It’s 5 p.m., and you’ve just realized that report you’ve been putting off is due tomorrow. It’s time to buckle down and open your computer. Actually, you should probably make dinner first. You usually like cooking, though it’s hard to enjoy with this work hanging over your head, and oh—it’s actually pretty late! Maybe you should just try again in the morning. This is the cycle of procrastination, and I promise you, we have all been there.
Procrastination is when we avoid a task we said we would do, for no good reason, despite expecting our behavior to bring negative consequences. Obviously, it’s irrational to do something you expect to harm you. But ironically, procrastination is the result of our bodies trying to protect us, specifically by avoiding a task we see as threatening.
We’re most likely to procrastinate tasks that evoke negative feelings, such as dread, incompetence, and insecurity. Because procrastination is motivated by our negative feelings, some individuals are more susceptible (易受影响的) to it than others. People who have difficulty regulating their emotions and those who struggle with low self-esteem are much more likely to procrastinate. However, it’s a common misconception that all procrastinators are lazy. When you’re feeling lazy, you’re more likely to sit around doing nothing than distract yourself with unimportant tasks. In fact, many people procrastinate because they care too much. Procrastinators often report a high fear of failure, putting things off because they’re afraid their work won’t live up to their high standards.
Whatever the reason for procrastination, the results are often the same. Procrastinators are likely to suffer from anxiety and depression, ongoing feelings of shame and physical ailments (轻病) associated with high stress.
So, how can we break the cycle of procrastination?
Traditionally, people thought procrastinators needed to cultivate discipline and practice strict time management. But today, many researchers feel the exact opposite. Being too hard on yourself can layer additional bad emotions onto a task. What we really need to do is to address and reduce these negative emotions.
1. What is procrastination?2. What kinds of people are more likely to procrastinate?
3. Please decide which part is false in the following statement, then underline it and explain why.
Ø Procrastinators are affected by negative emotions, are all lazy and are likely to suffer from physical ailments associated with high stress.
4. What strategies can you use to break the cycle of procrastination in your daily life? (In about 40 words)
2 . It often happens that a number of applicants (申请人) with almost the same qualifications and experience all apply for the same position. In their educational background, special skills and work experience, there is little, if anything, to choose between half a dozen candidates. How then does the employer make a choice? Usually on the basis of an interview.
There are many arguments for and against the interview as a way of selection. The main argument against it is that it results in a wholly subjective decision. As often as not, employers do not choose the best candidate. They choose the candidate who makes a good first impression on them. Some employers, of course, reply to this argument by saying that they have become so experienced in interviewing staff that they are able to make a good assessment of each candidate’s likely performance. The main argument in favor of the interview is that an employer is concerned not only with a candidate’s ability, but with his or her suitable personality for the particular work situation. Many employers, for example, will overlook occasional mistakes from their secretary if she has a pleasant personality.
It is perhaps true to say therefore, that the real purpose of an interview is not to assess the assessable aspects of each candidate but to make a guess at the things that are hard to measure, such as personality, character and social ability. Unfortunately, both for the employers and applicants for jobs, there are many people of great ability who simply do not interview well. There are also, of course, people who interview extremely well, but are later found to be very unsatisfactory employees. Candidates who interview well tend to be quietly confident, but never boastful (自夸的) direct and straightforward in their questions and answers; cheerful and friendly, but never over-familiar; and sincerely enthusiastic and optimistic. Candidates who interview badly tend to be either very shy or over-confident. They either talk too little or never stop talking. They are either over-polite or a bit rude.
1. People argue over the interview mainly because they have ________.| A．different purposes in the interview | B．different experiences in interviews |
| C．different standards of selection | D．different ways of selection |
| A．personality | B．character | C．opinion | D．ability |
| A．a link between success in interview and personality |
| B．connections between work abilities and personality |
| C．differences in interview experience |
| D．differences in personal behavior |
| A．He thinks it is a good way of selection. | B．He doesn’t quite agree with it. |
| C．He is neither for nor against it. | D．It is not clear. |
3 . We have been defending humanities for many decades now, but the crisis of the humanities only grows. In the face of declining student interest and mounting political scrutiny (审查), universities and colleges are increasingly putting humanities departments on the chopping block.
As a humanist, I am prepared to admit that I do not know what the value of the humanities is. I once asked the best teacher I ever had why she no longer taught her favorite novel, and she said that she stopped teaching a book when she found she was no longer curious about it. The humanistic spirit is, fundamentally, an inquisitive one.
In contrast, defenses of the humanities are not - and cannot be - conducted in an inquisitive spirit, because a defensive spirit is inimical to an inquisitive one. Defensiveness is, it must be admitted, an understandable response when the chopping block is brought out and you need to explain why you shouldn’t be on it, which requires their participants to pretend to know things that they do not actually know.
Nonetheless, we should be alert to the danger of becoming accustomed to putting our worst foot forward. An atmosphere of urgency and calls for immediate action are hostile to fields of study like literature and philosophy that require a reflective mood, and the pretense (假装) of knowing what one doesn’t actually know is hostile to forms of inquiry that demand an open mind.
A defensive mindset also encourages politicization. If the study of literature or philosophy helps to fight sexism or to promote democracy — and everyone agrees that sexism is bad, and democracy is good-then you have your answer as to why we shouldn’t cut funding for the study of literature or philosophy. Politicization is a way of arming the humanities for its political battles, but it comes at an intellectual cost. Why is sexism so bad? Why is democracy so good? Politicization silences these and other questions, whereas the function of the humanities is to raise them.
Humanists are not alone in their ignorance about the purpose of their disciplines. But scientists are under a lot less pressure to explain why they exist because the society at large believes itself to already have the answer to that question. If at some point I am called on to defend the study of Homer or Descartes at some official hearing, I will do my best, but I will not run to battle; the battle will have to come to me.
The task of humanists is to invite, to welcome, to excite, to engage. And when we let ourselves classrooms but also in our public-self presentation, we find we don’t need to defend or prove anything: We are irresistible.
1. What is the main concern regarding the crisis in humanities?| A．Students’ lack of interest in studying humanities courses. |
| B．People’s little knowledge regarding the purpose of humanities. |
| C．The mounting political scrutiny faced by humanities departments. |
| D．The pressure on humanists to argue for the value of their disciplines. |
| A．contrary. | B．relevant. | C．sensitive. | D．immune. |
| A．It is the worst action to take in the face of the crisis. |
| B．It leads to a compromise on human’s intellectual depth. |
| C．It requires a reflective mood on the study of humanities. |
| D．It brings about a lower chance of survival for humanities. |
| A．Humanities may not need any defense. | B．Science is more useful than humanities. |
| C．The future of humanities remains cloudy. | D．The battle of humanities is a hard one to fight. |
The term “multitasking” originally
Electric scooter safety
If you look around the streets of London, you’ll see the many methods people use to move around. Whether it’s on a commute to work, a trip to the shops, or a sightseeing excursion, there are people on buses, the Tube, cars, motorbikes, bicycles and even roller skates. The roads are already congested (jammed); and now there’s a new addition: electric, or “e-scooters”.
This traditional children’s vehicle has become more sophisticated over the years. And now, with the addition of a small electric motor, it’s become a cheap and easy mode of transport. Scooting around town can be fun and doesn’t involve much effort, so it’s no wonder they’re becoming increasingly popular in cities around the world. But following what’s believed to be the first fatal accident involving an electric scooter in the UK, questions are being asked about their safety and whether traffic laws should be changed.
Some scooter riders have been seen on pavements; others on the road jumping red traffic lights, adding to the frustration of motorists stuck in jams. In the UK, the law states that riding one on the public highway or pavement is forbidden. Riders currently face a £300 fixed-penalty notice and six points on their driving licence for doing so. But, despite this, it seems the increasing popularity of e-scooters means they can be seen everywhere. And now users are calling on regulations to be changed.
The UK government is looking at how safely they can be used on the road and is ‘reviewing’ the law. But its transport minister, Michael Ellis, has told the BBC that: “Micromobility products are appearing in countries across the globe and are an exciting innovation for which we know there is demand. However, safety must always be our top priority when considering their use on public highways in this country.”
There’s no doubt there are dangers in riding a two-wheeled scooter. Despite the fact that some of them can exceed 30mph, they sometimes only have one brake and no lights. They also become unstable if the rider hits a pothole, and however confident the rider may be, larger vehicles on the road make them vulnerable (easy to be hurt). So it seems more work needs to be done to give e-scooters a safe and legal space to travel in.
1. What is it that makes an e-scooter easy to ride?2. Why are motorists annoyed by those e-scooter riders?
3. Please decide which part is false in the following statement. Then underline it and explain why.
To answer the call of e-scooter users, the UK government is preparing to change the law about where e-scooters can be used.
4. Do you think e-scooters should be allowed on public roads? Why? (In about 40 words)
6 . I am one of the many city people who are always saying that given the choice we would prefer to live in the country away from the dirt and noise of a large city. I have managed to convince myself that if it weren’t for my job I would immediately head out for the open spaces and go back to nature in some sleepy village buried in the country. But how realistic (现实的) is the dream?
Cities can be frightening places. The majority of the population live in huge tower blocks, noisy, dirty and unfriendly. The sense of belonging to a group tends to disappear when you live fifteen floors up. Strangely enough, nowadays people on the same floor don’t even say hello to each other.
Country life, on the other hand, differs in that a sense of group generally unites the people of small villages together. People have the advantage of knowing that there is always someone to turn to when they need help. But it is also true that you are cut off from the exciting and important events that take place in cities. Shopping becomes a major problem, and for anything slightly out of the ordinary you have to go on a trip to the nearest large town. The city people are often worried by a sense of unbearable stillness and quiet.
What, then, is the answer? The country has the advantage of peace and quiet, but suffers from the disadvantage of being cut off. The city raises a feeling of loneliness, and constant noise beats the senses. But you are at the centre of things, and that life doesn’t come to an end at half-past nine at night. Some people have found or rather bought a solution between the two: they have expressed their preference for the “quiet life” by leaving the cities and moving to villages within commuting (通勤) distance of large cities.
What then of my dream? I’m eager for the idea, but you see there’s my cat, Toby. I’m not at all sure that he would take to all that fresh air and exercise in the long grass. I mean, can you see him mixing with all those energetic males down the farm? No, he would rather have the electric fire any evening.
1. Which of the following makes city people unhappy?| A．Colorful life. | B．A sense of group. | C．Close neighborhood. | D．A feeling of loneliness. |
| A．Designer clothes. | B．Farming tools. | C．Daily supplies. | D．Fresh vegetables. |
| A．enjoys living in huge tower blocks | B．is in two minds |
| C．will continue his life in the city | D．will move to the country |
Crowd control could soon become an important skill for climbers on Mount Everest, as important as physical strength or watching the weather. In a single day last week, nearly 40 people reached the top of the world — a record. Reports from base camp spoke of queues at dangerous ridges and crowds as people passed each other in the final dash for the 8,848 meters top.
More traditional mountaineers have been concerned about the circus atmosphere surrounding Everest in recent years, and there are warnings that the crowds are making the mountain more dangerous. In 1996, 14 died on the mountain when the members of several groups were trapped at high altitudes by sudden snowstorms. Bad weather in early May led to this year’s jam on the summit ridge, but the loss, luckily, was light. Just four climbers died, including a Nepali Sherpa who had made 11 previous successful climbing.
Traditionalists are also worried about the growing tendency of climbers to set records and achieve “firsts”, rather than simply climb the mountain. This year’s crop of mountaineers included the oldest man, 64-year-old Sherman Bull from Connecticut, and the youngest, 16-year-old Temba Tsheri Sherpa of Nepal. An American with only one arm was on the mountain this year; an Indian with no legs also tried but failed. Erik Weihennieyer, an American, became the first blind person to reach the top of the world. His fellow climbers stayed in front of him on the way up, describing the type of land and ringing bells.
Nepal views Mount Everest as something of a cash cow. The government charges journeys a minimum of $70,000. That is probably why officials in Katmandu are ignoring concerns about overcrowding and talking about even more climbers coming next year. But a celebration of the 48th anniversary of the first conquest of Everest, by Sir Edmund Hillary and Sherpa Tenzing Norgay, was cancelled after violent strikes. Tumultuous (动乱的) Nepali politics, it seems, could be just the crowd-control measure that Everest needs.
1. According to the author, what skills are important for climbers on Mount Everest?2. What are traditional mountaineers worried about?
3. Please decide which part is false in the following statement, then underline it and explain why.
●The Nepal government cares little about the overcrowding problem because of its internal tumultuous politics.
4. Do you think it is a good idea to limit the number of visitors to a tourist attraction? Why?
8 . Borders, departments, or issue areas all represent what systems analysts call system boundaries. System boundaries divide the big, messy, interconnected world into smaller subsystems. This is useful, even necessary. Our minds and our collective governance systems would be stuck if we had to always consider all the connections of everything to everything else. But dividing systems into subsystems can sometimes break a natural cooperativity. For instance, a decarbonizing country will spend money in its energy and transportation sectors and save money in its health system.
Decarbonization could be a win for the whole, but it might be experienced as a bother for particular subsystems.
Donella Meadows, the early systems modeler, wrote that system boundaries are “lines in the mind, not in the world.” And that is actually good news. If departments, and disciplines are just ideas, then there is nothing immovable about them. We can make these borders less obvious and conduct partnerships across them. We can even redraw them to include more of what matters in a single project or investment. That’s the premise of multisolving — using one investment of time or effort to achieve several goals at once.
For instance, Warm Up New Zealand (WUNZ) upgraded the energy efficiency of residential buildings and provided jobs in the building sector after a financial downturn. The project resulted in better health for residents, as well. That translated into health systems savings. Taken together, a 2011 study estimated that across all these benefits, the project saved $3.90 for every $1 invested.
Multisolving seems possible everywhere and like an obvious choice. Yet, it is very much the exception, not the rule. Why is multisolving still so rare when it has the power to boost progress on some of the most urgent issues we face?
Unfamiliarity stands in the way, as does an often-unexamined assumption that making issues smaller makes them easier to address. We often hear the viewpoint, “I already work on poverty (or climate, etc.) and that’s hard enough. Why should I add biodiversity or pollution to the mix?” Fundraising for crossing borders can be a struggle too. Funders want the “visible results” shown, but they don’t always see crossing borders as an essential part of achieving those results.
It is easy to devalue and underemphasize connection-building. After all, it can be delicate and not always visible. But to realize goals in today’s world, from equitable policies and low-carbon facilities to values like cooperation and fairness, we do need deep shifts, and we need them soon. And facilitating the flow of ideas back and forth across borders is one way to speed change.
1. As for systems boundaries, the author is ______.| A．critical | B．puzzled | C．supportive | D．unconcerned |
| A．Prediction. | B．Precondition. | C．Prevention. | D．Presentation. |
| A．People are familiar with multisolving. |
| B．WUNZ performed multisolving successfully. |
| C．Raising money helps to produce visible results. |
| D．Multisolving is widely used to address problems. |
| A．Multisolving: Hard to achieve soon |
| B．Multisolving: Essential to solve small issues |
| C．Multisolving: Conducting partnership across borders |
| D．Multisolving: Making systems whole, healthy, and sustainable |
If you listen to the stream of articles and podcasts telling us how to become a billionaire in 10 easy steps, you might hold the belief that squeezing ourselves dry each second of the day will bring happiness and success.
But this obsession with productivity is costing us. Even a car doesn’t stay in the same gear the whole time. “We are not machines,” says psychologist Professor Drew Dawson. “Performance declines as a function of time, of task and time of day.”
Instead of moments of boredom, where we might let our minds wander and come up with novel solutions to problems and novel ways of thinking, we seek constant stimulation - and have a lowered tolerance for boredom as a result.
“It leads people to a false assumption that the world’s most successful people are literally making good use of every single minute,” Dawson says. “That’s a myth. We’re not hardwired to act that way as humans, and it’s a good recipe for burnout.”
COVID-19, for a variety of reasons, has led people to question and even opt out of this myth. “Who wants to lie on their deathbed going, ‘I wish I’d been more productive’?” Dawson says. “Post-COVID, people are starting to say, ‘what am I losing compared to what am I gaining?’”
So, if not more productivity, what should we be aiming for?
·Get our priorities straight.
A life spent chasing the state of being able to do everything is less meaningful than a life of focusing on a few things that count. We can reflect on five things that matter most to us and lead a life around them. Once clear on them, we also become clear on where to direct our attention and what to say “no” to.
·Enjoy downtime(停工期)for its own sake
Glorifying productivity can blind us to the value of other parts of our lives, including boredom, connection, creativity and play. But activities in our lives don’t need to always be productive or worthwhile-enjoying an activity is reason enough to spend time on it.
We weren’t meant to be productive all the time, so stop constantly struggling, and start chilling.
1. What does “obsession with productivity” refer to in the passage?2. How has COVID-19 changed the situation according to the passage?
3. Please decide which part is false in the following statement, then underline it and explain why.
It is more meaningful to focus on a few things that count in life, so we can reflect on five things in our life to say “no” to. 4. Do you agree with the statement “enjoying an activity is reason enough to spend time on it”? Why or why not?(In about 40 words)
Most people believe when they are living
