题目列表(包括答案和解析)
That year , in the local school, there was a new math teacher, as well as some new pupils. One of the new kids was the stupidest child anyone had ever seen. It made no difference how quickly or how slowly they tried explaining numbers to him; he would always end up saying something enormously stupid. Like two plus two was five, seven times three was twenty-seven, or a triangle had thirty corners……
Before this boy arrived, math lessons had been the most boring of all. Now they were great fun. Encouraged by the new teacher, the children would listen to the pieces of nonsense spouted by the new kid, and they would have to correct his mistakes.
Whenever the new teacher asked questions, the stupid kid would stand up but made the wrong answers, the other students all wanted to be the first to find his mistakes, and then think up the most original ways to explain them. To do this they used all kinds of stuff : sweets, playing cards, oranges, paper planes, etc. It didn’t seem like any of this bothered the new kid.
However, Little Lewis was sure that it was bound to make him feel sad inside. Lewis was sure he would see him crying. So, one day, he decided to follow the new kid home after school. On leaving school, the new kid walked a few minutes to a local park, and there he waited for a while, until someone came along to meet him……
It was the new teacher!
The teacher gave the new kid a hug, and off they went, hand in hand. Following from a distance, Lewis could hear they were talking about math.
【小题1】根据短文第二三段描述，可知这位新老师的工作很有创造性，故选A。
【小题2】根据短文最后一段Following from a distance, Lewis could hear they were talking about math.描述，可知选B，这个所谓的最蠢的学生其实比其它学生知道的多。
【小题3】根据Lewis was sure he would see him crying. So, one day, he decided to follow the new kid home after school.描述，可知选B。
【小题4】联系上文To do this they used all kinds of stuff :可知选C。
【小题5】The math lessons became interesting again because of the new teacher’s ___________.
| A．creativity | B．imagination | C．responsibility | D．curiosity |
| A．was in great need of math teacher’s help after class |
| B．knew much more about math than other classmates |
| C．had no much gift for math and was slow to learn it |
| D．disliked both the new math teacher and his lessons |
| A．learn about where he lived | B．find out if he felt upset |
| C．say something to comfort him | D．make friends with him |
| A．To find the stupidest kid’s mistakes. |
| B．To think up the most original ways to explain. |
| C．To use all kinds of stuff. |
| D．To follow him home after school. |
Nowadays people are troubled by the violence that spreads throughout the media. Movies, television and video games are full of gunplay and bloodshed, and one might reasonably ask what’s wrong with a society that presents videos of violence as entertainment.
Viewing large amounts of violent television and video games may well contribute to violent behavior in certain individuals. The trouble comes when researchers downplay uncertainties in their studies or overstate the case for causality（因果关系）. Skeptics were dismayed several years ago when a group of societies including the American Medical Association tried to end the debate by issuing a joint statement: “At this time, well over 1,000 studies… point to a causal connection between media violence and aggressive behavior in some children.”
Freedom-of-speech advocates accused the societies of catering to politicians, and even disputed the number of studies (most were review articles and essays, they said). When Jonathan Freedman, a social psychologist at the University of Toronto, reviewed the literature, he found only 200 or so studies of television-watching and aggression. And when he weeded out “the most doubtful measures of aggression”, only 28% supported a connection.
The critical point here is causality. The alarmists say they have proved that violent media cause aggression. But the assumptions behind their observations need to be examined. When labeling games as violent or non-violent, should a hero eating a ghost really be counted as a violent event? And when experimenters record the time it takes game players to read “aggressive” or “non-aggressive” words from a list, can we be sure what they are actually measuring? The intention of the new Harvard Center on Media and Child Health to collect and standardize studies of media violence in order to compare their methodologies, assumptions and conclusions is an important step in the right direction.
Another appropriate step would be to tone down the criticism until we know more. Several researchers write, speak and testify quite a lot on the threat posed by violence in the media. That is, of course, their privilege. But when doing so, they often come out with statements that the matter has now been settled, drawing criticism from colleagues. In response, the alarmists accuse critics and news reporters of being deceived by the entertainment industry. Such clashes help neither science nor society.
【小题1】Why is there so much violence shown in movies, TV and video games?
| A．Showing violence is thought to be entertaining. |
| B．Something has gone wrong with today’s society |
| C．Many people are fond of gunplay and bloodshed. |
| D．There is a lot of violence in the real world today. |
| A．Violence on television is fairly accurate reflection of real-world life. |
| B．Most studies exaggerate (夸大) the effect of media violence on the viewers. |
| C．A causal relationship exists between media and real-world violence. |
| D．The influence of media violence on children has been underestimated. |
| A．use standardized measurements in the studies of media violence |
| B．initiated the debate over the influence of violent media on reality |
| C．insist on a direct link between violent media and aggressive behavior |
| D．use appropriate methodology in examining aggressive behavior |
| A．got rid of things that are not good | B．removed unwanted parts from something |
| C．picked out things that are useful | D．took away unnecessary details of a report |
| A．He more than agrees with the views held by the alarmists. |
| B．It should come to an end since the matter has now been settled. |
| C．The past studies in this field have proved to be misleading. |
| D．More studies should be conducted before conclusions are drawn. |
Nowadays people are troubled by the violence that spreads throughout the media. Movies, television and video games are full of gunplay and bloodshed, and one might reasonably ask what’s wrong with a society that presents videos of violence as entertainment.
Viewing large amounts of violent television and video games may well contribute to violent behavior in certain individuals. The trouble comes when researchers downplay uncertainties in their studies or overstate the case for causality（因果关系）. Skeptics were dismayed several years ago when a group of societies including the American Medical Association tried to end the debate by issuing a joint statement: “At this time, well over 1,000 studies… point to a causal connection between media violence and aggressive behavior in some children.”
Freedom-of-speech advocates accused the societies of catering to politicians, and even disputed the number of studies (most were review articles and essays, they said). When Jonathan Freedman, a social psychologist at the University of Toronto, reviewed the literature, he found only 200 or so studies of television-watching and aggression. And when he weeded out “the most doubtful measures of aggression”, only 28% supported a connection.
The critical point here is causality. The alarmists say they have proved that violent media cause aggression. But the assumptions behind their observations need to be examined. When labeling games as violent or non-violent, should a hero eating a ghost really be counted as a violent event? And when experimenters record the time it takes game players to read “aggressive” or “non-aggressive” words from a list, can we be sure what they are actually measuring? The intention of the new Harvard Center on Media and Child Health to collect and standardize studies of media violence in order to compare their methodologies, assumptions and conclusions is an important step in the right direction.
Another appropriate step would be to tone down the criticism until we know more. Several researchers write, speak and testify quite a lot on the threat posed by violence in the media. That is, of course, their privilege. But when doing so, they often come out with statements that the matter has now been settled, drawing criticism from colleagues. In response, the alarmists accuse critics and news reporters of being deceived by the entertainment industry. Such clashes help neither science nor society.
Why is there so much violence shown in movies, TV and video games?
A. Showing violence is thought to be entertaining.
B. Something has gone wrong with today’s society
C. Many people are fond of gunplay and bloodshed.
D. There is a lot of violence in the real world today.
What is the skeptics’ view of media violence?
A. Violence on television is fairly accurate reflection of real-world life.
B. Most studies exaggerate (夸大) the effect of media violence on the viewers.
C. A causal relationship exists between media and real-world violence.
D. The influence of media violence on children has been underestimated.
The author uses the term “alarmists” to refer to those who _________.
A. use standardized measurements in the studies of media violence
B. initiated the debate over the influence of violent media on reality
C. insist on a direct link between violent media and aggressive behavior
D. use appropriate methodology in examining aggressive behavior
The underlined phrase “weeded out” in Paragraph 3 most probably means _________.
A. got rid of things that are not good B. removed unwanted parts from something
C. picked out things that are useful D. took away unnecessary details of a report
What does the writer think of the debate concerning the relationship between the media and violence?
A. He more than agrees with the views held by the alarmists.
B. It should come to an end since the matter has now been settled.
C. The past studies in this field have proved to be misleading.
D. More studies should be conducted before conclusions are drawn.
Nowadays people are troubled by the violence that spreads throughout the media. Movies, television and video games are full of gunplay and bloodshed, and one might reasonably ask what’s wrong with a society that presents videos of violence as entertainment.
Viewing large amounts of violent television and video games may well contribute to violent behavior in certain individuals. The trouble comes when researchers downplay uncertainties in their studies or overstate the case for causality（因果关系）. Skeptics were dismayed several years ago when a group of societies including the American Medical Association tried to end the debate by issuing a joint statement: “At this time, well over 1,000 studies… point to a causal connection between media violence and aggressive behavior in some children.”
Freedom-of-speech advocates accused the societies of catering to politicians, and even disputed the number of studies (most were review articles and essays, they said). When Jonathan Freedman, a social psychologist at the University of Toronto, reviewed the literature, he found only 200 or so studies of television-watching and aggression. And when he weeded out “the most doubtful measures of aggression”, only 28% supported a connection.
The critical point here is causality. The alarmists say they have proved that violent media cause aggression. But the assumptions behind their observations need to be examined. When labeling games as violent or non-violent, should a hero eating a ghost really be counted as a violent event? And when experimenters record the time it takes game players to read “aggressive” or “non-aggressive” words from a list, can we be sure what they are actually measuring? The intention of the new Harvard Center on Media and Child Health to collect and standardize studies of media violence in order to compare their methodologies, assumptions and conclusions is an important step in the right direction.
Another appropriate step would be to tone down the criticism until we know more. Several researchers write, speak and testify quite a lot on the threat posed by violence in the media. That is, of course, their privilege. But when doing so, they often come out with statements that the matter has now been settled, drawing criticism from colleagues. In response, the alarmists accuse critics and news reporters of being deceived by the entertainment industry. Such clashes help neither science nor society.
Why is there so much violence shown in movies, TV and video games?
A. Showing violence is thought to be entertaining.
B. Something has gone wrong with today’s society
C. Many people are fond of gunplay and bloodshed.
D. There is a lot of violence in the real world today.
What is the skeptics’ view of media violence?
A. Violence on television is fairly accurate reflection of real-world life.
B. Most studies exaggerate (夸大) the effect of media violence on the viewers.
C. A causal relationship exists between media and real-world violence.
D. The influence of media violence on children has been underestimated.
The author uses the term “alarmists” to refer to those who _________.
A. use standardized measurements in the studies of media violence
B. initiated the debate over the influence of violent media on reality
C. insist on a direct link between violent media and aggressive behavior
D. use appropriate methodology in examining aggressive behavior
The underlined phrase “weeded out” in Paragraph 3 most probably means _________.
A. got rid of things that are not good B. removed unwanted parts from something
C. picked out things that are useful D. took away unnecessary details of a report
What does the writer think of the debate concerning the relationship between the media and violence?
A. He more than agrees with the views held by the alarmists.
B. It should come to an end since the matter has now been settled.
C. The past studies in this field have proved to be misleading.
D. More studies should be conducted before conclusions are drawn.
湖北省互联网违法和不良信息举报平台 | 网上有害信息举报专区 | 电信诈骗举报专区 | 涉历史虚无主义有害信息举报专区 | 涉企侵权举报专区
违法和不良信息举报电话：027-86699610 举报邮箱：58377363@163.com