题目内容
常年女性患者导尿,插入尿管多少厘米后,见尿再插1-2cm( )
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
常年男性患者导尿,插入尿管多少厘米后,见尿再插1-2cm( )
Directions: Read the five passages below and answer the questions following the passages by choosing the best answer from the four choices marked A), B), C) and D).Questions 1 to 6 are based on the following passage.【1】Engineering students are supposed to be examples of practicality and rationality, but when it comes to my college education, I am an idealist and a fool. In high school, I wanted to be an electrical engineer and, of course, any sensible student with my aims would have chosen a college with a large engineering department, famous reputation and lots of good labs and research equipment. Nevertheless, that is not what I did.【2】I chose to study engineering at a small liberal arts(文科) university that doesn't even offer a major in electrical engineering. Obviously, this was not a practical choice; I came here for more noble reasons. I wanted a broad education that would provide me with flexibility and a value system to guide me in my career. I wanted to open my eyes and expand my vision by interacting with people who weren't studying science or engineering. My parents, teachers and other adults praised me for such a sensible choice. They told me I was wise and mature beyond my 18 years, and I believed them.【3】I headed off to college sure I was going to have an advantage over those students who went to big engineering "factories" where they didn't care if you had values or were flexible. I was going to be a complete engineer: technical genius and sensitive humanist(人文学者) all in one.【4】Now I'm not so sure. Somewhere along the way, my noble ideals crashed into reality, as all noble ideals eventually do. After three years of struggling to balance math, physics and engineering courses with liberal arts courses, I have learned there are reasons why few engineering students try to reconcile (协调) engineering with liberal arts courses in college.【5】The reality that has blocked my path to become the typical successful student is that engineering and the liberal arts simply don't mix as easily as I assumed in high school. Individually they shape a person in very different ways; together they threaten to confuse. The struggle to reconcile the two fields of study is difficult.Why did the author choose to study engineering at a small liberal-arts university____?
Questions 19 to 24 are based on the following passage.【1】Call it the “learning paradox”, the more you struggle and even fail while you’re trying to learn new information, the better you’re likely to recall and apply that information later.【2】The learning paradox is at the heart of “productive failure”, a phenomenon identified by researcher Manu Kapur. Kapur points out that while the model adopted by many teachers when introducing students to new knowledge―providing lots of structure and guidance early on, until the students show that they can do it on their own ― makes intuitive sense, it may not be the best way to promote learning. Rather, it’s better to let the learners wrestle (较劲) with the material on their own for a while, refraining from giving them any assistance at the start. In a paper published recently, Kapur applied the principle of productive failure to mathematical problem solving in three schools.【3】With one group of students, the teacher provided strong “scaffolding” ― instructional support — and feedback. With the teacher’s help, these pupils were able to find the answers to their set of problems. Meanwhile, a second group was directed to solve the same problems by collaborating with one another, without any prompts from their instructor. These students weren’t able to complete the problems correctly. But in the course of trying to do so, they generated a lot of ideas about the nature of the problems and about what potential solutions would look like. And when the two groups were tested on what they’d learned, the second group “significantly outperformed” the first. The apparent struggles of the floundering (挣扎的) group have what Kapur calls a “hidden efficacy”: they lead people to understand the deep structure of problems, not simply their correct solutions. When these students encounter a new problem of the same type on a test, they’re able to transfer the knowledge they’ve gathered more effectively than those who were the passive recipients of someone else’s expertise.【4】In the real world, problems rarely come neatly packaged, so being able to discern their deep structure is key. But, Kapur notes, none of us like to fail, no matter how often Silicon Valley entrepreneurs praise the beneficial effects of an idea that fails or a start-up company that crashes and burns. So we need to “design for productive failure” by building it into the learning process. Kapur has identified three conditions that promote this kind of beneficial struggle. First, choose problems to work on that “challenge but do not frustrate”. Second, provide learners with opportunities to explain and elaborate on what they’re doing. Third, give learners the chance to compare and contrast good and bad solutions to the problems. And to those students who protest this tough-love teaching style: you'll thank me later.Which of the following sayings best justifies the “learning paradox” proposed by the author()?
Questions 13 to 18 are based on the following passage.【1】Homeownership has let us down. For generations, Americans believed that owning a home was undoubtedly good. Our political leaders hammered home the point. Franklin Roosevelt held that a country of homeowners was “unconquerable.” Homeownership could even save babies, save children, save families and save America. A house with a lawn and a fence wasn’t just a nice place to live in or a risk-free investment; it was a way to shape a nation. No wonder leaders of all political types wanted to spend more than $100 billion a year on subsidies(补助) and tax breaks to encourage people to buy.【2】But the dark side of homeownership is now all too apparent: Indeed, easy lending stimulated by the cult of homeownership may have triggered the financial crisis. Housing remains a drag on the economy. Existing-home sales in April dropped 27% from the previous month, worsening fears of a double-dip. And all that is just the obvious tale of a housing bubble and what happened when it popped. The real story is deeper and darker still.【3】For the better part of a century, politics, industry and culture lined up to create a fetish of the idea of buying a house. Homeownership has done plenty of good over the decades; it has provided stability to tens of millions of families. Yet by idealizing the act of buying a home, we have ignored the downsides. In the bubble years, lending standards slipped dramatically, allowing many Americans to put far too much of their income into paying for their housing. And we ignored longer-term phenomena too. Homeownership contributed to the hollowing out of cities and kept renters out of the best neighborhoods. It fed America’s overuse of energy and oil. It made it more difficult for those who had lost a job to find another. Perhaps worst of all, it helped us become casually self-deceiving: By telling ourselves that homeownership was a pathway to wealth and stable communities and better test scores, we avoided dealing with these frightening issues head-on.【4】Now, as the U.S. recovers from the biggest housing bust(破产) since the Great Depression, it is time to rethink how realistic our expectations of homeownership are—and how much money we want to spend chasing them. Many argue that homeownership should not be a goal pursued at all costs.Why does the author say they are disappointed at homeownership()?
微信支付 
支付宝支付