People who are hit by lightning and survive often have long-term effects. These may include memory loss, sleep disorders, muscle pain and depression(郁闷).
Experts tell people to seek(寻找) the safety of a building or a hard-top vehicle any time they hear thunder, even if it is not raining. They say lightning can strike as far as sixteen kilometers from any rainfall. Lightning can travel sideways. And at least ten percent of lightning happens without any clouds overhead that you can see.
People who are outdoors should make sure they are not the tallest thing around. Bend(屈身) low to the ground, but do not lie down. And do not stand near a tree or any tall object. Get away from water and anything made of metal. A car is safe, but do not touch any metal inside.
Safety experts say people in buildings should stay away from anything with wires or pipes that lead to the outside. The National Weather Service says if you plan to disconnect any electronic equipment, do so before the storm arrives. Do not use a wired telephone. Do not use water. All these can carry electricity.
Some people think a person struck by lightning carries an electrical charge （电荷） afterward. Experts say this is not true. It is safe to begin emergency treatment.
Each year about four hundred people in the United States are struck by lightning. Last year forty four people died. The average(平均) is close to seventy. The National Weather Service says that is more than the number of people killed by severe storms.
【小题1】According to the passage, which of the following is NOT true?

As the price of a college degree continues to rise, there's growing evidence that the monetary（货币的） payoff isn't quite as big as often advertised. The best estimate now is that a college degree is worth about $300,000 in today's dollars--nowhere near the million figure that is often quoted.
"That million number has driven me crazy!" says Sandy Baum, a Skidmore economist who studied the value of a college degree for the College Board last year.
Baum's research showed that college graduates earn, on average, about $20,000 a year more than those who finished their educations at high school. Add that up over a 40-year working life and the total differential is about $800,000, she figures. But since much of that bonus is earned many years from now, taking away the impact of inflation means that$800,000 in future dollars is worth only about $450,000 in today's dollars.
Then, if you remove the cost of a college degree--about ,$30,000 in tuition and books for students who get no aid and attend public in-state universities--and the money a student could have earned at a job instead of attending school, the real net value in today's dollars is somewhere in the $300,000 range, a number confirmed by other studies.
But, especially these days, that still makes a college degree one of the most lucrative investments a person can make, Baum notes.
　Better yet, college graduates can go on to earn advanced degrees, which return even bigger payoffs. The average holder of a bachelor's degree earns about$51,000 a year, Baum calculates. But those who've gone on to earn MBAs, law degrees, or other professional degrees earn about $100,000 a year.
　In addition, Baum found that there are plenty of other rewards for a degree. The quality of the jobs college graduates get is far better, for example. College graduates are more likely to get jobs with health insurance. And it is easier for them to find and hold jobs. The unemployment rate for college graduates was just 2.2 percent last year, half the unemployment level of those with only high school diplomas.
There are lots of other nonmonetary benefits as well. College graduates are healthier, contribute more to their communities, and raise kids who are better prepared academically, studies show.
Other researchers have found that the payoff of a degree is especially lucrative for students from low-income families, since the education and degrees give them a chance to break out of low-paying careers.
【小题1】What can be inferred from Para 1 ?

Baekeland and Hartmann report that the “short sleepers” had been more or less average in their sleep needs until the men were in their teens. But at about age 15 or so, the men voluntarily began cutting down their nightly sleep time because of pressures from school, work, and other activities. These men tended to view their nightly periods of unconsciousness as bothersome interruptions in their daily routines.

　　 In general, these “short sleeps” appeared ambitious, active, energetic, cheerful, conformist(不动摇) in their opinions, and very sure about their career choices. They often held several jobs at once, or workers full-or part-time while going to school. And many of them had a strong urge to appear “normal” or “acceptable” to their friends and associates.

　　When asked to recall their dreams, the “short sleepers” did poorly. More than this, they seemed to prefer not remembering. In similar fashion, their usual way of dealing with psychological problems was to deny that the problem existed, and then to keep busy in the hope that the trouble would go away.

　　The sleep patterns of the “short sleepers” were similar to, but less extreme than, sleep patterns shown by many mental patients categorized as manic(疯人).

　　The “long sleepers” were quite different indeed. Baekeland and Hartmann report that these young men had been lengthy sleeps since childhood. They seemed to enjoy their sleep, protected it, and were quite concerned when they were occasionally robbed of their desired 9 hours of nightly bed rest. They tended to recall their dreams much better than did the “short sleepers.”

　　Many of the “long sleepers” were shy, anxious, introverted (内向), inhibited (压抑), passive, mildly depressed, and unsure of themselves (particularly in social situations). Several openly states that sleep was an escape from their daily problems.

1. According to the report,______.

　　A. many short sleepers need less sleep by nature

　　B. many short sleepers are forced to reduce their nightly sleep time because they are busy

        with their work

　　C. long sleepers sleep a longer period of time during the day

　　D. many long sleepers preserve their sleeping habit formed during their childhood

2. Many “short sleepers” are likely to hold the view that _____.

　　A. sleep is a withdrawal from the reality

　　B. sleep interferes with their sound judgment

　　C. sleep is the least expensive item on their routine program

　　D. sleep is the best way to deal with psychological troubles

3.It is stated in the third paragraph that short sleepers _____.

　　A. are ideally vigorous even under the pressures of life

　　B. often neglect the consequences of inadequate sleep

　　C. do not know how to relax properly

　　D. are more unlikely to run into mental problems

4. When sometimes they cannot enjoy adequate sleep, the long sleepers might ____.

　　A. appear disturbed                     B. become energetic

　　C. feel dissatisfied                        D. be extremely depressed

PALO ALTO, California----"Switching off the television may help prevent children from getting fatter---- even if they do not change their diet or increase the amount they exercise," US researchers said last week.
　　A study of 192 third and fourth graders, generally aged eight and nine, found that children who cut the number of hours spent watching television gained nearly two pounds(0.9kg) less over a one-year period than those who did not change their television diet.
　　"The findings are important because they show that weight loss can only be the result of a reduction in television viewing and not any other activity," said Thomas Robinson, a pediatrician(儿科专家) at Stanford University.
　　"American children spend an average of more than four hours per day watching television and videos or playing video games, and rates of childhood being very fat have doubled over the past 20 years," Robinson said.
　　In the study, presented this week to the Pediatric Academic Societies‘ annual meeting in San Francisco, the researchers persuaded about 100 of the students to reduce their television viewing by one-quarter to one-third.
　　Children watching fewer hours of television showed a significantly smaller increase in waist size and had less body fat than other students who continued their normal television viewing, even though neither group ate a special diet or took part in any extra exercise.
　　"One explanation for the weight loss could be the children unstuck to the television may simply have been moving around more and burning off calories," Robinson said.
　　"Another reason might be due to eating fewer meals in front of the television. Some studies have suggested that eating in front of the TV encourages people to eat more," Robinson said.
【小题1】The author tries to tell us in the first two paragraphs that ________.

In the college-admissions wars, we parents are the true fighters. We’re pushing our kids to get good grades, take SAT preparatory courses and build resumes so they can get into the college of our first choice. I’ve twice been to the wars, and as I survey the battlefield, something different is happening. We see our kids’ college background as a prize demonstrating how well we’ve raised them. But we can’t acknowledge that our obsession(痴迷) is more about us than them. So we’ve created various justifications（辩解）that turn out to be half-truths, prejudices or myths. It actually doesn’t matter much whether Aaron and Nicole go to Stanford.
We have a full-developed panic; we worry that there won’t be enough prizes to go around. Fearful parents urge their children to apply to more schools than ever. What causes the hysteria(歇斯底里) is the belief that scarce elite（精英）degrees must be highly valuable. Their graduates must enjoy more success because they get a better education and develop better contacts. All seems right but mostly wrong. We haven’t found any convincing evidence that selectivity or prestige matters. Selective schools don’t systematically employ better instructional approaches than less selective schools. On two measures—professors’ feedback and the number of essay exams selective schools do slightly worse.
By some studies, selective schools do enhance（提高） their graduates’ lifetime earnings. The gain is reckoned at 2-4% for every 100-point increase in a school’s average SAT scores. But even this advantage is probably a statistical fluke(偶然). A well-known study examined students who got into highly selective schools and then went elsewhere. They earned just as much as graduates from higher-status schools.
Kids count more than their colleges. Getting into Yale may signify intelligence, talent and ambition. But it’s not the only indicator and, surprisingly, its significance is declining. The reason: so many similar people go elsewhere. Getting into college is not life’s only competition. In the next competition—the job market and graduate school—the results may change. Princeton economist Alan Krueger studied admissions to one top Ph.D. program. High scores on the GRE helped explain who got in; degrees of famous universities didn’t.
So, parents, take it easy（lighten up）. The stakes (利害关系) have been vastly exaggerated. Up to a point, we can rationalize our pushiness. America is a competitive society; our kids need to adjust to that. But too much pushiness can be destructive. The very ambition we impose on our children may get some into Harvard but may also set them up for disappointment. One study found that, other things being equal, graduates of highly selective schools experienced more job dissatisfaction. They may have been so conditioned to being on top that anything less disappoints.
1. Why does the author say that parents are the true fighters in the college-admissions wars?
A. They have the final say in which university their children are to attend.
B. They know best which universities are most suitable for their children.
C. They have to carry out intensive surveys of colleges before children make an application.
D. They care more about which college their children go to than the children themselves.
2. Why do parents urge their children to apply to more schools than ever?
A. They want to increase their children’s chances of entering a prestigious college.
B. They hope their children can enter a university that offers attractive scholarships.
C. Their children will have a wider choice of which college to go to.
D. Elite universities now enroll fewer student than they used to.
3. What does the author mean by “kids count more than their colleges” Line1, para.4?
A. Continuing education is more important to a person’s success.
B. A person’s happiness should be valued more than their education.
C. Kids’ actual abilities are more important than their college background.
D. What kids learn at college cannot keep up with job market requirements.
4. What does Krueger’s study tell us?
A. Getting into Ph.D. programs may be more competitive than getting into college.
B. Degrees of prestigious universities do not guarantee entry to graduate programs.
C. Graduates from prestigious universities do not care much about their GRE scores.
D. Connections built in prestigious universities may be kept long after graduation.
5. One possible result of pushing children into elite universities is that______
A. they earn less than their peers from other institutions　　
B. they turn out to be less competitive in the job market
C. they experience more job dissatisfaction after graduation　
D. they overemphasize their qualifications in job application