1 . The high-tech revolution has inspired a pleasure endless stream of new and exciting electronic products that we just can’t live without. In fact, the speed of technological innovation can make last year’s must-have this year’s junk. And that’s the problem.
The average life span of a personal computer has been shortened to around 18 months and this has nothing to do with worn-mice or damaged disk drives. Simply put, electronic products can become out of date before you’ve even figured out how they work.
So what happens to all those old keyboards, monitors, organizers and CPUs? Most are stored away in a warehouse (仓库), taking up valuable space. But many end up in landfills, and that is where the trouble really begins. Computer monitors can contain up to 3.5 kg of dangerous waste once they are no longer in use.
Unfortunately, this problem is not going to disappear anytime soon. In fact, it is growing by the minute. In Japan alone, people throw away some 20 million TVs, washing machines, refrigerators and air conditioners each year. What is to be done with all this techno-trash?
One way to reduce waste is to avoid throwing away in the first place. Many companies reuse parts from old products in new models. This is not cheating-it makes both environmental and economic sense. Cannon, for example, has adopted a philosophy known as “kyosei”, meaning “living and working together for the common good?” — a goal of achieving balance between the environment and the corporate (公司的) activities. The company has even gone so far as to say that environmental assurance should come before all business activities, and that companies unable to achieve such assurance do not deserve to remain in business.
As part of that effort, the company has started a global recycling program with a goal to reduce, reuse and recycle more than 90% of its used products. In 1999, for example, Cannon collected 128, 000 copying machines and 12, 175 tons of toner cartridges (色粉盒) in Japan, Europe and the United States.
Some argue that electronic garbage can also be controlled during the design phase. This concept, called “design for the environment”. Not only does this make environmental sense, but it saves the customer money. IBM, meanwhile, recently planned programs in Canada and the US that, for a small fee, will take back not just an IBM but also any manufacturer’s computer. Depending on the age and condition, the equipment will then be either donated to charity, or broken down for reusable parts and recyclable materials.
1. With the rapid development of science and technology high-tech products can ____.| A．last for many years |
| B．become worn out soon |
| C．become old and useless soon |
| D．be used forever |
| A．Too much room is needed for their probable storage. |
| B．People do not know how to deal with them at all. |
| C．The amount of this techno-trash is increasing everyday without stop. |
| D．Harmful substances contained within may pollute the environment. |
| A．Business must be achieved at the cost of environment. |
| B．Environment holds great importance than business. |
| C．Business and environment has little impact on each other. |
| D．Recycling makes only environment sense instead of economic benefits. |
| A．while designing products, we must make something to contain garbage |
| B．while designing products, don’t throw away garbage away |
| C．while designing, we must work out how much garbage the new product will bring about |
| D．while designing, we must take environment into consideration. |
| A．The problem caused by high-tech products can’t be solved in short time |
| B．The techno-trash problem can easily be solved in big countries |
| C．The problem can be solved to some degree if enough attention is paid |
| D．It is still hard to say whether this problem can be solved or not |
2 . In US emergency rooms (ER), the average wait time to see a doctor is more than two hours. There are more patients in need than there are doctors, nurses and other staff to help them. Many parents have suffered through hours in the ER with a sick, upset child, only to get sent home because their case is not considered urgent. What if there was another choice—like a house call from an intelligent machine?
Now, a new study shows that AI systems can assess (评估) a child’s medical chart and come up with a diagnosis (诊断), a determination of what is wrong with that patient.
The study took place at Guangzhou Women and Children’s Medical Center in southern China. First, a team of doctors reviewed 6, 183 medical charts. They summarized the information in these charts into a list of keywords linked to disease-related symptoms or signs, such as “fever”. Researchers then taught these keywords to the AI system. Once trained, the system scanned children’s charts for the key terms, checking if they were present or not in order to come to a conclusion. Finally, it offered diagnoses based on the charts, narrowing down from among 55 illness categories.
Dongxiao Zhu, an assistant professor of computer science at Wayne State University who did not take part in the study, however, sees this as “augmented intelligence (增强智能)” rather than “artificial intelligence”, because the system handled only 55 illness categories. Compare that to thousands of possibilities in the real world. The machine cannot yet get into the more complex aspects of a medical decision.
Zhu is also concerned about the amount of human work that went into the study—namely, the time and energy spent by human doctors. They spent hours grading the machine’s assessments and comparing them to their own. It’s no wonder that the process took four years. Considering that, it may be a while before you can skip the ER and see a robot-doctor instead.
1. What can we infer from Paragraph 1?| A．Patients pay too much for the ER. |
| B．American doctors aren’t responsible. |
| C．Children are treated urgently in the ER. |
| D．The emergency rooms are crowded with patients. |
| A．AI systems still have a long way to go. |
| B．AI systems diagnose disease like doctors. |
| C．AI systems will take over from doctors someday. |
| D．AI systems get into complex medical decisions. |
| A．By examining a patient first. |
| B．By reviewing many medical charts. |
| C．By scanning keywords about a disease. |
| D．By observing disease-related symptoms. |
| A．They need to be improved a lot. |
| B．They will replace real doctors soon. |
| C．They are suitable for complex disease. |
| D．They help doctors make a quick analysis. |
3 . One of the curious things about social networks is the way that some messages, pictures, or ideas can spread like wildfire while others that seem just as catchy or interesting barely register at all
Before you go deep into the puzzle, consider this: If you measure the height of your male friends, for example, the average is about 170 cm. You are 172 and your friends are all about the same height as you are. Indeed, the mathematical concept of “average” is a good way to capture the nature of this data set.
But imagine that one of your friends was much taller than you. This person would dramatically skew the average, which would make your friends taller than you, on average. In this case, the “average” is a poor way to capture this data set.
Exactly this situation occurs on social networks. On average, your coauthors will be cited more often than you, and the people you follow will post more frequently than you and so on.
Now Lerman from University of Southern Caledonia has discovered a related paradox, which they call the majority illusion (多数错觉). They illustrate this illusion with an example. They take 14 nodes linked up to form a small network. They then color three of these nodes and count how many of the remaining nodes link to them in a single step.
In situation (a), the uncolored nodes see more than half of their neighbors as colored. This is the majority illusion—the local impression that a specific feature is common when the global truth is entirely different. While in situation (b) the majority illusion doesn’t occur.
So how popular is it in the real world? It’s found out that the majority illusion occurs in almost all network scenarios. “The effect is largest in the political blogs network, where 60% of nodes will have majority active neigbbours, even when only 20% of the nodes are truly active,” says Lerman.
It immediately explains many interesting phenomena. For a start, it shows how some content can spread globally while other similar content does not—the key is to start with a small number of well-connected early adopters fooling the rest of the network into thinking it is common. The affected nodes then find it natural to follow the trend. A real spread finally comes into being.
But it is not yet a marketer’s charter. For that, marketers must first identify the popular nodes that can create the majority illusion for the merger audience. These influencers must then be persuaded to adopt the desired behavior or product, which is essential to the prospect of the marketing plan.
1. The phrase “skew the average” in the 3rd paragraph most probably refers to the action of __________.| A．hiding the real average to be unrecognizable to others |
| B．producing an average against the general feature of data |
| C．working out the common feature suggested by the average |
| D．ignoring the average because of the frequency by which it is reviewed |
| A．The number of the nodes in the network |
| B．The manner of the connection between the nodes. |
| C．The decision of which nodes to be colored. |
| D．The influence of the network on the nodes. |
| A．Majority illusion rarely bas impacts except in political blogs field. |
| B．The majority illusion on social networks relies on it that people you follow post more than you |
| C．The essence of successful opinion spread is to initiate the trend with well-connected sharers. |
| D．The spread scale of ideas on networks mainly depends on the quality of content. |
| A．thoroughly understand the concept of majority illusion |
| B．accurately figure out who is the powerful person to affect others |
| C．definitely decide who are the target audience for the promotion |
| D．successfully convince the influencers to practice certain action |
| A．The social network vision that tricks your mind. |
| B．Who is stealing your network identity? |
| C．Minority network opinion spread, curse or blessing? |
| D．Have you been misled during the last political voting? |
4 . Smartphones are our constant companions. For many of us, their glowing screens are a ubiquitous (十分普遍的) presence, drawing us in with endless distractions. They are in our hands as soon as we wake, and command our attention until the final moments before we fall asleep.
Steve Jobs would not approve.
In 2007, Jobs took the stage and introduced the world to the iPhone. If you watch the full speech, you will be surprised by how he imagined our relationship should be with this iconic (标志性的) invention. This vision is so different from the way most of us use these devices now.
In his remarks, Jobs spent an extended amount of time demonstrating how users could utilize (应用) its touch screen before detailing the many ways Apple engineers had improved the age-old process of making phone calls. “It’s the best iPod we’ve ever made,” Jobs exclaimed at one point. “The killer app is making calls,” he later added. Both lines drew thunderous applause.
The presentation confirms that Jobs imagined a simpler iPhone experience than the one we actually have more than a decade later. For example, there was no App Store when the iPhone was first introduced, and this was by design. Jobs was convinced that the phone’s carefully-designed native features were enough. He did not seek to completely change the rhythm of users’ daily lives. He simply wanted to take experiences we had already found important — listening to music, placing calls, generating directions — and make them better.
The minimalist (简约主义者) vision for the iPhone Jobs offered in 2007 is unrecognizable today — and that is a shame.
Under what I call the “constant companion model,” we now see our smartphones as always-on portal (通道) to information. We have become so used to it over the past decade that it is easy to forget the novelty (新奇) of the device. It seems increasingly clear to me that Jobs probably got it right from the very beginning: Many of us would be better-off returning to his original minimalist vision for our phones.
Practically speaking, to be a minimalist smartphone user means only using your device for a small number of features that do things of value to you. Otherwise, you simply put it away outside of these activities. This approach removes this gadget (小玩意) from the position of a constant companion down to a luxury object, such as a fancy bike, that gives you great pleasure when you use it but does not dominate your entire day.
Early in his 2007 keynote jobs said, “Today, Apple is going to reinvent the phone.” What he didn’t add, however, was the follow-up promise: “Tomorrow, we’re going to reinvent your life.” The smartphone is fantastic, but it was never meant to be the foundation for a new form of existence. If you return this innovation to its original role, you will get more out of both your phone and your life.
1. According to Steve Jobs, what was the main selling point of Apple’s first iPhone?| A．It allowed its users to have access to the Internet. |
| B．It was actually an iPod that could make phone calls. |
| C．It was installed with applications by third-party developers. |
| D．It could fulfill people’s desire to multitask in their daily lives. |
| A．expect to reinvent his life with the device |
| B．buy the latest model of iPhone and see it as a luxury |
| C．spend more time working than playing with his device |
| D．remove the unnecessary applications from the device |
| A．the native features of smartphones | B．the information on the Internet |
| C．the novelty of the device | D．the constant companion model |
| A．The minimalism of iPhone helps users bring out the best of the device. |
| B．Jobs expected iPhone to be the foundation for a new form of existence. |
| C．Smartphone users have changed their life to enjoy pleasant experiences. |
| D．The invention of App Store has made smartphones luxury objects. |
| A．tell readers why Steve Job created the iPhone |
| B．remind readers not to be addicted to their smartphones |
| C．show readers that smartphones can greatly change their lives |
| D．encourage readers to block Internet access on their smartphones |
5 . Gone are the days when a mother’s place was in the home: in Britain women with children are now as likely to be in paid work as their unburdened sisters. Many put their little darlings in day care long before they start school. Mindful that a poor start can spoil a person’s chances of success later in life, the state has intervened ever more closely in how babies and toddlers are looked after. Inspectors call not only at nurseries but also at homes where youngsters are minded; three-year-olds follow the national curriculum. Child care has increasingly become a profession.
For years after the government first began in 2001 to twist the arms of anyone who looked after an unrelated child to register with the schools, the numbers so doing fell. Kind but clueless neighbours stopped looking after little ones, who were instead herded into formal nurseries or handed over to one of the ever-fewer registered child-minders. The decline in the number of people taking in children now appears to have halted. According to data released by the Office for Standards in Education on October 27th, the number of registered child-minders reached its lowest point in September 2010 and has since recovered slightly.
The new lot are certainly better qualified. In 2010 fully 82% of nursery workers held diplomas notionally equivalent to A-levels, the university-entrance exams taken mostly by 18-year-olds, up from 56% seven years earlier, says Anand Shukla of the Daycare Trust, a charity. Nurseries staffed by university graduates tend to be rated highest by inspectors, increasing their appeal to the pickiest parents. As a result, more graduates are being recruited.
But professionalization has also pushed up the price of child care, defying even the economic depression. A survey by the Daycare Trust finds that a full-time nursery place in England for a child aged under two, who must be intensively supervised, costs £194 ($310) per week, on average. Prices in London and the south-east are far higher. Parents in Britain spend more on child care than anywhere else in the world, according to the OECD, a think-tank. Some 68% of a typical second earner's net income is spent on freeing her to work, compared with an OECD average of 52%.
The price of child care is not only eye-watering, but has also become a barrier to work. Soon after it took power the coalition government pledged to ensure that people are better off in work than on benefits, but a recent survey by Save the Children, a charity, found that the high cost of day care prevented a quarter of low-paid workers from returning to their jobs once they had started a family. The government pays for free part-time nursery places for three-and four-year-olds, and contributes towards day-care costs for younger children from poor areas. Alas, extending such an aid during stressful economic times would appear to be anything but child’s play.
1. Which of the following is true according to the first paragraph?| A．Nursery education plays a leading role in one’s personal growth. |
| B．Pregnant women have to work to lighten families’ economic burden. |
| C．Children in nursery have to take uniform nation courses. |
| D．The supervision of the state makes child care professional. |
| A．the registered child-minders are required to take the university-entrance exams |
| B．the number of registered child-minders has been declining since 2001 |
| C．anyone who looks after children at home must register with the schools |
| D．the growing recognition encourages more graduates to work as child-minders |
| A．prevents mothers from getting employed |
| B．may further depress the national economy |
| C．makes many families live on benefits |
| D．is far more than parents can afford |
| A．Objective. | B．Skeptical. | C．Supportive. | D．Biased. |
| A．The professionalization of child care has pushed up its price. |
| B．The high cost of child nursing makes many mothers give up their jobs. |
| C．The employment of more graduates makes nurseries more popular. |
| D．Parents in Britain pay most for child nursing throughout the world. |
6 . As far as we know batteries are playing an important role in our life.We couldn’t live without batteries.Why so? Batteries provide power for anything from small sensors to large systems. While scientists are finding ways to make them smaller but even more powerful, problems can arise when these batteries are much larger and heavier than the devices themselves. University of Missouri(MU) researchers are developing a nuclear energy source that is smaller, lighter and more efficient.
“To provide enough power, we need certain methods with high energy density(密度)”，said Jae Kwon, assistant professor of electrical and computer engineering at MU. “The radioisotope(放射性同位素) battery can provide power density that is much higher than chemical batteries.”
Kwon and his research team have been working on building a small nuclear battery, presently the size and thickness of a penny, intended to power various micro / nanoelectromechanreal systems (M/NEMS). Although nuclear batteries can cause concerns, Kwon said they are safe.
“People hear the word ‘nuclear’ and think of something very dangerous,” he said, “However, nuclear power sources have already been safely powering a variety of devices, such as pace-makers, space satellites and underwater systems.”
His new idea is not only in the battery’s size, but also in its semiconductor(半导体). Kwon’s battery uses a liquid semiconductor rather than a solid semiconductor.
“The key part of using a radioactive battery is that when you harvest the energy, part of the radiation energy can damage the lattice structure(晶体结构) of the solid semiconductor,”Kwon said,“By using a liquid semiconductor, we believe we can minimize that problem.”
Together with J. David Robertson, chemistry professor and associate director of the MU Research Reactor, Kwon is working to build and test the battery. In the future, they hope to increase the battery’s power, shrink its size and try with various other materials. Kwon said that battery could be thinner than the thickness of human hair.
1. According to paragraph 1 and 2,we can learn that________.| A．Batteries can only power small sensors . |
| B．The larger batteries are,the more power they can provide. |
| C．Certain methods with high energy density can provide power abundantly . |
| D．Jae Kwon is a professor of electrical and computer engineering at MU. |
| A．He teaches chemistry at MU. |
| B．He developed a chemical battery. |
| C．He is working on a nuclear energy source. |
| D．He made a breakthrough in computer engineering. |
| A．to show chemical batteries are widely applied. |
| B．to introduce nuclear batteries can be safely used. |
| C．to describe a nuclear-powered system. |
| D．to introduce various energy sources. |
| A．get rid of the radioactive waste |
| B．test the power of nuclear batteries. |
| C．decrease the size of nuclear batteries |
| D．decline the damage to lattice structure. |
| A．uses a solid semiconductor |
| B．will soon replace the present ones. |
| C．could be extremely thin. |
| D．has passed the final test. |
| A．science news report | B．book review |
| C．newspaper advertisement | D．science fiction story |
7 . When you hear “I have a dream…”, one of the most famous speeches in human history, you’ll never have the idea how the audience on the scene were fueled by emotional intelligence. When Martin Luther King. Jr. presented his dream, he chose language that would stir the hearts of his audience. Delivering this electrifying(震撼性的) message required emotional intelligence—the ability to recognize, understand, and manage emotions.
Emotional intelligence has been highly recommended by leaders, policymakers, and educators as the solution to a wide range of social problems. Emotional intelligence is important, but the uncontrolled enthusiasm has obscured (掩盖)a dark side. New evidence shows that when people sharpen their emotional skills, they become better at controlling others. When you’re good at controlling your own emotions, you can hide your true feelings. When you know what others are feeling, you can motivate them to act against their own best interests.
Social scientists have begun to document this dark side of emotional intelligence. In a research led by University of Toronto professor Jochen Menges, when a leader gave an inspiring speech filled with emotion, the audience was less likely to scrutinize (细察) the message and remembered the content. Ironically(讽刺 的是), audience members were so moved by the speech that they claimed to recall more of it.
The authors call this the awestruck effect, but it might just as easily be described as the dumbstruck effect. One observer reflected that Hitler’s persuasive impact came from his ability to strategically express emotions—he would “tear open his heart”—and these emotions affected his followers to the point that they would “stop thinking critically and just emote.”
Leaders who master emotions can rob us of our abilities to reason. If their values are out of step with our own, the results can be destructive. New evidence suggests that when people have self-serving motives, emotional intelligence becomes a weapon for controlling others.
Throwing light on this dark side of emotional intelligence is one mission of a research team led by University College London professor Martin Kilduff. According to these experts, emotional intelligence helps people disguise (伪装) one set of emotions while expressing another for personal gain. Professor Kilduff’s team writes, “The strategic disguise of one’s own emotions and the controlling of others’ emotions for strategic ends are behaviors evident not only on Shakespeare’s stage but also in the offices and corridors where power and influence are traded.”
Of course, people aren’t always using emotional intelligence for nefarious ends. More often than not, high EQ is helpful in most aspects of our life. Emotional intelligence—like any skill—can be used for good or evil. So whether it is a gift or a curse lies in your hand.
1. Why does the author mention Martin Luther King, Jr?| A．To honor the great leader for his courage. |
| B．To recommend his speech to other leaders. |
| C．To introduce the major topic to readers. |
| D．To advocate a society with fewer problems. |
| A．Developing the capability to control one’s own emotion. |
| B．Influencing people to do what brings disadvantages to them. |
| C．Appealing to the audience to concentrate and remember more. |
| D．Encouraging the moved audience to learn more of the speech. |
| A．His followers would tear open their hearts to him. |
| B．His followers would express emotions strategically. |
| C．His followers would lose the ability to reason properly. |
| D．His followers would develop the self-serving motives. |
| A．They disguise their true emotions and show another one. |
| B．They help their colleagues to build up confidence. |
| C．They present their strategic behaviors on the stage. |
| D．They lower their own dignity to gain popularity. |
| A．Immoral. | B．Unimportant. | C．Illegal. | D．Uncontrollable. |
| A．The benefits of emotional intelligence. |
| B．The advantages and disadvantages of emotions. |
| C．The reasons for using emotional skills. |
| D．The dark side of emotional intelligence. |
8 . It was a cold evening and my daughter and I were walking up Broadway. I didn't notice a guy sitting inside a cardboard box. But Nora did. She wasn't even four, but she
I don't remember my reply. But I do remember a sudden
A few days later, I saw an article in the newspaper about volunteers who picked up a food package from a nearby school on a Sunday morning and
The building was in a bad state. Facing us was a silver-haired woman in an old dress. She took the package and asked us to come in. Nora ran inside. I unwillingly followed.
Professionals call such a(n)
| A．pulled | B．glanced | C．waved | D．armed |
| A．would | B．can | C．need | D．must |
| A．general | B．funny | C．heavy | D．curious |
| A．area | B．part | C．eyesight | D．world |
| A．insects | B．animals | C．plants | D．birds |
| A．coldness | B．illness | C．suffering | D．ignorance |
| A．delivered | B．returned | C．devoted | D．posted |
| A．held | B．hurried | C．signed | D．lined |
| A．casual | B．sorry | C．astonished | D．excited |
| A．creative | B．valuable | C．shocking | D．simple |
| A．warn | B．stop | C．allow | D．push |
| A．turn back | B．get away | C．show up | D．come out |
| A．Therefore | B．Obviously | C．Still | D．Also |
| A．called | B．promised | C．invited | D．helped |
| A．Although | B．Once | C．Because | D．As |
| A．stay | B．visit | C．adventure | D．challenge |
| A．fair | B．famous | C．difficult | D．enjoyable |
| A．collect | B．make | C．order | D．wear |
| A．let | B．made | C．watched | D．noticed |
| A．increased | B．benefited | C．tried | D．seized |
9 . What is it about kids these days that makes older generations so easily angry? In some way or another, older generations have been disappointed at the youth's decline since the earliest days of civilization. Even Aristotletalked smack abouthow young folks thought they knew everything back in the 4th century BC.
So why do people throw all the shade on the next generation? A study out last month in Science Advances shows that negative opinions about kids aren't always based on their actions; it's more about how adults praise their past and current selves.
In the study, researehers looked at a trio of characteristics in three groups of US adults: respect for elders or authoritarianism（权威主义），intelligence, and enjoyment of reading. The team, led by John Protzko, a cognitive scientist at the University of California, Santa Barbara, asked the participants whether they thought kids in the modern age shared the same qualities. They found that adults who tested especially strong in one of the categories tended to see children today as weak in il. For example, if an adult got tagged or self-identified as intelligent, they were more likely to see "kids these days" as less intelligent than they used to be. This, Protzko thinks, is because they remembered their younger selves to be smarter, whether true or not. What's more, they only reserved their strong opinion for characteristics they related to.
In another stage of the study, the authors assigned random scores to participants to trick them into thinking how well-read they were. Many of the adults changed their opinions on kid's reading ability as a result, Protzko speculates that there are two reasons for the shift: How memories can go wrong and the lack of objective knowledge of what childhood is really like. "People who are high in a trail are imposing（迫使）their current high standing in that trait back in time, thinking 'Oh this must have been what all kids were like,' " he says. Over the years, the same memory bias（偏见）keeps occurring, making it seem like kids are somehow failing more and more. In fact,（he older a participant was, the more heavily this bias came into play, Protzko says.
While there's still a lot to learn about why adults might see younger generations as mediocre, this researeh can hint that an age-old phrase can boil down to one classic human trail：vanity（自负）.
―From Popular Science
1. What does the underlined phrase in the first paragraph mean?| A．Expressed his a flection for . | B．Talked positively about. |
| C．Spoke ill of. | D．Thought highly of. |
| A．Negative opinions about kids come from their ill behavior. |
| B．Adults always keeps their previous and present glories in mind. |
| C．Adults hold positive opinions about kids for their actions. |
| D．Kids are always blamed by adults who are more outstanding. |
| A．Because adults got tagged or self-indentified as intelligent. |
| B．Because adults thought they themselves much smarter. |
| C．Because adults hold the view that kids were weaker than them. |
| D．Because adults only remembered their own strengths subjectively. |
| A．Adults hold the bias that kids these days are failing. |
| B．Adults probably forgot all kids have the same characteristics. |
| C．That the same memory bias keeps occurring led to kid's failure. |
| D．The participants ignored the bias as they grew older. |
| A．①②--③④⑤ | B．①--②③④---⑤ |
| C．①②③--④---⑤ | D．①---②---③---④⑤ |
10 . By now you’ve probably heard about the “you’re not special” speech, when English teacher David McCullough told graduating seniors at Wellesley High School: "Do not get the idea you're anything special, because you're not." Mothers and fathers present at the ceremony — and a whole lot of other parents across the internet — took issue with McCullough's ego-puncturing words. But lost in the anger and protest was something we really should be taking to heart: our young people actually have no idea whether they're particularly talented or accomplished or not. In our eagerness to elevate their self-esteem, we forgot to teach them how to realistically assess their own abilities, a crucial requirement for getting better at anything from math to music to sports. In fact, it's not just privileged high-school students: we all tend to view ourselves as above average.
Such inflated (膨胀的) self-judgments have been found in study after study, and it's often exactly when we're least competent at a given task that we rate our performance most generously. In a 2006 study published in the journal Medical Education, for example, medical students who scored the lowest on an essay test were the most charitable in their self-evaluations, while high-scoring students judged themselves much more strictly. Poor students, the authors note, "lack insight" into their own inadequacy. Why should this be? Another study, led by Cornell University psychologist David Dunning, offers an enlightening explanation. People who are incompetent, he writes with co-author Justin Kruger, suffer from a "dual burden": they're not good at what they do, and their wry ineptness (笨拙) prevents them from recognizing how bad they are.
In Dunning and Kruger's study, subjects scoring at the bottom of the heap on tests of logic, grammar and humor "extremely overestimated" their talents. Although their test scores put them in the 12th percentile, they guessed they were in the 62nd. What these individuals lacked (in addition to clear logic, proper grammar and a sense of humor) was "metacognitive skill" (元认知技巧): the capacity to monitor how well they're performing. In the absence of that capacity, the subjects arrived at an overly hopeful view of their own abilities. There's a paradox (悖论) here, the authors note: “The skills that develop competence in a particular domain are often the very same skills necessary to evaluate competence in that domain. "In other words, to get better at judging how well we’re doing at an activity, we have to get better at the activity itself.
There are a couple of ways out of this double bind (两难). First, we can learn to make honest comparisons with others. Train yourself to recognize excellence, even when you yourself don't possess it, and compare what you can do against what truly excellent individuals are able to accomplish. Second, seek out feedback that is frequent, accurate and specific. Find a critic who will tell you not only how poorly you're doing, but just what it is that you're doing wrong. As Dunning and Kruger note, success indicates to us that everything went right, but failure is more ambiguous: any number of things could have gone wrong. Use this external feedback to figure out exactly where and when you screwed up.
If we adopt these strategies — and most importantly, teach them to our children — they won't need parents, or a commencement(毕业典礼) speaker, to tell them that they're special. They'll already know that they are, or have a plan to get that way.
1. The underlined phrase "took issue with" in paragraph 1 most probably means .| A．totally approved of | B．disagreed with |
| C．fully understood | D．held discussion about |
| A．we don’t know whether our young people are talented or not |
| B．young people can't reasonably define themselves |
| C．no requirement is set up for young people to get better |
| D．we always tend to consider ourselves to be privileged |
| A．They lack the capacity to monitor how well they are performing. |
| B．They usually give themselves high scores in self-evaluations. |
| C．They tend to be unable to know exactly how bad they are. |
| D．They are intelligently inadequate in tests and exams. |
| A．are not confident about their logic and grammar |
| B．tend to be very competent in their high-scoring fields |
| C．don't know how well they perform due to their stringent self-judgment |
| D．is very careful about their self-evaluations because they have their own limits |
| A．the best way to recognize excellence is to study past success and failure |
| B．through comparison with others, one will know where and when he fails |
| C．we need internal honesty with ourselves and external honesty from others |
| D．neither parents nor a commencement speaker can tell whether one is special |
| A．Special or Not? Teach Kids To Figure It Out |
| B．Let's Admit That We Are Not That Special |
| C．Tips On Making Ourselves More Special |
| D．Tell The Truth: Kids Overestimate their Talents |
