hydrogen most of the time.
Working in an airfree environment, however, is difficult. It's not a practical way to produce cheap energy. But Ghirardi and her colleagues have discovered that by removing a chemical called sulfate ( ) from the environment that the algae grow in, they will make hydrogen instead of sugars, even when air is present.
Unfortunately, removing the sulfate also makes the algae's cells work very slowly, and not much hydrogen is produced. Still, the researchers see this as a first step in their goal to produce hydrogen efficiently from algae. With more work, they may be able to speed the cells' activity and produce larger quantities of hydrogen.
The researchers hope that algae will one day be an easy-to-use fuel source. The organisms are cheap to get and to feed, Ghirardi says, and they can grow almost anywhere: "You can grow them in a reactor, in a pond. You can grow them in the ocean. There's a lot of flexibility in how you can use these organisms." | 1282.txt | 3 |
[
"superficial",
"remarkable",
"debatable",
"essential"
] | The word "imperative" (Line 5, Para. 1) most probably refers to something ________. | It's very interesting to note where the debate about diversity is taking place. It is taking place primarily in political circles. Here at the College Fund, we have a lot of contact with top corporate leaders; none of them is talking about getting rid of those instruments that produce diversity. In fact, they say that if their companies are to compete in the global village and in the global market place, diversity is an imperative. They also say that the need for talented, skilled Americans means we have to expand the pool means promoting policies that help provide skills to more minorities, more women and more immigrants. Corporate leaders know that if that doesn't occur in our society, they will not have the engineers, the scientist, the lawyers, or the business managers they will need.
Likewise, I don't hear people in the academy saying. "Let's go backward. Let's go back to the good old days, when we had a meritocracy " (which was never true-we never had a meritocracy, although we've come close to it in the last 30 years). I recently visited a great little college in New York where the campus had doubled its minority population in the last six years. I talked with an African American who has been a professor there for a long time, and she remembers that when she first joined the community, there were fewer than a handful of minorities on campus. Now, all of us feel the university is better because of the diversity. So where we hear this debate is primarily in political circles and in the media-not in corporate board rooms or on college campuses. | 4242.txt | 3 |
[
"Minorities.",
"Politicians.",
"Professors.",
"Managers."
] | Which of the following groups of people still differ in their views on diversity? | It's very interesting to note where the debate about diversity is taking place. It is taking place primarily in political circles. Here at the College Fund, we have a lot of contact with top corporate leaders; none of them is talking about getting rid of those instruments that produce diversity. In fact, they say that if their companies are to compete in the global village and in the global market place, diversity is an imperative. They also say that the need for talented, skilled Americans means we have to expand the pool means promoting policies that help provide skills to more minorities, more women and more immigrants. Corporate leaders know that if that doesn't occur in our society, they will not have the engineers, the scientist, the lawyers, or the business managers they will need.
Likewise, I don't hear people in the academy saying. "Let's go backward. Let's go back to the good old days, when we had a meritocracy " (which was never true-we never had a meritocracy, although we've come close to it in the last 30 years). I recently visited a great little college in New York where the campus had doubled its minority population in the last six years. I talked with an African American who has been a professor there for a long time, and she remembers that when she first joined the community, there were fewer than a handful of minorities on campus. Now, all of us feel the university is better because of the diversity. So where we hear this debate is primarily in political circles and in the media-not in corporate board rooms or on college campuses. | 4242.txt | 1 |
[
"lower the rate of unemployment",
"win equal political rights for minorities",
"be competitive in the world market",
"satisfy the demands of a growing population"
] | High corporate leaders seem to be in favor of promoting diversity so as to ________. | It's very interesting to note where the debate about diversity is taking place. It is taking place primarily in political circles. Here at the College Fund, we have a lot of contact with top corporate leaders; none of them is talking about getting rid of those instruments that produce diversity. In fact, they say that if their companies are to compete in the global village and in the global market place, diversity is an imperative. They also say that the need for talented, skilled Americans means we have to expand the pool means promoting policies that help provide skills to more minorities, more women and more immigrants. Corporate leaders know that if that doesn't occur in our society, they will not have the engineers, the scientist, the lawyers, or the business managers they will need.
Likewise, I don't hear people in the academy saying. "Let's go backward. Let's go back to the good old days, when we had a meritocracy " (which was never true-we never had a meritocracy, although we've come close to it in the last 30 years). I recently visited a great little college in New York where the campus had doubled its minority population in the last six years. I talked with an African American who has been a professor there for a long time, and she remembers that when she first joined the community, there were fewer than a handful of minorities on campus. Now, all of us feel the university is better because of the diversity. So where we hear this debate is primarily in political circles and in the media-not in corporate board rooms or on college campuses. | 4242.txt | 2 |
[
"meritocracy can never be realized without diversity",
"American political circles will not accept diversity",
"it is unlikely that diversity will occur in the U.S. media",
"minorities can only enter the fields where no debate is heard about diversity"
] | It can be inferred from the passage that ________. | It's very interesting to note where the debate about diversity is taking place. It is taking place primarily in political circles. Here at the College Fund, we have a lot of contact with top corporate leaders; none of them is talking about getting rid of those instruments that produce diversity. In fact, they say that if their companies are to compete in the global village and in the global market place, diversity is an imperative. They also say that the need for talented, skilled Americans means we have to expand the pool means promoting policies that help provide skills to more minorities, more women and more immigrants. Corporate leaders know that if that doesn't occur in our society, they will not have the engineers, the scientist, the lawyers, or the business managers they will need.
Likewise, I don't hear people in the academy saying. "Let's go backward. Let's go back to the good old days, when we had a meritocracy " (which was never true-we never had a meritocracy, although we've come close to it in the last 30 years). I recently visited a great little college in New York where the campus had doubled its minority population in the last six years. I talked with an African American who has been a professor there for a long time, and she remembers that when she first joined the community, there were fewer than a handful of minorities on campus. Now, all of us feel the university is better because of the diversity. So where we hear this debate is primarily in political circles and in the media-not in corporate board rooms or on college campuses. | 4242.txt | 0 |
[
"expanding the pool of potential employees",
"promoting policies that provide skills to employees",
"training more engineers, scientists lawyers and business managers",
"providing education for all regardless of race or sex"
] | According to the passage diversity can be achieved in American society by ________. | It's very interesting to note where the debate about diversity is taking place. It is taking place primarily in political circles. Here at the College Fund, we have a lot of contact with top corporate leaders; none of them is talking about getting rid of those instruments that produce diversity. In fact, they say that if their companies are to compete in the global village and in the global market place, diversity is an imperative. They also say that the need for talented, skilled Americans means we have to expand the pool means promoting policies that help provide skills to more minorities, more women and more immigrants. Corporate leaders know that if that doesn't occur in our society, they will not have the engineers, the scientist, the lawyers, or the business managers they will need.
Likewise, I don't hear people in the academy saying. "Let's go backward. Let's go back to the good old days, when we had a meritocracy " (which was never true-we never had a meritocracy, although we've come close to it in the last 30 years). I recently visited a great little college in New York where the campus had doubled its minority population in the last six years. I talked with an African American who has been a professor there for a long time, and she remembers that when she first joined the community, there were fewer than a handful of minorities on campus. Now, all of us feel the university is better because of the diversity. So where we hear this debate is primarily in political circles and in the media-not in corporate board rooms or on college campuses. | 4242.txt | 3 |
[
"The disease had never been effectively controlled throughout the event.",
"The policy of slaughtering animals to stop the disease spread proved to be a failure.",
"The slaughtering policy was arousing discontent among the public in Britons.",
"The government failed to take immediate actions of creating fire-break around the infected livestock."
] | Which one of the following statements is not TRUE of the foot-and-mouth disease in Briton in 2001? | Britons' most searing memories of their encounter with foot-and-mouth disease in 2001 are of the piles of animals slaughtered to try to stop its spread. Such a draconian policy might have been accepted had the disease been controlled quickly. But its ineffectiveness-more than 6m cows, sheep and pigs were culled before the disease was eradicated-led to widespread revulsion and a government rethink.
Just as in 2001, if an animal is thought to be infected, its herd will be culled and a quarantine zone set up. But this time, unless the disease is stamped out quickly, animals nearby will also be vaccinated to create a "fire-break" across which it is unlikely to travel. Already 300,000 doses of vaccine have been ordered, so that if government vets decide that slaughter alone is unlikely to be effective, they can start vaccinating straight away.
Humans almost never catch foot-and-mouth and it rarely kills the cloven-hooved beasts it affects. But animals produce less milk and meat, so its economic effects are severe. It is also highly contagious: infected livestock produce the virus that causes it in large quantities, and transmit it through saliva, mucus, milk, faeces and even droplets in their breath.
Even so, only countries where foot-and-mouth is endemic, as in parts of Latin America, vaccinate all animals. One reason is cost: the disease is caused by a virus with seven main types and tens of sub-types, with a targeted vaccine needed for each strain and shots repeated, perhaps as often as twice a year. It is also because vaccinating damages exports. Places that are free from foot-and-mouth are unwilling to import vaccinated beasts, or fresh meat from them, because they may still carry the disease.
The fear of being shut out of foreign markets led to the British government's disastrous foot-dragging over vaccination in 2001. But that same year an outbreak in the Netherlands involving 26 farms was brought under control in just one month by vaccinating 200,000 animals. Though healthy, these beasts then had to be culled so that farmers could return to exporting without restrictions as soon as possible.
Not even eternal vigilance on imports can keep a country free of foot-and-mouth disease: the latest outbreak was apparently caused by a breach of bio-security at the Pirbright laboratory complex in Surrey, where government researchers keep the live virus for vaccine research and Merial, an American animal-health company, manufactures vaccine for export. Human action, accidental or deliberate, seems likely to have been involved.
Ironically, one reason for eschewing vaccination is that although it provides the best hope of dealing with outbreaks, maintaining the capacity to produce vaccine is itself a risky business. Many earlier episodes of foot-and-mouth in countries normally free from the disease have been caused by laboratory escapes; in 1970 a leak from Pirbright's isolation facilities was fortunately contained. | 3615.txt | 0 |
[
"the piles of animals will not be slaughtered as in 2001.",
"animals near the infected herb will be injected with vaccine.",
"a belt of quarantine with vaccinated animals will be erected.",
"it is paying more attention to prevention of the outbreak of the epidemic."
] | The new policy is different from the policy in 2001 in the following aspects except _ | Britons' most searing memories of their encounter with foot-and-mouth disease in 2001 are of the piles of animals slaughtered to try to stop its spread. Such a draconian policy might have been accepted had the disease been controlled quickly. But its ineffectiveness-more than 6m cows, sheep and pigs were culled before the disease was eradicated-led to widespread revulsion and a government rethink.
Just as in 2001, if an animal is thought to be infected, its herd will be culled and a quarantine zone set up. But this time, unless the disease is stamped out quickly, animals nearby will also be vaccinated to create a "fire-break" across which it is unlikely to travel. Already 300,000 doses of vaccine have been ordered, so that if government vets decide that slaughter alone is unlikely to be effective, they can start vaccinating straight away.
Humans almost never catch foot-and-mouth and it rarely kills the cloven-hooved beasts it affects. But animals produce less milk and meat, so its economic effects are severe. It is also highly contagious: infected livestock produce the virus that causes it in large quantities, and transmit it through saliva, mucus, milk, faeces and even droplets in their breath.
Even so, only countries where foot-and-mouth is endemic, as in parts of Latin America, vaccinate all animals. One reason is cost: the disease is caused by a virus with seven main types and tens of sub-types, with a targeted vaccine needed for each strain and shots repeated, perhaps as often as twice a year. It is also because vaccinating damages exports. Places that are free from foot-and-mouth are unwilling to import vaccinated beasts, or fresh meat from them, because they may still carry the disease.
The fear of being shut out of foreign markets led to the British government's disastrous foot-dragging over vaccination in 2001. But that same year an outbreak in the Netherlands involving 26 farms was brought under control in just one month by vaccinating 200,000 animals. Though healthy, these beasts then had to be culled so that farmers could return to exporting without restrictions as soon as possible.
Not even eternal vigilance on imports can keep a country free of foot-and-mouth disease: the latest outbreak was apparently caused by a breach of bio-security at the Pirbright laboratory complex in Surrey, where government researchers keep the live virus for vaccine research and Merial, an American animal-health company, manufactures vaccine for export. Human action, accidental or deliberate, seems likely to have been involved.
Ironically, one reason for eschewing vaccination is that although it provides the best hope of dealing with outbreaks, maintaining the capacity to produce vaccine is itself a risky business. Many earlier episodes of foot-and-mouth in countries normally free from the disease have been caused by laboratory escapes; in 1970 a leak from Pirbright's isolation facilities was fortunately contained. | 3615.txt | 0 |
[
"it is unnecessary to vaccinate all the animals in counties in which there are little chances of infecting foot-and-mouth.",
"the cost of vaccines against all types of the virus causing the disease is very high.",
"vaccinated animals are less welcomed by importing countries.",
"the vaccine cost will be rising as types of virus causing the disease are increasing."
] | Only a few countries have all of their animals injected with vaccines because of the following reason except _ | Britons' most searing memories of their encounter with foot-and-mouth disease in 2001 are of the piles of animals slaughtered to try to stop its spread. Such a draconian policy might have been accepted had the disease been controlled quickly. But its ineffectiveness-more than 6m cows, sheep and pigs were culled before the disease was eradicated-led to widespread revulsion and a government rethink.
Just as in 2001, if an animal is thought to be infected, its herd will be culled and a quarantine zone set up. But this time, unless the disease is stamped out quickly, animals nearby will also be vaccinated to create a "fire-break" across which it is unlikely to travel. Already 300,000 doses of vaccine have been ordered, so that if government vets decide that slaughter alone is unlikely to be effective, they can start vaccinating straight away.
Humans almost never catch foot-and-mouth and it rarely kills the cloven-hooved beasts it affects. But animals produce less milk and meat, so its economic effects are severe. It is also highly contagious: infected livestock produce the virus that causes it in large quantities, and transmit it through saliva, mucus, milk, faeces and even droplets in their breath.
Even so, only countries where foot-and-mouth is endemic, as in parts of Latin America, vaccinate all animals. One reason is cost: the disease is caused by a virus with seven main types and tens of sub-types, with a targeted vaccine needed for each strain and shots repeated, perhaps as often as twice a year. It is also because vaccinating damages exports. Places that are free from foot-and-mouth are unwilling to import vaccinated beasts, or fresh meat from them, because they may still carry the disease.
The fear of being shut out of foreign markets led to the British government's disastrous foot-dragging over vaccination in 2001. But that same year an outbreak in the Netherlands involving 26 farms was brought under control in just one month by vaccinating 200,000 animals. Though healthy, these beasts then had to be culled so that farmers could return to exporting without restrictions as soon as possible.
Not even eternal vigilance on imports can keep a country free of foot-and-mouth disease: the latest outbreak was apparently caused by a breach of bio-security at the Pirbright laboratory complex in Surrey, where government researchers keep the live virus for vaccine research and Merial, an American animal-health company, manufactures vaccine for export. Human action, accidental or deliberate, seems likely to have been involved.
Ironically, one reason for eschewing vaccination is that although it provides the best hope of dealing with outbreaks, maintaining the capacity to produce vaccine is itself a risky business. Many earlier episodes of foot-and-mouth in countries normally free from the disease have been caused by laboratory escapes; in 1970 a leak from Pirbright's isolation facilities was fortunately contained. | 3615.txt | 3 |
[
"they may be more likely to infect the virus than the healthy ones.",
"the exporting restrictions were too strict to let these animals pass the custom.",
"the farmers were afraid of being deprived of the exporting right.",
"the government wanted to regain the former status of exporting animals."
] | Though vaccinated animals were free from the foot-and-mouth in Britain and Netherlands in 2001, they were still slaughtered because _ | Britons' most searing memories of their encounter with foot-and-mouth disease in 2001 are of the piles of animals slaughtered to try to stop its spread. Such a draconian policy might have been accepted had the disease been controlled quickly. But its ineffectiveness-more than 6m cows, sheep and pigs were culled before the disease was eradicated-led to widespread revulsion and a government rethink.
Just as in 2001, if an animal is thought to be infected, its herd will be culled and a quarantine zone set up. But this time, unless the disease is stamped out quickly, animals nearby will also be vaccinated to create a "fire-break" across which it is unlikely to travel. Already 300,000 doses of vaccine have been ordered, so that if government vets decide that slaughter alone is unlikely to be effective, they can start vaccinating straight away.
Humans almost never catch foot-and-mouth and it rarely kills the cloven-hooved beasts it affects. But animals produce less milk and meat, so its economic effects are severe. It is also highly contagious: infected livestock produce the virus that causes it in large quantities, and transmit it through saliva, mucus, milk, faeces and even droplets in their breath.
Even so, only countries where foot-and-mouth is endemic, as in parts of Latin America, vaccinate all animals. One reason is cost: the disease is caused by a virus with seven main types and tens of sub-types, with a targeted vaccine needed for each strain and shots repeated, perhaps as often as twice a year. It is also because vaccinating damages exports. Places that are free from foot-and-mouth are unwilling to import vaccinated beasts, or fresh meat from them, because they may still carry the disease.
The fear of being shut out of foreign markets led to the British government's disastrous foot-dragging over vaccination in 2001. But that same year an outbreak in the Netherlands involving 26 farms was brought under control in just one month by vaccinating 200,000 animals. Though healthy, these beasts then had to be culled so that farmers could return to exporting without restrictions as soon as possible.
Not even eternal vigilance on imports can keep a country free of foot-and-mouth disease: the latest outbreak was apparently caused by a breach of bio-security at the Pirbright laboratory complex in Surrey, where government researchers keep the live virus for vaccine research and Merial, an American animal-health company, manufactures vaccine for export. Human action, accidental or deliberate, seems likely to have been involved.
Ironically, one reason for eschewing vaccination is that although it provides the best hope of dealing with outbreaks, maintaining the capacity to produce vaccine is itself a risky business. Many earlier episodes of foot-and-mouth in countries normally free from the disease have been caused by laboratory escapes; in 1970 a leak from Pirbright's isolation facilities was fortunately contained. | 3615.txt | 3 |
[
"animals being wrongly or incompletely injected with vaccination.",
"importing animals from the countries with the foot-and-mouth-disease.",
"leak of the virus during the research experimentation.",
"malicious actions by some people with particular purpose."
] | The outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease may be a result of the following situations except _ | Britons' most searing memories of their encounter with foot-and-mouth disease in 2001 are of the piles of animals slaughtered to try to stop its spread. Such a draconian policy might have been accepted had the disease been controlled quickly. But its ineffectiveness-more than 6m cows, sheep and pigs were culled before the disease was eradicated-led to widespread revulsion and a government rethink.
Just as in 2001, if an animal is thought to be infected, its herd will be culled and a quarantine zone set up. But this time, unless the disease is stamped out quickly, animals nearby will also be vaccinated to create a "fire-break" across which it is unlikely to travel. Already 300,000 doses of vaccine have been ordered, so that if government vets decide that slaughter alone is unlikely to be effective, they can start vaccinating straight away.
Humans almost never catch foot-and-mouth and it rarely kills the cloven-hooved beasts it affects. But animals produce less milk and meat, so its economic effects are severe. It is also highly contagious: infected livestock produce the virus that causes it in large quantities, and transmit it through saliva, mucus, milk, faeces and even droplets in their breath.
Even so, only countries where foot-and-mouth is endemic, as in parts of Latin America, vaccinate all animals. One reason is cost: the disease is caused by a virus with seven main types and tens of sub-types, with a targeted vaccine needed for each strain and shots repeated, perhaps as often as twice a year. It is also because vaccinating damages exports. Places that are free from foot-and-mouth are unwilling to import vaccinated beasts, or fresh meat from them, because they may still carry the disease.
The fear of being shut out of foreign markets led to the British government's disastrous foot-dragging over vaccination in 2001. But that same year an outbreak in the Netherlands involving 26 farms was brought under control in just one month by vaccinating 200,000 animals. Though healthy, these beasts then had to be culled so that farmers could return to exporting without restrictions as soon as possible.
Not even eternal vigilance on imports can keep a country free of foot-and-mouth disease: the latest outbreak was apparently caused by a breach of bio-security at the Pirbright laboratory complex in Surrey, where government researchers keep the live virus for vaccine research and Merial, an American animal-health company, manufactures vaccine for export. Human action, accidental or deliberate, seems likely to have been involved.
Ironically, one reason for eschewing vaccination is that although it provides the best hope of dealing with outbreaks, maintaining the capacity to produce vaccine is itself a risky business. Many earlier episodes of foot-and-mouth in countries normally free from the disease have been caused by laboratory escapes; in 1970 a leak from Pirbright's isolation facilities was fortunately contained. | 3615.txt | 0 |
[
"The world population is increasing faster and faster.",
"Half of the world's water resources have been seriously polluted.",
"Humanity has not placed sufficient value on water resources.",
"Only half of the world's water can be used."
] | What is the real cause of the potential water crisis? | Humanity uses a little less than half the water available worldwide. Yet occurrences of shortages and droughts are causing famine and distress in some areas, and industrial and agricultural by-products are polluting water supplies. Since the world' population is expected to double in the next 50 years, many experts think we are on the edge of a widespread water crisis.
But that doesn't have to be the outcome. Water shortages do not have to trouble the world-if we start valuing water more than we have in the past. Just as we began to appreciate petroleum more after the 1970s oil crises, today we must start looking at water from a fresh economic perspective. We can no longer afford to consider water a virtually free resource of which we can use as much as we like in any way we want.
Instead, for all uses except the domestic demand of the poor, governments should price water to reflect its actual value. This means charging a fee for the water itself as well as for the supply costs.
Governments should also protect this resource by providing water in more economically and environmentally sound ways. For example, often the cheapest way to provide irrigation water in the dry tropics is through small-scale projects, such as gathering rainfall in depressions and pumping it to nearby cropland.
No matter what steps governments take to provide water more efficiently, they must change their institutional and legal approaches to water sue. Rather than spread control among hundreds or even thousands of local, regional, and national agencies that watch various aspects of water use, countries should set up central authorities to coordinate water policy. | 961.txt | 2 |
[
"has been exaggerated by some experts in the field",
"is underestimated by government organizations at different levels",
"poses a challenge to the technology of building reservoirs",
"is already serious in certain parts of the world"
] | As indicated in the passage, the water problem _ . | Humanity uses a little less than half the water available worldwide. Yet occurrences of shortages and droughts are causing famine and distress in some areas, and industrial and agricultural by-products are polluting water supplies. Since the world' population is expected to double in the next 50 years, many experts think we are on the edge of a widespread water crisis.
But that doesn't have to be the outcome. Water shortages do not have to trouble the world-if we start valuing water more than we have in the past. Just as we began to appreciate petroleum more after the 1970s oil crises, today we must start looking at water from a fresh economic perspective. We can no longer afford to consider water a virtually free resource of which we can use as much as we like in any way we want.
Instead, for all uses except the domestic demand of the poor, governments should price water to reflect its actual value. This means charging a fee for the water itself as well as for the supply costs.
Governments should also protect this resource by providing water in more economically and environmentally sound ways. For example, often the cheapest way to provide irrigation water in the dry tropics is through small-scale projects, such as gathering rainfall in depressions and pumping it to nearby cropland.
No matter what steps governments take to provide water more efficiently, they must change their institutional and legal approaches to water sue. Rather than spread control among hundreds or even thousands of local, regional, and national agencies that watch various aspects of water use, countries should set up central authorities to coordinate water policy. | 961.txt | 3 |
[
"correspond to its real value",
"be reduced to the minimum",
"stimulate domestic demand",
"take into account the occurrences of droughts"
] | According to the author, the water price should _ . | Humanity uses a little less than half the water available worldwide. Yet occurrences of shortages and droughts are causing famine and distress in some areas, and industrial and agricultural by-products are polluting water supplies. Since the world' population is expected to double in the next 50 years, many experts think we are on the edge of a widespread water crisis.
But that doesn't have to be the outcome. Water shortages do not have to trouble the world-if we start valuing water more than we have in the past. Just as we began to appreciate petroleum more after the 1970s oil crises, today we must start looking at water from a fresh economic perspective. We can no longer afford to consider water a virtually free resource of which we can use as much as we like in any way we want.
Instead, for all uses except the domestic demand of the poor, governments should price water to reflect its actual value. This means charging a fee for the water itself as well as for the supply costs.
Governments should also protect this resource by providing water in more economically and environmentally sound ways. For example, often the cheapest way to provide irrigation water in the dry tropics is through small-scale projects, such as gathering rainfall in depressions and pumping it to nearby cropland.
No matter what steps governments take to provide water more efficiently, they must change their institutional and legal approaches to water sue. Rather than spread control among hundreds or even thousands of local, regional, and national agencies that watch various aspects of water use, countries should set up central authorities to coordinate water policy. | 961.txt | 0 |
[
"build big lakes to store water",
"construct big pumping stations",
"channel water from nearby rivers to cropland",
"build small and cheap irrigation systems"
] | The author says that in some hot and dry areas it is advisable to _ . | Humanity uses a little less than half the water available worldwide. Yet occurrences of shortages and droughts are causing famine and distress in some areas, and industrial and agricultural by-products are polluting water supplies. Since the world' population is expected to double in the next 50 years, many experts think we are on the edge of a widespread water crisis.
But that doesn't have to be the outcome. Water shortages do not have to trouble the world-if we start valuing water more than we have in the past. Just as we began to appreciate petroleum more after the 1970s oil crises, today we must start looking at water from a fresh economic perspective. We can no longer afford to consider water a virtually free resource of which we can use as much as we like in any way we want.
Instead, for all uses except the domestic demand of the poor, governments should price water to reflect its actual value. This means charging a fee for the water itself as well as for the supply costs.
Governments should also protect this resource by providing water in more economically and environmentally sound ways. For example, often the cheapest way to provide irrigation water in the dry tropics is through small-scale projects, such as gathering rainfall in depressions and pumping it to nearby cropland.
No matter what steps governments take to provide water more efficiently, they must change their institutional and legal approaches to water sue. Rather than spread control among hundreds or even thousands of local, regional, and national agencies that watch various aspects of water use, countries should set up central authorities to coordinate water policy. | 961.txt | 3 |
[
"centralize the management of water resources",
"increase the sense of responsibility of agencies at all levels",
"guarantee full protection of the environment",
"encourage local and regional control of water resources"
] | In order to raise the efficiency of the water supply, measures should be taken to _ . | Humanity uses a little less than half the water available worldwide. Yet occurrences of shortages and droughts are causing famine and distress in some areas, and industrial and agricultural by-products are polluting water supplies. Since the world' population is expected to double in the next 50 years, many experts think we are on the edge of a widespread water crisis.
But that doesn't have to be the outcome. Water shortages do not have to trouble the world-if we start valuing water more than we have in the past. Just as we began to appreciate petroleum more after the 1970s oil crises, today we must start looking at water from a fresh economic perspective. We can no longer afford to consider water a virtually free resource of which we can use as much as we like in any way we want.
Instead, for all uses except the domestic demand of the poor, governments should price water to reflect its actual value. This means charging a fee for the water itself as well as for the supply costs.
Governments should also protect this resource by providing water in more economically and environmentally sound ways. For example, often the cheapest way to provide irrigation water in the dry tropics is through small-scale projects, such as gathering rainfall in depressions and pumping it to nearby cropland.
No matter what steps governments take to provide water more efficiently, they must change their institutional and legal approaches to water sue. Rather than spread control among hundreds or even thousands of local, regional, and national agencies that watch various aspects of water use, countries should set up central authorities to coordinate water policy. | 961.txt | 0 |
[
"incurred criticism",
"raised suspicion",
"received acclaim",
"aroused curiosity"
] | We learn from Para.1 that Gilbert's appointment has . | The decision of the New York Philharmonic to hire Alan Gilbert as its next music director has been the talk of the classical-music world ever since the sudden announcement of his appointment in 2009.For the most part, the response has been favorable, to say the least."Hooray! At last!" wrote Anthony Tommasini, a sober-sided classical-music critic.
One of the reasons why the appointment came as such a surprise, however, is that Gilbert is comparatively little known. Even Tommasini, who had advocated Gilbert's appointment in the Times, calls him "an unpretentious musician with no air of the formidable conductor about him." As a description of the next music director of an orchestra that has hitherto been led by musicians like Gustav Mahler and Pierre Boulez, that seems likely to have struck at least some Times readers as faint praise.
For my part, I have no idea whether Gilbert is a great conductor or even a good one. To be sure, he performs an impressive variety of interesting compositions, but it is not necessary for me to visit Avery Fisher Hall, or anywhere else, to hear interesting orchestral music. All I have to do is to go to my CD shelf, or boot up my computer and download still more recorded music from iTunes.
Devoted concertgoers who reply that recordings are no substitute for live performance are missing the point. For the time, attention, and money of the art-loving public, classical instrumentalists must compete not only with opera houses, dance troupes, theater companies, and museums, but also with the recorded performances of the great classical musicians of the 20th century. There recordings are cheap, available everywhere, and very often much higher in artistic quality than today's live performances; moreover, they can be "consumed" at a time and place of the listener's choosing. The widespread availability of such recordings has thus brought about a crisis in the institution of the traditional classical concert.
One possible response is for classical performers to program attractive new music that is not yet available on record.Gilbert's own interest in new music has been widely noted: Alex Ross, a classical-music critic, has described him as a man who is capable of turning the Philharmonic into "a markedly different, more vibrant organization." But what will be the nature of that difference? Merely expanding the orchestra's repertoire will not be enough. If Gilbert and the Philharmonic are to succeed, they must first change the relationship between America's oldest orchestra and the new audience it hopes to attract. | 2076.txt | 2 |
[
"influential",
"modest",
"respectable",
"talented"
] | Tommasini regards Gilbert as an artist who is . | The decision of the New York Philharmonic to hire Alan Gilbert as its next music director has been the talk of the classical-music world ever since the sudden announcement of his appointment in 2009.For the most part, the response has been favorable, to say the least."Hooray! At last!" wrote Anthony Tommasini, a sober-sided classical-music critic.
One of the reasons why the appointment came as such a surprise, however, is that Gilbert is comparatively little known. Even Tommasini, who had advocated Gilbert's appointment in the Times, calls him "an unpretentious musician with no air of the formidable conductor about him." As a description of the next music director of an orchestra that has hitherto been led by musicians like Gustav Mahler and Pierre Boulez, that seems likely to have struck at least some Times readers as faint praise.
For my part, I have no idea whether Gilbert is a great conductor or even a good one. To be sure, he performs an impressive variety of interesting compositions, but it is not necessary for me to visit Avery Fisher Hall, or anywhere else, to hear interesting orchestral music. All I have to do is to go to my CD shelf, or boot up my computer and download still more recorded music from iTunes.
Devoted concertgoers who reply that recordings are no substitute for live performance are missing the point. For the time, attention, and money of the art-loving public, classical instrumentalists must compete not only with opera houses, dance troupes, theater companies, and museums, but also with the recorded performances of the great classical musicians of the 20th century. There recordings are cheap, available everywhere, and very often much higher in artistic quality than today's live performances; moreover, they can be "consumed" at a time and place of the listener's choosing. The widespread availability of such recordings has thus brought about a crisis in the institution of the traditional classical concert.
One possible response is for classical performers to program attractive new music that is not yet available on record.Gilbert's own interest in new music has been widely noted: Alex Ross, a classical-music critic, has described him as a man who is capable of turning the Philharmonic into "a markedly different, more vibrant organization." But what will be the nature of that difference? Merely expanding the orchestra's repertoire will not be enough. If Gilbert and the Philharmonic are to succeed, they must first change the relationship between America's oldest orchestra and the new audience it hopes to attract. | 2076.txt | 1 |
[
"ignore the expenses of live performances",
"reject most kinds of recorded performances",
"exaggerate the variety of live performances",
"overestimate the value of live performances"
] | The author believes that the devoted concertgoers . | The decision of the New York Philharmonic to hire Alan Gilbert as its next music director has been the talk of the classical-music world ever since the sudden announcement of his appointment in 2009.For the most part, the response has been favorable, to say the least."Hooray! At last!" wrote Anthony Tommasini, a sober-sided classical-music critic.
One of the reasons why the appointment came as such a surprise, however, is that Gilbert is comparatively little known. Even Tommasini, who had advocated Gilbert's appointment in the Times, calls him "an unpretentious musician with no air of the formidable conductor about him." As a description of the next music director of an orchestra that has hitherto been led by musicians like Gustav Mahler and Pierre Boulez, that seems likely to have struck at least some Times readers as faint praise.
For my part, I have no idea whether Gilbert is a great conductor or even a good one. To be sure, he performs an impressive variety of interesting compositions, but it is not necessary for me to visit Avery Fisher Hall, or anywhere else, to hear interesting orchestral music. All I have to do is to go to my CD shelf, or boot up my computer and download still more recorded music from iTunes.
Devoted concertgoers who reply that recordings are no substitute for live performance are missing the point. For the time, attention, and money of the art-loving public, classical instrumentalists must compete not only with opera houses, dance troupes, theater companies, and museums, but also with the recorded performances of the great classical musicians of the 20th century. There recordings are cheap, available everywhere, and very often much higher in artistic quality than today's live performances; moreover, they can be "consumed" at a time and place of the listener's choosing. The widespread availability of such recordings has thus brought about a crisis in the institution of the traditional classical concert.
One possible response is for classical performers to program attractive new music that is not yet available on record.Gilbert's own interest in new music has been widely noted: Alex Ross, a classical-music critic, has described him as a man who is capable of turning the Philharmonic into "a markedly different, more vibrant organization." But what will be the nature of that difference? Merely expanding the orchestra's repertoire will not be enough. If Gilbert and the Philharmonic are to succeed, they must first change the relationship between America's oldest orchestra and the new audience it hopes to attract. | 2076.txt | 3 |
[
"They are often inferior to live concerts in quality.",
"They are easily accessible to the general public.",
"They help improve the quality of music.",
"They have only covered masterpieces."
] | According to the text, which of the following is true of recordings? | The decision of the New York Philharmonic to hire Alan Gilbert as its next music director has been the talk of the classical-music world ever since the sudden announcement of his appointment in 2009.For the most part, the response has been favorable, to say the least."Hooray! At last!" wrote Anthony Tommasini, a sober-sided classical-music critic.
One of the reasons why the appointment came as such a surprise, however, is that Gilbert is comparatively little known. Even Tommasini, who had advocated Gilbert's appointment in the Times, calls him "an unpretentious musician with no air of the formidable conductor about him." As a description of the next music director of an orchestra that has hitherto been led by musicians like Gustav Mahler and Pierre Boulez, that seems likely to have struck at least some Times readers as faint praise.
For my part, I have no idea whether Gilbert is a great conductor or even a good one. To be sure, he performs an impressive variety of interesting compositions, but it is not necessary for me to visit Avery Fisher Hall, or anywhere else, to hear interesting orchestral music. All I have to do is to go to my CD shelf, or boot up my computer and download still more recorded music from iTunes.
Devoted concertgoers who reply that recordings are no substitute for live performance are missing the point. For the time, attention, and money of the art-loving public, classical instrumentalists must compete not only with opera houses, dance troupes, theater companies, and museums, but also with the recorded performances of the great classical musicians of the 20th century. There recordings are cheap, available everywhere, and very often much higher in artistic quality than today's live performances; moreover, they can be "consumed" at a time and place of the listener's choosing. The widespread availability of such recordings has thus brought about a crisis in the institution of the traditional classical concert.
One possible response is for classical performers to program attractive new music that is not yet available on record.Gilbert's own interest in new music has been widely noted: Alex Ross, a classical-music critic, has described him as a man who is capable of turning the Philharmonic into "a markedly different, more vibrant organization." But what will be the nature of that difference? Merely expanding the orchestra's repertoire will not be enough. If Gilbert and the Philharmonic are to succeed, they must first change the relationship between America's oldest orchestra and the new audience it hopes to attract. | 2076.txt | 1 |
[
"doubtful",
"enthusiastic",
"confident",
"puzzled"
] | Regarding Gilbert's role in revitalizing the Philharmonic, the author feels . | The decision of the New York Philharmonic to hire Alan Gilbert as its next music director has been the talk of the classical-music world ever since the sudden announcement of his appointment in 2009.For the most part, the response has been favorable, to say the least."Hooray! At last!" wrote Anthony Tommasini, a sober-sided classical-music critic.
One of the reasons why the appointment came as such a surprise, however, is that Gilbert is comparatively little known. Even Tommasini, who had advocated Gilbert's appointment in the Times, calls him "an unpretentious musician with no air of the formidable conductor about him." As a description of the next music director of an orchestra that has hitherto been led by musicians like Gustav Mahler and Pierre Boulez, that seems likely to have struck at least some Times readers as faint praise.
For my part, I have no idea whether Gilbert is a great conductor or even a good one. To be sure, he performs an impressive variety of interesting compositions, but it is not necessary for me to visit Avery Fisher Hall, or anywhere else, to hear interesting orchestral music. All I have to do is to go to my CD shelf, or boot up my computer and download still more recorded music from iTunes.
Devoted concertgoers who reply that recordings are no substitute for live performance are missing the point. For the time, attention, and money of the art-loving public, classical instrumentalists must compete not only with opera houses, dance troupes, theater companies, and museums, but also with the recorded performances of the great classical musicians of the 20th century. There recordings are cheap, available everywhere, and very often much higher in artistic quality than today's live performances; moreover, they can be "consumed" at a time and place of the listener's choosing. The widespread availability of such recordings has thus brought about a crisis in the institution of the traditional classical concert.
One possible response is for classical performers to program attractive new music that is not yet available on record.Gilbert's own interest in new music has been widely noted: Alex Ross, a classical-music critic, has described him as a man who is capable of turning the Philharmonic into "a markedly different, more vibrant organization." But what will be the nature of that difference? Merely expanding the orchestra's repertoire will not be enough. If Gilbert and the Philharmonic are to succeed, they must first change the relationship between America's oldest orchestra and the new audience it hopes to attract. | 2076.txt | 0 |
[
"Beverage companies should be responsible for collecting and reusing discarded plastic soda bottles.",
"Throwaways should be collected by the state for recycling.",
"A fee should be charged on used containers for recycling.",
"Consumers had to pay for beverage containers and could get their money back on returning them."
] | What regulation was issued by New York State concerning beverage containers? | In 1993. New York State ordered stores to charge a deposit on beverage containers. Within a year. Consumers had returned millions of aluminum cans and glass and plastic bottles. Plenty of companies were eager to accept the aluminum and glass as raw materials for new products. But because few could figure out what to do with the plastic, much of it wound up buried in landfills. The problem was not limited to New York. Unfortunately, there were too few uses for second-hand plastic.
Today, one out of five plastic soda bottles is recycled in the United States. The reason for the change is that now there are dozens of companies across the country buying discarded plastic soda bottles and turning them into fence posts, paint brushes, etc.
As the New York experience shows, recycling involves more than simply separating valuable materials from the rest of the rubbish. A discard remains a discard until somebody figures out how to give it a second life-and until economic arrangements exist to give that second life value. Without adequate markets to absorb materials collected for recycling,
throwaways actually depress prices for used materials.
Shrinking landfill space, and rising costs for burying and burning rubbish are forcing local governments to look more closely at recycling. In many areas, the East Coast especially, recycling is already the least expensive waste-management option. For every ton of waste recycled, a city avoids paying for its disposal, which, in parts of New York, amounts to saving of more than $100 per ton. Recycling also stimulates the local economy by creating jobs and trims the pollution control and energy costs of industries that make recycled products by giving them a more refined raw material. | 1595.txt | 2 |
[
"end up somewhere underground",
"be turned into raw materials",
"have a second-life value",
"be separated from other rubbish"
] | The returned plastic bottles in New York used to _ . | In 1993. New York State ordered stores to charge a deposit on beverage containers. Within a year. Consumers had returned millions of aluminum cans and glass and plastic bottles. Plenty of companies were eager to accept the aluminum and glass as raw materials for new products. But because few could figure out what to do with the plastic, much of it wound up buried in landfills. The problem was not limited to New York. Unfortunately, there were too few uses for second-hand plastic.
Today, one out of five plastic soda bottles is recycled in the United States. The reason for the change is that now there are dozens of companies across the country buying discarded plastic soda bottles and turning them into fence posts, paint brushes, etc.
As the New York experience shows, recycling involves more than simply separating valuable materials from the rest of the rubbish. A discard remains a discard until somebody figures out how to give it a second life-and until economic arrangements exist to give that second life value. Without adequate markets to absorb materials collected for recycling,
throwaways actually depress prices for used materials.
Shrinking landfill space, and rising costs for burying and burning rubbish are forcing local governments to look more closely at recycling. In many areas, the East Coast especially, recycling is already the least expensive waste-management option. For every ton of waste recycled, a city avoids paying for its disposal, which, in parts of New York, amounts to saving of more than $100 per ton. Recycling also stimulates the local economy by creating jobs and trims the pollution control and energy costs of industries that make recycled products by giving them a more refined raw material. | 1595.txt | 3 |
[
"to sell them at a profitable price",
"how to turn them into useful things",
"how to reduce their recycling costs",
"to lower the prices for used materials"
] | The key problem in dealing with returned plastic beverage containers is _ . | In 1993. New York State ordered stores to charge a deposit on beverage containers. Within a year. Consumers had returned millions of aluminum cans and glass and plastic bottles. Plenty of companies were eager to accept the aluminum and glass as raw materials for new products. But because few could figure out what to do with the plastic, much of it wound up buried in landfills. The problem was not limited to New York. Unfortunately, there were too few uses for second-hand plastic.
Today, one out of five plastic soda bottles is recycled in the United States. The reason for the change is that now there are dozens of companies across the country buying discarded plastic soda bottles and turning them into fence posts, paint brushes, etc.
As the New York experience shows, recycling involves more than simply separating valuable materials from the rest of the rubbish. A discard remains a discard until somebody figures out how to give it a second life-and until economic arrangements exist to give that second life value. Without adequate markets to absorb materials collected for recycling,
throwaways actually depress prices for used materials.
Shrinking landfill space, and rising costs for burying and burning rubbish are forcing local governments to look more closely at recycling. In many areas, the East Coast especially, recycling is already the least expensive waste-management option. For every ton of waste recycled, a city avoids paying for its disposal, which, in parts of New York, amounts to saving of more than $100 per ton. Recycling also stimulates the local economy by creating jobs and trims the pollution control and energy costs of industries that make recycled products by giving them a more refined raw material. | 1595.txt | 2 |
[
"local governments find it easy to manage",
"recycling ahs great appeal for the jobless",
"recycling causes little pollution",
"other methods are more expensive"
] | Recycling ahs become the first choice for the disposal of rubbish because _ . | In 1993. New York State ordered stores to charge a deposit on beverage containers. Within a year. Consumers had returned millions of aluminum cans and glass and plastic bottles. Plenty of companies were eager to accept the aluminum and glass as raw materials for new products. But because few could figure out what to do with the plastic, much of it wound up buried in landfills. The problem was not limited to New York. Unfortunately, there were too few uses for second-hand plastic.
Today, one out of five plastic soda bottles is recycled in the United States. The reason for the change is that now there are dozens of companies across the country buying discarded plastic soda bottles and turning them into fence posts, paint brushes, etc.
As the New York experience shows, recycling involves more than simply separating valuable materials from the rest of the rubbish. A discard remains a discard until somebody figures out how to give it a second life-and until economic arrangements exist to give that second life value. Without adequate markets to absorb materials collected for recycling,
throwaways actually depress prices for used materials.
Shrinking landfill space, and rising costs for burying and burning rubbish are forcing local governments to look more closely at recycling. In many areas, the East Coast especially, recycling is already the least expensive waste-management option. For every ton of waste recycled, a city avoids paying for its disposal, which, in parts of New York, amounts to saving of more than $100 per ton. Recycling also stimulates the local economy by creating jobs and trims the pollution control and energy costs of industries that make recycled products by giving them a more refined raw material. | 1595.txt | 1 |
[
"rubbish is a potential remedy for the shortage of raw materials",
"local governments in the U.S. can expect big profits from recycling",
"recycling is to be recommended both economically and environmentally",
"landfills will still be widely used for waste disposal"
] | It can be concluded from the passage that _ . | In 1993. New York State ordered stores to charge a deposit on beverage containers. Within a year. Consumers had returned millions of aluminum cans and glass and plastic bottles. Plenty of companies were eager to accept the aluminum and glass as raw materials for new products. But because few could figure out what to do with the plastic, much of it wound up buried in landfills. The problem was not limited to New York. Unfortunately, there were too few uses for second-hand plastic.
Today, one out of five plastic soda bottles is recycled in the United States. The reason for the change is that now there are dozens of companies across the country buying discarded plastic soda bottles and turning them into fence posts, paint brushes, etc.
As the New York experience shows, recycling involves more than simply separating valuable materials from the rest of the rubbish. A discard remains a discard until somebody figures out how to give it a second life-and until economic arrangements exist to give that second life value. Without adequate markets to absorb materials collected for recycling,
throwaways actually depress prices for used materials.
Shrinking landfill space, and rising costs for burying and burning rubbish are forcing local governments to look more closely at recycling. In many areas, the East Coast especially, recycling is already the least expensive waste-management option. For every ton of waste recycled, a city avoids paying for its disposal, which, in parts of New York, amounts to saving of more than $100 per ton. Recycling also stimulates the local economy by creating jobs and trims the pollution control and energy costs of industries that make recycled products by giving them a more refined raw material. | 1595.txt | 0 |
[
"keeping people in a healthy physical condition",
"monitoring patients' body functions",
"removing people's bad living habits",
"ensuring people's psychological well-being"
] | Today medical care is placing more stress on _ . | As we have seen, the focus of medical care in our society has been shifting from curing disease to preventing disease-especially in terms of changing our many unhealthy behaviors, such as poor eating habits, smoking, and failure to exercise. The line of thought involved in this shift can be pursued further. Imagine a person who is about the right weight, but does not eat very nutritious foods, who feels OK but exercises only occasionally, who goes to work every day, but is not an outstanding worker, who drinks a few beers at home most nights but does not drive while drunk, and who has no chest pains or abnormal blood counts, but sleeps a lot and often feels tired. This person is not ill. He may not even be at risk for any particular disease. But we can imagine that this person could be a lot healthier.
The field of medicine has not traditionally distinguished between someone who is merely "not ill" and someone who is in excellent health and pays attention to the body's special needs. Both types have simply been called "well." In recent years, however, some health specialists have begun to apply the terms "well" and "wellness" only to those who are actively striving to maintain and improve their health. People who are well are concerned with nutrition and exercise, and they make a point of monitoring their body's condition. Most important, perhaps, people who are well take active responsibility for all matters related to their health. Even people who have a physical disease or handicap may be "well," in this new sense, if they make an effort to maintain the best possible health they can in the face of their physical limitations. "Wellness" may perhaps best be viewed not as a state that people can achieve, but as an ideal that people can strive for. People who are well are likely to be better able to resist disease and to fight disease when it strikes. And by focusing attention on healthy ways of living, the concept of wellness can have a beneficial impact on the ways in which people face the challenges of daily life. | 1463.txt | 2 |
[
"good health is more than not being ill",
"drinking, even if not to excess, could be harmful",
"regular health checks are essential to keeping fit",
"prevention is more difficult than cure"
] | In the first paragraph, people are reminded that _ . | As we have seen, the focus of medical care in our society has been shifting from curing disease to preventing disease-especially in terms of changing our many unhealthy behaviors, such as poor eating habits, smoking, and failure to exercise. The line of thought involved in this shift can be pursued further. Imagine a person who is about the right weight, but does not eat very nutritious foods, who feels OK but exercises only occasionally, who goes to work every day, but is not an outstanding worker, who drinks a few beers at home most nights but does not drive while drunk, and who has no chest pains or abnormal blood counts, but sleeps a lot and often feels tired. This person is not ill. He may not even be at risk for any particular disease. But we can imagine that this person could be a lot healthier.
The field of medicine has not traditionally distinguished between someone who is merely "not ill" and someone who is in excellent health and pays attention to the body's special needs. Both types have simply been called "well." In recent years, however, some health specialists have begun to apply the terms "well" and "wellness" only to those who are actively striving to maintain and improve their health. People who are well are concerned with nutrition and exercise, and they make a point of monitoring their body's condition. Most important, perhaps, people who are well take active responsibility for all matters related to their health. Even people who have a physical disease or handicap may be "well," in this new sense, if they make an effort to maintain the best possible health they can in the face of their physical limitations. "Wellness" may perhaps best be viewed not as a state that people can achieve, but as an ideal that people can strive for. People who are well are likely to be better able to resist disease and to fight disease when it strikes. And by focusing attention on healthy ways of living, the concept of wellness can have a beneficial impact on the ways in which people face the challenges of daily life. | 1463.txt | 0 |
[
"does not have any unhealthy living habits",
"does not have any physical handicaps",
"is able to handle his daily routines",
"is free from any kind of disease"
] | Traditionally, a person is considered "well" if he _ . | As we have seen, the focus of medical care in our society has been shifting from curing disease to preventing disease-especially in terms of changing our many unhealthy behaviors, such as poor eating habits, smoking, and failure to exercise. The line of thought involved in this shift can be pursued further. Imagine a person who is about the right weight, but does not eat very nutritious foods, who feels OK but exercises only occasionally, who goes to work every day, but is not an outstanding worker, who drinks a few beers at home most nights but does not drive while drunk, and who has no chest pains or abnormal blood counts, but sleeps a lot and often feels tired. This person is not ill. He may not even be at risk for any particular disease. But we can imagine that this person could be a lot healthier.
The field of medicine has not traditionally distinguished between someone who is merely "not ill" and someone who is in excellent health and pays attention to the body's special needs. Both types have simply been called "well." In recent years, however, some health specialists have begun to apply the terms "well" and "wellness" only to those who are actively striving to maintain and improve their health. People who are well are concerned with nutrition and exercise, and they make a point of monitoring their body's condition. Most important, perhaps, people who are well take active responsibility for all matters related to their health. Even people who have a physical disease or handicap may be "well," in this new sense, if they make an effort to maintain the best possible health they can in the face of their physical limitations. "Wellness" may perhaps best be viewed not as a state that people can achieve, but as an ideal that people can strive for. People who are well are likely to be better able to resist disease and to fight disease when it strikes. And by focusing attention on healthy ways of living, the concept of wellness can have a beneficial impact on the ways in which people face the challenges of daily life. | 1463.txt | 3 |
[
"to best satisfy their body's special needs",
"to strive to maintain the best possible health",
"to meet the strictest standards of bodily health",
"to keep a proper balance between work and leisure"
] | According to the author, the true meaning of "wellness" is for people _ . | As we have seen, the focus of medical care in our society has been shifting from curing disease to preventing disease-especially in terms of changing our many unhealthy behaviors, such as poor eating habits, smoking, and failure to exercise. The line of thought involved in this shift can be pursued further. Imagine a person who is about the right weight, but does not eat very nutritious foods, who feels OK but exercises only occasionally, who goes to work every day, but is not an outstanding worker, who drinks a few beers at home most nights but does not drive while drunk, and who has no chest pains or abnormal blood counts, but sleeps a lot and often feels tired. This person is not ill. He may not even be at risk for any particular disease. But we can imagine that this person could be a lot healthier.
The field of medicine has not traditionally distinguished between someone who is merely "not ill" and someone who is in excellent health and pays attention to the body's special needs. Both types have simply been called "well." In recent years, however, some health specialists have begun to apply the terms "well" and "wellness" only to those who are actively striving to maintain and improve their health. People who are well are concerned with nutrition and exercise, and they make a point of monitoring their body's condition. Most important, perhaps, people who are well take active responsibility for all matters related to their health. Even people who have a physical disease or handicap may be "well," in this new sense, if they make an effort to maintain the best possible health they can in the face of their physical limitations. "Wellness" may perhaps best be viewed not as a state that people can achieve, but as an ideal that people can strive for. People who are well are likely to be better able to resist disease and to fight disease when it strikes. And by focusing attention on healthy ways of living, the concept of wellness can have a beneficial impact on the ways in which people face the challenges of daily life. | 1463.txt | 1 |
[
"People who have strong muscles as well as slim figures.",
"People who are not presently experiencing any symptoms of disease.",
"People who try to be as possible, regardless of their limitations.",
"People who can recover from illness even without seeking medical care."
] | According to what the author advocates, which of the following groups of people would be considered healthy? | As we have seen, the focus of medical care in our society has been shifting from curing disease to preventing disease-especially in terms of changing our many unhealthy behaviors, such as poor eating habits, smoking, and failure to exercise. The line of thought involved in this shift can be pursued further. Imagine a person who is about the right weight, but does not eat very nutritious foods, who feels OK but exercises only occasionally, who goes to work every day, but is not an outstanding worker, who drinks a few beers at home most nights but does not drive while drunk, and who has no chest pains or abnormal blood counts, but sleeps a lot and often feels tired. This person is not ill. He may not even be at risk for any particular disease. But we can imagine that this person could be a lot healthier.
The field of medicine has not traditionally distinguished between someone who is merely "not ill" and someone who is in excellent health and pays attention to the body's special needs. Both types have simply been called "well." In recent years, however, some health specialists have begun to apply the terms "well" and "wellness" only to those who are actively striving to maintain and improve their health. People who are well are concerned with nutrition and exercise, and they make a point of monitoring their body's condition. Most important, perhaps, people who are well take active responsibility for all matters related to their health. Even people who have a physical disease or handicap may be "well," in this new sense, if they make an effort to maintain the best possible health they can in the face of their physical limitations. "Wellness" may perhaps best be viewed not as a state that people can achieve, but as an ideal that people can strive for. People who are well are likely to be better able to resist disease and to fight disease when it strikes. And by focusing attention on healthy ways of living, the concept of wellness can have a beneficial impact on the ways in which people face the challenges of daily life. | 1463.txt | 2 |
[
"eventually.",
"easily.",
"constantly.",
"loosely."
] | The word "readily" in the passage is closest in meaning to | Until the early- to mid-twentieth century, scientists believed that stars generate energy by shrinking. As stars contracted, it was thought, they would get hotter and hotter, giving off light in the process. This could not be the primary way that stars shine, however. If it were, they would scarcely last a million years, rather than the billions of years in age that we know they are. We now know that stars are fueled by nuclear fusion. Each time fusion takes place, energy is released as a by-product. This energy, expelled into space, is what we see as starlight. The fusion process begins when two hydrogen nuclei smash together to form a particle called the deuteron (a combination of a positive proton and a neutral neutron). Deuterons readily combine with additional protons to form helium. Helium, in turn, can fuse together to form heavier elements, such as carbon. In a typical star, merger after merger takes place until significant quantities of heavy elements are built up.
We must distinguish, at this point, between two different stellar types: Population I and Population ll, the latter being much older than the former. These groups can also be distinguished by their locations. Our galaxy, the Milky Way, is shaped like a flat disk surrounding a central bulge. Whereas Population I stars are found mainly in the galactic disk, Population II stars mostly reside in the central bulge of the galaxy and in the halo surrounding this bulge.
Population II stars date to the early stages of the universe. Formed when the cosmos was filled with hydrogen and helium gases, they initially contained virtually no heavy elements. They shine until their fusible material is exhausted. When Population II stars die, their material is spread out into space. Some of this dust is eventually incorporated into newly formed Population I stars. Though Population I stars consist mostly of hydrogen and helium gas, they also contain heavy elements (heavier than helium), which comprise about 1 or 2 percent of their mass. These heavier materials are fused from the lighter elements that the stars have collected. Thus, Population I stars contain material that once belonged to stars from previous generations. The Sun is a good example of a Population I star.
What will happen when the Sun dies? In several billion years, our mother star will burn much brighter. It will expend more and more of its nuclear fuel, until little is left of its original hydrogen. Then, at some point in the far future, all nuclear reactions in the Sun's center will cease.
Once the Sun passes into its "postnuclear" phase, it will separate effectively into two different regions: an inner zone and an outer zone. While no more hydrogen fuel will remain in the inner zone, there will be a small amount left in the outer zone. Rapidly, changes will begin to take place that will serve to tear the Sun apart. The inner zone, its nuclear fires no longer burning, will begin to collapse under the influence of its own weight and will contract into a tiny hot core, dense and dim. An opposite fate will await the outer region, a loosely held-together ball of gas. A shock wave caused by the inner zone's contraction will send ripples through the dying star, pushing the stellar exterior's material farther and farther outward. The outer envelope will then grow rapidly, increasing, in a short interval, hundreds of times in size. As it expands, it will cool down by thousands of degrees. Eventually, the Sun will become a red giant star, cool and bright. It will be so large that it will occupy the whole space that used to be the Earth's orbit and so brilliant that it would be able to be seen with the naked eye thousands of light-years away. It will exist that way for millions of years, gradually releasing the material of its outer envelope into space. Finally, nothing will be left of the gaseous exterior of the Sun; all that will remain will be the hot, white core. The Sun will have become a white dwarf star. The core will shrink, giving off the last of its energy, and the Sun will finally die. | 1500.txt | 1 |
[
"protons combining with helium atoms.",
"atoms of heavier elements smashing together.",
"various particles fusing with one another.",
"hydrogen atoms breaking apart."
] | According to paragraph 1, the energy that comes from stars and that is seen as light is the result of | Until the early- to mid-twentieth century, scientists believed that stars generate energy by shrinking. As stars contracted, it was thought, they would get hotter and hotter, giving off light in the process. This could not be the primary way that stars shine, however. If it were, they would scarcely last a million years, rather than the billions of years in age that we know they are. We now know that stars are fueled by nuclear fusion. Each time fusion takes place, energy is released as a by-product. This energy, expelled into space, is what we see as starlight. The fusion process begins when two hydrogen nuclei smash together to form a particle called the deuteron (a combination of a positive proton and a neutral neutron). Deuterons readily combine with additional protons to form helium. Helium, in turn, can fuse together to form heavier elements, such as carbon. In a typical star, merger after merger takes place until significant quantities of heavy elements are built up.
We must distinguish, at this point, between two different stellar types: Population I and Population ll, the latter being much older than the former. These groups can also be distinguished by their locations. Our galaxy, the Milky Way, is shaped like a flat disk surrounding a central bulge. Whereas Population I stars are found mainly in the galactic disk, Population II stars mostly reside in the central bulge of the galaxy and in the halo surrounding this bulge.
Population II stars date to the early stages of the universe. Formed when the cosmos was filled with hydrogen and helium gases, they initially contained virtually no heavy elements. They shine until their fusible material is exhausted. When Population II stars die, their material is spread out into space. Some of this dust is eventually incorporated into newly formed Population I stars. Though Population I stars consist mostly of hydrogen and helium gas, they also contain heavy elements (heavier than helium), which comprise about 1 or 2 percent of their mass. These heavier materials are fused from the lighter elements that the stars have collected. Thus, Population I stars contain material that once belonged to stars from previous generations. The Sun is a good example of a Population I star.
What will happen when the Sun dies? In several billion years, our mother star will burn much brighter. It will expend more and more of its nuclear fuel, until little is left of its original hydrogen. Then, at some point in the far future, all nuclear reactions in the Sun's center will cease.
Once the Sun passes into its "postnuclear" phase, it will separate effectively into two different regions: an inner zone and an outer zone. While no more hydrogen fuel will remain in the inner zone, there will be a small amount left in the outer zone. Rapidly, changes will begin to take place that will serve to tear the Sun apart. The inner zone, its nuclear fires no longer burning, will begin to collapse under the influence of its own weight and will contract into a tiny hot core, dense and dim. An opposite fate will await the outer region, a loosely held-together ball of gas. A shock wave caused by the inner zone's contraction will send ripples through the dying star, pushing the stellar exterior's material farther and farther outward. The outer envelope will then grow rapidly, increasing, in a short interval, hundreds of times in size. As it expands, it will cool down by thousands of degrees. Eventually, the Sun will become a red giant star, cool and bright. It will be so large that it will occupy the whole space that used to be the Earth's orbit and so brilliant that it would be able to be seen with the naked eye thousands of light-years away. It will exist that way for millions of years, gradually releasing the material of its outer envelope into space. Finally, nothing will be left of the gaseous exterior of the Sun; all that will remain will be the hot, white core. The Sun will have become a white dwarf star. The core will shrink, giving off the last of its energy, and the Sun will finally die. | 1500.txt | 2 |
[
"To establish that starlight is produced by an ongoing process and not by a one-time event.",
"To suggest that stars contract much more slowly than was previously believed.",
"To argue that shrinking cannot be the main way stars generate energy.",
"To argue that fusion in a star slows down as quantities of heavy elements build up."
] | In paragraph 1, why does the author point out that stars are billions of years old? | Until the early- to mid-twentieth century, scientists believed that stars generate energy by shrinking. As stars contracted, it was thought, they would get hotter and hotter, giving off light in the process. This could not be the primary way that stars shine, however. If it were, they would scarcely last a million years, rather than the billions of years in age that we know they are. We now know that stars are fueled by nuclear fusion. Each time fusion takes place, energy is released as a by-product. This energy, expelled into space, is what we see as starlight. The fusion process begins when two hydrogen nuclei smash together to form a particle called the deuteron (a combination of a positive proton and a neutral neutron). Deuterons readily combine with additional protons to form helium. Helium, in turn, can fuse together to form heavier elements, such as carbon. In a typical star, merger after merger takes place until significant quantities of heavy elements are built up.
We must distinguish, at this point, between two different stellar types: Population I and Population ll, the latter being much older than the former. These groups can also be distinguished by their locations. Our galaxy, the Milky Way, is shaped like a flat disk surrounding a central bulge. Whereas Population I stars are found mainly in the galactic disk, Population II stars mostly reside in the central bulge of the galaxy and in the halo surrounding this bulge.
Population II stars date to the early stages of the universe. Formed when the cosmos was filled with hydrogen and helium gases, they initially contained virtually no heavy elements. They shine until their fusible material is exhausted. When Population II stars die, their material is spread out into space. Some of this dust is eventually incorporated into newly formed Population I stars. Though Population I stars consist mostly of hydrogen and helium gas, they also contain heavy elements (heavier than helium), which comprise about 1 or 2 percent of their mass. These heavier materials are fused from the lighter elements that the stars have collected. Thus, Population I stars contain material that once belonged to stars from previous generations. The Sun is a good example of a Population I star.
What will happen when the Sun dies? In several billion years, our mother star will burn much brighter. It will expend more and more of its nuclear fuel, until little is left of its original hydrogen. Then, at some point in the far future, all nuclear reactions in the Sun's center will cease.
Once the Sun passes into its "postnuclear" phase, it will separate effectively into two different regions: an inner zone and an outer zone. While no more hydrogen fuel will remain in the inner zone, there will be a small amount left in the outer zone. Rapidly, changes will begin to take place that will serve to tear the Sun apart. The inner zone, its nuclear fires no longer burning, will begin to collapse under the influence of its own weight and will contract into a tiny hot core, dense and dim. An opposite fate will await the outer region, a loosely held-together ball of gas. A shock wave caused by the inner zone's contraction will send ripples through the dying star, pushing the stellar exterior's material farther and farther outward. The outer envelope will then grow rapidly, increasing, in a short interval, hundreds of times in size. As it expands, it will cool down by thousands of degrees. Eventually, the Sun will become a red giant star, cool and bright. It will be so large that it will occupy the whole space that used to be the Earth's orbit and so brilliant that it would be able to be seen with the naked eye thousands of light-years away. It will exist that way for millions of years, gradually releasing the material of its outer envelope into space. Finally, nothing will be left of the gaseous exterior of the Sun; all that will remain will be the hot, white core. The Sun will have become a white dwarf star. The core will shrink, giving off the last of its energy, and the Sun will finally die. | 1500.txt | 2 |
[
"how old they are and where in their galaxies they are found.",
"how old they are and whether they have a halo around them.",
"where in their galaxies they are found and whether they bulge out in the center.",
"whether they are at the center of a flat disk and whether they have a halo."
] | According to paragraph 2, Population I stars and Population II stars differ from each other in terms of both | Until the early- to mid-twentieth century, scientists believed that stars generate energy by shrinking. As stars contracted, it was thought, they would get hotter and hotter, giving off light in the process. This could not be the primary way that stars shine, however. If it were, they would scarcely last a million years, rather than the billions of years in age that we know they are. We now know that stars are fueled by nuclear fusion. Each time fusion takes place, energy is released as a by-product. This energy, expelled into space, is what we see as starlight. The fusion process begins when two hydrogen nuclei smash together to form a particle called the deuteron (a combination of a positive proton and a neutral neutron). Deuterons readily combine with additional protons to form helium. Helium, in turn, can fuse together to form heavier elements, such as carbon. In a typical star, merger after merger takes place until significant quantities of heavy elements are built up.
We must distinguish, at this point, between two different stellar types: Population I and Population ll, the latter being much older than the former. These groups can also be distinguished by their locations. Our galaxy, the Milky Way, is shaped like a flat disk surrounding a central bulge. Whereas Population I stars are found mainly in the galactic disk, Population II stars mostly reside in the central bulge of the galaxy and in the halo surrounding this bulge.
Population II stars date to the early stages of the universe. Formed when the cosmos was filled with hydrogen and helium gases, they initially contained virtually no heavy elements. They shine until their fusible material is exhausted. When Population II stars die, their material is spread out into space. Some of this dust is eventually incorporated into newly formed Population I stars. Though Population I stars consist mostly of hydrogen and helium gas, they also contain heavy elements (heavier than helium), which comprise about 1 or 2 percent of their mass. These heavier materials are fused from the lighter elements that the stars have collected. Thus, Population I stars contain material that once belonged to stars from previous generations. The Sun is a good example of a Population I star.
What will happen when the Sun dies? In several billion years, our mother star will burn much brighter. It will expend more and more of its nuclear fuel, until little is left of its original hydrogen. Then, at some point in the far future, all nuclear reactions in the Sun's center will cease.
Once the Sun passes into its "postnuclear" phase, it will separate effectively into two different regions: an inner zone and an outer zone. While no more hydrogen fuel will remain in the inner zone, there will be a small amount left in the outer zone. Rapidly, changes will begin to take place that will serve to tear the Sun apart. The inner zone, its nuclear fires no longer burning, will begin to collapse under the influence of its own weight and will contract into a tiny hot core, dense and dim. An opposite fate will await the outer region, a loosely held-together ball of gas. A shock wave caused by the inner zone's contraction will send ripples through the dying star, pushing the stellar exterior's material farther and farther outward. The outer envelope will then grow rapidly, increasing, in a short interval, hundreds of times in size. As it expands, it will cool down by thousands of degrees. Eventually, the Sun will become a red giant star, cool and bright. It will be so large that it will occupy the whole space that used to be the Earth's orbit and so brilliant that it would be able to be seen with the naked eye thousands of light-years away. It will exist that way for millions of years, gradually releasing the material of its outer envelope into space. Finally, nothing will be left of the gaseous exterior of the Sun; all that will remain will be the hot, white core. The Sun will have become a white dwarf star. The core will shrink, giving off the last of its energy, and the Sun will finally die. | 1500.txt | 0 |
[
"They contain material that was once contained in Population II stars.",
"In terms of their mass, they consist primarily of hydrogen and helium.",
"They contain elements that were formed through the fusion of lighter ones.",
"They generally do not last as long as Population II stars."
] | According to paragraphs 2 and 3, all of the following are true of Population I stars EXCEPT | Until the early- to mid-twentieth century, scientists believed that stars generate energy by shrinking. As stars contracted, it was thought, they would get hotter and hotter, giving off light in the process. This could not be the primary way that stars shine, however. If it were, they would scarcely last a million years, rather than the billions of years in age that we know they are. We now know that stars are fueled by nuclear fusion. Each time fusion takes place, energy is released as a by-product. This energy, expelled into space, is what we see as starlight. The fusion process begins when two hydrogen nuclei smash together to form a particle called the deuteron (a combination of a positive proton and a neutral neutron). Deuterons readily combine with additional protons to form helium. Helium, in turn, can fuse together to form heavier elements, such as carbon. In a typical star, merger after merger takes place until significant quantities of heavy elements are built up.
We must distinguish, at this point, between two different stellar types: Population I and Population ll, the latter being much older than the former. These groups can also be distinguished by their locations. Our galaxy, the Milky Way, is shaped like a flat disk surrounding a central bulge. Whereas Population I stars are found mainly in the galactic disk, Population II stars mostly reside in the central bulge of the galaxy and in the halo surrounding this bulge.
Population II stars date to the early stages of the universe. Formed when the cosmos was filled with hydrogen and helium gases, they initially contained virtually no heavy elements. They shine until their fusible material is exhausted. When Population II stars die, their material is spread out into space. Some of this dust is eventually incorporated into newly formed Population I stars. Though Population I stars consist mostly of hydrogen and helium gas, they also contain heavy elements (heavier than helium), which comprise about 1 or 2 percent of their mass. These heavier materials are fused from the lighter elements that the stars have collected. Thus, Population I stars contain material that once belonged to stars from previous generations. The Sun is a good example of a Population I star.
What will happen when the Sun dies? In several billion years, our mother star will burn much brighter. It will expend more and more of its nuclear fuel, until little is left of its original hydrogen. Then, at some point in the far future, all nuclear reactions in the Sun's center will cease.
Once the Sun passes into its "postnuclear" phase, it will separate effectively into two different regions: an inner zone and an outer zone. While no more hydrogen fuel will remain in the inner zone, there will be a small amount left in the outer zone. Rapidly, changes will begin to take place that will serve to tear the Sun apart. The inner zone, its nuclear fires no longer burning, will begin to collapse under the influence of its own weight and will contract into a tiny hot core, dense and dim. An opposite fate will await the outer region, a loosely held-together ball of gas. A shock wave caused by the inner zone's contraction will send ripples through the dying star, pushing the stellar exterior's material farther and farther outward. The outer envelope will then grow rapidly, increasing, in a short interval, hundreds of times in size. As it expands, it will cool down by thousands of degrees. Eventually, the Sun will become a red giant star, cool and bright. It will be so large that it will occupy the whole space that used to be the Earth's orbit and so brilliant that it would be able to be seen with the naked eye thousands of light-years away. It will exist that way for millions of years, gradually releasing the material of its outer envelope into space. Finally, nothing will be left of the gaseous exterior of the Sun; all that will remain will be the hot, white core. The Sun will have become a white dwarf star. The core will shrink, giving off the last of its energy, and the Sun will finally die. | 1500.txt | 3 |
[
"absolutely.",
"usually.",
"almost.",
"as a result."
] | The word "virtually" in the passage is closest in meaning to | Until the early- to mid-twentieth century, scientists believed that stars generate energy by shrinking. As stars contracted, it was thought, they would get hotter and hotter, giving off light in the process. This could not be the primary way that stars shine, however. If it were, they would scarcely last a million years, rather than the billions of years in age that we know they are. We now know that stars are fueled by nuclear fusion. Each time fusion takes place, energy is released as a by-product. This energy, expelled into space, is what we see as starlight. The fusion process begins when two hydrogen nuclei smash together to form a particle called the deuteron (a combination of a positive proton and a neutral neutron). Deuterons readily combine with additional protons to form helium. Helium, in turn, can fuse together to form heavier elements, such as carbon. In a typical star, merger after merger takes place until significant quantities of heavy elements are built up.
We must distinguish, at this point, between two different stellar types: Population I and Population ll, the latter being much older than the former. These groups can also be distinguished by their locations. Our galaxy, the Milky Way, is shaped like a flat disk surrounding a central bulge. Whereas Population I stars are found mainly in the galactic disk, Population II stars mostly reside in the central bulge of the galaxy and in the halo surrounding this bulge.
Population II stars date to the early stages of the universe. Formed when the cosmos was filled with hydrogen and helium gases, they initially contained virtually no heavy elements. They shine until their fusible material is exhausted. When Population II stars die, their material is spread out into space. Some of this dust is eventually incorporated into newly formed Population I stars. Though Population I stars consist mostly of hydrogen and helium gas, they also contain heavy elements (heavier than helium), which comprise about 1 or 2 percent of their mass. These heavier materials are fused from the lighter elements that the stars have collected. Thus, Population I stars contain material that once belonged to stars from previous generations. The Sun is a good example of a Population I star.
What will happen when the Sun dies? In several billion years, our mother star will burn much brighter. It will expend more and more of its nuclear fuel, until little is left of its original hydrogen. Then, at some point in the far future, all nuclear reactions in the Sun's center will cease.
Once the Sun passes into its "postnuclear" phase, it will separate effectively into two different regions: an inner zone and an outer zone. While no more hydrogen fuel will remain in the inner zone, there will be a small amount left in the outer zone. Rapidly, changes will begin to take place that will serve to tear the Sun apart. The inner zone, its nuclear fires no longer burning, will begin to collapse under the influence of its own weight and will contract into a tiny hot core, dense and dim. An opposite fate will await the outer region, a loosely held-together ball of gas. A shock wave caused by the inner zone's contraction will send ripples through the dying star, pushing the stellar exterior's material farther and farther outward. The outer envelope will then grow rapidly, increasing, in a short interval, hundreds of times in size. As it expands, it will cool down by thousands of degrees. Eventually, the Sun will become a red giant star, cool and bright. It will be so large that it will occupy the whole space that used to be the Earth's orbit and so brilliant that it would be able to be seen with the naked eye thousands of light-years away. It will exist that way for millions of years, gradually releasing the material of its outer envelope into space. Finally, nothing will be left of the gaseous exterior of the Sun; all that will remain will be the hot, white core. The Sun will have become a white dwarf star. The core will shrink, giving off the last of its energy, and the Sun will finally die. | 1500.txt | 2 |
[
"used up.",
"released.",
"invisible.",
"broken up."
] | The word "exhausted" in the passage is closest in meaning to | Until the early- to mid-twentieth century, scientists believed that stars generate energy by shrinking. As stars contracted, it was thought, they would get hotter and hotter, giving off light in the process. This could not be the primary way that stars shine, however. If it were, they would scarcely last a million years, rather than the billions of years in age that we know they are. We now know that stars are fueled by nuclear fusion. Each time fusion takes place, energy is released as a by-product. This energy, expelled into space, is what we see as starlight. The fusion process begins when two hydrogen nuclei smash together to form a particle called the deuteron (a combination of a positive proton and a neutral neutron). Deuterons readily combine with additional protons to form helium. Helium, in turn, can fuse together to form heavier elements, such as carbon. In a typical star, merger after merger takes place until significant quantities of heavy elements are built up.
We must distinguish, at this point, between two different stellar types: Population I and Population ll, the latter being much older than the former. These groups can also be distinguished by their locations. Our galaxy, the Milky Way, is shaped like a flat disk surrounding a central bulge. Whereas Population I stars are found mainly in the galactic disk, Population II stars mostly reside in the central bulge of the galaxy and in the halo surrounding this bulge.
Population II stars date to the early stages of the universe. Formed when the cosmos was filled with hydrogen and helium gases, they initially contained virtually no heavy elements. They shine until their fusible material is exhausted. When Population II stars die, their material is spread out into space. Some of this dust is eventually incorporated into newly formed Population I stars. Though Population I stars consist mostly of hydrogen and helium gas, they also contain heavy elements (heavier than helium), which comprise about 1 or 2 percent of their mass. These heavier materials are fused from the lighter elements that the stars have collected. Thus, Population I stars contain material that once belonged to stars from previous generations. The Sun is a good example of a Population I star.
What will happen when the Sun dies? In several billion years, our mother star will burn much brighter. It will expend more and more of its nuclear fuel, until little is left of its original hydrogen. Then, at some point in the far future, all nuclear reactions in the Sun's center will cease.
Once the Sun passes into its "postnuclear" phase, it will separate effectively into two different regions: an inner zone and an outer zone. While no more hydrogen fuel will remain in the inner zone, there will be a small amount left in the outer zone. Rapidly, changes will begin to take place that will serve to tear the Sun apart. The inner zone, its nuclear fires no longer burning, will begin to collapse under the influence of its own weight and will contract into a tiny hot core, dense and dim. An opposite fate will await the outer region, a loosely held-together ball of gas. A shock wave caused by the inner zone's contraction will send ripples through the dying star, pushing the stellar exterior's material farther and farther outward. The outer envelope will then grow rapidly, increasing, in a short interval, hundreds of times in size. As it expands, it will cool down by thousands of degrees. Eventually, the Sun will become a red giant star, cool and bright. It will be so large that it will occupy the whole space that used to be the Earth's orbit and so brilliant that it would be able to be seen with the naked eye thousands of light-years away. It will exist that way for millions of years, gradually releasing the material of its outer envelope into space. Finally, nothing will be left of the gaseous exterior of the Sun; all that will remain will be the hot, white core. The Sun will have become a white dwarf star. The core will shrink, giving off the last of its energy, and the Sun will finally die. | 1500.txt | 0 |
[
"absorb.",
"lose.",
"increase to.",
"make up."
] | The word "comprise" in the passage is closest in meaning to | Until the early- to mid-twentieth century, scientists believed that stars generate energy by shrinking. As stars contracted, it was thought, they would get hotter and hotter, giving off light in the process. This could not be the primary way that stars shine, however. If it were, they would scarcely last a million years, rather than the billions of years in age that we know they are. We now know that stars are fueled by nuclear fusion. Each time fusion takes place, energy is released as a by-product. This energy, expelled into space, is what we see as starlight. The fusion process begins when two hydrogen nuclei smash together to form a particle called the deuteron (a combination of a positive proton and a neutral neutron). Deuterons readily combine with additional protons to form helium. Helium, in turn, can fuse together to form heavier elements, such as carbon. In a typical star, merger after merger takes place until significant quantities of heavy elements are built up.
We must distinguish, at this point, between two different stellar types: Population I and Population ll, the latter being much older than the former. These groups can also be distinguished by their locations. Our galaxy, the Milky Way, is shaped like a flat disk surrounding a central bulge. Whereas Population I stars are found mainly in the galactic disk, Population II stars mostly reside in the central bulge of the galaxy and in the halo surrounding this bulge.
Population II stars date to the early stages of the universe. Formed when the cosmos was filled with hydrogen and helium gases, they initially contained virtually no heavy elements. They shine until their fusible material is exhausted. When Population II stars die, their material is spread out into space. Some of this dust is eventually incorporated into newly formed Population I stars. Though Population I stars consist mostly of hydrogen and helium gas, they also contain heavy elements (heavier than helium), which comprise about 1 or 2 percent of their mass. These heavier materials are fused from the lighter elements that the stars have collected. Thus, Population I stars contain material that once belonged to stars from previous generations. The Sun is a good example of a Population I star.
What will happen when the Sun dies? In several billion years, our mother star will burn much brighter. It will expend more and more of its nuclear fuel, until little is left of its original hydrogen. Then, at some point in the far future, all nuclear reactions in the Sun's center will cease.
Once the Sun passes into its "postnuclear" phase, it will separate effectively into two different regions: an inner zone and an outer zone. While no more hydrogen fuel will remain in the inner zone, there will be a small amount left in the outer zone. Rapidly, changes will begin to take place that will serve to tear the Sun apart. The inner zone, its nuclear fires no longer burning, will begin to collapse under the influence of its own weight and will contract into a tiny hot core, dense and dim. An opposite fate will await the outer region, a loosely held-together ball of gas. A shock wave caused by the inner zone's contraction will send ripples through the dying star, pushing the stellar exterior's material farther and farther outward. The outer envelope will then grow rapidly, increasing, in a short interval, hundreds of times in size. As it expands, it will cool down by thousands of degrees. Eventually, the Sun will become a red giant star, cool and bright. It will be so large that it will occupy the whole space that used to be the Earth's orbit and so brilliant that it would be able to be seen with the naked eye thousands of light-years away. It will exist that way for millions of years, gradually releasing the material of its outer envelope into space. Finally, nothing will be left of the gaseous exterior of the Sun; all that will remain will be the hot, white core. The Sun will have become a white dwarf star. The core will shrink, giving off the last of its energy, and the Sun will finally die. | 1500.txt | 3 |
[
"To identify the most serious question concerning star death that scientists must address.",
"To introduce the topic that the rest of the passage will discuss.",
"To suggest that scientists remain uncertain about some aspects of star death.",
"To suggest that the Sun may not be a good example of a Population I star."
] | Why does the author ask the question "What will happen when the Sun dies?" ? | Until the early- to mid-twentieth century, scientists believed that stars generate energy by shrinking. As stars contracted, it was thought, they would get hotter and hotter, giving off light in the process. This could not be the primary way that stars shine, however. If it were, they would scarcely last a million years, rather than the billions of years in age that we know they are. We now know that stars are fueled by nuclear fusion. Each time fusion takes place, energy is released as a by-product. This energy, expelled into space, is what we see as starlight. The fusion process begins when two hydrogen nuclei smash together to form a particle called the deuteron (a combination of a positive proton and a neutral neutron). Deuterons readily combine with additional protons to form helium. Helium, in turn, can fuse together to form heavier elements, such as carbon. In a typical star, merger after merger takes place until significant quantities of heavy elements are built up.
We must distinguish, at this point, between two different stellar types: Population I and Population ll, the latter being much older than the former. These groups can also be distinguished by their locations. Our galaxy, the Milky Way, is shaped like a flat disk surrounding a central bulge. Whereas Population I stars are found mainly in the galactic disk, Population II stars mostly reside in the central bulge of the galaxy and in the halo surrounding this bulge.
Population II stars date to the early stages of the universe. Formed when the cosmos was filled with hydrogen and helium gases, they initially contained virtually no heavy elements. They shine until their fusible material is exhausted. When Population II stars die, their material is spread out into space. Some of this dust is eventually incorporated into newly formed Population I stars. Though Population I stars consist mostly of hydrogen and helium gas, they also contain heavy elements (heavier than helium), which comprise about 1 or 2 percent of their mass. These heavier materials are fused from the lighter elements that the stars have collected. Thus, Population I stars contain material that once belonged to stars from previous generations. The Sun is a good example of a Population I star.
What will happen when the Sun dies? In several billion years, our mother star will burn much brighter. It will expend more and more of its nuclear fuel, until little is left of its original hydrogen. Then, at some point in the far future, all nuclear reactions in the Sun's center will cease.
Once the Sun passes into its "postnuclear" phase, it will separate effectively into two different regions: an inner zone and an outer zone. While no more hydrogen fuel will remain in the inner zone, there will be a small amount left in the outer zone. Rapidly, changes will begin to take place that will serve to tear the Sun apart. The inner zone, its nuclear fires no longer burning, will begin to collapse under the influence of its own weight and will contract into a tiny hot core, dense and dim. An opposite fate will await the outer region, a loosely held-together ball of gas. A shock wave caused by the inner zone's contraction will send ripples through the dying star, pushing the stellar exterior's material farther and farther outward. The outer envelope will then grow rapidly, increasing, in a short interval, hundreds of times in size. As it expands, it will cool down by thousands of degrees. Eventually, the Sun will become a red giant star, cool and bright. It will be so large that it will occupy the whole space that used to be the Earth's orbit and so brilliant that it would be able to be seen with the naked eye thousands of light-years away. It will exist that way for millions of years, gradually releasing the material of its outer envelope into space. Finally, nothing will be left of the gaseous exterior of the Sun; all that will remain will be the hot, white core. The Sun will have become a white dwarf star. The core will shrink, giving off the last of its energy, and the Sun will finally die. | 1500.txt | 1 |
[
"undergo a much less dramatic change in size.",
"maintain more nearly constant temperatures.",
"cease to be a site of energy-generating activity.",
"still contain some amount of hydrogen."
] | According to paragraph 5, once the Sun is in its "postnuclear" phase, the outer zone will differ from the inner zone in that the outer zone will | Until the early- to mid-twentieth century, scientists believed that stars generate energy by shrinking. As stars contracted, it was thought, they would get hotter and hotter, giving off light in the process. This could not be the primary way that stars shine, however. If it were, they would scarcely last a million years, rather than the billions of years in age that we know they are. We now know that stars are fueled by nuclear fusion. Each time fusion takes place, energy is released as a by-product. This energy, expelled into space, is what we see as starlight. The fusion process begins when two hydrogen nuclei smash together to form a particle called the deuteron (a combination of a positive proton and a neutral neutron). Deuterons readily combine with additional protons to form helium. Helium, in turn, can fuse together to form heavier elements, such as carbon. In a typical star, merger after merger takes place until significant quantities of heavy elements are built up.
We must distinguish, at this point, between two different stellar types: Population I and Population ll, the latter being much older than the former. These groups can also be distinguished by their locations. Our galaxy, the Milky Way, is shaped like a flat disk surrounding a central bulge. Whereas Population I stars are found mainly in the galactic disk, Population II stars mostly reside in the central bulge of the galaxy and in the halo surrounding this bulge.
Population II stars date to the early stages of the universe. Formed when the cosmos was filled with hydrogen and helium gases, they initially contained virtually no heavy elements. They shine until their fusible material is exhausted. When Population II stars die, their material is spread out into space. Some of this dust is eventually incorporated into newly formed Population I stars. Though Population I stars consist mostly of hydrogen and helium gas, they also contain heavy elements (heavier than helium), which comprise about 1 or 2 percent of their mass. These heavier materials are fused from the lighter elements that the stars have collected. Thus, Population I stars contain material that once belonged to stars from previous generations. The Sun is a good example of a Population I star.
What will happen when the Sun dies? In several billion years, our mother star will burn much brighter. It will expend more and more of its nuclear fuel, until little is left of its original hydrogen. Then, at some point in the far future, all nuclear reactions in the Sun's center will cease.
Once the Sun passes into its "postnuclear" phase, it will separate effectively into two different regions: an inner zone and an outer zone. While no more hydrogen fuel will remain in the inner zone, there will be a small amount left in the outer zone. Rapidly, changes will begin to take place that will serve to tear the Sun apart. The inner zone, its nuclear fires no longer burning, will begin to collapse under the influence of its own weight and will contract into a tiny hot core, dense and dim. An opposite fate will await the outer region, a loosely held-together ball of gas. A shock wave caused by the inner zone's contraction will send ripples through the dying star, pushing the stellar exterior's material farther and farther outward. The outer envelope will then grow rapidly, increasing, in a short interval, hundreds of times in size. As it expands, it will cool down by thousands of degrees. Eventually, the Sun will become a red giant star, cool and bright. It will be so large that it will occupy the whole space that used to be the Earth's orbit and so brilliant that it would be able to be seen with the naked eye thousands of light-years away. It will exist that way for millions of years, gradually releasing the material of its outer envelope into space. Finally, nothing will be left of the gaseous exterior of the Sun; all that will remain will be the hot, white core. The Sun will have become a white dwarf star. The core will shrink, giving off the last of its energy, and the Sun will finally die. | 1500.txt | 3 |
[
"It will contract, sending an energy wave through the rest of the star.",
"It will shine with a bright red glow before it finally shrinks and dies.",
"It will expand to hundreds of times its previous size.",
"It will shrink due to the weight of the outer envelope."
] | According to paragraph 5, which of the following will be true about the inner core of the dying Sun? | Until the early- to mid-twentieth century, scientists believed that stars generate energy by shrinking. As stars contracted, it was thought, they would get hotter and hotter, giving off light in the process. This could not be the primary way that stars shine, however. If it were, they would scarcely last a million years, rather than the billions of years in age that we know they are. We now know that stars are fueled by nuclear fusion. Each time fusion takes place, energy is released as a by-product. This energy, expelled into space, is what we see as starlight. The fusion process begins when two hydrogen nuclei smash together to form a particle called the deuteron (a combination of a positive proton and a neutral neutron). Deuterons readily combine with additional protons to form helium. Helium, in turn, can fuse together to form heavier elements, such as carbon. In a typical star, merger after merger takes place until significant quantities of heavy elements are built up.
We must distinguish, at this point, between two different stellar types: Population I and Population ll, the latter being much older than the former. These groups can also be distinguished by their locations. Our galaxy, the Milky Way, is shaped like a flat disk surrounding a central bulge. Whereas Population I stars are found mainly in the galactic disk, Population II stars mostly reside in the central bulge of the galaxy and in the halo surrounding this bulge.
Population II stars date to the early stages of the universe. Formed when the cosmos was filled with hydrogen and helium gases, they initially contained virtually no heavy elements. They shine until their fusible material is exhausted. When Population II stars die, their material is spread out into space. Some of this dust is eventually incorporated into newly formed Population I stars. Though Population I stars consist mostly of hydrogen and helium gas, they also contain heavy elements (heavier than helium), which comprise about 1 or 2 percent of their mass. These heavier materials are fused from the lighter elements that the stars have collected. Thus, Population I stars contain material that once belonged to stars from previous generations. The Sun is a good example of a Population I star.
What will happen when the Sun dies? In several billion years, our mother star will burn much brighter. It will expend more and more of its nuclear fuel, until little is left of its original hydrogen. Then, at some point in the far future, all nuclear reactions in the Sun's center will cease.
Once the Sun passes into its "postnuclear" phase, it will separate effectively into two different regions: an inner zone and an outer zone. While no more hydrogen fuel will remain in the inner zone, there will be a small amount left in the outer zone. Rapidly, changes will begin to take place that will serve to tear the Sun apart. The inner zone, its nuclear fires no longer burning, will begin to collapse under the influence of its own weight and will contract into a tiny hot core, dense and dim. An opposite fate will await the outer region, a loosely held-together ball of gas. A shock wave caused by the inner zone's contraction will send ripples through the dying star, pushing the stellar exterior's material farther and farther outward. The outer envelope will then grow rapidly, increasing, in a short interval, hundreds of times in size. As it expands, it will cool down by thousands of degrees. Eventually, the Sun will become a red giant star, cool and bright. It will be so large that it will occupy the whole space that used to be the Earth's orbit and so brilliant that it would be able to be seen with the naked eye thousands of light-years away. It will exist that way for millions of years, gradually releasing the material of its outer envelope into space. Finally, nothing will be left of the gaseous exterior of the Sun; all that will remain will be the hot, white core. The Sun will have become a white dwarf star. The core will shrink, giving off the last of its energy, and the Sun will finally die. | 1500.txt | 0 |
[
"The Sun's outer envelope will expand rapidly as a result of decreasing temperatures in the outer zone.",
"The Sun will reach the red giant stage millions of years before it becomes a white dwarf star",
"After the Sun has released the material of its outer envelope into space, nuclear fusion will continue at the remaining core for a limited period.",
"While the outer region of the Sun expands, it releases all its material into space."
] | Paragraph 5 supports which of the following about the death of the Sun? | Until the early- to mid-twentieth century, scientists believed that stars generate energy by shrinking. As stars contracted, it was thought, they would get hotter and hotter, giving off light in the process. This could not be the primary way that stars shine, however. If it were, they would scarcely last a million years, rather than the billions of years in age that we know they are. We now know that stars are fueled by nuclear fusion. Each time fusion takes place, energy is released as a by-product. This energy, expelled into space, is what we see as starlight. The fusion process begins when two hydrogen nuclei smash together to form a particle called the deuteron (a combination of a positive proton and a neutral neutron). Deuterons readily combine with additional protons to form helium. Helium, in turn, can fuse together to form heavier elements, such as carbon. In a typical star, merger after merger takes place until significant quantities of heavy elements are built up.
We must distinguish, at this point, between two different stellar types: Population I and Population ll, the latter being much older than the former. These groups can also be distinguished by their locations. Our galaxy, the Milky Way, is shaped like a flat disk surrounding a central bulge. Whereas Population I stars are found mainly in the galactic disk, Population II stars mostly reside in the central bulge of the galaxy and in the halo surrounding this bulge.
Population II stars date to the early stages of the universe. Formed when the cosmos was filled with hydrogen and helium gases, they initially contained virtually no heavy elements. They shine until their fusible material is exhausted. When Population II stars die, their material is spread out into space. Some of this dust is eventually incorporated into newly formed Population I stars. Though Population I stars consist mostly of hydrogen and helium gas, they also contain heavy elements (heavier than helium), which comprise about 1 or 2 percent of their mass. These heavier materials are fused from the lighter elements that the stars have collected. Thus, Population I stars contain material that once belonged to stars from previous generations. The Sun is a good example of a Population I star.
What will happen when the Sun dies? In several billion years, our mother star will burn much brighter. It will expend more and more of its nuclear fuel, until little is left of its original hydrogen. Then, at some point in the far future, all nuclear reactions in the Sun's center will cease.
Once the Sun passes into its "postnuclear" phase, it will separate effectively into two different regions: an inner zone and an outer zone. While no more hydrogen fuel will remain in the inner zone, there will be a small amount left in the outer zone. Rapidly, changes will begin to take place that will serve to tear the Sun apart. The inner zone, its nuclear fires no longer burning, will begin to collapse under the influence of its own weight and will contract into a tiny hot core, dense and dim. An opposite fate will await the outer region, a loosely held-together ball of gas. A shock wave caused by the inner zone's contraction will send ripples through the dying star, pushing the stellar exterior's material farther and farther outward. The outer envelope will then grow rapidly, increasing, in a short interval, hundreds of times in size. As it expands, it will cool down by thousands of degrees. Eventually, the Sun will become a red giant star, cool and bright. It will be so large that it will occupy the whole space that used to be the Earth's orbit and so brilliant that it would be able to be seen with the naked eye thousands of light-years away. It will exist that way for millions of years, gradually releasing the material of its outer envelope into space. Finally, nothing will be left of the gaseous exterior of the Sun; all that will remain will be the hot, white core. The Sun will have become a white dwarf star. The core will shrink, giving off the last of its energy, and the Sun will finally die. | 1500.txt | 1 |
[
"might be shorter",
"might be longer",
"shorter than his father, but longer than his mother",
"might be longer than his father, but shorter than his mother"
] | Prof. Andrew Prentice said that the life of an extremely fat child _ | Children are getting so fat they may be the first generation to die before their parents, an expert claimed yesterday. Today's youngsters are already falling prey to potential killers such as diabetes because of their weight. Fatty fast- food diets combined with sedentary lifestyles dominated by televisions and computers could mean kids will die tragically young, says Professor Andrew Prentice, from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.
At the same time, the shape of the human body is going through a huge evolutionary shift because adults are getting so fat. Here in Britain, latest research shows that the average waist size for a man is 36-38in, and may be 42-44, by 2032. This compares with only 32.6in. in 1972.Women‘s waists have grown from an average of 22in. in 1920 to 24in. in the Fifties and 30in. now. One of the major reasons why children now are at greater risk is that we are getting fatter younger.
In the UK alone, more than one million under- 16s are classed as overweight or obese- double the number in the mid Eighties. One in ten four-year- olds are also medically classified as obese.
The obesity pandemic-an extensive epidemic- which started in the US, has now spread to Europe, Australasia, Central America and the Middle East. Many nations now record more than 20 per cent of their population as clinically obese and well over half the population as overweight.
Prof. Prentice said the change in our shape has been caused by an oversupply of easily available high-energy foods combined with a dramatic drop in the energy we use as a result of technology developments.
He is not alone in his concern. Only last week one medical journal revealed how obesity was fuelling a rise in cancer cases. Obesity also increases the risk factor for strokes and heart disease as well as diabetes. An averagely obese person's lifespan is shortened by around nine years while a severely obese person by many more.
Prof. Prentice said: " So will parents outlive their children, as claimed recently by an American obesity specialist? The answer is yes and no. Yes, when the offspring become grossly obese. This is now becoming an alarmingly common occurrence in the US. Such children and adolescents have a greatly reduced quality of life in terms of both their physical and psychosocial health.‖ So say" No" to that doughnut and burger. | 3968.txt | 0 |
[
"victim",
"vitamin",
"food",
"fool"
] | The word " prey" (Line 3, Para.1) means _ | Children are getting so fat they may be the first generation to die before their parents, an expert claimed yesterday. Today's youngsters are already falling prey to potential killers such as diabetes because of their weight. Fatty fast- food diets combined with sedentary lifestyles dominated by televisions and computers could mean kids will die tragically young, says Professor Andrew Prentice, from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.
At the same time, the shape of the human body is going through a huge evolutionary shift because adults are getting so fat. Here in Britain, latest research shows that the average waist size for a man is 36-38in, and may be 42-44, by 2032. This compares with only 32.6in. in 1972.Women‘s waists have grown from an average of 22in. in 1920 to 24in. in the Fifties and 30in. now. One of the major reasons why children now are at greater risk is that we are getting fatter younger.
In the UK alone, more than one million under- 16s are classed as overweight or obese- double the number in the mid Eighties. One in ten four-year- olds are also medically classified as obese.
The obesity pandemic-an extensive epidemic- which started in the US, has now spread to Europe, Australasia, Central America and the Middle East. Many nations now record more than 20 per cent of their population as clinically obese and well over half the population as overweight.
Prof. Prentice said the change in our shape has been caused by an oversupply of easily available high-energy foods combined with a dramatic drop in the energy we use as a result of technology developments.
He is not alone in his concern. Only last week one medical journal revealed how obesity was fuelling a rise in cancer cases. Obesity also increases the risk factor for strokes and heart disease as well as diabetes. An averagely obese person's lifespan is shortened by around nine years while a severely obese person by many more.
Prof. Prentice said: " So will parents outlive their children, as claimed recently by an American obesity specialist? The answer is yes and no. Yes, when the offspring become grossly obese. This is now becoming an alarmingly common occurrence in the US. Such children and adolescents have a greatly reduced quality of life in terms of both their physical and psychosocial health.‖ So say" No" to that doughnut and burger. | 3968.txt | 0 |
[
"An extremely weighty child.",
"An extremely fat child.",
"An extremely fatty child.",
"An over weight child."
] | Which of the following fails to refer to an obese child? | Children are getting so fat they may be the first generation to die before their parents, an expert claimed yesterday. Today's youngsters are already falling prey to potential killers such as diabetes because of their weight. Fatty fast- food diets combined with sedentary lifestyles dominated by televisions and computers could mean kids will die tragically young, says Professor Andrew Prentice, from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.
At the same time, the shape of the human body is going through a huge evolutionary shift because adults are getting so fat. Here in Britain, latest research shows that the average waist size for a man is 36-38in, and may be 42-44, by 2032. This compares with only 32.6in. in 1972.Women‘s waists have grown from an average of 22in. in 1920 to 24in. in the Fifties and 30in. now. One of the major reasons why children now are at greater risk is that we are getting fatter younger.
In the UK alone, more than one million under- 16s are classed as overweight or obese- double the number in the mid Eighties. One in ten four-year- olds are also medically classified as obese.
The obesity pandemic-an extensive epidemic- which started in the US, has now spread to Europe, Australasia, Central America and the Middle East. Many nations now record more than 20 per cent of their population as clinically obese and well over half the population as overweight.
Prof. Prentice said the change in our shape has been caused by an oversupply of easily available high-energy foods combined with a dramatic drop in the energy we use as a result of technology developments.
He is not alone in his concern. Only last week one medical journal revealed how obesity was fuelling a rise in cancer cases. Obesity also increases the risk factor for strokes and heart disease as well as diabetes. An averagely obese person's lifespan is shortened by around nine years while a severely obese person by many more.
Prof. Prentice said: " So will parents outlive their children, as claimed recently by an American obesity specialist? The answer is yes and no. Yes, when the offspring become grossly obese. This is now becoming an alarmingly common occurrence in the US. Such children and adolescents have a greatly reduced quality of life in terms of both their physical and psychosocial health.‖ So say" No" to that doughnut and burger. | 3968.txt | 0 |
[
"Asia",
"North America",
"Europe",
"Central America"
] | According to the passage, obesity is an extensive epidemic starting in _ | Children are getting so fat they may be the first generation to die before their parents, an expert claimed yesterday. Today's youngsters are already falling prey to potential killers such as diabetes because of their weight. Fatty fast- food diets combined with sedentary lifestyles dominated by televisions and computers could mean kids will die tragically young, says Professor Andrew Prentice, from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.
At the same time, the shape of the human body is going through a huge evolutionary shift because adults are getting so fat. Here in Britain, latest research shows that the average waist size for a man is 36-38in, and may be 42-44, by 2032. This compares with only 32.6in. in 1972.Women‘s waists have grown from an average of 22in. in 1920 to 24in. in the Fifties and 30in. now. One of the major reasons why children now are at greater risk is that we are getting fatter younger.
In the UK alone, more than one million under- 16s are classed as overweight or obese- double the number in the mid Eighties. One in ten four-year- olds are also medically classified as obese.
The obesity pandemic-an extensive epidemic- which started in the US, has now spread to Europe, Australasia, Central America and the Middle East. Many nations now record more than 20 per cent of their population as clinically obese and well over half the population as overweight.
Prof. Prentice said the change in our shape has been caused by an oversupply of easily available high-energy foods combined with a dramatic drop in the energy we use as a result of technology developments.
He is not alone in his concern. Only last week one medical journal revealed how obesity was fuelling a rise in cancer cases. Obesity also increases the risk factor for strokes and heart disease as well as diabetes. An averagely obese person's lifespan is shortened by around nine years while a severely obese person by many more.
Prof. Prentice said: " So will parents outlive their children, as claimed recently by an American obesity specialist? The answer is yes and no. Yes, when the offspring become grossly obese. This is now becoming an alarmingly common occurrence in the US. Such children and adolescents have a greatly reduced quality of life in terms of both their physical and psychosocial health.‖ So say" No" to that doughnut and burger. | 3968.txt | 1 |
[
"pneumonia",
"diabetes",
"heart disease",
"stroke"
] | Which of the following disease is NOT mentioned in the passage? | Children are getting so fat they may be the first generation to die before their parents, an expert claimed yesterday. Today's youngsters are already falling prey to potential killers such as diabetes because of their weight. Fatty fast- food diets combined with sedentary lifestyles dominated by televisions and computers could mean kids will die tragically young, says Professor Andrew Prentice, from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.
At the same time, the shape of the human body is going through a huge evolutionary shift because adults are getting so fat. Here in Britain, latest research shows that the average waist size for a man is 36-38in, and may be 42-44, by 2032. This compares with only 32.6in. in 1972.Women‘s waists have grown from an average of 22in. in 1920 to 24in. in the Fifties and 30in. now. One of the major reasons why children now are at greater risk is that we are getting fatter younger.
In the UK alone, more than one million under- 16s are classed as overweight or obese- double the number in the mid Eighties. One in ten four-year- olds are also medically classified as obese.
The obesity pandemic-an extensive epidemic- which started in the US, has now spread to Europe, Australasia, Central America and the Middle East. Many nations now record more than 20 per cent of their population as clinically obese and well over half the population as overweight.
Prof. Prentice said the change in our shape has been caused by an oversupply of easily available high-energy foods combined with a dramatic drop in the energy we use as a result of technology developments.
He is not alone in his concern. Only last week one medical journal revealed how obesity was fuelling a rise in cancer cases. Obesity also increases the risk factor for strokes and heart disease as well as diabetes. An averagely obese person's lifespan is shortened by around nine years while a severely obese person by many more.
Prof. Prentice said: " So will parents outlive their children, as claimed recently by an American obesity specialist? The answer is yes and no. Yes, when the offspring become grossly obese. This is now becoming an alarmingly common occurrence in the US. Such children and adolescents have a greatly reduced quality of life in terms of both their physical and psychosocial health.‖ So say" No" to that doughnut and burger. | 3968.txt | 0 |
[
"She quit smoking with her daughter's help.",
"She succeeded in quitting smoking abruptly.",
"She was also a researcher of tobacco and health.",
"She studied the smoking patterns of adult smokers."
] | What does Lindson-Hawley say about her mother? | "One of the reasons I find this topic very interesting is because my mom was a smoker when I was younger," says Lindson-Hawley, who studies tobacco and health at the University of Oxford.
By studying about 700 adult smokers, she found out that her mom quit the right way-by stopping abruptly and completely.
In her study, participants were randomly （）assigned to two groups. One had to quit abruptly on a given day, going from about a pack a day to zero. The other cut down gradually over the course of two weeks. People in both groups used nicotine （）patches before they quit, in addition to a second form of nicotine replacement, like gum or spray. They also had talk therapy with a nurse before and after quit day.
Six months out, more people who had quit abruptly had stuck with it-more than one-fifth of them, compared to about one-seventh in the other group. Although these numbers appear low, it is much higher than if people try without support.
And the quit rates were particularly convincing given that before the study started, most of the people had said they'd rather cut down gradually before quitting. "If you're training for a marathon, you wouldn't expect to turn up and just be able to run it. And I think people see that for smoking as well. They think, 'Well, if I gradually reduce, it's like practice,'" says Lindson-Hawley. But that wasn't the case. Instead of giving people practice, the gradual reduction likely gave them cravings （）and withdrawal symptoms before they even reached quit day, which could be why fewer people in that group actually made it to that Point. "Regardless of your stated preference, if you're ready to quit, quitting abruptly is more effective," says Dr. Gabriela Ferreira. "When you can quote a specific number like a fifth of the patients were able to quit, that's compelling. It gives them the encouragement, I think, to really go for it," Ferreira says.
People rarely manage to quit the first time they try. But at least, she says, they can maximize the odds of success. | 1331.txt | 1 |
[
"They were given physical training.",
"They were looked after by physicians.",
"They were encouraged by psychologists.",
"They were offered nicotine replacements."
] | What kind of support did smokers receive to quit smoking in Lindson-Hawley's study? | "One of the reasons I find this topic very interesting is because my mom was a smoker when I was younger," says Lindson-Hawley, who studies tobacco and health at the University of Oxford.
By studying about 700 adult smokers, she found out that her mom quit the right way-by stopping abruptly and completely.
In her study, participants were randomly （）assigned to two groups. One had to quit abruptly on a given day, going from about a pack a day to zero. The other cut down gradually over the course of two weeks. People in both groups used nicotine （）patches before they quit, in addition to a second form of nicotine replacement, like gum or spray. They also had talk therapy with a nurse before and after quit day.
Six months out, more people who had quit abruptly had stuck with it-more than one-fifth of them, compared to about one-seventh in the other group. Although these numbers appear low, it is much higher than if people try without support.
And the quit rates were particularly convincing given that before the study started, most of the people had said they'd rather cut down gradually before quitting. "If you're training for a marathon, you wouldn't expect to turn up and just be able to run it. And I think people see that for smoking as well. They think, 'Well, if I gradually reduce, it's like practice,'" says Lindson-Hawley. But that wasn't the case. Instead of giving people practice, the gradual reduction likely gave them cravings （）and withdrawal symptoms before they even reached quit day, which could be why fewer people in that group actually made it to that Point. "Regardless of your stated preference, if you're ready to quit, quitting abruptly is more effective," says Dr. Gabriela Ferreira. "When you can quote a specific number like a fifth of the patients were able to quit, that's compelling. It gives them the encouragement, I think, to really go for it," Ferreira says.
People rarely manage to quit the first time they try. But at least, she says, they can maximize the odds of success. | 1331.txt | 3 |
[
"It is idealized.",
"It is unexpected.",
"It is encouraging.",
"It is misleading."
] | How does Dr. Gabriela Ferreira view the result of Lindson-Hawley's experiment? | "One of the reasons I find this topic very interesting is because my mom was a smoker when I was younger," says Lindson-Hawley, who studies tobacco and health at the University of Oxford.
By studying about 700 adult smokers, she found out that her mom quit the right way-by stopping abruptly and completely.
In her study, participants were randomly （）assigned to two groups. One had to quit abruptly on a given day, going from about a pack a day to zero. The other cut down gradually over the course of two weeks. People in both groups used nicotine （）patches before they quit, in addition to a second form of nicotine replacement, like gum or spray. They also had talk therapy with a nurse before and after quit day.
Six months out, more people who had quit abruptly had stuck with it-more than one-fifth of them, compared to about one-seventh in the other group. Although these numbers appear low, it is much higher than if people try without support.
And the quit rates were particularly convincing given that before the study started, most of the people had said they'd rather cut down gradually before quitting. "If you're training for a marathon, you wouldn't expect to turn up and just be able to run it. And I think people see that for smoking as well. They think, 'Well, if I gradually reduce, it's like practice,'" says Lindson-Hawley. But that wasn't the case. Instead of giving people practice, the gradual reduction likely gave them cravings （）and withdrawal symptoms before they even reached quit day, which could be why fewer people in that group actually made it to that Point. "Regardless of your stated preference, if you're ready to quit, quitting abruptly is more effective," says Dr. Gabriela Ferreira. "When you can quote a specific number like a fifth of the patients were able to quit, that's compelling. It gives them the encouragement, I think, to really go for it," Ferreira says.
People rarely manage to quit the first time they try. But at least, she says, they can maximize the odds of success. | 1331.txt | 2 |
[
"is something few can accomplish",
"needs some practice first",
"requires a lot of patience",
"is a challenge at the beginning"
] | The idea of "a marathon" (Line 2，Para. 5) illustrates the popular belief that quitting smoking _____. | "One of the reasons I find this topic very interesting is because my mom was a smoker when I was younger," says Lindson-Hawley, who studies tobacco and health at the University of Oxford.
By studying about 700 adult smokers, she found out that her mom quit the right way-by stopping abruptly and completely.
In her study, participants were randomly （）assigned to two groups. One had to quit abruptly on a given day, going from about a pack a day to zero. The other cut down gradually over the course of two weeks. People in both groups used nicotine （）patches before they quit, in addition to a second form of nicotine replacement, like gum or spray. They also had talk therapy with a nurse before and after quit day.
Six months out, more people who had quit abruptly had stuck with it-more than one-fifth of them, compared to about one-seventh in the other group. Although these numbers appear low, it is much higher than if people try without support.
And the quit rates were particularly convincing given that before the study started, most of the people had said they'd rather cut down gradually before quitting. "If you're training for a marathon, you wouldn't expect to turn up and just be able to run it. And I think people see that for smoking as well. They think, 'Well, if I gradually reduce, it's like practice,'" says Lindson-Hawley. But that wasn't the case. Instead of giving people practice, the gradual reduction likely gave them cravings （）and withdrawal symptoms before they even reached quit day, which could be why fewer people in that group actually made it to that Point. "Regardless of your stated preference, if you're ready to quit, quitting abruptly is more effective," says Dr. Gabriela Ferreira. "When you can quote a specific number like a fifth of the patients were able to quit, that's compelling. It gives them the encouragement, I think, to really go for it," Ferreira says.
People rarely manage to quit the first time they try. But at least, she says, they can maximize the odds of success. | 1331.txt | 1 |
[
"They find it even more difficult.",
"They are simply unable to make it.",
"They show fewer withdrawal symptoms.",
"They feel much less pain in the process."
] | What happens when people try to quit smoking gradually? | "One of the reasons I find this topic very interesting is because my mom was a smoker when I was younger," says Lindson-Hawley, who studies tobacco and health at the University of Oxford.
By studying about 700 adult smokers, she found out that her mom quit the right way-by stopping abruptly and completely.
In her study, participants were randomly （）assigned to two groups. One had to quit abruptly on a given day, going from about a pack a day to zero. The other cut down gradually over the course of two weeks. People in both groups used nicotine （）patches before they quit, in addition to a second form of nicotine replacement, like gum or spray. They also had talk therapy with a nurse before and after quit day.
Six months out, more people who had quit abruptly had stuck with it-more than one-fifth of them, compared to about one-seventh in the other group. Although these numbers appear low, it is much higher than if people try without support.
And the quit rates were particularly convincing given that before the study started, most of the people had said they'd rather cut down gradually before quitting. "If you're training for a marathon, you wouldn't expect to turn up and just be able to run it. And I think people see that for smoking as well. They think, 'Well, if I gradually reduce, it's like practice,'" says Lindson-Hawley. But that wasn't the case. Instead of giving people practice, the gradual reduction likely gave them cravings （）and withdrawal symptoms before they even reached quit day, which could be why fewer people in that group actually made it to that Point. "Regardless of your stated preference, if you're ready to quit, quitting abruptly is more effective," says Dr. Gabriela Ferreira. "When you can quote a specific number like a fifth of the patients were able to quit, that's compelling. It gives them the encouragement, I think, to really go for it," Ferreira says.
People rarely manage to quit the first time they try. But at least, she says, they can maximize the odds of success. | 1331.txt | 0 |
[
"Family violence",
"The Great Depression",
"Bad relationship between parents and their six children",
"Her father's disloyalty"
] | According to the speaker, what contributed to her parents' divorce? | "Loving a child is a circular business.The more you give,the more you get,the more you want to give."Penelope Leachwon said.What she said proves to be true of my blended family.I was born in 1931.As the youngest of six children,I learned to share my parents' love.
Raising six children during the difficult time of the Great Depression took its toll on my parents' relationship and resulted in their divorce when I was 18 years old.Daddy never had very close relationships with his children and drifted even farther away from us after the divorce.Several years later,a wonderful woman came into his life and they were married.She had two sons,one of them still at home.Under her influence,we became a blended family and a good relationship developed between the two famliies.She always treated us as if we were her own children.It was because of our other mother.Daddy's second wife, that he became closer to his own children.
They shared over 25 years together before our father passed away.At the time of his death, the question came up of my mother,Daddy's first wife,attending his funeral.I will never forget the unconditional love shown by my step mother.When I asked her if she would object to mother attending Daddy's funeral,without giving it a second thought,she immediately replied,"Of course not,honey.She is the mother of my children." | 518.txt | 1 |
[
"Love is blind.",
"Love is a business.",
"Love breeds love.",
"Love can tame the wildest."
] | "Loving a child is a circular business.The more you give,the more you get,the more you want to give."How do you understand this sentence? | "Loving a child is a circular business.The more you give,the more you get,the more you want to give."Penelope Leachwon said.What she said proves to be true of my blended family.I was born in 1931.As the youngest of six children,I learned to share my parents' love.
Raising six children during the difficult time of the Great Depression took its toll on my parents' relationship and resulted in their divorce when I was 18 years old.Daddy never had very close relationships with his children and drifted even farther away from us after the divorce.Several years later,a wonderful woman came into his life and they were married.She had two sons,one of them still at home.Under her influence,we became a blended family and a good relationship developed between the two famliies.She always treated us as if we were her own children.It was because of our other mother.Daddy's second wife, that he became closer to his own children.
They shared over 25 years together before our father passed away.At the time of his death, the question came up of my mother,Daddy's first wife,attending his funeral.I will never forget the unconditional love shown by my step mother.When I asked her if she would object to mother attending Daddy's funeral,without giving it a second thought,she immediately replied,"Of course not,honey.She is the mother of my children." | 518.txt | 2 |
[
"His children's efforts.",
"His improved financial condition.",
"His advanced age.",
"His second wife's positive influence."
] | What brought the father closer to his own children? | "Loving a child is a circular business.The more you give,the more you get,the more you want to give."Penelope Leachwon said.What she said proves to be true of my blended family.I was born in 1931.As the youngest of six children,I learned to share my parents' love.
Raising six children during the difficult time of the Great Depression took its toll on my parents' relationship and resulted in their divorce when I was 18 years old.Daddy never had very close relationships with his children and drifted even farther away from us after the divorce.Several years later,a wonderful woman came into his life and they were married.She had two sons,one of them still at home.Under her influence,we became a blended family and a good relationship developed between the two famliies.She always treated us as if we were her own children.It was because of our other mother.Daddy's second wife, that he became closer to his own children.
They shared over 25 years together before our father passed away.At the time of his death, the question came up of my mother,Daddy's first wife,attending his funeral.I will never forget the unconditional love shown by my step mother.When I asked her if she would object to mother attending Daddy's funeral,without giving it a second thought,she immediately replied,"Of course not,honey.She is the mother of my children." | 518.txt | 3 |
[
"a wonderful woman",
"unconditional love shown to her step children",
"positive influence on the blended family",
"caring for her own children only"
] | Which one is NOT true about the writer's step mother? | "Loving a child is a circular business.The more you give,the more you get,the more you want to give."Penelope Leachwon said.What she said proves to be true of my blended family.I was born in 1931.As the youngest of six children,I learned to share my parents' love.
Raising six children during the difficult time of the Great Depression took its toll on my parents' relationship and resulted in their divorce when I was 18 years old.Daddy never had very close relationships with his children and drifted even farther away from us after the divorce.Several years later,a wonderful woman came into his life and they were married.She had two sons,one of them still at home.Under her influence,we became a blended family and a good relationship developed between the two famliies.She always treated us as if we were her own children.It was because of our other mother.Daddy's second wife, that he became closer to his own children.
They shared over 25 years together before our father passed away.At the time of his death, the question came up of my mother,Daddy's first wife,attending his funeral.I will never forget the unconditional love shown by my step mother.When I asked her if she would object to mother attending Daddy's funeral,without giving it a second thought,she immediately replied,"Of course not,honey.She is the mother of my children." | 518.txt | 3 |
[
"Divorce often has disastrous consequences.",
"Happiness is hard to find in blended families.",
"The piety of the family relation should be respected in the highest degree.",
"Love is the base of family relationship especially in blended families."
] | What message does the writer want to convey in this passage? | "Loving a child is a circular business.The more you give,the more you get,the more you want to give."Penelope Leachwon said.What she said proves to be true of my blended family.I was born in 1931.As the youngest of six children,I learned to share my parents' love.
Raising six children during the difficult time of the Great Depression took its toll on my parents' relationship and resulted in their divorce when I was 18 years old.Daddy never had very close relationships with his children and drifted even farther away from us after the divorce.Several years later,a wonderful woman came into his life and they were married.She had two sons,one of them still at home.Under her influence,we became a blended family and a good relationship developed between the two famliies.She always treated us as if we were her own children.It was because of our other mother.Daddy's second wife, that he became closer to his own children.
They shared over 25 years together before our father passed away.At the time of his death, the question came up of my mother,Daddy's first wife,attending his funeral.I will never forget the unconditional love shown by my step mother.When I asked her if she would object to mother attending Daddy's funeral,without giving it a second thought,she immediately replied,"Of course not,honey.She is the mother of my children." | 518.txt | 3 |
[
"A big house.",
"A special tour.",
"A stylish car.",
"A rich meal."
] | According to Dumn and Norton , which of the following is the most rewarding purchase? | What would you do with $590m? This is now a question for Gloria Mackenzie, an 84-year-old widow who recently emerged from her small, tin-roofed house in Florida to collect the biggest undivided lottery jackpot in history. If she hopes her new-found fortune will yield lasting feelings of fulfillment, she could do worse than read "Happy Money" by Elizabeth Dumn and Michael Norton.
These two academics use an array of behavioral research to show that the most rewarding ways to spend money can be counterintuitive. Fantasies of great wealth often involve visions of fancy cars and extravagant homes. Yet satisfaction with these material purchases wears off fairly quickly. What was once exciting and new becomes old-hat; regret creeps in. It is far better to spend money on experiences, say Ms. Dumn and Mr. Norton, like interesting trips, unique meals or even going to the cinema. These purchases often become more valuable with time----as stories or memories----particularly if they involve feeling more connected to others.
This slim volume is packed with tips to help wage slaves as well as lottery winners get the most "happiness bang for your buck." It seems most people would be better off if they could shorten their commutes to work, spend more time with friends and family and less of it watching television ( something the average American spends a whopping two months a year doing, and is hardly jollier for it ) . Buying gifts or giving to charity is often more pleasurable than purchasing things for oneself, and luxuries are most enjoyable when they are consumed sparingly. This is apparently the reason MacDonald's restricts the availability of its popular McRib－a marketing trick that has turned the pork sandwich into an object of obsession.
Readers of "Happy Money" are clearly a privileged lot, anxious about fulfillment, not hunger. Money may not quite buy happiness, but people in wealthier countries are generally happier than those in poor ones. Yet the link between feeling good and spending money on others can be seen among rich and poor people around the world, and scarcity enhances the pleasure of most things for most people. Not everyone will agree with the authors' policy ideas, which range from mandating more holiday time to reducing tax incentives for American homebuyers. But most people will come away from this book believing it was money well spent. | 4133.txt | 1 |
[
"critical",
"supportive",
"sympathetic",
"ambiguous"
] | The author's attitude toward Americans' watching TV is _____. | What would you do with $590m? This is now a question for Gloria Mackenzie, an 84-year-old widow who recently emerged from her small, tin-roofed house in Florida to collect the biggest undivided lottery jackpot in history. If she hopes her new-found fortune will yield lasting feelings of fulfillment, she could do worse than read "Happy Money" by Elizabeth Dumn and Michael Norton.
These two academics use an array of behavioral research to show that the most rewarding ways to spend money can be counterintuitive. Fantasies of great wealth often involve visions of fancy cars and extravagant homes. Yet satisfaction with these material purchases wears off fairly quickly. What was once exciting and new becomes old-hat; regret creeps in. It is far better to spend money on experiences, say Ms. Dumn and Mr. Norton, like interesting trips, unique meals or even going to the cinema. These purchases often become more valuable with time----as stories or memories----particularly if they involve feeling more connected to others.
This slim volume is packed with tips to help wage slaves as well as lottery winners get the most "happiness bang for your buck." It seems most people would be better off if they could shorten their commutes to work, spend more time with friends and family and less of it watching television ( something the average American spends a whopping two months a year doing, and is hardly jollier for it ) . Buying gifts or giving to charity is often more pleasurable than purchasing things for oneself, and luxuries are most enjoyable when they are consumed sparingly. This is apparently the reason MacDonald's restricts the availability of its popular McRib－a marketing trick that has turned the pork sandwich into an object of obsession.
Readers of "Happy Money" are clearly a privileged lot, anxious about fulfillment, not hunger. Money may not quite buy happiness, but people in wealthier countries are generally happier than those in poor ones. Yet the link between feeling good and spending money on others can be seen among rich and poor people around the world, and scarcity enhances the pleasure of most things for most people. Not everyone will agree with the authors' policy ideas, which range from mandating more holiday time to reducing tax incentives for American homebuyers. But most people will come away from this book believing it was money well spent. | 4133.txt | 0 |
[
"consumers are sometimes irrational",
"popularity usually comes after quality",
"marketing tricks are after effective",
"rarity generally increases pleasure"
] | MacRib is mentioned in Paragraph 3 to show that _____. | What would you do with $590m? This is now a question for Gloria Mackenzie, an 84-year-old widow who recently emerged from her small, tin-roofed house in Florida to collect the biggest undivided lottery jackpot in history. If she hopes her new-found fortune will yield lasting feelings of fulfillment, she could do worse than read "Happy Money" by Elizabeth Dumn and Michael Norton.
These two academics use an array of behavioral research to show that the most rewarding ways to spend money can be counterintuitive. Fantasies of great wealth often involve visions of fancy cars and extravagant homes. Yet satisfaction with these material purchases wears off fairly quickly. What was once exciting and new becomes old-hat; regret creeps in. It is far better to spend money on experiences, say Ms. Dumn and Mr. Norton, like interesting trips, unique meals or even going to the cinema. These purchases often become more valuable with time----as stories or memories----particularly if they involve feeling more connected to others.
This slim volume is packed with tips to help wage slaves as well as lottery winners get the most "happiness bang for your buck." It seems most people would be better off if they could shorten their commutes to work, spend more time with friends and family and less of it watching television ( something the average American spends a whopping two months a year doing, and is hardly jollier for it ) . Buying gifts or giving to charity is often more pleasurable than purchasing things for oneself, and luxuries are most enjoyable when they are consumed sparingly. This is apparently the reason MacDonald's restricts the availability of its popular McRib－a marketing trick that has turned the pork sandwich into an object of obsession.
Readers of "Happy Money" are clearly a privileged lot, anxious about fulfillment, not hunger. Money may not quite buy happiness, but people in wealthier countries are generally happier than those in poor ones. Yet the link between feeling good and spending money on others can be seen among rich and poor people around the world, and scarcity enhances the pleasure of most things for most people. Not everyone will agree with the authors' policy ideas, which range from mandating more holiday time to reducing tax incentives for American homebuyers. But most people will come away from this book believing it was money well spent. | 4133.txt | 3 |
[
"has left much room for readers' criticism",
"may prove to be a worthwhile purchase",
"has predicted a wider income gap in the US",
"may give its readers a sense of achievement"
] | According to the last paragraph, Happy Money _____. | What would you do with $590m? This is now a question for Gloria Mackenzie, an 84-year-old widow who recently emerged from her small, tin-roofed house in Florida to collect the biggest undivided lottery jackpot in history. If she hopes her new-found fortune will yield lasting feelings of fulfillment, she could do worse than read "Happy Money" by Elizabeth Dumn and Michael Norton.
These two academics use an array of behavioral research to show that the most rewarding ways to spend money can be counterintuitive. Fantasies of great wealth often involve visions of fancy cars and extravagant homes. Yet satisfaction with these material purchases wears off fairly quickly. What was once exciting and new becomes old-hat; regret creeps in. It is far better to spend money on experiences, say Ms. Dumn and Mr. Norton, like interesting trips, unique meals or even going to the cinema. These purchases often become more valuable with time----as stories or memories----particularly if they involve feeling more connected to others.
This slim volume is packed with tips to help wage slaves as well as lottery winners get the most "happiness bang for your buck." It seems most people would be better off if they could shorten their commutes to work, spend more time with friends and family and less of it watching television ( something the average American spends a whopping two months a year doing, and is hardly jollier for it ) . Buying gifts or giving to charity is often more pleasurable than purchasing things for oneself, and luxuries are most enjoyable when they are consumed sparingly. This is apparently the reason MacDonald's restricts the availability of its popular McRib－a marketing trick that has turned the pork sandwich into an object of obsession.
Readers of "Happy Money" are clearly a privileged lot, anxious about fulfillment, not hunger. Money may not quite buy happiness, but people in wealthier countries are generally happier than those in poor ones. Yet the link between feeling good and spending money on others can be seen among rich and poor people around the world, and scarcity enhances the pleasure of most things for most people. Not everyone will agree with the authors' policy ideas, which range from mandating more holiday time to reducing tax incentives for American homebuyers. But most people will come away from this book believing it was money well spent. | 4133.txt | 1 |
[
"balance feeling good and spending money",
"spend large sums of money won in lotteries",
"obtain lasting satisfaction from money spent",
"become more reasonable in spending on luxuries"
] | This text mainly discusses how to _____. | What would you do with $590m? This is now a question for Gloria Mackenzie, an 84-year-old widow who recently emerged from her small, tin-roofed house in Florida to collect the biggest undivided lottery jackpot in history. If she hopes her new-found fortune will yield lasting feelings of fulfillment, she could do worse than read "Happy Money" by Elizabeth Dumn and Michael Norton.
These two academics use an array of behavioral research to show that the most rewarding ways to spend money can be counterintuitive. Fantasies of great wealth often involve visions of fancy cars and extravagant homes. Yet satisfaction with these material purchases wears off fairly quickly. What was once exciting and new becomes old-hat; regret creeps in. It is far better to spend money on experiences, say Ms. Dumn and Mr. Norton, like interesting trips, unique meals or even going to the cinema. These purchases often become more valuable with time----as stories or memories----particularly if they involve feeling more connected to others.
This slim volume is packed with tips to help wage slaves as well as lottery winners get the most "happiness bang for your buck." It seems most people would be better off if they could shorten their commutes to work, spend more time with friends and family and less of it watching television ( something the average American spends a whopping two months a year doing, and is hardly jollier for it ) . Buying gifts or giving to charity is often more pleasurable than purchasing things for oneself, and luxuries are most enjoyable when they are consumed sparingly. This is apparently the reason MacDonald's restricts the availability of its popular McRib－a marketing trick that has turned the pork sandwich into an object of obsession.
Readers of "Happy Money" are clearly a privileged lot, anxious about fulfillment, not hunger. Money may not quite buy happiness, but people in wealthier countries are generally happier than those in poor ones. Yet the link between feeling good and spending money on others can be seen among rich and poor people around the world, and scarcity enhances the pleasure of most things for most people. Not everyone will agree with the authors' policy ideas, which range from mandating more holiday time to reducing tax incentives for American homebuyers. But most people will come away from this book believing it was money well spent. | 4133.txt | 2 |
[
"some people are too easy-going",
"some people are too timid",
"there are too many superiors around us",
"some people dare not stick up for their own rights"
] | In the passage, the writer talks about the problem that _ . | Have you ever been afraid to talk back when you were treated unfairly? Have you ever bought something just because the salesman talked you into it? Are you afraid to ask a boy (girl) for a date?
Many people are afraid to assert themselves (insist upon their own rights). Dr Robert Alberti, author of Stand Up, Speak Out, and Talk Back, thinks it's because their self-esteem is low. "Our whole set-up makes people doubt themselves," says Alberti. "There's always a 'superior' around - a parent, a teacher, a boss - who 'knows better'".
But Alberti and other scientists are doing something to help people to assert themselves. They offer "assertiveness training" courses (AT). In the AT courses people learn that they have a right to be themselves. They learn to speak out and feel good about doing so. They learn to be aggressive(, ) without hurting other people.
In one way, learning to speak out is to overcome fear. A group taking an AT course will help the timid person to lose his fear. But AT uses an even stronger motive-the need to share. The timid person speaks out in the group because he wants to tell how he feels. AT says you can get to feel good about yourself. And once you do, you can learn to speak out. | 2719.txt | 3 |
[
"make them distrust their own judgment",
"make things more favorable for them",
"keep them from speaking out as much as their superiors do",
"help them to learn to speak up for their rights"
] | The effect of our set-up on people is often to _ . | Have you ever been afraid to talk back when you were treated unfairly? Have you ever bought something just because the salesman talked you into it? Are you afraid to ask a boy (girl) for a date?
Many people are afraid to assert themselves (insist upon their own rights). Dr Robert Alberti, author of Stand Up, Speak Out, and Talk Back, thinks it's because their self-esteem is low. "Our whole set-up makes people doubt themselves," says Alberti. "There's always a 'superior' around - a parent, a teacher, a boss - who 'knows better'".
But Alberti and other scientists are doing something to help people to assert themselves. They offer "assertiveness training" courses (AT). In the AT courses people learn that they have a right to be themselves. They learn to speak out and feel good about doing so. They learn to be aggressive(, ) without hurting other people.
In one way, learning to speak out is to overcome fear. A group taking an AT course will help the timid person to lose his fear. But AT uses an even stronger motive-the need to share. The timid person speaks out in the group because he wants to tell how he feels. AT says you can get to feel good about yourself. And once you do, you can learn to speak out. | 2719.txt | 0 |
[
"use the need of people to share",
"show people they have the right to be themselves",
"help people to be aggressive at anytime even when others suffer",
"help people overcome fear"
] | One thing AT doesn't do is to _ . | Have you ever been afraid to talk back when you were treated unfairly? Have you ever bought something just because the salesman talked you into it? Are you afraid to ask a boy (girl) for a date?
Many people are afraid to assert themselves (insist upon their own rights). Dr Robert Alberti, author of Stand Up, Speak Out, and Talk Back, thinks it's because their self-esteem is low. "Our whole set-up makes people doubt themselves," says Alberti. "There's always a 'superior' around - a parent, a teacher, a boss - who 'knows better'".
But Alberti and other scientists are doing something to help people to assert themselves. They offer "assertiveness training" courses (AT). In the AT courses people learn that they have a right to be themselves. They learn to speak out and feel good about doing so. They learn to be aggressive(, ) without hurting other people.
In one way, learning to speak out is to overcome fear. A group taking an AT course will help the timid person to lose his fear. But AT uses an even stronger motive-the need to share. The timid person speaks out in the group because he wants to tell how he feels. AT says you can get to feel good about yourself. And once you do, you can learn to speak out. | 2719.txt | 2 |
[
"The Military is in",
"The Military is up",
"The Military is down",
"The Military is on"
] | What is the main idea of this passage? | The Military Is In
Things have really changed. Not only is the military standing tall again, it is staging a remarkable comeback in the quantity and quality of the recruits it is attracting. Recruiters, once denounced by antiwar students as "baby killers" and barred from campuses, are welcomed ever at elite universities. ROTC (Reserve Officer's Training Corps) programs, that faltered during the Viet Nam era, when protesters were fire bombing their headquarters, are flourishing again. The military academies are enjoying a steady increase in applications.
Certainly, the depressed economy has increased the allure of the jobs, technical training and generous student loans offered by the military. Students know that if they go in and become, say, nuclear weapons specialists, they can come out and demand a salary of $60,000 a year. Military salaries, while not always competitive with those paid for comparable jobs in the private sector, are more than respectable, especially considering the wide array of benefits that are available: free medical service, room and board, and PX (Post Exchange) privileges. Monthly pay for a recruit is $574; for a sergeant with four years services it is $906; for a major with ten years' service it is $2,305. The services' slick $175 million-a-year advertising campaign promising adventure and fulfillment has helped win over the TV generation. Kids are walking down the school hallways chanting ‘Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines,' just like in the commercials. And many military officials feel that the key difference is the enhanced patriotism among the nation's youth. There is a return to the view that the military is an honorable profession. The days of a judge telling a miscreant to join the Army or go to jail are over. Recruiting for all four services combined is running at 101%of authorized goals. And the retention rate is now so high, that the services are refusing some re-enlistment applications and reducing annual recruiting target.
The military academics are also enjoying halcyon years, attracting more and better-qualified students. Compared to private colleges, where tuition and expenses have been climbing sharply, the service schools are a real bargain: not only is tuition free, but recruits get allowances of up to $500 a mouth. It is reported 12,300 applicants are for the 1,450 positions in this year's freshman class. Military academies are now just as selective as any of the best universities in the country.
Nationwide, ROTC enrollment exceeds 105,000,a 64% increase over the 1974 figure. In the mid 70's, the ROTC students refused to wear their uniforms on campus because they suffered all sorts of ridicule, if they did. Now if they wear them to class no one looks at them twice. To them, Viet Nam is ancient history, something the old folks talk about. | 300.txt | 0 |
[
"Approval.",
"Indifferent.",
"Distaste.",
"Scolding."
] | What was the attitude of the students in 1970's towards the military? | The Military Is In
Things have really changed. Not only is the military standing tall again, it is staging a remarkable comeback in the quantity and quality of the recruits it is attracting. Recruiters, once denounced by antiwar students as "baby killers" and barred from campuses, are welcomed ever at elite universities. ROTC (Reserve Officer's Training Corps) programs, that faltered during the Viet Nam era, when protesters were fire bombing their headquarters, are flourishing again. The military academies are enjoying a steady increase in applications.
Certainly, the depressed economy has increased the allure of the jobs, technical training and generous student loans offered by the military. Students know that if they go in and become, say, nuclear weapons specialists, they can come out and demand a salary of $60,000 a year. Military salaries, while not always competitive with those paid for comparable jobs in the private sector, are more than respectable, especially considering the wide array of benefits that are available: free medical service, room and board, and PX (Post Exchange) privileges. Monthly pay for a recruit is $574; for a sergeant with four years services it is $906; for a major with ten years' service it is $2,305. The services' slick $175 million-a-year advertising campaign promising adventure and fulfillment has helped win over the TV generation. Kids are walking down the school hallways chanting ‘Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines,' just like in the commercials. And many military officials feel that the key difference is the enhanced patriotism among the nation's youth. There is a return to the view that the military is an honorable profession. The days of a judge telling a miscreant to join the Army or go to jail are over. Recruiting for all four services combined is running at 101%of authorized goals. And the retention rate is now so high, that the services are refusing some re-enlistment applications and reducing annual recruiting target.
The military academics are also enjoying halcyon years, attracting more and better-qualified students. Compared to private colleges, where tuition and expenses have been climbing sharply, the service schools are a real bargain: not only is tuition free, but recruits get allowances of up to $500 a mouth. It is reported 12,300 applicants are for the 1,450 positions in this year's freshman class. Military academies are now just as selective as any of the best universities in the country.
Nationwide, ROTC enrollment exceeds 105,000,a 64% increase over the 1974 figure. In the mid 70's, the ROTC students refused to wear their uniforms on campus because they suffered all sorts of ridicule, if they did. Now if they wear them to class no one looks at them twice. To them, Viet Nam is ancient history, something the old folks talk about. | 300.txt | 2 |
[
"\"become visible\".",
"\"begin to grow\".",
"\"be made public\".",
"\"gain a certain position\"."
] | The phrase "come out" is closest in meaning to | The Military Is In
Things have really changed. Not only is the military standing tall again, it is staging a remarkable comeback in the quantity and quality of the recruits it is attracting. Recruiters, once denounced by antiwar students as "baby killers" and barred from campuses, are welcomed ever at elite universities. ROTC (Reserve Officer's Training Corps) programs, that faltered during the Viet Nam era, when protesters were fire bombing their headquarters, are flourishing again. The military academies are enjoying a steady increase in applications.
Certainly, the depressed economy has increased the allure of the jobs, technical training and generous student loans offered by the military. Students know that if they go in and become, say, nuclear weapons specialists, they can come out and demand a salary of $60,000 a year. Military salaries, while not always competitive with those paid for comparable jobs in the private sector, are more than respectable, especially considering the wide array of benefits that are available: free medical service, room and board, and PX (Post Exchange) privileges. Monthly pay for a recruit is $574; for a sergeant with four years services it is $906; for a major with ten years' service it is $2,305. The services' slick $175 million-a-year advertising campaign promising adventure and fulfillment has helped win over the TV generation. Kids are walking down the school hallways chanting ‘Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines,' just like in the commercials. And many military officials feel that the key difference is the enhanced patriotism among the nation's youth. There is a return to the view that the military is an honorable profession. The days of a judge telling a miscreant to join the Army or go to jail are over. Recruiting for all four services combined is running at 101%of authorized goals. And the retention rate is now so high, that the services are refusing some re-enlistment applications and reducing annual recruiting target.
The military academics are also enjoying halcyon years, attracting more and better-qualified students. Compared to private colleges, where tuition and expenses have been climbing sharply, the service schools are a real bargain: not only is tuition free, but recruits get allowances of up to $500 a mouth. It is reported 12,300 applicants are for the 1,450 positions in this year's freshman class. Military academies are now just as selective as any of the best universities in the country.
Nationwide, ROTC enrollment exceeds 105,000,a 64% increase over the 1974 figure. In the mid 70's, the ROTC students refused to wear their uniforms on campus because they suffered all sorts of ridicule, if they did. Now if they wear them to class no one looks at them twice. To them, Viet Nam is ancient history, something the old folks talk about. | 300.txt | 3 |
[
"Free tuition.",
"Spacious room.",
"Considerate allowance.",
"Technical training."
] | Which one of the following is NOT mentioned as a reason to attract students. | The Military Is In
Things have really changed. Not only is the military standing tall again, it is staging a remarkable comeback in the quantity and quality of the recruits it is attracting. Recruiters, once denounced by antiwar students as "baby killers" and barred from campuses, are welcomed ever at elite universities. ROTC (Reserve Officer's Training Corps) programs, that faltered during the Viet Nam era, when protesters were fire bombing their headquarters, are flourishing again. The military academies are enjoying a steady increase in applications.
Certainly, the depressed economy has increased the allure of the jobs, technical training and generous student loans offered by the military. Students know that if they go in and become, say, nuclear weapons specialists, they can come out and demand a salary of $60,000 a year. Military salaries, while not always competitive with those paid for comparable jobs in the private sector, are more than respectable, especially considering the wide array of benefits that are available: free medical service, room and board, and PX (Post Exchange) privileges. Monthly pay for a recruit is $574; for a sergeant with four years services it is $906; for a major with ten years' service it is $2,305. The services' slick $175 million-a-year advertising campaign promising adventure and fulfillment has helped win over the TV generation. Kids are walking down the school hallways chanting ‘Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines,' just like in the commercials. And many military officials feel that the key difference is the enhanced patriotism among the nation's youth. There is a return to the view that the military is an honorable profession. The days of a judge telling a miscreant to join the Army or go to jail are over. Recruiting for all four services combined is running at 101%of authorized goals. And the retention rate is now so high, that the services are refusing some re-enlistment applications and reducing annual recruiting target.
The military academics are also enjoying halcyon years, attracting more and better-qualified students. Compared to private colleges, where tuition and expenses have been climbing sharply, the service schools are a real bargain: not only is tuition free, but recruits get allowances of up to $500 a mouth. It is reported 12,300 applicants are for the 1,450 positions in this year's freshman class. Military academies are now just as selective as any of the best universities in the country.
Nationwide, ROTC enrollment exceeds 105,000,a 64% increase over the 1974 figure. In the mid 70's, the ROTC students refused to wear their uniforms on campus because they suffered all sorts of ridicule, if they did. Now if they wear them to class no one looks at them twice. To them, Viet Nam is ancient history, something the old folks talk about. | 300.txt | 1 |
[
"Historians ought to make use of written rather than oral accounts.",
"Historians should rely primarily on birth registers.",
"Historians should rely exclusively on data that can be quantified.",
"Historians ought to make use of data that can be quantified."
] | With which of the following statements regarding the resources that historians ought to use would the author of the passage be most likely to agree? | In his 1976 study of slavery in the United States, Herbert Gutman, like Fogel, Engerman, and Genovese, has rightly stressed the slaves'achievements. But unlike these historians, Gutman gives plantation owners little credit for these achievements. Rather, Gutman argues that one must look to the Black family and the slaves' extended kinship system to understand how crucial achievements, such as the maintenance of a cultural heritage and the development of a com- munal consciousness, were possible. His findings compel attention.
Gutman recreates the family and extended kinship structure mainly through an ingenious use of what any historian should draw upon, quantifiabledata, derived in this case mostly from plantation birth registers. He also uses accounts of ex-slaves to probe the human reality behind his statistics. These sources indicate that the two-parent household predominated in slave quarters just as it did among freed slaves after emancipation. Although Gutman admits that forced separation by sale was frequent, he shows that the slaves' preference, revealed most clearly on plantations where sale was infrequent, was very much for stable monogamy. In less conclusive fashion Fogel, Engerman, and Genovese had already indicated the predominance of two-parent households;however, only Gutman emphasizes the preference for stable monogamy and points out what stable monogamy meant for the slaves' cultural heritage. Gutman argues convincingly that the stability of the Black family encouraged the transmission of-and so was crucial in sustaining-the Black heritage of folklore, music, and religious expression from one generation to another, a heritage that slaves were continually fashioning out of their African and American experiences.
Gutman's examination of other facets of kinship also produces important findings. Gutman discovers that cousins rarely married, an exogamous tendency that contrasted sharply with the endogamy practiced by the plantation owners. This preference for exogamy, Gutman suggests, may have derived from West African rules governing marriage, which, though they differed from one tribal group to another, all involved some kind of prohibition against unions with close kin. This taboo against cousins' marrying is important, argues Gutman, because it is one of many indications of a strong awareness among slaves of an extended kinship network. The fact that distantly related kin would care for children separated from their families also suggests this awareness. When blood relationships were few, as in newly created plantations in the South- west, "fictive" kinship arrangements took their place until a new pattern of consanguinity developed. Gutman presents convincing evidence that this extended kinship structure-which he believes developed by the mid-to-late eighteenth century-provided the foundations for the strong communal consciousness that existed among slaves.
In sum, Gutman's study is significant because it offers a closely reasoned and original explanation of some of the slaves' achievements, one that correctly emphasizes the resources that slaves themselves possessed. | 2001.txt | 3 |
[
"The heritage was formed primarily out of the experiences of those slaves who attempted to preserve the stability of their families.",
"The heritage was not formed out of the experiences of those slaves who married their cousins.",
"The heritage was formed more out of the African than out of the American experiences of slaves.",
"The heritage was not formed out of the experiences of only a single generation of slaves."
] | Which of the following statements about the formation of the Black heritage of folklore, music, and religious expression is best supported by the information presented in the passage? | In his 1976 study of slavery in the United States, Herbert Gutman, like Fogel, Engerman, and Genovese, has rightly stressed the slaves'achievements. But unlike these historians, Gutman gives plantation owners little credit for these achievements. Rather, Gutman argues that one must look to the Black family and the slaves' extended kinship system to understand how crucial achievements, such as the maintenance of a cultural heritage and the development of a com- munal consciousness, were possible. His findings compel attention.
Gutman recreates the family and extended kinship structure mainly through an ingenious use of what any historian should draw upon, quantifiabledata, derived in this case mostly from plantation birth registers. He also uses accounts of ex-slaves to probe the human reality behind his statistics. These sources indicate that the two-parent household predominated in slave quarters just as it did among freed slaves after emancipation. Although Gutman admits that forced separation by sale was frequent, he shows that the slaves' preference, revealed most clearly on plantations where sale was infrequent, was very much for stable monogamy. In less conclusive fashion Fogel, Engerman, and Genovese had already indicated the predominance of two-parent households;however, only Gutman emphasizes the preference for stable monogamy and points out what stable monogamy meant for the slaves' cultural heritage. Gutman argues convincingly that the stability of the Black family encouraged the transmission of-and so was crucial in sustaining-the Black heritage of folklore, music, and religious expression from one generation to another, a heritage that slaves were continually fashioning out of their African and American experiences.
Gutman's examination of other facets of kinship also produces important findings. Gutman discovers that cousins rarely married, an exogamous tendency that contrasted sharply with the endogamy practiced by the plantation owners. This preference for exogamy, Gutman suggests, may have derived from West African rules governing marriage, which, though they differed from one tribal group to another, all involved some kind of prohibition against unions with close kin. This taboo against cousins' marrying is important, argues Gutman, because it is one of many indications of a strong awareness among slaves of an extended kinship network. The fact that distantly related kin would care for children separated from their families also suggests this awareness. When blood relationships were few, as in newly created plantations in the South- west, "fictive" kinship arrangements took their place until a new pattern of consanguinity developed. Gutman presents convincing evidence that this extended kinship structure-which he believes developed by the mid-to-late eighteenth century-provided the foundations for the strong communal consciousness that existed among slaves.
In sum, Gutman's study is significant because it offers a closely reasoned and original explanation of some of the slaves' achievements, one that correctly emphasizes the resources that slaves themselves possessed. | 2001.txt | 3 |
[
"give the historian access to the most complete plantation birth registers",
"permit the historian to observe the kinship patterns that had been most popular among West African tribes",
"provide the historian with evidence concerning the preference of freed slaves for stable monogamy",
"furnish the historian with the opportunity to discover the kind of marital commitment that slaves themselves chose to have"
] | It can be inferred from the passage that, of the following, the most probable reason why a historian of slavery might be interested in studying the type of plantations mentioned in line 31 is that this type would | In his 1976 study of slavery in the United States, Herbert Gutman, like Fogel, Engerman, and Genovese, has rightly stressed the slaves'achievements. But unlike these historians, Gutman gives plantation owners little credit for these achievements. Rather, Gutman argues that one must look to the Black family and the slaves' extended kinship system to understand how crucial achievements, such as the maintenance of a cultural heritage and the development of a com- munal consciousness, were possible. His findings compel attention.
Gutman recreates the family and extended kinship structure mainly through an ingenious use of what any historian should draw upon, quantifiabledata, derived in this case mostly from plantation birth registers. He also uses accounts of ex-slaves to probe the human reality behind his statistics. These sources indicate that the two-parent household predominated in slave quarters just as it did among freed slaves after emancipation. Although Gutman admits that forced separation by sale was frequent, he shows that the slaves' preference, revealed most clearly on plantations where sale was infrequent, was very much for stable monogamy. In less conclusive fashion Fogel, Engerman, and Genovese had already indicated the predominance of two-parent households;however, only Gutman emphasizes the preference for stable monogamy and points out what stable monogamy meant for the slaves' cultural heritage. Gutman argues convincingly that the stability of the Black family encouraged the transmission of-and so was crucial in sustaining-the Black heritage of folklore, music, and religious expression from one generation to another, a heritage that slaves were continually fashioning out of their African and American experiences.
Gutman's examination of other facets of kinship also produces important findings. Gutman discovers that cousins rarely married, an exogamous tendency that contrasted sharply with the endogamy practiced by the plantation owners. This preference for exogamy, Gutman suggests, may have derived from West African rules governing marriage, which, though they differed from one tribal group to another, all involved some kind of prohibition against unions with close kin. This taboo against cousins' marrying is important, argues Gutman, because it is one of many indications of a strong awareness among slaves of an extended kinship network. The fact that distantly related kin would care for children separated from their families also suggests this awareness. When blood relationships were few, as in newly created plantations in the South- west, "fictive" kinship arrangements took their place until a new pattern of consanguinity developed. Gutman presents convincing evidence that this extended kinship structure-which he believes developed by the mid-to-late eighteenth century-provided the foundations for the strong communal consciousness that existed among slaves.
In sum, Gutman's study is significant because it offers a closely reasoned and original explanation of some of the slaves' achievements, one that correctly emphasizes the resources that slaves themselves possessed. | 2001.txt | 3 |
[
"The rules were derived from rules governing fictive kinship arrangements.",
"The rules forbade marriages between close kin.",
"The rules are mentioned in Herbert Gutman's study.",
"The rules are mentioned in Herbert Gutman's study."
] | According to the passage, all of the following are true of the West African rules governing marriage mentioned in lines(57-61) EXCEPT: | In his 1976 study of slavery in the United States, Herbert Gutman, like Fogel, Engerman, and Genovese, has rightly stressed the slaves'achievements. But unlike these historians, Gutman gives plantation owners little credit for these achievements. Rather, Gutman argues that one must look to the Black family and the slaves' extended kinship system to understand how crucial achievements, such as the maintenance of a cultural heritage and the development of a com- munal consciousness, were possible. His findings compel attention.
Gutman recreates the family and extended kinship structure mainly through an ingenious use of what any historian should draw upon, quantifiabledata, derived in this case mostly from plantation birth registers. He also uses accounts of ex-slaves to probe the human reality behind his statistics. These sources indicate that the two-parent household predominated in slave quarters just as it did among freed slaves after emancipation. Although Gutman admits that forced separation by sale was frequent, he shows that the slaves' preference, revealed most clearly on plantations where sale was infrequent, was very much for stable monogamy. In less conclusive fashion Fogel, Engerman, and Genovese had already indicated the predominance of two-parent households;however, only Gutman emphasizes the preference for stable monogamy and points out what stable monogamy meant for the slaves' cultural heritage. Gutman argues convincingly that the stability of the Black family encouraged the transmission of-and so was crucial in sustaining-the Black heritage of folklore, music, and religious expression from one generation to another, a heritage that slaves were continually fashioning out of their African and American experiences.
Gutman's examination of other facets of kinship also produces important findings. Gutman discovers that cousins rarely married, an exogamous tendency that contrasted sharply with the endogamy practiced by the plantation owners. This preference for exogamy, Gutman suggests, may have derived from West African rules governing marriage, which, though they differed from one tribal group to another, all involved some kind of prohibition against unions with close kin. This taboo against cousins' marrying is important, argues Gutman, because it is one of many indications of a strong awareness among slaves of an extended kinship network. The fact that distantly related kin would care for children separated from their families also suggests this awareness. When blood relationships were few, as in newly created plantations in the South- west, "fictive" kinship arrangements took their place until a new pattern of consanguinity developed. Gutman presents convincing evidence that this extended kinship structure-which he believes developed by the mid-to-late eighteenth century-provided the foundations for the strong communal consciousness that existed among slaves.
In sum, Gutman's study is significant because it offers a closely reasoned and original explanation of some of the slaves' achievements, one that correctly emphasizes the resources that slaves themselves possessed. | 2001.txt | 0 |
[
"These practices began to alter sometime around the mid-eighteenth century.",
"These practices varied markedly from one region of the country to another",
"Plantation owners usually based their choice of marriage partners on economic considerations.",
"Plantation owners often married their cousins."
] | Which of the following statements concerning the marriage practices of plantat ion owners during the period of Black slavery in the United States can most logically be inferred from the information in the passage. | In his 1976 study of slavery in the United States, Herbert Gutman, like Fogel, Engerman, and Genovese, has rightly stressed the slaves'achievements. But unlike these historians, Gutman gives plantation owners little credit for these achievements. Rather, Gutman argues that one must look to the Black family and the slaves' extended kinship system to understand how crucial achievements, such as the maintenance of a cultural heritage and the development of a com- munal consciousness, were possible. His findings compel attention.
Gutman recreates the family and extended kinship structure mainly through an ingenious use of what any historian should draw upon, quantifiabledata, derived in this case mostly from plantation birth registers. He also uses accounts of ex-slaves to probe the human reality behind his statistics. These sources indicate that the two-parent household predominated in slave quarters just as it did among freed slaves after emancipation. Although Gutman admits that forced separation by sale was frequent, he shows that the slaves' preference, revealed most clearly on plantations where sale was infrequent, was very much for stable monogamy. In less conclusive fashion Fogel, Engerman, and Genovese had already indicated the predominance of two-parent households;however, only Gutman emphasizes the preference for stable monogamy and points out what stable monogamy meant for the slaves' cultural heritage. Gutman argues convincingly that the stability of the Black family encouraged the transmission of-and so was crucial in sustaining-the Black heritage of folklore, music, and religious expression from one generation to another, a heritage that slaves were continually fashioning out of their African and American experiences.
Gutman's examination of other facets of kinship also produces important findings. Gutman discovers that cousins rarely married, an exogamous tendency that contrasted sharply with the endogamy practiced by the plantation owners. This preference for exogamy, Gutman suggests, may have derived from West African rules governing marriage, which, though they differed from one tribal group to another, all involved some kind of prohibition against unions with close kin. This taboo against cousins' marrying is important, argues Gutman, because it is one of many indications of a strong awareness among slaves of an extended kinship network. The fact that distantly related kin would care for children separated from their families also suggests this awareness. When blood relationships were few, as in newly created plantations in the South- west, "fictive" kinship arrangements took their place until a new pattern of consanguinity developed. Gutman presents convincing evidence that this extended kinship structure-which he believes developed by the mid-to-late eighteenth century-provided the foundations for the strong communal consciousness that existed among slaves.
In sum, Gutman's study is significant because it offers a closely reasoned and original explanation of some of the slaves' achievements, one that correctly emphasizes the resources that slaves themselves possessed. | 2001.txt | 3 |
[
"The author compares and contrasts the work of several historians and then discusses areas for possible new research.",
"The author presents his thesis, draws on the work of several historians for evidence to support his thesis, and concludes by reiterating his thesis.",
"The author describes some features of a historical study and then uses those features to put forth his own argument.",
"The author presents the general argument of a historical study, describes the study in more detail, and concludes with a brief judgments of the study's value."
] | Which of the following best describes the organization of the passage? | In his 1976 study of slavery in the United States, Herbert Gutman, like Fogel, Engerman, and Genovese, has rightly stressed the slaves'achievements. But unlike these historians, Gutman gives plantation owners little credit for these achievements. Rather, Gutman argues that one must look to the Black family and the slaves' extended kinship system to understand how crucial achievements, such as the maintenance of a cultural heritage and the development of a com- munal consciousness, were possible. His findings compel attention.
Gutman recreates the family and extended kinship structure mainly through an ingenious use of what any historian should draw upon, quantifiabledata, derived in this case mostly from plantation birth registers. He also uses accounts of ex-slaves to probe the human reality behind his statistics. These sources indicate that the two-parent household predominated in slave quarters just as it did among freed slaves after emancipation. Although Gutman admits that forced separation by sale was frequent, he shows that the slaves' preference, revealed most clearly on plantations where sale was infrequent, was very much for stable monogamy. In less conclusive fashion Fogel, Engerman, and Genovese had already indicated the predominance of two-parent households;however, only Gutman emphasizes the preference for stable monogamy and points out what stable monogamy meant for the slaves' cultural heritage. Gutman argues convincingly that the stability of the Black family encouraged the transmission of-and so was crucial in sustaining-the Black heritage of folklore, music, and religious expression from one generation to another, a heritage that slaves were continually fashioning out of their African and American experiences.
Gutman's examination of other facets of kinship also produces important findings. Gutman discovers that cousins rarely married, an exogamous tendency that contrasted sharply with the endogamy practiced by the plantation owners. This preference for exogamy, Gutman suggests, may have derived from West African rules governing marriage, which, though they differed from one tribal group to another, all involved some kind of prohibition against unions with close kin. This taboo against cousins' marrying is important, argues Gutman, because it is one of many indications of a strong awareness among slaves of an extended kinship network. The fact that distantly related kin would care for children separated from their families also suggests this awareness. When blood relationships were few, as in newly created plantations in the South- west, "fictive" kinship arrangements took their place until a new pattern of consanguinity developed. Gutman presents convincing evidence that this extended kinship structure-which he believes developed by the mid-to-late eighteenth century-provided the foundations for the strong communal consciousness that existed among slaves.
In sum, Gutman's study is significant because it offers a closely reasoned and original explanation of some of the slaves' achievements, one that correctly emphasizes the resources that slaves themselves possessed. | 2001.txt | 3 |
[
"The Influence of Herbert Gutman on Historians of Slavery in the United States",
"Gutman's Explanation of How Slaves Could Maintain a Cultural Heritage and Develop a Communal Consciousness",
"Slavery in the United States: New Controversy About an Old Subject",
"The Black Heritage of Folklore, Music, and Religious Expression: Its Growing Influence"
] | Which of the following is the most appropriate title for the passage, based on its content? | In his 1976 study of slavery in the United States, Herbert Gutman, like Fogel, Engerman, and Genovese, has rightly stressed the slaves'achievements. But unlike these historians, Gutman gives plantation owners little credit for these achievements. Rather, Gutman argues that one must look to the Black family and the slaves' extended kinship system to understand how crucial achievements, such as the maintenance of a cultural heritage and the development of a com- munal consciousness, were possible. His findings compel attention.
Gutman recreates the family and extended kinship structure mainly through an ingenious use of what any historian should draw upon, quantifiabledata, derived in this case mostly from plantation birth registers. He also uses accounts of ex-slaves to probe the human reality behind his statistics. These sources indicate that the two-parent household predominated in slave quarters just as it did among freed slaves after emancipation. Although Gutman admits that forced separation by sale was frequent, he shows that the slaves' preference, revealed most clearly on plantations where sale was infrequent, was very much for stable monogamy. In less conclusive fashion Fogel, Engerman, and Genovese had already indicated the predominance of two-parent households;however, only Gutman emphasizes the preference for stable monogamy and points out what stable monogamy meant for the slaves' cultural heritage. Gutman argues convincingly that the stability of the Black family encouraged the transmission of-and so was crucial in sustaining-the Black heritage of folklore, music, and religious expression from one generation to another, a heritage that slaves were continually fashioning out of their African and American experiences.
Gutman's examination of other facets of kinship also produces important findings. Gutman discovers that cousins rarely married, an exogamous tendency that contrasted sharply with the endogamy practiced by the plantation owners. This preference for exogamy, Gutman suggests, may have derived from West African rules governing marriage, which, though they differed from one tribal group to another, all involved some kind of prohibition against unions with close kin. This taboo against cousins' marrying is important, argues Gutman, because it is one of many indications of a strong awareness among slaves of an extended kinship network. The fact that distantly related kin would care for children separated from their families also suggests this awareness. When blood relationships were few, as in newly created plantations in the South- west, "fictive" kinship arrangements took their place until a new pattern of consanguinity developed. Gutman presents convincing evidence that this extended kinship structure-which he believes developed by the mid-to-late eighteenth century-provided the foundations for the strong communal consciousness that existed among slaves.
In sum, Gutman's study is significant because it offers a closely reasoned and original explanation of some of the slaves' achievements, one that correctly emphasizes the resources that slaves themselves possessed. | 2001.txt | 1 |
[
"He enjoyed his career and marriage.",
"He had few childhood playmates.",
"He received little love from his family.",
"He was envied by others in his childhood."
] | What do we know about John? | When John was growing up, other kids felt sorry for him. His parents always had him weeding the garden, carrying out the garbage and delivering newspapers. But when John reached adulthood, he was better off than his childhood playmates. He had more job satisfaction, a better marriage and was healthier. Most of all, he was happier. Far happier.
These are the findings of a 40-year study that followed the lives of 456 teenage boys from Boston. The study showed that those who had worked as boys enjoyed happier and more productive lives than those who had not. "Boys who worked in the home or community gained competence and came to feel they were worthwhile members of society," said George Vaillant, the psychologist who made the discovery. "And because they felt good about themselves, others felt good about them."
Vaillant's study followed these males in great detail. Interviews were repeated at ages 25, 31 and 47. Under Vaillant, the researchers compared the men's mental-health scores with their boyhood-activity scores with their boyhood-activity scores. Points were awarded for part-time jobs, housework, effort in school, and ability to deal with problems.
The link between what the men had done as boys and how they turned out as adults was surprisingly sharp. Those who had done the most boyhood activities were twice as likely to have warm relations with a wide variety of people, five times as likely to be well paid and 16 times less likely to have been unemployed. The researchers also found that IQ and family social and economic class made no real difference in how the boys turned out. Working----at any age----is important. Childhood activities help a child develop responsibility, independence, confidence and competence---the underpinnings of emotional health. They also help him understand that people must cooperate and work toward common goals. The most competent adults are those who know how to do this. Yet work isn't everything. As Tolstoy once said, "One can live magnificently in this world if one knows how to work and how to love, to work for the person one loves and to love one's work." | 450.txt | 0 |
[
"a description of personal values and social values",
"an analysis of how work was related to competence",
"an example for parents' expectations of their children",
"an explanation why some boys grew into happy men"
] | Vaillant's words in Paragraph 2 serve as _ . | When John was growing up, other kids felt sorry for him. His parents always had him weeding the garden, carrying out the garbage and delivering newspapers. But when John reached adulthood, he was better off than his childhood playmates. He had more job satisfaction, a better marriage and was healthier. Most of all, he was happier. Far happier.
These are the findings of a 40-year study that followed the lives of 456 teenage boys from Boston. The study showed that those who had worked as boys enjoyed happier and more productive lives than those who had not. "Boys who worked in the home or community gained competence and came to feel they were worthwhile members of society," said George Vaillant, the psychologist who made the discovery. "And because they felt good about themselves, others felt good about them."
Vaillant's study followed these males in great detail. Interviews were repeated at ages 25, 31 and 47. Under Vaillant, the researchers compared the men's mental-health scores with their boyhood-activity scores with their boyhood-activity scores. Points were awarded for part-time jobs, housework, effort in school, and ability to deal with problems.
The link between what the men had done as boys and how they turned out as adults was surprisingly sharp. Those who had done the most boyhood activities were twice as likely to have warm relations with a wide variety of people, five times as likely to be well paid and 16 times less likely to have been unemployed. The researchers also found that IQ and family social and economic class made no real difference in how the boys turned out. Working----at any age----is important. Childhood activities help a child develop responsibility, independence, confidence and competence---the underpinnings of emotional health. They also help him understand that people must cooperate and work toward common goals. The most competent adults are those who know how to do this. Yet work isn't everything. As Tolstoy once said, "One can live magnificently in this world if one knows how to work and how to love, to work for the person one loves and to love one's work." | 450.txt | 3 |
[
"recording the boys' effort in school",
"evaluating the men's mental health",
"comparing different sets of scores",
"measuring the men's problem solving ability"
] | Vaillant's team obtained their findings by _ . | When John was growing up, other kids felt sorry for him. His parents always had him weeding the garden, carrying out the garbage and delivering newspapers. But when John reached adulthood, he was better off than his childhood playmates. He had more job satisfaction, a better marriage and was healthier. Most of all, he was happier. Far happier.
These are the findings of a 40-year study that followed the lives of 456 teenage boys from Boston. The study showed that those who had worked as boys enjoyed happier and more productive lives than those who had not. "Boys who worked in the home or community gained competence and came to feel they were worthwhile members of society," said George Vaillant, the psychologist who made the discovery. "And because they felt good about themselves, others felt good about them."
Vaillant's study followed these males in great detail. Interviews were repeated at ages 25, 31 and 47. Under Vaillant, the researchers compared the men's mental-health scores with their boyhood-activity scores with their boyhood-activity scores. Points were awarded for part-time jobs, housework, effort in school, and ability to deal with problems.
The link between what the men had done as boys and how they turned out as adults was surprisingly sharp. Those who had done the most boyhood activities were twice as likely to have warm relations with a wide variety of people, five times as likely to be well paid and 16 times less likely to have been unemployed. The researchers also found that IQ and family social and economic class made no real difference in how the boys turned out. Working----at any age----is important. Childhood activities help a child develop responsibility, independence, confidence and competence---the underpinnings of emotional health. They also help him understand that people must cooperate and work toward common goals. The most competent adults are those who know how to do this. Yet work isn't everything. As Tolstoy once said, "One can live magnificently in this world if one knows how to work and how to love, to work for the person one loves and to love one's work." | 450.txt | 2 |
[
"competent adults know more about love than work.",
"Emotional health is essential to a wonderful adult life.",
"Love brings more joy to people than work does.",
"Independence is the key to one's success."
] | What can be inferred from the last paragraph? | When John was growing up, other kids felt sorry for him. His parents always had him weeding the garden, carrying out the garbage and delivering newspapers. But when John reached adulthood, he was better off than his childhood playmates. He had more job satisfaction, a better marriage and was healthier. Most of all, he was happier. Far happier.
These are the findings of a 40-year study that followed the lives of 456 teenage boys from Boston. The study showed that those who had worked as boys enjoyed happier and more productive lives than those who had not. "Boys who worked in the home or community gained competence and came to feel they were worthwhile members of society," said George Vaillant, the psychologist who made the discovery. "And because they felt good about themselves, others felt good about them."
Vaillant's study followed these males in great detail. Interviews were repeated at ages 25, 31 and 47. Under Vaillant, the researchers compared the men's mental-health scores with their boyhood-activity scores with their boyhood-activity scores. Points were awarded for part-time jobs, housework, effort in school, and ability to deal with problems.
The link between what the men had done as boys and how they turned out as adults was surprisingly sharp. Those who had done the most boyhood activities were twice as likely to have warm relations with a wide variety of people, five times as likely to be well paid and 16 times less likely to have been unemployed. The researchers also found that IQ and family social and economic class made no real difference in how the boys turned out. Working----at any age----is important. Childhood activities help a child develop responsibility, independence, confidence and competence---the underpinnings of emotional health. They also help him understand that people must cooperate and work toward common goals. The most competent adults are those who know how to do this. Yet work isn't everything. As Tolstoy once said, "One can live magnificently in this world if one knows how to work and how to love, to work for the person one loves and to love one's work." | 450.txt | 1 |
[
"They only expect to get huge returns.",
"They are acting in an irrational way.",
"They benefit at taxpayers' expense.",
"They will regret doing so someday."
] | What does the author think of college students funding their education through loans? | There're currently 21.5 million students in America, and many will be funding their college on borrowed money. Given that there's now over $1.3 trillion in student loans on the books, it's pretty clear that many students are far from sensible. The average student's debt upon graduation now approaches $40,000, and as college becomes ever more expensive, calls to make it "free" are multiplying. Even Hillary Clinton says that when it comes to college, "Costs won't be a barrier."
But the only way college could be free is if the faculty and staff donated their time, the buildings required no maintenance, and campuses required no utilities. As long as it's impossible to produce something from nothing, costs are absolutely a barrier.
The actual question we debate is who should pay for people to go to college. If taxpayers are to bear the cost of forgiving student loans, shouldn't they have a say in how their money is used?
At least taxpayers should be able to decide what students will study on the public dime. If we're going to force taxpayers to foot the bill for college degrees, students should only study those subjects that're of greatest benefit to taxpayers. After all, students making their own choices in this respect is what caused the problem in the first place. We simply don't need more poetry, gender studies, or sociology majors. How do we know which subjects benefit society? Easy.
Average starting salaries give a clear indication of what type of training society needs its new workers to have. Certainly, there're benefits to a college major beyond the job a student can perform. But if we're talking about the benefits to society, the only thing that matters is what the major enables the student to produce for society. And the value of what the student can produce is reflected in the wage employers are willing to pay the student to produce it.
A low wage for elementary school teachers, however, doesn't mean elementary education isn't important. It simply means there're too many elementary school teachers already.
Meanwhile, there're few who're willing and able to perform jobs requiring a petroleum engineering major, so the value of one more of those people is very high.
So we can have taxpayers pick up students' tuition in exchange for dictating what those students will study. Or we can allow students both to choose their majors and pay for their education themselves. But in the end, one of two things is true:
Either a college major is worth its cost or it isn't. If yes, taxpayer financing isn't needed. If not, taxpayer financing isn't desirable. Either way, taxpayers have no business paying for students' college education. | 2062.txt | 1 |
[
"impractical",
"unsustainable",
"a goal to strive for",
"a way to social equality"
] | In the author's opinion, free college education is ________. | There're currently 21.5 million students in America, and many will be funding their college on borrowed money. Given that there's now over $1.3 trillion in student loans on the books, it's pretty clear that many students are far from sensible. The average student's debt upon graduation now approaches $40,000, and as college becomes ever more expensive, calls to make it "free" are multiplying. Even Hillary Clinton says that when it comes to college, "Costs won't be a barrier."
But the only way college could be free is if the faculty and staff donated their time, the buildings required no maintenance, and campuses required no utilities. As long as it's impossible to produce something from nothing, costs are absolutely a barrier.
The actual question we debate is who should pay for people to go to college. If taxpayers are to bear the cost of forgiving student loans, shouldn't they have a say in how their money is used?
At least taxpayers should be able to decide what students will study on the public dime. If we're going to force taxpayers to foot the bill for college degrees, students should only study those subjects that're of greatest benefit to taxpayers. After all, students making their own choices in this respect is what caused the problem in the first place. We simply don't need more poetry, gender studies, or sociology majors. How do we know which subjects benefit society? Easy.
Average starting salaries give a clear indication of what type of training society needs its new workers to have. Certainly, there're benefits to a college major beyond the job a student can perform. But if we're talking about the benefits to society, the only thing that matters is what the major enables the student to produce for society. And the value of what the student can produce is reflected in the wage employers are willing to pay the student to produce it.
A low wage for elementary school teachers, however, doesn't mean elementary education isn't important. It simply means there're too many elementary school teachers already.
Meanwhile, there're few who're willing and able to perform jobs requiring a petroleum engineering major, so the value of one more of those people is very high.
So we can have taxpayers pick up students' tuition in exchange for dictating what those students will study. Or we can allow students both to choose their majors and pay for their education themselves. But in the end, one of two things is true:
Either a college major is worth its cost or it isn't. If yes, taxpayer financing isn't needed. If not, taxpayer financing isn't desirable. Either way, taxpayers have no business paying for students' college education. | 2062.txt | 0 |
[
"Work even harder to repay society.",
"Choose their subjects more carefully.",
"Choose majors that will serve society's practical needs.",
"Allow taxpayers to participate in college administration."
] | What should students do if taxpayers are to bear their college costs? | There're currently 21.5 million students in America, and many will be funding their college on borrowed money. Given that there's now over $1.3 trillion in student loans on the books, it's pretty clear that many students are far from sensible. The average student's debt upon graduation now approaches $40,000, and as college becomes ever more expensive, calls to make it "free" are multiplying. Even Hillary Clinton says that when it comes to college, "Costs won't be a barrier."
But the only way college could be free is if the faculty and staff donated their time, the buildings required no maintenance, and campuses required no utilities. As long as it's impossible to produce something from nothing, costs are absolutely a barrier.
The actual question we debate is who should pay for people to go to college. If taxpayers are to bear the cost of forgiving student loans, shouldn't they have a say in how their money is used?
At least taxpayers should be able to decide what students will study on the public dime. If we're going to force taxpayers to foot the bill for college degrees, students should only study those subjects that're of greatest benefit to taxpayers. After all, students making their own choices in this respect is what caused the problem in the first place. We simply don't need more poetry, gender studies, or sociology majors. How do we know which subjects benefit society? Easy.
Average starting salaries give a clear indication of what type of training society needs its new workers to have. Certainly, there're benefits to a college major beyond the job a student can perform. But if we're talking about the benefits to society, the only thing that matters is what the major enables the student to produce for society. And the value of what the student can produce is reflected in the wage employers are willing to pay the student to produce it.
A low wage for elementary school teachers, however, doesn't mean elementary education isn't important. It simply means there're too many elementary school teachers already.
Meanwhile, there're few who're willing and able to perform jobs requiring a petroleum engineering major, so the value of one more of those people is very high.
So we can have taxpayers pick up students' tuition in exchange for dictating what those students will study. Or we can allow students both to choose their majors and pay for their education themselves. But in the end, one of two things is true:
Either a college major is worth its cost or it isn't. If yes, taxpayer financing isn't needed. If not, taxpayer financing isn't desirable. Either way, taxpayers have no business paying for students' college education. | 2062.txt | 2 |
[
"It is underestimated by profit-seeking employers.",
"It is to be proved by what they can do on the job.",
"It is well reflected in their average starting salary.",
"It is embodied in how they remove social barriers."
] | What does the author say about the value of a student's college education? | There're currently 21.5 million students in America, and many will be funding their college on borrowed money. Given that there's now over $1.3 trillion in student loans on the books, it's pretty clear that many students are far from sensible. The average student's debt upon graduation now approaches $40,000, and as college becomes ever more expensive, calls to make it "free" are multiplying. Even Hillary Clinton says that when it comes to college, "Costs won't be a barrier."
But the only way college could be free is if the faculty and staff donated their time, the buildings required no maintenance, and campuses required no utilities. As long as it's impossible to produce something from nothing, costs are absolutely a barrier.
The actual question we debate is who should pay for people to go to college. If taxpayers are to bear the cost of forgiving student loans, shouldn't they have a say in how their money is used?
At least taxpayers should be able to decide what students will study on the public dime. If we're going to force taxpayers to foot the bill for college degrees, students should only study those subjects that're of greatest benefit to taxpayers. After all, students making their own choices in this respect is what caused the problem in the first place. We simply don't need more poetry, gender studies, or sociology majors. How do we know which subjects benefit society? Easy.
Average starting salaries give a clear indication of what type of training society needs its new workers to have. Certainly, there're benefits to a college major beyond the job a student can perform. But if we're talking about the benefits to society, the only thing that matters is what the major enables the student to produce for society. And the value of what the student can produce is reflected in the wage employers are willing to pay the student to produce it.
A low wage for elementary school teachers, however, doesn't mean elementary education isn't important. It simply means there're too many elementary school teachers already.
Meanwhile, there're few who're willing and able to perform jobs requiring a petroleum engineering major, so the value of one more of those people is very high.
So we can have taxpayers pick up students' tuition in exchange for dictating what those students will study. Or we can allow students both to choose their majors and pay for their education themselves. But in the end, one of two things is true:
Either a college major is worth its cost or it isn't. If yes, taxpayer financing isn't needed. If not, taxpayer financing isn't desirable. Either way, taxpayers have no business paying for students' college education. | 2062.txt | 2 |
[
"Students should think carefully whether to go to college.",
"Taxpayers should only finance the most gifted students.",
"The worth of a college education is open to debate.",
"College students should fund their own education."
] | What message does the author want to convey in the passage? | There're currently 21.5 million students in America, and many will be funding their college on borrowed money. Given that there's now over $1.3 trillion in student loans on the books, it's pretty clear that many students are far from sensible. The average student's debt upon graduation now approaches $40,000, and as college becomes ever more expensive, calls to make it "free" are multiplying. Even Hillary Clinton says that when it comes to college, "Costs won't be a barrier."
But the only way college could be free is if the faculty and staff donated their time, the buildings required no maintenance, and campuses required no utilities. As long as it's impossible to produce something from nothing, costs are absolutely a barrier.
The actual question we debate is who should pay for people to go to college. If taxpayers are to bear the cost of forgiving student loans, shouldn't they have a say in how their money is used?
At least taxpayers should be able to decide what students will study on the public dime. If we're going to force taxpayers to foot the bill for college degrees, students should only study those subjects that're of greatest benefit to taxpayers. After all, students making their own choices in this respect is what caused the problem in the first place. We simply don't need more poetry, gender studies, or sociology majors. How do we know which subjects benefit society? Easy.
Average starting salaries give a clear indication of what type of training society needs its new workers to have. Certainly, there're benefits to a college major beyond the job a student can perform. But if we're talking about the benefits to society, the only thing that matters is what the major enables the student to produce for society. And the value of what the student can produce is reflected in the wage employers are willing to pay the student to produce it.
A low wage for elementary school teachers, however, doesn't mean elementary education isn't important. It simply means there're too many elementary school teachers already.
Meanwhile, there're few who're willing and able to perform jobs requiring a petroleum engineering major, so the value of one more of those people is very high.
So we can have taxpayers pick up students' tuition in exchange for dictating what those students will study. Or we can allow students both to choose their majors and pay for their education themselves. But in the end, one of two things is true:
Either a college major is worth its cost or it isn't. If yes, taxpayer financing isn't needed. If not, taxpayer financing isn't desirable. Either way, taxpayers have no business paying for students' college education. | 2062.txt | 3 |
[
"Debating upon Year-round Schooling",
"Advantages of Year-round Education",
"Disadvantages of a Long Summer Vacation",
"Different Types of School Calendars"
] | The best title for the passage seems to be | Some people say the traditional calendar of 180 days no longer meets the needs of American society. They point out that students in most other industrial countries are in school more hours a day and more days a year. Critics also say a long summer vacation causes students to forget much of what they learned and schools are under pressure to raise test scores. Some schools have changed their calendars to try to improve student performance. They have lengthened the school day or added days to the year or both. This can be costly if schools need air conditioning on hot days and school employees need to be paid for the extra time.
Some schools have a year-round schedule. The school year is extended over twelve months. Instead of a long vacation, there are many short ones. Local businesses may object to a longer school year because students are unable to work as long at summer jobs. Some parts of the country had year- round programs in the nineteenth century, mostly for economic reasons. They felt it wasted money to use school buildings for only part of the year. Year-round programs can also reduce crowding in schools. In one version, students attend school for nine weeks and then have three weeks off. The students are in groups that are not all in school at the same time.
Another year-round calendar has all students in school together for nine weeks and off for three. This is meant to provide the continuous learning that can be lost over a long break. But year-round schooling has opponents. They say it can cause problems for families when they want to make summer plans. And they say it interferes with activities outside school -- including summer employment.
Some experts say no really good studies have been done to measure the effect of school calendars on performance. But some educators think year-round schooling especially helps students from poor families that lack educational support at home. | 1534.txt | 0 |
[
"The traditional calendar is out of date.",
"Long holidays cause students to forget much of what they learned.",
"Schools face pressure to raise test marks.",
"Schools in other countries do so."
] | Which of the following is NOT one of the reasons that schools should extend school days? | Some people say the traditional calendar of 180 days no longer meets the needs of American society. They point out that students in most other industrial countries are in school more hours a day and more days a year. Critics also say a long summer vacation causes students to forget much of what they learned and schools are under pressure to raise test scores. Some schools have changed their calendars to try to improve student performance. They have lengthened the school day or added days to the year or both. This can be costly if schools need air conditioning on hot days and school employees need to be paid for the extra time.
Some schools have a year-round schedule. The school year is extended over twelve months. Instead of a long vacation, there are many short ones. Local businesses may object to a longer school year because students are unable to work as long at summer jobs. Some parts of the country had year- round programs in the nineteenth century, mostly for economic reasons. They felt it wasted money to use school buildings for only part of the year. Year-round programs can also reduce crowding in schools. In one version, students attend school for nine weeks and then have three weeks off. The students are in groups that are not all in school at the same time.
Another year-round calendar has all students in school together for nine weeks and off for three. This is meant to provide the continuous learning that can be lost over a long break. But year-round schooling has opponents. They say it can cause problems for families when they want to make summer plans. And they say it interferes with activities outside school -- including summer employment.
Some experts say no really good studies have been done to measure the effect of school calendars on performance. But some educators think year-round schooling especially helps students from poor families that lack educational support at home. | 1534.txt | 3 |
[
"the need of science",
"the need of research",
"economic reasons",
"political reasons"
] | There were year-round programs in the 19th century because of .. | Some people say the traditional calendar of 180 days no longer meets the needs of American society. They point out that students in most other industrial countries are in school more hours a day and more days a year. Critics also say a long summer vacation causes students to forget much of what they learned and schools are under pressure to raise test scores. Some schools have changed their calendars to try to improve student performance. They have lengthened the school day or added days to the year or both. This can be costly if schools need air conditioning on hot days and school employees need to be paid for the extra time.
Some schools have a year-round schedule. The school year is extended over twelve months. Instead of a long vacation, there are many short ones. Local businesses may object to a longer school year because students are unable to work as long at summer jobs. Some parts of the country had year- round programs in the nineteenth century, mostly for economic reasons. They felt it wasted money to use school buildings for only part of the year. Year-round programs can also reduce crowding in schools. In one version, students attend school for nine weeks and then have three weeks off. The students are in groups that are not all in school at the same time.
Another year-round calendar has all students in school together for nine weeks and off for three. This is meant to provide the continuous learning that can be lost over a long break. But year-round schooling has opponents. They say it can cause problems for families when they want to make summer plans. And they say it interferes with activities outside school -- including summer employment.
Some experts say no really good studies have been done to measure the effect of school calendars on performance. But some educators think year-round schooling especially helps students from poor families that lack educational support at home. | 1534.txt | 2 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.