1 . Airlines already place common-sense limits on young passengers. For example, on United Airlines, babies younger than seven days old can’t fly. And lately, there’s been a heated discussion about keeping little ones out of business class. Why draw a line there?
No one’s suggesting a ban on babies, or even kids, from flights. That wouldn’t make sense for passengers or airlines. Banning children from flights would be a financial disaster for airlines. That’s because leisure travel accounts for two-thirds of all air travel incomes, and people sometimes take their kids on vacation with them despite their kids’ screams, tantrums (发脾气) and meltdowns.
But maybe it’s time for a little course correction when it comes to children. Maybe there are places we should keep baby-free, such as a section of the plane, or the entire plane. It will benefit passengers because all or some of them will arrive at their destinations well-rested and ready for their vacation or work.
There are some passengers who believe airlines shouldn’t restrict young passengers from flying anywhere. They think people seem to forget that babies and toddlers are people. Restricting children may be an easy solution, but it will have long-term consequences. They’re not going to like the humans they grow up to be.
There’s an equally convincing argument that we should place sensible limits on babies. Some may have physiological challenges that make a flight unbearable. Others may not have the patience to sit in a pressurized aluminum tube for hours. Some of them are just not ready to sit still for a 12-hour flight. But the biggest challenge for babies and toddlers is the pressure changes on the climb to and fall from cruising (平稳行驶的) altitude.
Babies will keep flying anyway. So there are always a few ways of staying calm when you are seated close to a seat-kicking child who raises the noise level on your next flight, for example, asking a flight attendant for help, buying a good pair of noise-canceling headphones or earplugs or avoiding the babies entirely by booking the red-eye flights.
1. What is the common sense about children taking flights?A.Children tend to lack patience. |
B.Not all children should be banned from flights. |
C.Flights shouldn’t ban children from business class. |
D.Babies should be accompanied by adults on flights. |
A.Flights have no suitable seats for them. |
B.Airlines can’t profit as much from them. |
C.They make their parents lose their minds. |
D.They are too noisy for other passengers. |
A.Children’s mental health will be influenced. |
B.Children tend to lose the appetite for flying. |
C.Children are likely to be ignored when they grow up. |
D.Children will have a weak connection with their family. |
A.A discussion about keeping little children out of flights. |
B.A benefit of passengers on the flights keeping baby-free. |
C.A financial disaster for airlines banning children from flights. |
D.A new measure to make all passengers happy on the flights. |
2 . “In the United States, 40 million Americans are food insecure. They don’t know where their next meal is going to come from,” said Aidan Reilly, who co-founded Farmlink. “Meanwhile, in the United States we’re throwing out over 100 billion pounds of food every year.”
Started during the hard period in spring 2020, Farmlink was initially supposed to help struggling families and food banks. Reilly and his childhood friend James Kanoff were reading and watching news about food shortages, and they learned that local farms were forced to destroy spare produce that they couldn’t sell, especially with restaurants, schools and hotels closed. Reilly, Kanoff and a group of friends worked together over Zoom, text and e-mail to contact farms. They didn’t really set out to start a nonprofit then but just thought it would be great to figure out one way to help starving (饥饿的) people.
With “we’ll come to you” as their catchphrase, the group rented trucks and attempted to do all the food pickup and deliveries themselves. They had a lot of difficulties in the beginning, but they made it work, moving more than one million pounds of produce from farms to food banks within just two months and transforming their project into a massive logistics operation in the process. Word spread, and more and more young people at home during the pandemic reached out to help.
Farmlink has worked with more than 100 farms and 300 communities in the United States, rescuing and moving enough food to distribute (配送) more than 64 million meals. “The bigger Farmlink gets, the bigger our worldview gets. There are everyday Americans who live next to us and don’t know how they’re going to feed their kids. And that’s exactly who we’re doing this for,” Reilly said.
1. What does Aidan Reilly think is the reason for food shortages in the US?A.The lack of food suppliers. |
B.High food prices for most Americans. |
C.Underproduction of food in the world. |
D.The mismatch between food supply and demand. |
A.It produced food specifically for them. |
B.It collected money by selling produce. |
C.It set up food distribution channels. |
D.It persuaded the rich to donate food to them. |
A.All Americans. | B.People in poor countries. |
C.People living nearby. | D.Parents with starving kids. |
A.A Project Widening Our Worldview |
B.A Bridge Between Spare Food and Starvation |
C.A Nonprofit Organization for Food Production |
D.A Group of People Fighting Against Food Waste |
3 . Have you ever wondered why most store-bought tomatoes are so tasteless? Does it relate to climate change or soils? The answer has something to do with farmers’ income: Tomato farmers care about output, and the genetic variants (基因变体) associated with output are not associated with tasty tomato flavor, a new study finds.
Is it possible to bring back the rich, sweet flavor of the tomato? To find out, Denise Tieman, research assistant at the University of Florida, explored which genes are associated with tomatoes’ taste.
In an attempt to fix supermarket tomatoes, Florida researchers looked at 398 different types and identified the chemical and genetic makeup of each one. They had participants taste-test 101 varieties, cross-referencing the participants’ favorites with their research findings. They ended up with 13 genetic compositions that are most likely responsible for giving tomatoes their flavor. The researchers then measured the content of the 13 flavor compositions in each of the tomatoes, and identified about250 genetic loci (遗传基因座) that controlled tomato flavor. And the researchers also wanted to explore why supermarket tomatoes have no taste.
It turns out that for industrial growers, it all comes down to priorities (优先性). North American consumers want year-round availability, so farmers started raising their plants for qualities like firmness, shelf life, high output and disease resistance, says Tieman. “Not to discount any of that because it’s all important. We want to have tomatoes in the grocery stores year round and be able to ship them long distances when it’s winter in the north. If they have to be shipped from Florida or Mexico, you need to have all those features.” But as growers planted tomatoes to meet those priorities, the flavor gradually disappeared.
Going back to the old varieties is not an option—at least, not for grocery stores. But the researchers believe that there is hope for a growable tomato that’s both long-lasting and flavorful in about three to five years.
1. What is the main reason for the tasteless store-bought tomatoes?A.They get little energy from the soil. |
B.They are affected by climate change. |
C.Tomato farmers prioritize output over flavor. |
D.Consumers demand tomatoes with a longer shelf life. |
A.They conducted a survey on tomato consumers. |
B.They measured the size and firmness of tomatoes. |
C.They analyzed the genetics of different tomato varieties. |
D.They interviewed tomato farmers about their growing methods. |
A.Reserved. | B.Positive. | C.Objective. | D.Dismissive. |
A.How Are Tasty Tomatoes Produced? |
B.New Tomato Varieties to Be Released |
C.Risks of Too Much Tomato Consumption |
D.Why Do Store Tomatoes Lose Their Flavor? |
4 . Traditionally, the number of meaningful social relationships one can maintain is around 150. This concept finds its roots in the natural development of the human brain. However, in the digital age, where our social connections extend far beyond the geographical boundaries (界限), we easily create more connections with the help of the rising online platforms. Then, a question arises: Does the digital age rewrite the rules of social connection?
A study published in Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking explored the effect of social media usage on the size of social circles and the closeness of relationships. The researchers found that more time spent on social media made for a larger number of online “friends,” but not a larger number of offline friends. Further, the findings were not linked to feelings of closeness towards online or offline friends.
Another study from the European Journal of Information Systems studied the link between social media usage and “social overload” — the feeling that too much of the energy for socializing is being used up by online relationships. The authors found that social media usage directly contributed to the experience of social overload, related to digital tiredness and dissatisfaction with social media.
With social media platforms rising, one’s ability to connect with people challenges the traditional concept. The brain, used to manage a limited number of relationships, now fights against the difficulties of dealing with a large number of digital connections, leading to a less attention and feeling investment (投入) in a relationship. And the online shallow connections can not develop meaningful, lasting relationships that stand the test of digital distance.
Therefore, in the digital age’s social whirlwind, instead of drowning (淹没) in a sea of weak interaction (互动), choose to engage in meaningful conversations and focus on the handful of relationships that truly fit your heart. Hug the beauty of face-to-face connections, allowing the richness of human interaction to flower beyond the digital world. By doing so, we create digital and physical spaces that truly improve our well-being.
1. Why did the author mention the traditional concept in the first paragraph?A.To tell a story. | B.To develop the topic. |
C.To show his sincerity. | D.To give an example. |
A.Online relationships were closer. |
B.Spending more time online improved one’s health. |
C.Social media usage had no effect on one’s social circles. |
D.The large online social circles didn’t mean the large number of offline friends. |
A.It resulted in one’s less attention to a relationship. |
B.It caused the brain to break down and damaged the health. |
C.It led to expression errors when one socialized with friends. |
D.It developed shallow connections that stand the test of distance. |
A.It is a good choice to give up online connections completely. |
B.Face-to-face connections are time-consuming and meaningless in digital age. |
C.It is a must to merely concentrate on the few relationships truly fitting your heart. |
D.It poses a challenge for the brain to deal with large numbers of digital connections. |
5 . People don’t usually become homeless suddenly. It’s a chutes-and-ladders (阶梯状) process. A large new statewide study takes a closer look at the period just before homelessness, by asking a representative sample of almost 3,200 homeless people from all over the state about the dilemma they fell into, and what would have helped.
Some of the findings were unsurprising: in the state with the nation’s largest homeless population, people are unhoused because they don’t have enough money, or have experienced trauma (创伤). A quarter of all survey participants had experienced family violence, and their lives and health get much worse once homelessness strikes. But some of the report’s data run counter to popular perception: for example, most homeless people are not from out of state, contrary to the common belief that homeless people move to California for the weather and policies.
The study’s lead author, Dr. Margot Kushel, says there’s a “doom loop” of homelessness, where people have jobs that don’t cover living expenses, so they lose their homes, and the resulting instability makes it harder to keep their jobs.
Kushel points to really exciting models of homelessness prevention, where in low-income communities, they’ll have subway and bus posters saying, “Are you at risk of becoming homeless? Call us.” These programs might offer anything from cash to finding landlords or roommates. “What was really striking to us was how little money people thought it would have taken,” says Kushel. Most participants suggested that less than $500 a month, or a onetime payment of $10,000, would have kept them housed. Kushel cautions that the vast majority of mental health issues among the study participants are anxiety and depression. It’s likely that the lack of resources results in those conditions, rather than the illness causing the homelessness. “The driving issue is clearly the deep poverty,” Kushel says.
1. What does the study focus on?A.The homeless’ nationalities. | B.The current situation of the homeless. |
C.Homeless people’s previous experiences. | D.The solution to wiping out homelessness. |
A.Deep poverty gives rise to homelessness. |
B.Most participants have experienced domestic violence. |
C.The majority of homeless people are native Californian. |
D.Homeless people move to California for the weather and policies. |
A.A terrible circle. | B.A different situation. |
C.An improved condition. | D.An unpredictable future. |
A.Anxiety and depression caused homelessness. | B.People expected a very low charge of housing. |
C.Homeless prevention exists in all communities. | D.The program offers accommodation free of charge. |
Teenage life is full of adventures and challenges. Doing voluntary work is popular among some teenagers. And extra-curricular activities
7 . Parents continuously discuss about how to get their children stronger and tougher, but whatever they do, it’s not working. Cases of anxiety disorders and depression are rising rapidly among teenagers. What are they doing wrong?
The word “antifragile” is invented and used to describe a small but very important class of systems that gain from shocks, challenges, and disorder. The immune (免疫的) system is one of them: it requires exposure to certain kinds of bacteria and potential allergens (过敏原) in childhood in order to develop to its full ability.
Children’s social and emotional abilities areas anti fragile as their immune systems. If parents over protect kids and keep them “safe” from unpleasant social situations and negative emotions, parents deprive (剥夺) them of the challenges and opportunities for skill-building they need to grow strong. Such children are likely to suffer more when exposed later to other unpleasant but ordinary life events, such as teasing and social rejection. It’s not the kids’ fault. Outdoor play and independent mobility went down; screen time and adult-monitored activities went up.
Yet free play in which kids workout their own rules of engagement, take small risks, and learn to master small dangers turns out to be vital for the development of adult social and even physical competence. Depriving them of free play prevents their social-emotional growth. Norwegian play researchers Ellen and Leif warned: “We may observe an increased anxiety or mental disorders in society if children are forbidden from participating in age-adequate risky play.”
They wrote those words in 2011. Over the following few years, their prediction came true. Kids born after 1994 are suffering from much higher rates of anxiety disorders and depression than did the previous generation. Besides, there is also arise in the rate at which teenage girls are admitted to hospital for deliberately harming themselves.
What can parents do to change these trends? How can parents raise kids strong enough to handle the ordinary and extraordinary challenges of life? Parents can’t guarantee that giving primary schoolchildren more independence today will bring down the rate of teenage suicide tomorrow. The links between childhood over protection and teenage mental illness are suggestive but not clear-cut. Yet there are good reasons to suspect that by depriving kids natural anti fragile of the wide range of experiences they need to become strong, parents are systematically preventing their growth. parents should let go—and let them grow.
1. Parents over protect children, because .A.children are not independent enough |
B.they want to keep children from being teased |
C.they are concerned about their children’s safety |
D.parent-monitored activities area must |
A.To stress its importance. | B.To analyze the cause of anxiety. |
C.To question the latest discovery. | D.To help understand a new word. |
A.Stop trying to perfect your child. |
B.Prepare the child for the road, not the road for the child. |
C.While we try to teach our children all about life, our children teach us what life is all about. |
D.It takes great courage to raise children. |
A.reduce children’s risky behavior | B.strengthen children’s friendship |
C.promote children’s toughness | D.develop children’s leadership skills |
8 . The case for and against social media
Is social media harmful to teenagers?
An argument for social media claims it can strengthen social bonds by facilitating relationships with people in different geographical areas. For example, social media has helped old school friends to get back in touch after many years without contact.
Ideally, we should have enough self-control to be able to limit our use of social media, enjoying the benefits it can bring.
A.The disadvantages of social media. |
B.In my opinion, the disadvantages of social media outweigh the benefits. |
C.It is all too easy to become absorbed in this online life rather than communicate in real life. |
D.People secure jobs now through social media or research information for their studies. |
E.This is the question we are going to examine. |
F.We will look at the arguments for and against using social media before answering the question. |
G.We aim to control our use of social media. |
增加:在缺词处加一个漏字符号(∧),并在其下面写上该加的词。
删除:把多余的词用斜线(\)划掉。
修改:在错词下划一横线,并在该词下面写出修改后的词。
注意:
1. 每处错误及其修改均仅限一词;
2. 只允许修改10处, 多者(从第11处起)不计分。
Do you often talk with your parents? A recently survey shows that nearly half of the high school students doesn’t like to talk with their parents. 43. 3% of them have trouble communicate with their parents. What was worse, 82. 8% of them don’t want to share their secrets their parents. Actually, it is important for us to communicate with our parents though they are the dearest people in our life, whom care for us all the time. By letting them know that what we think, we can get practical advice from them, which can help us to deal with many problem in life.
In this way, we can feel more confident about us and live happily.
Have you ever wondered what life is like now
So what did they talk about? For
That said, it’s not all a matter of improvement. Quite a few people told me that they feel more stressed these days because they rely a lot on technology and they are always