题目内容
（请给出正确答案）
[单选题]
We ___ our children with a good education.
A.give
B.equip
C.apply
D.adapt
查看答案
如果结果不匹配，请 联系老师 获取答案
题目内容
（请给出正确答案）
如果结果不匹配，请 联系老师 获取答案
题目内容
（请给出正确答案）
A.give
B.equip
C.apply
D.adapt
如果结果不匹配，请 联系老师 获取答案
更多“We ___ our children with a goo…”相关的问题
It is not wrong to upgrade the convenience we give to our children, but____________(过度的安逸和舒适会消磨青少年克服困难的意志).
听力原文：W: I am really glad our club decided to raise money for the children's hospital, and most of the people we have phoned seemed happy to contribute．
M: Yeah, I agree. Now we have gone through all the numbers on our list now, so I guess we can call it a day.
Q: What does the man mean？
(19)
A．Go home and have a good rest.
B．Call all the people on the list today.
C．Go through ail the numbers on their list.
D．Ask people on the list to contribute.
A.I believe they will make our home even nicer for Janet, Michael, and their new friends
B.With your help, we'll buy new computers for our children in a day or two
C.gain, thank you for all you did for the children
D.There was a look of joy on their faces
E.One or two of the children might even show you what they can do with their new computers
As parents, we usually groom our children's future according to what we are or what we wanted to be. We buy them toys and educational materials according to what we dream our children would become someday.
In career pathing, the parents' role plays a major part for the individual's success in identifying their chosen career. (27) The best approach is to support the child's interest and not forcing them to take courses that the parents wanted for themselves. Support can be provided by helping them read materials on their field of interest, (28) exposing them to the career and providing information as to the advantages and sacrifices that one may take to accomplish their chosen field. This is not difficult nowadays. The internet and the publications are now very affordable and even the media provides the information for the different careers that our children may take. There are shows and programs that can provide a picture of the different fields. (29) But before you go to your television and change the channel of what your children is watching, check first if the program is fit for their age and maturity.
(33)
A．During their employment.
B．When they have found a job.
C．During their childhood.
D．When they are in college.
Symptoms of pervasive anti-Intellectualism in our schools aren't difficult to find. "Schools have always been in a society where practical is more important than intellectual," says education historian and writer Diane Ravitch "Schools could be a counterbalance." Ravitch's latest book. Left Back: A Century of Failed School Reforms. traces what she considers the roots of anti-Intellectualism in our schools. Schools, she concludes, are anything but a counterbalance to the American distaste for intellectual pursuits.
But they could and should be. When we encourage our children to reject the life of the mind, we leave them vulnerable to exploitation and control. Without the ability to think critically, to defend their ideas and understand the ideas of others, they cannot fully participate in our democracy. If we continue along this path, says writer Earl Shorris our nation will suffer. "We will become a second-rate country," he says. "We will have a less civil society."
"Intellect is resented as a form. of power or privilege." Writes historian and Professor Richard Hofstadter in Anti-Intellectualism in American Life. a Pulitzer Prize winning book on the roots of anti-Intellectualism in US politics, religion, and education. Animosity toward intellectuals is in our country's DNA. From the beginning of our history, says Hofstadter. our democratic and populist urges have driven us to reject anything that smells of elitism Practicality, common sense, and native intelligence have been considered more noble qualities than anything you could learn from a book.
Ralph Waldo Emerson and other Transcendentalist philosophers thought schooling and rigorous book learning put unnatural restraints on children: "We are shut up in schools and college recitation rooms for 10 or 15 years and come out at last with a bellyful of words and do not know a thing." Mark Twain's Huckleberry Finn exemplified American anti-intellectualism. Its hero avoids being civilized—going to school and learning to read—so he can preserve his innate goodness.
Intellect, according to Hofstadter, is different from native intelligence, a quality we reluctantly admire. Intellect is the critical, creative, and contemplative side of the mind. Intelligence seeks to grasp, manipulate, reorder, and adjust, while intellect examines, ponders, wonders, theorizes, criticizes and imagines.
School remains a place where intellect is mistrusted. Hofstadter says our country's educational system is in the grips of people who "joyfully and militantly proclaim their hostility to intellect and their eagerness to identify with children who show the least intellectual promise."
What do American parents expect their children to acquire in school？
A．Profound knowledge of the world.
B．Practical abilities for future career.
C．The habit of thinking independently.
D．The confidence in intellectual pursuits.
We have a full-blown prestige panic, we worry that there won't be enough prizes to go around. Fearful parents urge their children to apply to more schools than ever. Underlying the hysteria (歇斯底里) 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 is plausible-and mostly wrong. We haven't found any convincing evidence that selectivity or prestige matters. Selective schools don't systematically employ better instructional approaches than less-selective schools. 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 4 % for every 100-point increase in a school's average SAT scores. But even this advantage is probably a statistical fluke (偶然). A well-known study examined students who got into highly selective schools and then went else where. 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 and graduate school--the results may change. Old-boy networks are breaking down. Princeton economist Alan Krueger studied admissions to one top Ph. D. program High scores on the GRE helped explain who got in; degrees of prestigious universities 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 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.
Why does the author say that parents are the true fighters in the college-admissions wars？
A．They have the final say in which university their children are to attend.
B．They know best which universities are most suitable for their children.
C．They have to carry out intensive surveys of colleges before children make an application.
D．They care more about which college their children go to than the children themselves.
We have found that there is major obstacle that parents need to overcome in connection with TV viewing. Surprisingly enough, we are going to advocate that parents act rudely—at least as fat' as the TV set is concerned. Most of us have been socialized all our lives with the warning "Don' t interrupt when someone else is speaking." Yet our ancestors never imagined a mechanical visitor sitting in the middle of our home who talks without stop and never allows the listener an opportunity to put a word in edgewise.
During our research, we found upon questioning parents that they usually reacted to TV content they disliked or disagreed with by remaining silent. This brings to mind an old saying that parents might well be advised to consider, "Silence gives consent."
We advocate loud reactions and exclamations of disapproval when something is presented on TV which is in opposition to the family' s values or offends them in any way. Similarly, when a program is in accordance with the family' s views, parents should approve of its content and applaud loudly. There is much that Shakespearean audiences of old could teach us in regard to such spontaneous, public reactions. Silence is misleading to our children.
This process of direct intervention vocal approval or disapproval of TV content—is highly effective with young children, because they ant curious, lemming rapidly and ready to place a great deal of confidence in the information and attitudes of their parents and other significant adults, such as teachers. For teenagers indirect intervention is recommended, because this group is more resistant to adult statements and does not like to be "Iectured." Indirect intervention is the practice of making comments about TV to other members of the family, but in such a way that teenager is sure to overhear the comments.
Our research shows that through such parental comments of approval or disapproval, adults can dramatically influence the information their children receive and retain from watching TV.
We may infer from the first paragraph that parents______.
A．find that their children like to watch those sex or violence TV programs
B．hope that school or society can do something to control bad TV programs
C．feel that they can exert some influences on their children at home only
D．realize that there is a generation gap between them and their children
听力原文： Today we're going to talk about shyness and discuss recent research on ways to help children learn to get along with others socially.
Many people consider themselves shy. In fact, forty percent of people who took part in our survey said they were shy--that's two out of every five people. And there are studies to indicate that the tendency toward shyness may be inherited. But certain timid children doesn't mean that they are bound to be shy forever. There is something parents, teachers, and the children themselves can do to overcome this tendency--and even to prevent it.
Our researchers found that if parents gently push their shy children to try new things, they can help these children become less afraid and less inhibited. Another way to help shy children is to train them in social skills. For example, there are special training programs where children are taught things like looking at other children while talking to them, talking about others' interests, and even smiling.
These groups have been very successful in giving shy children a place to feel safe and accepted, and building up their self-esteem.
(33)
A．Showing children how to behave.
B．Helping children overcome shyness.
C．Several causes of children's shyness.
D．How timid children become shy adults.
Passage Two
Questions 57 to 61 are based on the following passage.
In the college-admissions wars, we parents are the true fights. We are pushing our kids to get good grades, take SAT preparatory courses and build resumes so they can get into the college of our first choice. I’ve twice been to the wars, and as I survey the battlefield, something different is happening. We see our kids’ college background as e prize demonstrating how well we’ve raised them. But we can’t acknowledge that our obsession(痴迷) 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.
We have a full-blown prestige panic; we worry that there won’t be enough prizes to go around. Fearful parents urge their children to apply to more schools than ever. Underlying the hysteria(歇斯底里) 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 is plausible——and mostly wrong. We haven’t found any convincing evidence that selectivity or prestige matters. Selective schools don’t systematically employ better instructional approaches than less selective schools. 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 2-4% for every 100-poinnt increase in a school’s average SAT scores. But even this advantage is probably a statistical fluke(偶然). A well-known study 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 intellgence, 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 is not life only competiton. Old-boy networks are breaking down. princeton economist Alan Krueger studied admissions to one top Ph.D. program. High scores on the GRE helpd explain who got in; degrees of prestigious universities 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 found that, other things being equal, graduates of highly selective schools experienced more job dissatisfaction. They may have been so conditioned to deing on top that anything less disappoints.
注意此部分试题请在答题卡2上作答。
57.Why dose the author say that parents are the true fighters in the college-admissions wars？
A. They have the final say in which university their children are to attend.
B. They know best which universities are most suitable for their children.
C. they have to carry out intensive surveys of colleges before children make an application.
D. they care more about which college their children go to than the children themselves.
M: If you want your kids to be polite, you have to be polite to them.
Q: What conclusion can we draw from the conversation？
(16)
A．Children learn by example.
B．Children must not tell lies.
C．Children don't like discipline.
D．Children must control their temper.
