单项选择题
1、根据以下资料，回答题：
        Mothers really do favour their “precious first borns”over the children they have later, research has found.
        Among examples of attention lavished (慷慨给予．on the "precious firstborns" (PFBs．were tales of how mothers cub bed shampoo into their own eyes before using it on their baby to ensure it wouldn't sting, and pulling their prams (婴儿车．backwards for miles to keep the sun off their adored offspring.
        While they will conscientiously disinfect (消毒．everything that comes into contact with their PFB and change them up to 150 times a week, their later children have to make do with items licked clean by the dog and stew (炖，焖．in their own juices until their parents are ready to deal with them.
        The term PFB and its poorer sibling the Neglected Subsequent Children (NSCs．were coined bymembers of the parenting website Mumsnet.
        Among the tales reported was one of a mother that used a hairdryer on her baby's bottom after changing her.
        "She was chatting to her neighbor and asked if they were ever disturbed by her crying. "
        "The neighbor assured her they were not, but that they had been woken once or twice by what sounded like a hairdryer. "
        Another serf-obsessed mother turned down an invitation of a friend and her baby's christening party because she thought her own child's "total gorgeousness would show their baby up and make them feel bad".
        Another confirmed the differing hygiene (卫生学．practices used for Child One and Two, saying: "" First child, suck able items must be disinfected in Milton or steam after they're dropped on the floor. Second child: items must be wiped over with a clean damp cloth. Third child: give them to the dog to lick clean. "Justine Roberts, co-founder of Mumsnet, told the reporters that most mothers would agree they　treated the first child differently to later children.
        "Precious First Born syndrome is something-we can all relate to--most muns will confess to having　checked on their sound asleep firstborns several times a night, while neglected subsequent children are　liable to bawl for an age before we even notice," she said.
What does the phrase "stew in their own juices" in Paragraph 3 probably mean?
A．Do not take any measures.
B．Stand what has happened
C．Think about solutions themselves..
D．Cry for possible assistance.


2、

根据以下内容回答题
Is College a Worthy Investment?
A．Why are we spending so much money on college? Andwhy are we so unhappy about it? We all seem to  agree that a college education is wonderful, and yet strangely we worry when we see families investing   so much in this supposedly essential good. Maybe it's time to ask a question that seems almost sacrilegious (大不敬) : is all this investment in college education really worth it?
B． The answer. I fear, is no. For an increasing number of kids, the extra time and money spent pursuing a college diploma will leave them worse off than they were before they set foot on campus.
C．For my entire adult life, a good education has been the most important thing for middle-class households. My parents spent more educating my sister and me than they spent on their house, and  they're not the only ones.., and, of course, for an increasing number of families, most of the cost of  their house is actually the cost of living in a good school district. Questioning the value of a college    education seems a bit like questioning the value of happiness, or tim.
D．The average price of all goods and services has risen about 50 percent. But the price of a college    education has nearly doubled in that time. Is the education that today's students are getting twice as  good? Are new workers twice as smart? Have they become somehow massively more expensive to educate?
E ．Perhaps a bit. Richard Vedder, an Ohio University economics professor, says, "I look at the data, and   I see college costs rising faster than inflation up to the mid-1980s by 1 percent a year. Now I see them  rising 3to 4 percent a year over inflation. What has happened? The federal government has started  dropping money out of airplanes. " Aid has increased, subsidized (补贴的) loans have become    available, and "the universities have gotten the money. " Economist Bryan Caplan, who is writing a  book about education, agrees: "It's a giant waste of resources that will continue as long as the    subsidies continue. "
F．Promotional literature for colleges and student loans often speaks of debt as an "investment in   yourself. " But an investment is supposed to generate income to pay off the loans. More than haft of all recent graduates are tmemployed or in jobs that do not require a degree, and the amount of student- loan debt carried by households has increased more than five times since 1999. These graduates were    told that a diploma was all they needed to succeed, but it won't even get them out of the spare  bedroom at Mom and Dad's. For many, the most visible result of their four years is the loan payments, which now average hundreds of dollars a month on loan balances in the tens of thousands.
G．It's true about the money--sort of. College graduates now make 80 percent more than people who have only a high-school diploma, and though there are no precise estimates, the wage premium (高出的部分) for an outstanding school seems to be even higher. But that's not true of every student. It's very  easy to spend four years majoring in English literature and come out no more employable than you    were before you went in. Conversely, chemical engineers straight out of school can easily make almost four times the wages of an entry-level high-sch0ol graduate.
H． James Heckman, the Nobel Prize-winning economist, has examined how the returns on education  break down for individuals with different backgrounds and levels of ability. "Even with these high  prices, you're still finding a high return for individuals who are bright and motivated," he says. On the  other hand, "if you're not college ready, then the answer is no, it's not worth it. " Experts tend to    agree that for the average student, college is still worth it today, but they also agree that the rapid  increase in price is eating up more and more of the potential return. For borderline students,  tuition ( 学费) rise can push those returns into negative territory.
I． Everyone seems to agree that the government, and parents, should be rethinking how we invest in  higher education-and that employers need to rethink the increasing use of college degrees as crude screening tools for jobs that don't really require college skills, "Employers seeing a surplus of college  graduates and looking to fill jobs are just adding that requirement," says Vedder. "In fact, a college    degree becomes a job requirement for becoming a bar-tender. "
J． We have started to see some change on the fmance side. A law passed in 2007 allows many students to  cap their loan payment at 10 percent of their income and forgives any balance after 25 years. Bnt of course, that doesn't control the cost of education; it just shifts it to taxpayers. It also encourages  gradimtes to choose lower-paying careers, which reduces the financial return to education still further. "You're subsidizing people to become priests and poets and so forth," says Heckman. "You may think that's a good thing, or you may not. " Either way it will be expensive for the government.
K． What might be a lot cheaper is putting more kids to work. Caplan notes that work also btfilds valuable skills--probably more valuable for kids who don't naturally love sitting in a classroom. Heckman agrees wholeheartedly:" People are different, and those abilities can be shaped. That's what we've learned, and public policy should recognize that. "
L． Heckman would like to see more apprenticeship-style (学徒式) programs, where kids can learn in the  workplace  learn not just specific job skills, but the kind of "soft skills," like getting to work on time  and getting along with a team, that are crucial for career success, "It's about having mentors (指导者) and having workplace-based education," he says. "Time  and again I've seen examples of this kind of program working. "
M． Ah, but how do we get there from here? With better public policy, hopefully, but also by making  better individual decisions. "Historically markets have been able to handle these things," says Vedder, "and I think eventually markets will handle this one. ff it doesn't improve soon, people are going to wake up and ask, 'Why am I going to college?'"

Caplan suggests that kids who don't love school go to work,


3、根据下列材料，请回答题：
How to Reinvent College Rankings：Show the Data Students Need Most
A. All rankings are misleading and biased (有偏见的.. But they're also the only way to pick a school. I've heard those exact words dozens of times and inferred their sentiment hundreds more. They undoubtedly were a major contributing factor in the 250.000 applications to the too colleges this past year. With only 14,000 chances available, there will be a lot of disappointed families when decisions are announced in a few days. For 30 years, I've co-authored bestselling books and provocative articles about how to improve one's chances of being accepted at a "top" college.
B. The first edition of our book Getting In! revealed what went on behind the admission committees' closed doors，and introduced the concepts of packaging and positioning to the college-application vocabulary. The newest edition adapts the same principles to the digital age. But the core messagere mains: good colleges are not looking for the well-rounded kid--they're looking to put together thewell-rounded class.
C. What were revelations in 1983 are common knowledge today--at least among college-bound students, parents, and counselors. They also don't have to be told that the odds of getting into a "highly selective" school are ridiculously low. Brown and Dartmouth will each accept about 9 percent of applicants; Cornell, Northwestern, and Georgetown about 16 percent. And Harvard, Yale, and Stanford? Forget about it: less than 7 percent!
D. Wanting to attend a "name" school isn't illogical. And there is nothing illogical in parents wanting a better return on their investment. A college's brand value--whether that school's name will be recognized and open employers' door.
E. Colleges, counselors, and parents talk a lot about finding the right "fit" between a school and a student. In reality, the process is dominated by reputation. The problem is that college reputation shave been controlled by rankings. Far too many "highly ranked" colleges are gaming the rankings and trying to attract more and more applicants--when the particular college is actually a poor "fit" for many of the kids applying. Colleges want to attract and reject more kids because that "selectivity" improves the institution's ranking. College presidents publicly complain there are too many college rankings. Privately, they admit they have to provide the data that feed that maw (大胃口.. They can't afford to be left off a rankings list. The real losers in this system are students and their parents. A bad fit is costly, not just in dollars, but in time, energy, and psychological well-being.
F. The emphasis should be on finding the right fit. But finding the right fit is not east. Subjective guide books like Edward Fiske's--originally titled the New York Times Selective Guide to Colleges--are very useful and consciously do not include rankings. Ted changed his three-category rating system to make it more difficult to simply add "stars" and rank-list colleges. Even families who can afford to visit lots of colleges and endure the backward-walking tours find that carious personalities soon blur in their memory.
G. Thus it is not surprising that anxious, busy parents turn to rankings for shorthand comfort. Unfortunately, the data that U, S. News and other media companies are collecting are largely irrelevant. As a result, the rankings they generate are not meaningless, just misleading. Some examples: U. S. News places a good deal of emphasis on the percentage of faculty who hold a" terminal degree"--typically a Ph. D. Unfortunately, a terminal degree does not correlate (相关的.in any way with whether that professor is a good teacher. It also doesn't improve that professor's accessibility to students. In fact, there is usually such a correlation: the more senior the professor, the less time they have for undergraduates.
H. U.S. News' second most heavily weighted factor--after a college's six-year graduation rate--is a peer assessment of colleges by college presidents and admissions deans. You read that right: administrators are asked to evaluate colleges that are competitive with their own school. If not an complete conflict of interest, this measure is highly suspect.
I. Even some seemingly reasonable "inputs" are often meaningless. U.S. News heavily weights the number of classes with fewer than 20 students. But small classes are like comfort food., it is what high-school kids are familiar with. They have never sat in a large lecture hall with a very interesting speaker. So it is not something they could look forward or value.
J. While most rankings suffer from major problems in criteria(标准. and inputs, the biggest problem is simpler: all the ranking systems use weightings that reflect the editors' personal biases. Very simply，some editors' priorities are undoubtedly going be different from what is important to me. Assuredly preferences are different from my kids', And both will differ markedly from our neighbors' objectives.
K. Colleges say they truly want to attract kids for whom the school will be a good fit. To make good on that promise, colleges need to provide families with insight, not just information； and they need to focus on outputs, not. just inputs. Collecting and sharing four sets of very different data would be a good start； Better insight into the quality of education a student will get on that campus. Colleges need to share the exam scores for all students applying to medical school, law school, business school, and graduate programs. These tests reflect not just the ability of the kids who've gone to that college, but what they've learned in the three-plus years they've attended. Colleges need to assess a campus "happiness" coefficient (系数.. A happy campus is a more productive learning environment; and one that has a lower incidence of alcohol and drug abuse. The full debt that families incur (招致. ; not just student debt. The salaries of graduates one, five, and 10 years after graduation.
L. A fifth useful metric is what employers--both nationally and regionally--think of graduates from particular colleges. Hiring preferences are a useful proxy (代表.for reputation.
M. The last piece in enabling families to find a better fit will come from entrepreneurs. Some smart "kid" will develop an online tool that will allow students and parents to take this new college-reported data and assign weighting factors to the characteristics that are important to them. The tool would then generate a customized ranking of colleges that reflects the family's priorities--not some editor's.
N. Colleges may complain about the rankings, but they are complicit (串通一气的. in keeping them. It is reminiscent (怀旧的. of the classic Claude Raines line in Casablanca: "I'm shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here!" ff colleges really want kids for whom their college is a good fit, they will collect and publish the types of honest data that will give families a better basis for smart decisions.

The rankings generated on the basis of data collected by U.S. News and other media companies are misleading.

简答题
4、中国致力于建设国家创新体系，通过营造良好的环境，推进知识创新、技术创新和体制创新。中国政府支持科学家为了国家需求和科学发展开展基础研究，鼓励他们进行“好奇心驱动的研究”。在未来50年甚至更长的时期里，中国的发展将在很大程度上依赖于今天基础研究和高技术研究的创新成就，依赖于这些研究中所必然孕育的人才。



5、1．近年来，“微博”越来越流行，许多人利用“微博”来表达心声、交流想法、传递信息：
2．“微博”流行的原因；
3．目前“微博”中可能存在的问题。

6、每当提起冰糖葫芦(crysta |-sugar-coated haws)，很多人就能回忆起自己的童年。冰糖葫芦是中国传统美食，酸甜适口，老少皆宜。传统的冰糖葫芦是在冬天才会在市场上看到的，由于山楂和外面的那层糖皮被寒冷的气温冻住，所以咬起来的感觉，十分地坚硬，像在吃冰一样。但是近年来，在夏天冰糖葫芦也有出售，但是由于天气炎热，外面的那层糖皮变得十分黏稠，昧道和冬天比起来也相差甚远。


7、寺庙文化完整地保存了我国各个朝代的历史文物，在国家公布的全国文物保护单位中。寺庙及相关设施占一半，不愧称之为“历史文物的保险库”(Safe Treasury of Cu l tura | Her i tage)。寺庙建筑与传统宫殿建筑形式相结合，具有鲜明的民族风格和民俗特色。同时，寺庙文化已渗透到我们生活的各个方面：如天文、地理、书法、雕刻等。各地一年一度的庙会如火如荼，不仅丰富了各地的文化氛围，同时促进了地方旅游业的发展。


8、You shouM write a short essay entitled Creating a Green Campus．
写作导航
1．建设绿色校园十分重要；
2．绿色校园不仅指绿色环境；
3．为了建设绿色校园我们应该采取的措施。


9、回答题：
　　A) The effect of television on children has been debated ever since the first sets were turned on. Nowthree new studies find that too much tube time can lower test scores, retard learning and even predict college performance. The reports appear in the July issue of the Archives of Pediatrics & Ado-lescent Medicine.
　　B) In the first report, researchers studied the effect that having a TV in a child's bedroom can have onthird graders. "We looked at the household media environment in relation to academic achievementon mathematics, reading and language arts tests," said study author Dina L.G. Borzekowski, an as-sistant professor at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.
　　C)  Borzekowski and her colleague, Dr. Thomas Robinson of Stanford University, collected data on386 third graders and their parents about how much TV the children watched, the number of TVsets, computers and video game consoles in the household and where they were. They also collecteddata on how much time the children spent using the different media, as well as the time spent doinghomework and reading. The researchers found that the media in the household, where it is and howit is used can have a profound effect on learning. "We found that the household media environmenthas a very close association with performance on the different test scores," Borzekowski said.
　　D)  "A child who has a TV in his or her bedroom is likely to have a score that is eight points lower ona mathematics test compared to a child who doesn't have a TV in the bedroom," she noted. Thesechildren also scored lower on the reading and language arts tests. However, children who have ac-cess to a home computer are likely to have higher scores on each of the tests compared with chil-dren who don't have access to a home computer, Borzekowski noted.
　　E) The reasons why TV has this negative effect are not clear, Borzekowski said. "When there's TVin the bedroom, parents are less likely to have control over the content and the amount watched,"Borzekowski said. "They are also unable to know how early or how late the set is on. This seemsto be associated with kids' performance on academic tests." Borzekowski believes that content andthe time the TV is on may be the primary reasons for its negative effect. "If the TV is in the familyroom, then parents can see the content of what children are watching," she said. "Parents can chooseto sit alongside and watch, or turn the set off. A simple and straightforward, positive parenting strat-egy is to keep the TV out of the child's bedroom, or remove it if it's already there."
　　F) In the second report, Dr. Robert J. Hancox from the University of Otago in Dunedin, New Zealand,and colleagues found, regardless of your intelligence or social background, if you watch a lot of TVduring childhood, you are a lot less likely to have a college degree by your mid-20s. In their study,the researchers followed 1,037 people born in 1972 and 1973. Every two years, between the ages of5 and 15, they were asked how much television they watched. The researchers found that those whowatched the most television during these years had earned fewer degrees by the time they were 26."We found that the more television the child had watched, the more likely they were to leave schoolwithout any qualifications," Hancox said in a prepared statement. "Those who watched little televi-sion had the best chance of going on to university and earning a degree."
　　G) Hancox's team found that watching TV at an early age had the most effect on graduating from col-lege. "An interesting finding was that although teenage viewing was strongly linked to leavingschool without any qualifications, it was earlier childhood viewing that had the greatest impact ongetting a degree," he said. "This suggests that excessive television in younger children has a long-lasting adverse effect on educational performance."
　　H) In the third paper, Frederick J. Zimmerman and Dr. Dimitri A. Christakis from the University of Washington report that, for very young children, watching TV can result in lower test scores inmathematics, reading recognition and reading comprehension. "We looked at how much televisionchildren watched before age 3 and then at ages 3 to 5," Zimmerman said. "We found that for chil-dren who watched a small amount of TV in the earlier years, there was co nsiderable beneficial ef-fect compared to children who watched a lot of TV."
　　I) For children aged 3 to 5, the effect was not as clear, Zimmerman said. "There were some beneficialeffects of watching TV on reading, but no beneficial effects for math or vocabulary," he noted. "Theworst pattern was to watch more than three hours of TV before age 3. Those kids had a significantdisadvantage compared to the other kids." Parents should follow the American Academy of Pediat-rics recommendation, which is no TV for children under 2, Zimmerman said. "Personally, I feel thecutoff should be children under 3, because there is just not any good content for children under 3."
　　J) One expert believes that TV can have both positive and negative effects, but it all depends on whatchildren are watching. "Content matters," said Deborah L. Linebarger, an assistant professor at theUniversity of Pennsylvania, who co-authored an accompanying editorial. "Educational content hasbeen found to be related to performance on school readiness tests, higher grades when they are teen-agers, whereas, non-educational content tends to be associated with lower academic performance."
　　K) Another expert agrees. "TV watching takes up space that could be used by more useful things," saidDr. Christopher P. Lucas, a clinical coordinator at the Early Childhood Evaluation and TreatmentProgram at the New York University Child Study Center. "TV is not necessarily toxic, but is some-thing that has to be done in moderation; something that balances the other needs of the child forhealthy development."
　　L) Lucas puts the responsibility for how much TV kids watch and what they watch squarely on par-ents. "The amount of TV watching certainly has a link with the reduced amount of time reading ordoing homework," he said. "The key is the amount of control parents have in limiting the amount ofaccess. Get the TV out of the bedroom; be aware of what is being watched; limit the amount of TVwatching."
According to Borzekowski, children having chances to use a family computer are likely to acquire better results on the different tests.

10、