题目内容
CA scientist working at her lab bench and a six-old baby playing with his food might seem to have little in common.After all,the scientist is engaged in serious research to uncover the very nature of the physical world,and the baby is,well, just playing…right?Perhaps,but some developmental psychologists()have argued that this“play”is more like a scientific investigation than one might think.Take a closer look at the baby playing at the table.Each time the bowl of rice is pushed over the table edge,itfalls in the ground---and, in the process, it belongs out important evidence about how physical objects interact ; bowls of rice do not flood in mid-sit, but require support to remain stable. It is likely that babies are not born knowing the basic fact of the universe; nor are they ever clearly taught it. Instead, babies may form an understanding of object support through repeated experiments and then build on this knowledge to learn even more about how objects interact. Though their ranges and tools differ, the baby’s investigation and the scientist’s experiment appear to share the same aim(to learn about the natural world ), overall approach (gathering direct evidence from the world), and logic (are my observations what I expected?).Some psychologists suggest that young children learn about more than just the physical world in this way---that they investigate human psychology and the rules of language using similar means. For example, it may only be through repeated experiments, evidence gathering, and finally overturning a theory, that a baby will come to accept the idea that other people can have different views and desires from what he or she has, for example, unlike the child , Mommy actually doesn’t like Dove chocolate.Viewing childhood development as a scientific investigation throws on how children learn ,but it also offers an inspiring look at science and scientists. Why do young children and scientists seem to be so much alike? Psychologists have suggested that science as an effort ---the desire to explore, explain, and understand our world---is simply something that comes from our babyhood. Perhaps evolution provided human babies with curiosity and a natural drive to explain their worlds, and adult scientists simply make use of the same drive that served them as children. The same cognitive systems that make young children feel good about feel good about figuring something out may have been adopted by adult scientists. As some psychologists put it, ”It is not that children are little scientists but that scientists are big children.” We learn from Paragraph 2 that（）
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
阅读短文，并按照题目要求用英语回答问题。I’m a 34-year-old man, married, lived in a nice house, and have a successful career as an educational consultant. But my life was not always so great. I had a learning disability from an early age. I went to a special school where I got plenty of extra help. Still, I suffered the rest of my school days in public schools.My life improved remarkably when I discovered art. The art world gave me a chance to express myself without words. I went to a workshop and gradually got good at making things with clay(黏土). Here I learned my first important lesson: disabled as I was in language. I could still be smart and well express myself with clay. And my confidence came along.I got my next lesson from rock climbing. It was a fun thing but I was scared from the start. I soon noticed it wasn’t a talent thing; it was practice. So I did it more. After about five years of climbing, I found myself in Yosemite Valley on a big wall. I learned that if you fall in love with something and do it all the time, you will get better at it.Later I decided to apply my previous experience to learning how to read and write. Every day I practiced reading and writing, which I used to avoid as much as possible. After two hard years, I was literate.Having gone through the long process with art, rock climbing, and reading and writing, now I’ve got to a point in my life where I know I am smart enough to dive into an area that is totally unknown, hard, but interesting. What made the author’s school days difficult? (No more than 5 words)
阅读下面短文，掌握其大意，然后从21—40各题所给的四个选项（A、B、C和D）中，选出最佳选项，并在答题纸上将该选项标号涂黑。During the war,my husband was stationed at an army camp in a desert in California.I went to live there in order to be 21 him. I hated the place .I had never 22 been so unhappy . My husband was ordered out on a long-term duty,and I was left in a tiny shack(棚屋) alone. The heat was 23 -almost 125 0F even in the shade of a cactus(仙人掌)。 24 a soul to talk to . The wind blew non-stop ,and all the food I ate ,and the evry air I breathed,were 25 with sand , sand , sand !I was so sorry for myself that I wrote to my parents. I told them I was 26 and coming back home.I said I couldn’t stand it one minute longer. I 27 be in prison! My father answered my 28 with just two lines-two lines that will always sing in my 29 - two lines that completely changed my life :Two men looked out from prison barsOne saw the mud ,the other saw the starsI read those two lines 30 I was ashamed of myself. I made up my mind I would find out what was good in my present 31 ; I would look for the starsI made friends with the natives,and their 32 amazed me. They gave me presents of their favorite artworks which they had 33 to sell to toueists . I studied the delightful forms of the cactus .I watched for the desert sunsets,and 34 for seashells that had been left there millions of years ago when the desert had been an ocean 35What brought about this 36 change in me ? The desert hadn’t changed , 37 I had .I had changed my 38 And by doing so ,I changed an unhappy experience into the most amazing 39 of my life . I was excited by this new world that I had dicovered I had looked out of my self-creatded prison and 40 the stars 23（）
The dictionary is（）: many words have been added to the language since it was published.
CA scientist working at her lab bench and a six-old baby playing with his food might seem to have little in common.After all,the scientist is engaged in serious research to uncover the very nature of the physical world,and the baby is,well, just playing…right?Perhaps,but some developmental psychologists()have argued that this“play”is more like a scientific investigation than one might think.Take a closer look at the baby playing at the table.Each time the bowl of rice is pushed over the table edge,itfalls in the ground---and, in the process, it belongs out important evidence about how physical objects interact ; bowls of rice do not flood in mid-sit, but require support to remain stable. It is likely that babies are not born knowing the basic fact of the universe; nor are they ever clearly taught it. Instead, babies may form an understanding of object support through repeated experiments and then build on this knowledge to learn even more about how objects interact. Though their ranges and tools differ, the baby’s investigation and the scientist’s experiment appear to share the same aim(to learn about the natural world ), overall approach (gathering direct evidence from the world), and logic (are my observations what I expected?).Some psychologists suggest that young children learn about more than just the physical world in this way---that they investigate human psychology and the rules of language using similar means. For example, it may only be through repeated experiments, evidence gathering, and finally overturning a theory, that a baby will come to accept the idea that other people can have different views and desires from what he or she has, for example, unlike the child , Mommy actually doesn’t like Dove chocolate.Viewing childhood development as a scientific investigation throws on how children learn ,but it also offers an inspiring look at science and scientists. Why do young children and scientists seem to be so much alike? Psychologists have suggested that science as an effort ---the desire to explore, explain, and understand our world---is simply something that comes from our babyhood. Perhaps evolution provided human babies with curiosity and a natural drive to explain their worlds, and adult scientists simply make use of the same drive that served them as children. The same cognitive systems that make young children feel good about feel good about figuring something out may have been adopted by adult scientists. As some psychologists put it, ”It is not that children are little scientists but that scientists are big children.” What is the author’s tone when he discusses the connection between scientists’ research and babies’ play?（）
微信支付 
支付宝支付