1、大学英语六级分类模拟题 459 及答案解析(总分：436.50，做题时间：90 分钟)一、Part Writing(总题数：1，分数：106.50)1.市场商品丰富，但假冒商品频现； 2. 假冒商品的危害； 3. 应对假冒商品的措。 Harmfulness of Fake Products（分数：106.50）_二、Part Reading Compr(总题数：0，分数：0.00)三、Section A(总题数：1，分数：25.00)Should Single-Sex Education Be Eliminated?A. Why is a neuroscientist here debatin
2、g single-sex schooling? Honestly, I had no fixed ideas on the topic when I started researching it for my book. Pink Brain, Blue Brain. But any discussion of gender differences in children inevitably leads to this debate, so I felt compelled to dive into the research data on single-sex schooling. I r
3、ead every study I could, weighed the existing evidence, and ultimately concluded that single-sex education is not the answer to gender gaps in achievement or the best way forward for today“s young people. After my book was published, I met several developmental and cognitive psychologists whose work
4、 was addressing gender and education from different angles, and we published a peer-reviewed Education Forum piece in Science magazine with the pro-vocative title, “The Pseudoscience of Single-Sex Education.“ B. We showed that three lines of research used to justify single-sex schoolingeducational.
5、neuroscience, and social psychologyall fail to support its alleged benefits, and SO the widely-held view that gender separation is somehow better for boys, girls, or both is nothing more than a myth. The Research on Academic Outcomes C. First, we reviewed the extensive educational research that has
6、compared academic outcomes in students attending single-sex versus coeducational schools. The overwhelming conclusion when you put this enormous literature together is that there is no clear academic advantage of sitting in all-female or all-male classes, in spite of much popular belief to the contr
7、ary. I base this conclusion not on any individual study, but on large-scale and systematic reviews of thousands of studies conducted in every major English-speaking country. D. Of course, there“re many excellent single-sex schools out there, but as these careful re-search reviews have demonstrated,
8、it is not their single-sex composition that makes them excellent. It“s all the other advantages that are typically packed into such schools, such as financial resources, quality of the faculty, and pro-academic culture, along with the family background and pre-selected ability of the students themse
9、lves that determine their outcomes. E. A case in point is the study by Linda Sax at UCLA, who used data from a large national survey of college freshmen to evaluate the effect of single-sex versus coeducational high schools. Commissioned by the National Coalition of Girls“ schools, the raw findings
10、look pretty good for the fundershigher SAT scores and a stronger academic orientation among women who had attended all girls“ high schools(men weren“t studied.)However, once the researchers controlled for both student and school attributesmeasures such as family income, parents“ education, and schoo
11、l resources most of these effects were erased or diminished. F. When it comes to boys in particular, the data show that single-sex education is distinctly unhelpful for them. Among the minority of studies that have reported advantages of single-sex schooling, virtually all of them were studies of gi
12、rls. There“re no rigorous studies in the United States that find single-sex schooling is better for boys, and in fact, a separate line of research by economists has shown that both boys and girls exhibit greater cognitive growth over the school year based on the “dose“ of girls in a classroom. In fa
13、ct, boys benefit even more than girls from having larger numbers of female classmates. So single-sex schooling is really not the answer to the current “boy crisis“ in education. Brain and Cognitive Development G. The second line of research often used to justify single-sex education falls squarely w
14、ithin my area of expertise: brain and cognitive development. It“s been more than a decade now since the “brain sex movement“ began infiltrating (渗入) our schools, and there are literally hundreds of schools caught up in the fad (新潮). Public schools in Wisconsin, Indiana, Florida and many other states
15、 now proudly declare on their websites that they separate boys and girls because “research solidly indicates that boys and girls learn differently,“ due to “hard-wired“ differences in their brains, eyes, ears, autonomic nervous systems, and more. H. All of these statements can be traced to just a fe
16、w would-be neuroscientists, especially physician Leonard Sax and therapist Michael Gurian. Each gives lectures, runs conferences, and does a lot of professional development on so-called “gender-specific learning“. I analyzed their various claims about sex differences in hearing, vision, language, ma
17、th, stress responses, and “learning styles“ in my book and a long peer-reviewed paper. Other neuroscientists and psychologists have similarly exposed their work. In short, the mechanisms by which our brains learn language, math, physics, and every other subject don“t differ between boys and girls. O
18、f course, learning does vary a lot between individual students, but research reliably shows that this variance is far greater within populations of boys or girls than between the two sexes. I. The equal protection clause of the U. S. Constitution prohibits separation of students by sex in public edu
19、cation that“s based on precisely this kind of “overbroad generalizations about the different talents, capacities, or preferences of males and females.“ And the reason it is prohibited is be-cause it leads far too easily to stereotyping and sex discrimination. Social Developmental Psychology J. That
20、brings me to the third area of research which fails to support single-sex schooling and indeed suggests the practice is actually harmful: social-developmental psychology. K. It“s a well-proven finding in social psychology that segregation promotes stereotyping and prejudice, whereas intergroup conta
21、ct reduces themand the results are the same whether you di-vide groups by race, age, gender, body mass index, sexual orientation, or any other category. What“s more, children are especially vulnerable to this kind of bias, because they are dependent on adults for learning which social categories are
22、 important and why we divide people into different groups. L. You don“t have to look far to find evidence of stereotyping and sex discrimination in single-sex schools. There was the failed single-sex experiment in California, where six school districts used generous state grants to set up separate b
23、oys“ and girls“ academies in the late 1990s. Once boys and girls were segregated, teachers resorted to traditional gender stereotypes to run their classes, and within just three years, five of the six districts had gone back to co-education. M. At the same time, researchers are increasingly discover
24、ing benefits of gender interaction in youth. A large British study found that children with other-sex older siblings(兄弟姐妹) exhibit less stereotypical play than children with same-sex older siblings, such as girls who like sports and building toys and boys who like art and dramatic play. Another stud
25、y of high school social networks found less bullying and aggression the higher the density of mixed-sex friendships within a given adolescent network. Then there is the finding we cited in our Science paper of higher divorce and depression rates among a large group of British men who attended single
26、-sex schools as teenagers, which might be explained by the lack of opportunity to learn about relationships during their formative years. N. Whether in nursery school, high school, or the business world, gender segregation narrows our perceptions of each other, facilitating stereotyping and sexist a
27、ttitudes. It“s very simple: the more we structure children and adolescents“ environment around gender distinctions and separation, the more they will use these categories as the primary basis for understanding themselves and others. O. Gender is an important issue in education. There are gaps in rea
28、ding, writing, and science achievement that should be narrower. There are gaps in career choice that should be narrowerif we really want to maximize human potential and American economic growth. But stereotyping boys and girls and separating them in the name of fictitious(虚构的) brain differences is n
29、ever going to close these gaps.（分数：25.00）(1).Hundreds of schools separate boys from girls in class on the alleged brain and cognitive differences.（分数：2.50）(2).A review of extensive educational research shows no obvious academic advantage of single-sex schooling.（分数：2.50）(3).The author did not have a
30、ny fixed ideas on single-sex education when she began her re-search on the subject.（分数：2.50）(4).Research found men who attended single-sex schools in their teens were more likely to suffer from depression.（分数：2.50）(5).Studies in social psychology have shown segregation in school education has a nega
31、tive impact on children.（分数：2.50）(6).Reviews of research indicate there are more differences in brain and cognitive development within the same sex than between different sexes.（分数：2.50）(7).The findings of the national survey of college freshmen about the impact of single-sex schooling fail to take
32、into account student and school attributes.（分数：2.50）(8).It wasn“t long before most of the school districts that experimented with single-sex education abandoned the practice.（分数：2.50）(9).Boys from coeducational classes demonstrate greater cognitive abilities according to the economists“ research.（分数
33、：2.50）(10).As careful research reviews show. academic excellence in some single-sex schools is attributed to other factors than single-sex education.（分数：2.50）四、Section B(总题数：0，分数：0.00)五、Passage One(总题数：2，分数：142.00)Britain“s universities are in an awful spin. Top universities were overwhelmed by the
34、24% of A-level applicants with indistinguishable straight A“s; newer ones are beating the byways for bodies. Curiously, both images of educationthe weeping willows of Cambridge and the futuristic architecture of UEL (University of East London)are cherished by the government. Ministers want to see ha
35、lf of all young people in universities by 2010 (numbers have stalled at 42%), without letting go of the world-class quality of its top institutions. Many argue that the two goals are incompatible without spending a lot more money. Researchers scrabble (寻找) for funds, and students complain of large c
36、lasses and reduced teaching time. To help solve the problem, the government agreed in 2004 to let universities increase tuition fees. Though low, the fees have introduced a market into higher education. Universities can offer cut-price tuition, although most have stuck close to the 3,000. Other ince
37、ntives are more popular. Newcomers to St. Mark newer ones are beating the byways for bodies. Curiously, both images of educationthe weeping willows of Cambridge and the futuristic architecture of UEL (University of East London)are cherished by the government. Ministers want to see half of all young
38、people in universities by 2010 (numbers have stalled at 42%), without letting go of the world-class quality of its top institutions. Many argue that the two goals are incompatible without spending a lot more money. Researchers scrabble (寻找) for funds, and students complain of large classes and reduc
39、ed teaching time. To help solve the problem, the government agreed in 2004 to let universities increase tuition fees. Though low, the fees have introduced a market into higher education. Universities can offer cut-price tuition, although most have stuck close to the 3,000. Other incentives are more
40、popular. Newcomers to St. Mark if you don“t, say you don“t. He thought it was the correct attitude towards study. In ancient times, the doors of Chinese shops had on it an inscription “genuine goods at a fair price for all customers“. This shows that since old times China has advocated the ethics of
41、 fair trade, honesty towards customers, no deception and no falsification. In modern China, the virtue of being honest and trustworthy has been carried forward. It is to be single-minded and responsible at. work and in learning, and it is to be honest to friends and one should practice what he/she says.
