The latest research suggests that the key factor separating geniuses from the merely accomplished is not I.Q., a generally bad predictor of success. Instead, it’s purposeful practice. Top performers spend more hours practising their craft. If you wanted to picture how a typical genius might develop, you’d take a girl who possessed a slightly above average language ability. It wouldn’t have to be a big talent, just enough so that she might gain some sense of distinction. Then you would want her to meet, say, a novelist, who coincidentally shared some similar qualities. Maybe the writer was from the same town, had the same family background, or shared the same birthday.

This contact would give the girl a vision of her future self. It would hive her some idea of a fascinating circle she might someday join. It would also help if one of her parents died when she was 12, giving her a strong sense of insecurity and fuelling a desperate need for success. Armed with this ambition, she would read novels and life stories of writers without end. This would give her a primary knowledge of her field.  She’d be able to see new writing in deeper ways and quickly understand its inner workings.

Then she would practise writing. Her practice would be slow, painstaking and error-focused. By practising in this way, he delays the automatizing process. Her mind wants to turn conscious, newly learned skills into unconscious. Automatically performed skills. By practising slowly, by breaking skills down into tiny parts and repeating, she forces the brain to internalize a better pattern of performance. Then she would find an adviser who would provide a constant stream of feedback, viewing her performance form the outside, correcting the smallest errors, pushing her to take on tougher challenges. By now she is redoing problems—how do I get characters into a room—dozens and dozens of times. She is establishing habits of thought she can call upon in order to understand or solve future problems.

The primary quality our young writer possesses is not some mysterious genius. It’s the ability to develop a purposeful, laborious and boring practice routine; the latest research takes some of the magic out of great achievement. But it underlines a fact that is often neglected. Public discussion is affected by genetics and what we’re “hard-wired” to do. And it’s true that genes play a role in our capabilities. But the brain is also very plastic. We construct ourselves through behaviour.

1．The passage mainly deals with          .

A．the function of I.Q. in cultivating a writer

B．the relationship between genius and success

C．the decisive factor in making a genius

D．the way of gaining some sense of distinction

2．By reading novels and writers’ stories, the girl could         .

A．come to understand the inner structure of writing

B．join a fascinating circle of writers someday

C．share with a novelist her likes and dislikes

D．learn from the living examples to establish a sense of security

3．In the girl’s long painstaking training process, ________.

A．her adviser forms a primary challenging force to her success.

B．her writing turns into an automatic pattern of performance

C．she acquires the magic of some great achievement

D．she comes to realize she is “hard-wired” to write

4．What can be concluded from the passage?

A．A fuelling ambition plays a leading role in one’s success

B．A responsible adviser is more important than the knowledge of writing.

C．As to the growth of a genius, I.Q. doesn’t matter, but just his/her effort.

D．What really matters is what you do rather then who you are.

The latest research suggests a more prosaic, democratic, even puritanical view of the world. The key factor separating geniuses from the merely accomplished is not a divine spark. It’s not I.Q., a generally bad predictor of success, even in realms like chess. Instead, it’s deliberate practice. Top performers spend more hours (many more hours) rigorously practicing their craft. If you wanted to picture how a typical genius might develop, you’d take a girl who possessed a slightly above average verbal ability. It wouldn’t have to be a big talent, just enough so that she might gain some sense of distinction. Then you would want her to meet, say, a novelist, who coincidentally shared some similar biographical traits. Maybe the writer was from the same town, had the same ethnic background, or, shared the same birthday.

This contact would give the girl a vision of her future self. It would give her some idea of a fascinating circle she might someday join. It would also help if one of her parents died when she was 12, giving her a strong sense of insecurity and fueling a desperate need for success. Armed with this ambition, she would read novels and life stories of writers without end. This would give her a primary knowledge of her field. She’d be able to see new writing in deeper ways and quickly perceive its inner workings.

Then she would practice writing. Her practice would be slow, painstaking and error-focused. By practicing in this way, she delays the automatizing process. Her mind wants to turn conscious, newly learned skills into unconscious, automatically performed skills. By practicing slowly, by breaking skills down into tiny parts and repeating, she forces the brain to internalize a better pattern of performance. Then she would find an adviser who would provide a constant stream of feedback, viewing her performance from the outside, correcting the smallest errors, pushing her to take on tougher challenges. By now she is redoing problems―how do I get characters into a room―dozens and dozens of times. She is establishing habits of thought she can call upon in order to understand or solve future problems.

The primary trait she possesses is not some mysterious genius. It’s the ability to develop a purposeful, laborious and boring practice routine. The latest research takes some of the magic out of great achievement. But it underlines a fact that is often neglected. Public discussion is affected by genetics and what we’re “hard-wired” to do. And it’s true that genes play a role in our capabilities. But the brain is also very plastic. We construct ourselves through behavior.

76. The passage mainly deals with _____.

77. By reading novels and writers’ stories, the girl could ______.

A. come to understand the inner structure of writing

B. join a fascinating circle of writers someday

C. share with a novelist her likes and dislikes

D. learn from the living examples to establish a sense of security

78. In the girl’s long painstaking training process, _____.

A. her adviser forms a primary challenging force to her success

B. her writing turns into an automatic pattern of performance

C. she acquires the magic of some great achievements

D. she comes to realize she is “hard-wired” to write

79. What can be concluded from the passage?

A. A fuelling ambition plays a leading role in one’s success.

B. A responsible adviser is more important than the knowledge of writing.

C. As to the growth of a genius, I.Q. doesn’t matter, but just his/her efforts.