Question

阅读理解

阅读下面短文，从每题所给四个选项中选出最佳答案。

　　The popularly－held view has it that “opportunity to learn” is the key to educational success－i. e., the more time children spend on a subject, the better they do at it. Alas, the evidence so far is not encouraging for the proponent(支持者) of this theory. According to a recent study, there seems little correlation(相互关系)between time spent on a subject and performance of pupils in tests.

　　Next－and of particular interest to governments of poor countries－there appears to be little evidence to support the argument that the main cause of educational under－achievements is under－funding. Low－spending countries such as South Korea and the Czech Republic are at the top. High－spenders such as America and Denmark do much worse. Obviously, there are dozens of reasons other than spending why one country does well, another badly, but the success of the lowspending Czechs and Koreans does show that spending more on schools is not a prerequisite(先决条件) for improving standards.

　　Another article of faith among the teaching profession－that children are bound to do better in small classes－is also being broken by educational research. The study found that France, America and Britain, where children are usually taught in classes of twenty－odd, do significantly worse than East Asian countries where almost twice as many pupils are crammed into each class. Again, there may be social reasons why some countries can cope better with large classes than others. All the same, the comparison refutes(驳倒，反驳) the argument that larger is necessarily worse.

　　Further, the study even cast some doubt over the cultural explanation for the greater success of East Asia：that there is some hard－to－define Asian culture, connected with parental authority and a strong social value on education, which makes children more eager to learn and easier to teach. Those who make this argument say it would of course be impossible to replicate(复制) such oriental(东方的) magic in the West.

　　Yet the results of the study suggest that this is, to put it mildly, exaggerated(夸张), if “culture” makes English children so poor at math, then why have they done so well at science(not far behind the Japanese and South Koreans)? And why do English pupils do well at science and badly at math, while in France it is the other way around? A less mystical, more common explanation suggests itself：English schools teach science well and math badly; French schools teach math better than science; East Asian schools teach both subjects well.

1．The passage is mainly connected with ________.

[　　]

A．building a relationship between culture and education

B．exposing educational myths(神话)

C．introducing educational theories

D．comparing educational practices in different countries

2．All of the following are commonly－held beliefs about education except ________.

[　　]

A．time spent on a subject correlates with academic success

B．educational achievements correlate with the money spent

C．culture is not a deciding factor in school performance

D．large classes contribute to poor educational achievement

3．The fact that English pupils do well at science and badly at math while in France it is the other way around has something to do with ________.

[　　]

A．teaching methods

B．cultural values

C．money spent

D．class size

4．Which of the following statements is supported by the passage?

[　　]

A．Low－spending will lead to good school performance.

B．Students in large classes will do better than students in small classes.

C．Asian culture makes students eager to learn and easy to teach.

D．Austrian teenagers do better than New Zealand's teenagers.

5．Which of the following countries does worst in science?

[　　]

A．France

B．South Korea

C．Britain

D．Japan

Answer 1

答案：D;D;A;C;A