题目内容
TEXT B In the college admissions wars. we parents are the true gladiators. We’re pushing our kids to get good grades, take SAT prep courses and build resumes so they can get into the college of our first choice. We say our motives are selfless and sensible. A degree from Stanford or Princeton is the ticket for life. If Aaron and Nicole don’t get in, they’re forever doomed. Gosh, we’re delusional. I’ve twice been to the wars. and as I survey the battlefield, something different is happening. It’s oneupmanship among parents. We see our kids’ college pedigrees as trophies attesting to how well--or how poorly--we’ve raised them. But we can’t acknowledge mat our obsession is more about us than them. So we’ve contrived various justifications that turn out to be half-truths, prejudices or myths. It actually doesn’t matter much whether Aaron and Nicole go to Stanford. Admissions anxiety afflicts only a minority of parents. It’s true that getting into college has generally become tougher because the number of high-school graduates has grown. From 1994 to 2006, the increase is 28 percent. Still, 64 percent of freshmen attend schools where acceptance rates exceed 70 percent, and the application surge at elite schools dwarfs population growth. We have a full blown prestige panic; we worry that there won’t be enough trophies to go around. Fearful parents prod their children to apply to more schools than ever. "The epicenters of parental anxiety used to be on the coasts: Boston, New York, Washington, Los Angeles," says Tom Parker, Amherst’s admissions dean. "But it’s radiated throughout the country." Underlying the hysteria is the belief that scarce elite degrees must be highly valuable. Their graduates must enjoy more success because they get a better education and develop better contacts, All that’s plausible--and mostly wrong. "We haven’t found any convincing evidence that selectivity or prestige matters," says Ernest T. Pascarella of the University of Iowa, co-author of How College Affects Students, an 827 page evaluation of hundreds of studies of the college experience. Selective schools don’t systematically employ better instructional approaches than less-selective schools, according to a study by Pascarella and George Kuh of Indiana University. Some do; some don’t. On two measures--professors’ feedback and the number of essay exams--selective schools do slightly worse. By some studies, selective schools do enhance their graduates’ lifetime earnings. The gain is reckoned at 2 percent to 4 percent for every 100 point increase in a school’s average SAT scores. But even this ad vantage is probably a statistical fluke. A well known study by Princeton economist Alan Krueger and Stacy Berg Dale of Mathematica Policy Research 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, paradoxically, its significance is declining. The reason: so many similar people go elsewhere: Getting into college isn’t life’s only competition. In the next competition--the job market, graduate school--the results may change. Old-boy networks are breaking down, Krueger studied admissions to one top Ph. D. program. High scores on the Graduate Record Exam helped explain who got in; Ivy League degrees didn’t. So, parents, lighten up. The stakes 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 of students 20 years out 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. What fires parents’ fanaticism is their self-serving desire to announce their own success. Many succumb; I did. I located my ideal school for my daughter. She got in and went elsewhere. Take that, Dad. I located the ideal school for my son. Fleck, he wouldn’t even visit the place, Pow, Dad. They both love their schools and seem amply stimulated. Foolish Dad. Which of the following statements about selective schools is TRUE
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
TEXT C The idea that government should regulate intellectual property through copyrights and patents is relatively recent in human history, and the precise details of what intellectual property is protected for how long vary across nations and occasionally change. There are two standard sociological justifications for patents or copyrights: They reward creators for their labor, and they encourage greater creativity. Both of these are empirical claims that can be tested scientifically and could be false in some realms. Consider music. Star performers existed before the 20th century, such as Franz Liszt and Niccolo Paganini, but mass media produced a celebrity system promoting a few stars whose music was not necessarily the best or most diverse. Copyright provides protection for distribution companies and for a few celebrities, thereby helping to support the industry as currently defined, but it may actually harm the majority of performers. This is comparable to Anatole France’s famous irony, "The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges." In theory, copyright covers the creations of celebrities and obscurities equally, but only major distribution companies have the resources to defend their property rights in court. In a sense, this is quite fair, because nobody wants to steal unpopular music, but by supporting the property rights of celebrities, copyright strengthens them as a class in contrast to anonymous musicians. Internet music file sharing has become a significant factor in the social lives of children, who download bootleg music tracks for their own use and to give as gifts to friends. If we are to believe one recent poll done by a marketing firm rather than social scientists, 48%o of American Internet users aged 12 to 17 had downloaded music files in the past month. In so doing, they violate copyright laws, and criminologists would hypothesize they thereby learn contempt for laws in general. A poll by the Pew Internet and American Life Project found that two-thirds of an estimated 35 million Americans who download music files do not care whether they are copyrighted. Thus, on the level of families, ending copyright could be morally as well as economically advantageous. On a much higher level, however, the culture-exporting nations (notably the United States) could stand to lose, although we cannot really predict the net balance of costs and benefits in the absence of proper research. We do not presently have good cross-national data on file sharing or a well-developed theoretical framework to guide research on whether copyright protection supports cultural imperialism versus enhancing the positions of diverse cultures in the global marketplace. It will not be easy to test such hypotheses, and extensive economic research has not conclusively answered the question of whether the patent system really promotes innovation. Vie will need many careful, sharp focus studies of well-formed hypotheses in specific industries and sectors of life. For example, observational and interview research can uncover the factors that really promote cultural innovation among artists of various kinds and determine the actual consequences for children of Internet peer-to-peer file sharing. Free Internet music file sharing may bring about all of the following consequences EXCEPT ______.
A1型题 关于甲亢手术治疗的适应证，不正确的是（）.
TEXT C The idea that government should regulate intellectual property through copyrights and patents is relatively recent in human history, and the precise details of what intellectual property is protected for how long vary across nations and occasionally change. There are two standard sociological justifications for patents or copyrights: They reward creators for their labor, and they encourage greater creativity. Both of these are empirical claims that can be tested scientifically and could be false in some realms. Consider music. Star performers existed before the 20th century, such as Franz Liszt and Niccolo Paganini, but mass media produced a celebrity system promoting a few stars whose music was not necessarily the best or most diverse. Copyright provides protection for distribution companies and for a few celebrities, thereby helping to support the industry as currently defined, but it may actually harm the majority of performers. This is comparable to Anatole France’s famous irony, "The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges." In theory, copyright covers the creations of celebrities and obscurities equally, but only major distribution companies have the resources to defend their property rights in court. In a sense, this is quite fair, because nobody wants to steal unpopular music, but by supporting the property rights of celebrities, copyright strengthens them as a class in contrast to anonymous musicians. Internet music file sharing has become a significant factor in the social lives of children, who download bootleg music tracks for their own use and to give as gifts to friends. If we are to believe one recent poll done by a marketing firm rather than social scientists, 48%o of American Internet users aged 12 to 17 had downloaded music files in the past month. In so doing, they violate copyright laws, and criminologists would hypothesize they thereby learn contempt for laws in general. A poll by the Pew Internet and American Life Project found that two-thirds of an estimated 35 million Americans who download music files do not care whether they are copyrighted. Thus, on the level of families, ending copyright could be morally as well as economically advantageous. On a much higher level, however, the culture-exporting nations (notably the United States) could stand to lose, although we cannot really predict the net balance of costs and benefits in the absence of proper research. We do not presently have good cross-national data on file sharing or a well-developed theoretical framework to guide research on whether copyright protection supports cultural imperialism versus enhancing the positions of diverse cultures in the global marketplace. It will not be easy to test such hypotheses, and extensive economic research has not conclusively answered the question of whether the patent system really promotes innovation. Vie will need many careful, sharp focus studies of well-formed hypotheses in specific industries and sectors of life. For example, observational and interview research can uncover the factors that really promote cultural innovation among artists of various kinds and determine the actual consequences for children of Internet peer-to-peer file sharing. The word "obscurities" in the second paragraph most probably means ______.
TEXT D Fishermen on the high seas have plenty of worries, not the least of which are boat tossing storms, territorial squabbles and even pirates. Now Boris Worm, a marine biologist at Dalhousie University in Halifax, Canada, has added another. After studying, among other things, global catch data over more than 50 years, he and a team of 13 researchers in four countries have come to a stunning conclusion. By the middle of this century, fishermen will have almost nothing left to catch. "None of us regular working folk are going to be able to afford seafood," says Stephen Palumbi, a Stanford University marine biologist and co-author of the study published in Science. "It’s going to be too rare and too expensive." Don’t tell that to your local sushi chef. Over the past three decades, the fish export trade has grown fourfold, to 30 million tons, and its value has increased ninefold, to $ 71 Billion. The dietary attractiveness of seafood has stoked demand. About 90% of the ocean’s big predators like cod and tuna--have been fished out of existence. Increasingly, fish and shrimp farms are filling the shortfall. Though touted as a solution to overfishing, many of them have--along with rampant coastal development, climate change and pollution devastated the reefs, mangroves and seagrass beds where many commercially valuable fish hatch. Steven Murawski, chief scientist at the U. S. National Marine Fisheries Service, finds Worm’s headlining prediction far too pessimistic, Industry experts are even more skeptical "There’s now a global effort to reduce or eliminate fishing practices that aren’t sustainable," says industry analyst Howard Johnson. "With that increased awareness, these projections just aren’t realistic." Perhaps. Still, the destructive fishing practices that have decimated tuna and cod have not declined worldwide, as Johnson suggests. Up to half the marine life caught by fishers is discarded, often dead, as bycatch, and vibrant coral forests are still being stripped bare by dragnets. Worm argues that fisheries based on ecosystems stripped of their biological diversity are especially prone to collapse. At least 29% of fished species have already collapsed, according to the study, and the trend is accelerating. what’s a fish eater to do "Vote with your wallet," says Michael Sutton, who runs the Monterey Bay Aquarium’s Seafood Watch program in California. Since 1999, the aquarium has handed out pocket guides listing sustainably harvested seafood. The Marine Stewardship Council has partnered with corporations to similarly certify wild and farm-raised seafood. Some 370 products in more than two dozen countries bear the British group’s "Fish Forever" label of approval. Wal-Mart and Red Lobster, among others, have made commitments to sell sustainably harvested seafood. But that’s just a spit in the ocean unless consumers in Japan, India, China and Europe join the chorus for change. "If everyone in the U. S. started eating sustainable seafood," says Worldwatch Institute senior researcher Brian Halweil, "it would be wonderful, but it wouldn’t address the global issues. We’re at the very beginning of this." The author’s attitude towards the opponents of Worm’s study is ______.
微信支付 
支付宝支付