2021年1月23日发(作者：bread的音标)







免费？宅在家学英语？怎么报名？

最牛英语口语培训模式：躺在家里练口语，全程外教一对一，三个月畅谈无阻！

洛基英语，免费体验全部在线一对一课程：
/ielts/
（报名网址）



Passage Three
Questions 31 to 35 are based on the following passage.







About the time that schools and others quite reasonably became interested in
seeing to it that all children, whatever their background, were fairly treated,
intelligence testing became unpopular.







Some thought it was unfair to minority children. Through the past few
decades such testing has gone out of fashion and many communities have indeed
forbidden it.







However, paradoxically, just recently a group of black parents filed a
lawsuit(
诉讼
) in California claiming that the state
’
s

ban on IQ testing discriminates
against their children by denying them the opportunity to take the test. (They believed,
correctly, that IQ tests are a valid method of evaluating children for special education
classes.) The judge, therefore, reversed, at least partially, his original decision.







And so the argument goes on and on. Does it benefit or harm children from
minority groups to have their intelligence tested? We have always been on the side of
permitting, even facilitating, such testing. If a child of any color or group is doing
poorly in school it seems to us very important to know whether it is because he or she
is of low intelligence, or whether some other factor is the cause.







What school and family can do to improve poor performance is influenced by
its cause. It is not discriminative to evaluate either a child
’
s physical condition or his
intellectual level.







Unfortunately, intellectual level seems to be a sensitive subject, and what the
law allows us to do varies from time to time. The same fluctuation back and forth
occurs in areas other than intelligence. Thirty years or so ago, for instance, white
families were encouraged to adopt black children. It was considered discriminative
not to do so.







And then the style changed and this cross-racial adopting became generally
unpopular, and social agencies felt that black children should go to black families only.
It is hard to say what are the best procedures. But surely good will on the part of all of
us is needed.







As to intelligence, in our opinion, the more we know about any child
’
s
intellectual level, the better for the child in question.


31.




Why did the intelligence test become unpopular in the past few decades?
A)

Its validity was challenged by many communities.
B)


It was considered discriminative against minority children.
C)

It met with strong opposition from the majority of black parents.
D)

It deprived the black children of their rights to a good education.


32.




The recent legal action taken by some black parents in California aimed to










免费？宅在家学英语？怎么报名？







.
A)




draw public attention to IQ testing







B) put an end to special education
C) remove the state
’
s ban on intelligence tests



D) have their children enter white schools


33.


The author believes that intelligence testing








.
A)



may ease racial confrontation in the United States
B)



can encourage black children to keep up with white children
C)



may seriously aggravate racial discrimination in the United States
D)


can help black parents make decisions about their children
’
s education


34.


The author
’
s opinion of child adoption seems to be that








.
A)




no rules whatsoever can be prescribed


B) white families should adopt black children









C) adoption should be based on IQ test results














D) cross-racial adoption is to be advocated


35.



Child adoption is mentioned in the passage to show that








.
A)



good will may sometimes complicate racial problems
B)









social surroundings are vital to the healthy growth of children
C)








intelligence testing also applies to non- academic areas
D)







American opinion can shift when it comes to sensitive issues
Passage Four
Questions 36 to 40 are based on the following passage.







Not too many decades ago it seemed
“
obvious
”

both to the general public
and to sociologists that modern society has changed people
’
s natural relations,
loosened their responsibilities to kin
（亲戚）

and neighbors, and substituted in their
place superficial relationships with passing acquaintances. However, in recent years a
growing body of research has revealed that the
“
obvious
”

is not true. It seems that
if you are a city resident, you typically know a smaller proportion of your neighbors
than you do if you are a resident of a smaller community. But, for the most part, this
fact has few significant consequences. It does not necessarily follow that if you know
few of your neighbors you will know no one else.







Even in very large cities, people maintain close social ties within small,
private social worlds. Indeed, the number and quality of meaningful relationships do
not differ between more and less urban people. Small-town residents are more
involved with kin than are big-city residents. Yet city dwellers compensate by
developing friendships with people who share similar interests and activities.
Urbanism may produce a different style of life, but the quality of life does not differ
between town and city. Nor are residents of large communities any likelier to display
psychological symptoms of stress or alienation, a feeling of not belonging, than are
residents of smaller communities. However, city dwellers do worry more about crime,
and this leads them to a distrust of strangers.