How many really suffer as a result of labor market problems This is one of the most critical yet contentious social policy questions. In many ways, our social statistics exaggerate the degree of hardship. Unemployment does not have the same dire consequences today as it did in the 1930’s when most of the unemployed were primary breadwinners, when income and earnings were usually much closer to the margin of subsistence, and when there were no countervailing social programs for those failing in the labor market.
Increasing affluence,the rise of families with more than one wage earnerslavery, the growing predominance of secondary earners among the unemployed, and improved social welfare protection have unquestionably mitigated the consequences of joblessness. Earnings and income data also overstate the dimensions of hardship. Among the millions with hourly earnings at or below the minimum wage level, the over-whelming majority are from multiple earners, relatively affluent families. Most of those counted by the poverty statistics are elderly or handicapped or have family responsibilities which keep them out of the labor force, so the poverty statistics are by no means an accurate indicator of labor market pathologies.
Yet there are also many ways our social statistics underestimate the degree of labor-market-related hardship. The unemployment counts exclude the millions of fully employed workers whose wages are so low that their families remain in poverty. Low wages and repeated or prolonged unemployment frequently interact to undermine the capacity for self-support. Since the number experiencing joblessness at some time during the year is several times the number unemployed in any month, those who suffer as a result of forced idleness can equal or exceed average annual unemployment, even though only a minority of the jobless in any month really suffer. For every person counted in the monthly unemployment tallies, there is another working part-time because of the inability to find fulltime work, or else outside the labor force but wanting a job. Finally, income transfers in our country have always focused on the elderly, disabled, and dependent, neglecting the needs of the working poor, so that the dramatic expansion of cash and in kind transfers does not necessarily mean that those failing in the labor market are adequately protected.
As a result of such contradictory evidence, it is uncertain whether those suffering seriously as a result of thousands or the tens of millions, and, hence, whether high levels of joblessness can be tolerated or must be countered by job creation and economic stimulus. There is only one area of agreement in this debate—that the existing poverty, employment, and earnings statistics are inadequate for one of their primary applications, measuring the consequences of labor market problems.
Which of the tollowing does " labor market problems" in the first sentenee refer to（）
How many really suffer as a result of labor market problems This is one of the most critical yet contentious social policy questions. In many ways,our social statistics exaggerate the degree of hardship. Unemployment does not have the same dire consequences today as it did in the 1930’s when most of the unemployed were primary breadwinnersslavery, when income and earnings were usually much closer to the margin of subsistence, and when there were no countervailing social programs for those failing in the labor market.
Increasing affluence, the rise of families with more than one wage earner, the growing predominance of secondary earners among the unemployed, and improved social welfare protection have unquestionably mitigated the consequences of joblessness. Earnings and income data also overstate the dimensions of hardship. Among the millions with hourly earnings at or below the minimum wage level, the over-whelming majority are from multiple earners, relatively affluent families. Most of those counted by the poverty statistics are elderly or handicapped or have family responsibilities which keep them out of the labor force, so the poverty statistics are by no means an accurate indicator of labor market pathologies.
Yet there are also many ways our social statistics underestimate the degree of labor-market-related hardship. The unemployment counts exclude the millions of fully employed workers whose wages are so low that their families remain in poverty. Low wages and repeated or prolonged unemployment frequently interact to undermine the capacity for self-support. Since the number experiencing joblessness at some time during the year is several times the number unemployed in any month, those who suffer as a result of forced idleness can equal or exceed average annual unemployment, even though only a minority of the jobless in any month really suffer. For every person counted in the monthly unemployment tallies, there is another working part-time because of the inability to find fulltime work, or else outside the labor force but wanting a job. Finally, income transfers in our country have always focused on the elderly, disabled, and dependent, neglecting the needs of the working poor, so that the dramatic expansion of cash and in kind transfers does not necessarily mean that those failing in the labor market are adequately protected.
As a result of such contradictory evidence, it is uncertain whether those suffering seriously as a result of thousands or the tens of millions, and, hence, whether high levels of joblessness can be tolerated or must be countered by job creation and economic stimulus. There is only one area of agreement in this debate—that the existing poverty, employment, and earnings statistics are inadequate for one of their primary applications, measuring the consequences of labor market problems.
The author contrasts the 1930’s with the present in order to show that（）
How many really suffer as a result of labor market problems This is one of the most critical yet contentious social policy questions. In many ways, our social statistics exaggerate the degree of hardship. Unemployment does not have the same dire consequences today as it did in the 1930’s when most of the unemployed were primary breadwinners, when income and earnings were usually much closer to the margin of subsistence, and when there were no countervailing social programs for those failing in the labor market.
Increasing affluence, the rise of families with more than one wage earner, the growing predominance of secondary earners among the unemployed, and improved social welfare protection have unquestionably mitigated the consequences of joblessness. Earnings and income data also overstate the dimensions of hardship. Among the millions with hourly earnings at or below the minimum wage level, the over-whelming majority are from multiple earners, relatively affluent families. Most of those counted by the poverty statistics are elderly or handicapped or have family responsibilities which keep them out of the labor force, so the poverty statistics are by no means an accurate indicator of labor market pathologies.
Yet there are also many ways our social statistics underestimate the degree of labor-market-related hardship. The unemployment counts exclude the millions of fully employed workers whose wages are so low that their families remain in poverty. Low wages and repeated or prolonged unemployment frequently interact to undermine the capacity for self-support. Since the number experiencing joblessness at some time during the year is several times the number unemployed in any month, those who suffer as a result of forced idleness can equal or exceed average annual unemployment, even though only a minority of the jobless in any month really suffer. For every person counted in the monthly unemployment tallies, there is another working part-time because of the inability to find fulltime work, or else outside the labor force but wanting a job. Finally, income transfers in our country have always focused on the elderly, disabled, and dependent, neglecting the needs of the working poor, so that the dramatic expansion of cash and in kind transfers does not necessarily mean that those failing in the labor market are adequately protected.
As a result of such contradictory evidence, it is uncertain whether those suffering seriously as a result of thousands or the tens of millions, and, hence, whether high levels of joblessness can be tolerated or must be countered by job creation and economic stimulus. There is only one area of agreement in this debate—that the existing poverty, employment, and earnings statistics are inadequate for one of their primary applications, measuring the consequences of labor market problems.
Which of the following proposals best responds to the issues raised by the author（）
How many really suffer as a result of labor market problems This is one of the most critical yet contentious social policy questions. In many ways, our social statistics exaggerate the degree of hardship. Unemployment does not have the same dire consequences today as it did in the 1930’s when most of the unemployed were primary breadwinners, when income and earnings were usually much closer to the margin of subsistence, and when there were no countervailing social programs for those failing in the labor market.
Increasing affluence, the rise of families with more than one wage earner, the growing predominance of secondary earners among the unemployed, and improved social welfare protection have unquestionably mitigated the consequences of joblessness. Earnings and income data also overstate the dimensions of hardship. Among the millions with hourly earnings at or below the minimum wage level, the over-whelming majority are from multiple earners, relatively affluent families. Most of those counted by the poverty statistics are elderly or handicapped or have family responsibilities which keep them out of the labor force, so the poverty statistics are by no means an accurate indicator of labor market pathologies.
Yet there are also many ways our social statistics underestimate the degree of labor-market-related hardship. The unemployment counts exclude the millions of fully employed workers whose wages are so low that their families remain in poverty. Low wages and repeated or prolonged unemployment frequently interact to undermine the capacity for self-support. Since the number experiencing joblessness at some time during the year is several times the number unemployed in any month, those who suffer as a result of forced idleness can equal or exceed average annual unemployment, even though only a minority of the jobless in any month really suffer. For every person counted in the monthly unemployment tallies, there is another working part-time because of the inability to find fulltime work, or else outside the labor force but wanting a job. Finally, income transfers in our country have always focused on the elderly, disabled, and dependent, neglecting the needs of the working poor, so that the dramatic expansion of cash and in kind transfers does not necessarily mean that those failing in the labor market are adequately protected.
As a result of such contradictory evidence, it is uncertain whether those suffering seriously as a result of thousands or the tens of millions, and, hence, whether high levels of joblessness can be tolerated or must be countered by job creation and economic stimulus. There is only one area of agreement in this debate—that the existing poverty, employment, and earnings statistics are inadequate for one of their primary applications, measuring the consequences of labor market problems.
The author’s purpose in citing those who are repeatedly unemployed during a twelve-month period is most probably to show that（）
How many really suffer as a result of labor market problems This is one of the most critical yet contentious social policy questions. In many ways, our social statistics exaggerate the degree of hardship. Unemployment does not have the same dire consequences today as it did in the 1930’s when most of the unemployed were primary breadwinners, when income and earnings were usually much closer to the margin of subsistence, and when there were no countervailing social programs for those failing in the labor market.
Increasing affluence, the rise of families with more than one wage earner, the growing predominance of secondary earners among the unemployed, and improved social welfare protection have unquestionably mitigated the consequences of joblessness. Earnings and income data also overstate the dimensions of hardship. Among the millions with hourly earnings at or below the minimum wage level, the over-whelming majority are from multiple earners, relatively affluent families. Most of those counted by the poverty statistics are elderly or handicapped or have family responsibilities which keep them out of the labor force, so the poverty statistics are by no means an accurate indicator of labor market pathologies.
Yet there are also many ways our social statistics underestimate the degree of labor-market-related hardship. The unemployment counts exclude the millions of fully employed workers whose wages are so low that their families remain in poverty. Low wages and repeated or prolonged unemployment frequently interact to undermine the capacity for self-support. Since the number experiencing joblessness at some time during the year is several times the number unemployed in any month, those who suffer as a result of forced idleness can equal or exceed average annual unemployment, even though only a minority of the jobless in any month really suffer. For every person counted in the monthly unemployment tallies, there is another working part-time because of the inability to find fulltime work, or else outside the labor force but wanting a job. Finally, income transfers in our country have always focused on the elderly, disabled, and dependent, neglecting the needs of the working poor, so that the dramatic expansion of cash and in kind transfers does not necessarily mean that those failing in the labor market are adequately protected.
As a result of such contradictory evidence, it is uncertain whether those suffering seriously as a result of thousands or the tens of millions, and, hence, whether high levels of joblessness can be tolerated or must be countered by job creation and economic stimulus. There is only one area of agreement in this debate—that the existing poverty, employment, and earnings statistics are inadequate for one of their primary applications, measuring the consequences of labor market problems.
According to the text, one factor that causes unemployment and earnings figures to over predict the amount of economic hardship is the（）
In most people’s mind, growth is associated with prosperity. We judge how well the economy is doing by the size of the Gross National Product (GNP), a measure, supposedly, of growth. Equally axiomatic:, however, is the notion that increased pressure on dwindling natural resources must inevitably lead to a decline in prosperity, especially when accompanied by a growth in population. So, which is correct
What growth advocates mean, primarily, when they say growth is necessary for prosperity is that growth is necessary for the smooth functioning of the economic system. In one arena the argument in favor of growth is particularly compelling and that is with regard to the Third World. To argue against growth, other than population growth, in light of Third World poverty and degradation seems callous. But is it Could it be that growth, especially the growth of the wealthier countries, has contributed to the impoverishment, not the advancement, of Third World countries If not, how do we account for the desperate straits these countries find themselves in today after a century of dedication to growth
To see how this might be the case we must look at the impact of growth on Third World countries the reality, not the abstract stages-of-economic-growth theory advocated through rose-colored glasses by academicians of the developed world. What good is growth to the people of the Third World if it means the conversion of peasant farms into mechanized agribusinesses producing commodities not for local consumption but for export, if it means the stripping of their land of its mineral and other natural treasures to the benefit of foreign investors and a handful of their local collaborators, if it means the assumption of a crush ing foreign indebtedness, the proceeds of which goes not into the development of the country but into the purchase of expensive cars and the buying of luxurious residence in Miami.Admittedly, this is an oversimplification. But the point, I believe, remains valid: that growth in underdeveloped countries cannot simply be judged in the abstract; it must be judged based on the true nature of growth in these societies, on who benefits and who is harmed, on where growth is leading these people and where it has left them. When considered in this way, it just might be that in the present context growth is more detrimental to the well-being of the wretched of the earth than beneficial.
So, do we need growth for prosperity Only the adoption of zero growth can provide the answer. But that is a test not easily undertaken. Modern economies are incredibly complex phenomena, a tribute to man’s ability to organize and a challenge to his ability to understand. Anything that affects their functioning, such as a policy of zero growth, should not be proposed without a wary prudence and a self-doubting humility. But if the prospect of leaping into the economic unknown is fear-inspiring, equally so is the prospect of letting that fear prevent us from acting when the failure to act could mean untold misery for future generations and perhaps environmental catastrophes which threaten our very existence.
Which of the following statements does the author support（）
In most people’s mind, growth is associated with prosperity. We judge how well the economy is doing by the size of the Gross National Product (GNP), a measure, supposedly, of growth. Equally axiomatic:, however, is the notion that increased pressure on dwindling natural resources must inevitably lead to a decline in prosperity, especially when accompanied by a growth in population. So, which is correct
What growth advocates mean, primarily, when they say growth is necessary for prosperity is that growth is necessary for the smooth functioning of the economic system. In one arena the argument in favor of growth is particularly compelling and that is with regard to the Third World. To argue against growth, other than population growth, in light of Third World poverty and degradation seems callous. But is it Could it be that growth, especially the growth of the wealthier countries, has contributed to the impoverishment, not the advancement, of Third World countries If not, how do we account for the desperate straits these countries find themselves in today after a century of dedication to growth
To see how this might be the case we must look at the impact of growth on Third World countries the reality, not the abstract stages-of-economic-growth theory advocated through rose-colored glasses by academicians of the developed world. What good is growth to the people of the Third World if it means the conversion of peasant farms into mechanized agribusinesses producing commodities not for local consumption but for export, if it means the stripping of their land of its mineral and other natural treasures to the benefit of foreign investors and a handful of their local collaborators, if it means the assumption of a crush ing foreign indebtedness, the proceeds of which goes not into the development of the country but into the purchase of expensive cars and the buying of luxurious residence in Miami.Admittedly, this is an oversimplification. But the point, I believe, remains valid: that growth in underdeveloped countries cannot simply be judged in the abstract; it must be judged based on the true nature of growth in these societies, on who benefits and who is harmed, on where growth is leading these people and where it has left them. When considered in this way, it just might be that in the present context growth is more detrimental to the well-being of the wretched of the earth than beneficial.
So, do we need growth for prosperity Only the adoption of zero growth can provide the answer. But that is a test not easily undertaken. Modern economies are incredibly complex phenomena, a tribute to man’s ability to organize and a challenge to his ability to understand. Anything that affects their functioning, such as a policy of zero growth, should not be proposed without a wary prudence and a self-doubting humility. But if the prospect of leaping into the economic unknown is fear-inspiring, equally so is the prospect of letting that fear prevent us from acting when the failure to act could mean untold misery for future generations and perhaps environmental catastrophes which threaten our very existence.
It is implied in Paragraphs 2 and 3 that（）
In most people’s mind, growth is associated with prosperity. We judge how well the economy is doing by the size of the Gross National Product (GNP), a measure, supposedly, of growth. Equally axiomatic:, however, is the notion that increased pressure on dwindling natural resources must inevitably lead to a decline in prosperity, especially when accompanied by a growth in population. So, which is correct
What growth advocates mean, primarily, when they say growth is necessary for prosperity is that growth is necessary for the smooth functioning of the economic system. In one arena the argument in favor of growth is particularly compelling and that is with regard to the Third World. To argue against growth, other than population growth, in light of Third World poverty and degradation seems callous. But is it Could it be that growth, especially the growth of the wealthier countries, has contributed to the impoverishment, not the advancement, of Third World countries If not, how do we account for the desperate straits these countries find themselves in today after a century of dedication to growth
To see how this might be the case we must look at the impact of growth on Third World countries the reality, not the abstract stages-of-economic-growth theory advocated through rose-colored glasses by academicians of the developed world. What good is growth to the people of the Third World if it means the conversion of peasant farms into mechanized agribusinesses producing commodities not for local consumption but for export, if it means the stripping of their land of its mineral and other natural treasures to the benefit of foreign investors and a handful of their local collaborators, if it means the assumption of a crush ing foreign indebtedness, the proceeds of which goes not into the development of the country but into the purchase of expensive cars and the buying of luxurious residence in Miami.Admittedly, this is an oversimplification. But the point, I believe, remains valid: that growth in underdeveloped countries cannot simply be judged in the abstract; it must be judged based on the true nature of growth in these societies, on who benefits and who is harmed, on where growth is leading these people and where it has left them. When considered in this way, it just might be that in the present context growth is more detrimental to the well-being of the wretched of the earth than beneficial.
So, do we need growth for prosperity Only the adoption of zero growth can provide the answer. But that is a test not easily undertaken. Modern economies are incredibly complex phenomena, a tribute to man’s ability to organize and a challenge to his ability to understand. Anything that affects their functioning, such as a policy of zero growth, should not be proposed without a wary prudence and a self-doubting humility. But if the prospect of leaping into the economic unknown is fear-inspiring, equally so is the prospect of letting that fear prevent us from acting when the failure to act could mean untold misery for future generations and perhaps environmental catastrophes which threaten our very existence.
With regard to the economic development in Third World countries, the author is actually saying that（）
In most people’s mind, growth is associated with prosperity. We judge how well the economy is doing by the size of the Gross National Product (GNP), a measure, supposedly, of growth. Equally axiomatic:, however, is the notion that increased pressure on dwindling natural resources must inevitably lead to a decline in prosperity, especially when accompanied by a growth in population. So, which is correct
What growth advocates mean, primarily, when they say growth is necessary for prosperity is that growth is necessary for the smooth functioning of the economic system. In one arena the argument in favor of growth is particularly compelling and that is with regard to the Third World. To argue against growth, other than population growth, in light of Third World poverty and degradation seems callous. But is it Could it be that growth, especially the growth of the wealthier countries, has contributed to the impoverishment, not the advancement, of Third World countries If not, how do we account for the desperate straits these countries find themselves in today after a century of dedication to growth
To see how this might be the case we must look at the impact of growth on Third World countries the reality, not the abstract stages-of-economic-growth theory advocated through rose-colored glasses by academicians of the developed world. What good is growth to the people of the Third World if it means the conversion of peasant farms into mechanized agribusinesses producing commodities not for local consumption but for export, if it means the stripping of their land of its mineral and other natural treasures to the benefit of foreign investors and a handful of their local collaborators, if it means the assumption of a crush ing foreign indebtedness, the proceeds of which goes not into the development of the country but into the purchase of expensive cars and the buying of luxurious residence in Miami.Admittedly, this is an oversimplification. But the point, I believe, remains valid: that growth in underdeveloped countries cannot simply be judged in the abstract; it must be judged based on the true nature of growth in these societies, on who benefits and who is harmed, on where growth is leading these people and where it has left them. When considered in this way, it just might be that in the present context growth is more detrimental to the well-being of the wretched of the earth than beneficial.
So, do we need growth for prosperity Only the adoption of zero growth can provide the answer. But that is a test not easily undertaken. Modern economies are incredibly complex phenomena, a tribute to man’s ability to organize and a challenge to his ability to understand. Anything that affects their functioning, such as a policy of zero growth, should not be proposed without a wary prudence and a self-doubting humility. But if the prospect of leaping into the economic unknown is fear-inspiring, equally so is the prospect of letting that fear prevent us from acting when the failure to act could mean untold misery for future generations and perhaps environmental catastrophes which threaten our very existence.
The author seems to believe that prosperity（）
In most people’s mind, growth is associated with prosperity. We judge how well the economy is doing by the size of the Gross National Product (GNP), a measure, supposedly, of growth. Equally axiomatic:, however, is the notion that increased pressure on dwindling natural resources must inevitably lead to a decline in prosperity, especially when accompanied by a growth in population. So, which is correct
What growth advocates mean, primarily, when they say growth is necessary for prosperity is that growth is necessary for the smooth functioning of the economic system. In one arena the argument in favor of growth is particularly compelling and that is with regard to the Third World. To argue against growth, other than population growth, in light of Third World poverty and degradation seems callous. But is it Could it be that growth, especially the growth of the wealthier countries, has contributed to the impoverishment, not the advancement, of Third World countries If not, how do we account for the desperate straits these countries find themselves in today after a century of dedication to growth
To see how this might be the case we must look at the impact of growth on Third World countries the reality, not the abstract stages-of-economic-growth theory advocated through rose-colored glasses by academicians of the developed world. What good is growth to the people of the Third World if it means the conversion of peasant farms into mechanized agribusinesses producing commodities not for local consumption but for export, if it means the stripping of their land of its mineral and other natural treasures to the benefit of foreign investors and a handful of their local collaborators, if it means the assumption of a crush ing foreign indebtedness, the proceeds of which goes not into the development of the country but into the purchase of expensive cars and the buying of luxurious residence in Miami.Admittedly, this is an oversimplification. But the point, I believe, remains valid: that growth in underdeveloped countries cannot simply be judged in the abstract; it must be judged based on the true nature of growth in these societies, on who benefits and who is harmed, on where growth is leading these people and where it has left them. When considered in this way, it just might be that in the present context growth is more detrimental to the well-being of the wretched of the earth than beneficial.
So, do we need growth for prosperity Only the adoption of zero growth can provide the answer. But that is a test not easily undertaken. Modern economies are incredibly complex phenomena, a tribute to man’s ability to organize and a challenge to his ability to understand. Anything that affects their functioning, such as a policy of zero growth, should not be proposed without a wary prudence and a self-doubting humility. But if the prospect of leaping into the economic unknown is fear-inspiring, equally so is the prospect of letting that fear prevent us from acting when the failure to act could mean untold misery for future generations and perhaps environmental catastrophes which threaten our very existence.
The answer of the author to the question "Do we need growth for prosperity" is（）
Anyone who doubts that children are born with a healthy amount of ambition need spend only a few minutes with a baby eagerly learning to walk or a headstrong toddler starting to talk. No matter how many times the little ones stumble in their initial efforts, most keep on trying, determined to master their amazing new skill. It is only several years later, around the start of middle or junior high school, many psychologists and teachers agree, that a good number of kids seem to lose their natural drive to succeed and end up joining the ranks of underachievers.
It’s not quite that simple. “Kids can be given the opportunities to become passionate about a subject or activity, but they can’t be forced, ” says Jacquelynne Eccles, a psychology professor at the University of Michigan, who led a landmark, 25-year study examining what motivated first grade students in three school districts. Even so, a growing number of educators and psychologists do believe it is possible to unearth ambition in students who don’t seem to have much. They say that by instilling confidence, encouraging some risk taking, being accepting of failure and expanding the areas in which children may be successful, both parents and teachers can reignite that innate desire to achieve.
Figuring out why the fire went out is the first step. Assuming that a kid doesn’t suffer from an emotional or learning disability, or isn’t involved in some family crisis at home, many educators attribute a sudden lack of motivation to a fear of failure or peer pressure that conveys the message that doing well academically some how isn’t cool. “Kids get so caught up in the moment-to-moment issue of will they look smart or dumb, and it blocks them from thinking about the long term,” says Carol Dweck, a psychology professor at Stanford. “You have to teach them that they are in charge of their intellectual growth and that their intelligence is malleable. ”
Howard (a social psychologist and president of the Efficacy Institute, an organization that works with teachers and parents to help improve children’s academic performance) and other educators say it’s important to expose kids to a world beyond homework and tests, through volunteer work, sports, hobbies and other extracurricular activities. “The crux of the issue is that many students experience education as irrelevant to their life goals and ambitions, ” says Michael Nakkual, a Harvard education professor who runs a Boston-area mentoring program which works to get low-income underachievers in touch with their aspirations. The key to getting kids to aim higher at school is to disabuse them of the notion that classwork is irrelevant, to show them how doing well at school can actually help them fulfill their dreams beyond it. Like any ambitious toddler, they need to understand that you have to learn to walk before you can run.
What’s the main idea of the first paragraph（）
Anyone who doubts that children are born with a healthy amount of ambition need spend only a few minutes with a baby eagerly learning to walk or a headstrong toddler starting to talk. No matter how many times the little ones stumble in their initial efforts, most keep on trying, determined to master their amazing new skill. It is only several years later, around the start of middle or junior high school, many psychologists and teachers agree, that a good number of kids seem to lose their natural drive to succeed and end up joining the ranks of underachievers.
It’s not quite that simple. “Kids can be given the opportunities to become passionate about a subject or activity, but they can’t be forced, ” says Jacquelynne Eccles, a psychology professor at the University of Michigan, who led a landmark, 25-year study examining what motivated first grade students in three school districts. Even so, a growing number of educators and psychologists do believe it is possible to unearth ambition in students who don’t seem to have much. They say that by instilling confidence, encouraging some risk taking, being accepting of failure and expanding the areas in which children may be successful, both parents and teachers can reignite that innate desire to achieve.
Figuring out why the fire went out is the first step. Assuming that a kid doesn’t suffer from an emotional or learning disability, or isn’t involved in some family crisis at home, many educators attribute a sudden lack of motivation to a fear of failure or peer pressure that conveys the message that doing well academically some how isn’t cool. “Kids get so caught up in the moment-to-moment issue of will they look smart or dumb, and it blocks them from thinking about the long term,” says Carol Dweck, a psychology professor at Stanford. “You have to teach them that they are in charge of their intellectual growth and that their intelligence is malleable. ”
Howard (a social psychologist and president of the Efficacy Institute, an organization that works with teachers and parents to help improve children’s academic performance) and other educators say it’s important to expose kids to a world beyond homework and tests, through volunteer work, sports, hobbies and other extracurricular activities. “The crux of the issue is that many students experience education as irrelevant to their life goals and ambitions, ” says Michael Nakkual, a Harvard education professor who runs a Boston-area mentoring program which works to get low-income underachievers in touch with their aspirations. The key to getting kids to aim higher at school is to disabuse them of the notion that classwork is irrelevant, to show them how doing well at school can actually help them fulfill their dreams beyond it. Like any ambitious toddler, they need to understand that you have to learn to walk before you can run.
The students’ ambition to succeed may be hindered by（）
Anyone who doubts that children are born with a healthy amount of ambition need spend only a few minutes with a baby eagerly learning to walk or a headstrong toddler starting to talk. No matter how many times the little ones stumble in their initial efforts, most keep on trying, determined to master their amazing new skill. It is only several years later, around the start of middle or junior high school,many psychologists and teachers agree贝语网校, that a good number of kids seem to lose their natural drive to succeed and end up joining the ranks of underachievers.
It’s not quite that simple. “Kids can be given the opportunities to become passionate about a subject or activity, but they can’t be forced, ” says Jacquelynne Eccles, a psychology professor at the University of Michigan, who led a landmark, 25-year study examining what motivated first grade students in three school districts. Even so, a growing number of educators and psychologists do believe it is possible to unearth ambition in students who don’t seem to have much. They say that by instilling confidence, encouraging some risk taking, being accepting of failure and expanding the areas in which children may be successful, both parents and teachers can reignite that innate desire to achieve.
Figuring out why the fire went out is the first step. Assuming that a kid doesn’t suffer from an emotional or learning disability, or isn’t involved in some family crisis at home, many educators attribute a sudden lack of motivation to a fear of failure or peer pressure that conveys the message that doing well academically some how isn’t cool. “Kids get so caught up in the moment-to-moment issue of will they look smart or dumb, and it blocks them from thinking about the long term,” says Carol Dweck, a psychology professor at Stanford. “You have to teach them that they are in charge of their intellectual growth and that their intelligence is malleable. ”
Howard (a social psychologist and president of the Efficacy Institute, an organization that works with teachers and parents to help improve children’s academic performance) and other educators say it’s important to expose kids to a world beyond homework and tests, through volunteer work, sports, hobbies and other extracurricular activities. “The crux of the issue is that many students experience education as irrelevant to their life goals and ambitions, ” says Michael Nakkual, a Harvard education professor who runs a Boston-area mentoring program which works to get low-income underachievers in touch with their aspirations. The key to getting kids to aim higher at school is to disabuse them of the notion that classwork is irrelevant, to show them how doing well at school can actually help them fulfill their dreams beyond it. Like any ambitious toddler, they need to understand that you have to learn to walk before you can run.
What is the message that peer pressure conveys to children（）
Anyone who doubts that children are born with a healthy amount of ambition need spend only a few minutes with a baby eagerly learning to walk or a headstrong toddler starting to talk. No matter how many times the little ones stumble in their initial efforts, most keep on trying, determined to master their amazing new skill. It is only several years later, around the start of middle or junior high school, many psychologists and teachers agree, that a good number of kids seem to lose their natural drive to succeed and end up joining the ranks of underachievers.
It’s not quite that simple. “Kids can be given the opportunities to become passionate about a subject or activity, but they can’t be forced, ” says Jacquelynne Eccles, a psychology professor at the University of Michigan, who led a landmark, 25-year study examining what motivated first grade students in three school districts. Even so, a growing number of educators and psychologists do believe it is possible to unearth ambition in students who don’t seem to have much. They say that by instilling confidence, encouraging some risk taking, being accepting of failure and expanding the areas in which children may be successful, both parents and teachers can reignite that innate desire to achieve.
Figuring out why the fire went out is the first step. Assuming that a kid doesn’t suffer from an emotional or learning disability, or isn’t involved in some family crisis at home, many educators attribute a sudden lack of motivation to a fear of failure or peer pressure that conveys the message that doing well academically some how isn’t cool. “Kids get so caught up in the moment-to-moment issue of will they look smart or dumb, and it blocks them from thinking about the long term,” says Carol Dweck, a psychology professor at Stanford. “You have to teach them that they are in charge of their intellectual growth and that their intelligence is malleable. ”
Howard (a social psychologist and president of the Efficacy Institute, an organization that works with teachers and parents to help improve children’s academic performance) and other educators say it’s important to expose kids to a world beyond homework and tests, through volunteer work, sports, hobbies and other extracurricular activities. “The crux of the issue is that many students experience education as irrelevant to their life goals and ambitions, ” says Michael Nakkual, a Harvard education professor who runs a Boston-area mentoring program which works to get low-income underachievers in touch with their aspirations. The key to getting kids to aim higher at school is to disabuse them of the notion that classwork is irrelevant, to show them how doing well at school can actually help them fulfill their dreams beyond it. Like any ambitious toddler, they need to understand that you have to learn to walk before you can run.
What does the expression “to disabuse them of the notion” (Line 7, Para. 4) mean（）
Anyone who doubts that children are born with a healthy amount of ambition need spend only a few minutes with a baby eagerly learning to walk or a headstrong toddler starting to talk. No matter how many times the little ones stumble in their initial efforts, most keep on trying, determined to master their amazing new skill. It is only several years later, around the start of middle or junior high school, many psychologists and teachers agree, that a good number of kids seem to lose their natural drive to succeed and end up joining the ranks of underachievers.
It’s not quite that simple. “Kids can be given the opportunities to become passionate about a subject or activity, but they can’t be forced, ” says Jacquelynne Eccles, a psychology professor at the University of Michigan, who led a landmark, 25-year study examining what motivated first grade students in three school districts. Even so, a growing number of educators and psychologists do believe it is possible to unearth ambition in students who don’t seem to have much. They say that by instilling confidence, encouraging some risk taking, being accepting of failure and expanding the areas in which children may be successful, both parents and teachers can reignite that innate desire to achieve.
Figuring out why the fire went out is the first step. Assuming that a kid doesn’t suffer from an emotional or learning disability, or isn’t involved in some family crisis at home, many educators attribute a sudden lack of motivation to a fear of failure or peer pressure that conveys the message that doing well academically some how isn’t cool. “Kids get so caught up in the moment-to-moment issue of will they look smart or dumb, and it blocks them from thinking about the long term,” says Carol Dweck, a psychology professor at Stanford. “You have to teach them that they are in charge of their intellectual growth and that their intelligence is malleable. ”
Howard (a social psychologist and president of the Efficacy Institute, an organization that works with teachers and parents to help improve children’s academic performance) and other educators say it’s important to expose kids to a world beyond homework and tests, through volunteer work, sports, hobbies and other extracurricular activities. “The crux of the issue is that many students experience education as irrelevant to their life goals and ambitions, ” says Michael Nakkual, a Harvard education professor who runs a Boston-area mentoring program which works to get low-income underachievers in touch with their aspirations. The key to getting kids to aim higher at school is to disabuse them of the notion that classwork is irrelevant, to show them how doing well at school can actually help them fulfill their dreams beyond it. Like any ambitious toddler, they need to understand that you have to learn to walk before you can run.
According to the text, which of the following is correct（）Before you speak to any audience, you should learn as much about its members as possible. Only in that way can you best adapt the level of your language and the content of your talk to your listeners.
41. Speaking to someone you know well. ______
Where are you likely to speak Certainly, in this class you’ll give several talks, and since you know most, if not all, of the students, you should face no major problems in adapting your approach to them. Another speaking possibility exists in your workplace.
A third speaking possibility exists in any organization (social, cultural, athletic, and so on ) that you belong to. You may be asked to speak at the next meeting or at the annual banquet. Here again, you know the people involved, their background, their education level, and their attitudes, and that’s a tremendous advantage for you. Since we’re upbeat and positive in this course, we’ll assume that you’ve given successful talks under all three circumstances, and with this course under your belt, you can do it again. Since good speakers are hard to find and word about them travels fast, suppose that one day you get an invitation to speak to an organization in which you don’t know a soul. What do you do now If you feel able to handle the topic you’re asked to speak on, accept this rare challenge. Here’s where audience analysis comes into play. Be sure to ask the person who invited you for information on the members, information that encompasses a broad spectrum, such as in the following areas.
42. How old are your listeners ______
43. Sex composition of your listeners. ______
44. Interest in topic. ______
45. Interests or hobbies of the listeners. ______
If you’re invited to speak to a women’s or men’s organization, you know the answer to this question at once. Quite often, however, audiences are mixed fairly evenly, although at times one sex may predominate.
Do members of your prospective audience spend evenings watching TV movies and drinking beer at a local tavern, or do they read the Harvard Classics and attend concerts of Beethoven and Mozart Do they play bingo and 21, or do they pursue the questions the intriguing intricacies of contract bridge and chess Answers to these questions can help you choose the most appropriate material and language for your audience. Your choices can be crucial in determining the success or failure of your presentation.
Are the members recent college graduates, senior citizens, or business executives in midcareer Just remember, age exerts a powerful impact on people’s attitudes, values and motivations.
For example, your department manager may ask you to explain and demonstrate a procedure to some fellow employee. Or she may select you to address your department on behalf of the local blood donor drive. In both speech situations--in class and on the job-- you’re familiar with your audience; you speak their language; you have things in common with them.
Are you aware of the educational background of your audience How many of them have doctoral degrees, master degrees or bachelor degrees This will decide what kind of language you should adopt and how much they can understand.
Are the members of the organization interested in the topic or are they required to attend regardless of their interest If the latter is true, what types of material will most likely pique their curiosity
Before you speak to any audience, you should learn as much about its members as possible. Only in that way can you best adapt the level of your language and the content of your talk to your listeners.
41. Speaking to someone you know well. ______
Where are you likely to speak Certainly, in this class you’ll give several talks, and since you know most, if not all, of the students, you should face no major problems in adapting your approach to them. Another speaking possibility exists in your workplace.
A third speaking possibility exists in any organization (social, cultural, athletic, and so on ) that you belong to. You may be asked to speak at the next meeting or at the annual banquet. Here again, you know the people involved, their background, their education level, and their attitudes, and that’s a tremendous advantage for you. Since we’re upbeat and positive in this course, we’ll assume that you’ve given successful talks under all three circumstances, and with this course under your belt, you can do it again. Since good speakers are hard to find and word about them travels fast, suppose that one day you get an invitation to speak to an organization in which you don’t know a soul. What do you do now If you feel able to handle the topic you’re asked to speak on, accept this rare challenge. Here’s where audience analysis comes into play. Be sure to ask the person who invited you for information on the members, information that encompasses a broad spectrum, such as in the following areas.
42. How old are your listeners ______
43. Sex composition of your listeners. ______
44. Interest in topic. ______
45. Interests or hobbies of the listeners. ______
If you’re invited to speak to a women’s or men’s organization, you know the answer to this question at once. Quite often, however, audiences are mixed fairly evenly, although at times one sex may predominate.
Do members of your prospective audience spend evenings watching TV movies and drinking beer at a local tavern, or do they read the Harvard Classics and attend concerts of Beethoven and Mozart Do they play bingo and 21, or do they pursue the questions the intriguing intricacies of contract bridge and chess Answers to these questions can help you choose the most appropriate material and language for your audience. Your choices can be crucial in determining the success or failure of your presentation.
Are the members recent college graduates, senior citizens, or business executives in midcareer Just remember, age exerts a powerful impact on people’s attitudes, values and motivations.
For example, your department manager may ask you to explain and demonstrate a procedure to some fellow employee. Or she may select you to address your department on behalf of the local blood donor drive. In both speech situations--in class and on the job-- you’re familiar with your audience; you speak their language; you have things in common with them.
Are you aware of the educational background of your audience How many of them have doctoral degrees, master degrees or bachelor degrees This will decide what kind of language you should adopt and how much they can understand.
Are the members of the organization interested in the topic or are they required to attend regardless of their interest If the latter is true, what types of material will most likely pique their curiosity
Before you speak to any audience, you should learn as much about its members as possible. Only in that way can you best adapt the level of your language and the content of your talk to your listeners.
41. Speaking to someone you know well. ______
Where are you likely to speak Certainly, in this class you’ll give several talks, and since you know most, if not all, of the students, you should face no major problems in adapting your approach to them. Another speaking possibility exists in your workplace.
A third speaking possibility exists in any organization (social, cultural, athletic, and so on ) that you belong to. You may be asked to speak at the next meeting or at the annual banquet. Here again, you know the people involved, their background, their education level, and their attitudes, and that’s a tremendous advantage for you. Since we’re upbeat and positive in this course, we’ll assume that you’ve given successful talks under all three circumstances, and with this course under your belt, you can do it again. Since good speakers are hard to find and word about them travels fast, suppose that one day you get an invitation to speak to an organization in which you don’t know a soul. What do you do now If you feel able to handle the topic you’re asked to speak on, accept this rare challenge. Here’s where audience analysis comes into play. Be sure to ask the person who invited you for information on the members, information that encompasses a broad spectrum, such as in the following areas.
42. How old are your listeners ______
43. Sex composition of your listeners. ______
44. Interest in topic. ______
45. Interests or hobbies of the listeners. ______
If you’re invited to speak to a women’s or men’s organization, you know the answer to this question at once. Quite often, however, audiences are mixed fairly evenly, although at times one sex may predominate.
Do members of your prospective audience spend evenings watching TV movies and drinking beer at a local tavern, or do they read the Harvard Classics and attend concerts of Beethoven and Mozart Do they play bingo and 21, or do they pursue the questions the intriguing intricacies of contract bridge and chess Answers to these questions can help you choose the most appropriate material and language for your audience. Your choices can be crucial in determining the success or failure of your presentation.
Are the members recent college graduates, senior citizens, or business executives in midcareer Just remember, age exerts a powerful impact on people’s attitudes, values and motivations.
For example, your department manager may ask you to explain and demonstrate a procedure to some fellow employee. Or she may select you to address your department on behalf of the local blood donor drive. In both speech situations--in class and on the job-- you’re familiar with your audience; you speak their language; you have things in common with them.
Are you aware of the educational background of your audience How many of them have doctoral degrees, master degrees or bachelor degrees This will decide what kind of language you should adopt and how much they can understand.
Are the members of the organization interested in the topic or are they required to attend regardless of their interest If the latter is true, what types of material will most likely pique their curiosity
Before you speak to any audience, you should learn as much about its members as possible. Only in that way can you best adapt the level of your language and the content of your talk to your listeners.
41. Speaking to someone you know well. ______
Where are you likely to speak Certainly, in this class you’ll give several talks, and since you know most, if not all, of the students, you should face no major problems in adapting your approach to them. Another speaking possibility exists in your workplace.
A third speaking possibility exists in any organization (social, cultural, athletic, and so on ) that you belong to. You may be asked to speak at the next meeting or at the annual banquet. Here again, you know the people involved, their background, their education level, and their attitudes, and that’s a tremendous advantage for you. Since we’re upbeat and positive in this course, we’ll assume that you’ve given successful talks under all three circumstances, and with this course under your belt, you can do it again. Since good speakers are hard to find and word about them travels fast, suppose that one day you get an invitation to speak to an organization in which you don’t know a soul. What do you do now If you feel able to handle the topic you’re asked to speak on, accept this rare challenge. Here’s where audience analysis comes into play. Be sure to ask the person who invited you for information on the members, information that encompasses a broad spectrum, such as in the following areas.
42. How old are your listeners ______
43. Sex composition of your listeners. ______
44. Interest in topic. ______
45. Interests or hobbies of the listeners. ______
If you’re invited to speak to a women’s or men’s organization, you know the answer to this question at once. Quite often, however, audiences are mixed fairly evenly, although at times one sex may predominate.
Do members of your prospective audience spend evenings watching TV movies and drinking beer at a local tavern, or do they read the Harvard Classics and attend concerts of Beethoven and Mozart Do they play bingo and 21, or do they pursue the questions the intriguing intricacies of contract bridge and chess Answers to these questions can help you choose the most appropriate material and language for your audience. Your choices can be crucial in determining the success or failure of your presentation.
Are the members recent college graduates, senior citizens, or business executives in midcareer Just remember, age exerts a powerful impact on people’s attitudes, values and motivations.
For example, your department manager may ask you to explain and demonstrate a procedure to some fellow employee. Or she may select you to address your department on behalf of the local blood donor drive. In both speech situations--in class and on the job-- you’re familiar with your audience; you speak their language; you have things in common with them.
Are you aware of the educational background of your audience How many of them have doctoral degrees, master degrees or bachelor degrees This will decide what kind of language you should adopt and how much they can understand.
Are the members of the organization interested in the topic or are they required to attend regardless of their interest If the latter is true, what types of material will most likely pique their curiosity
Before you speak to any audience, you should learn as much about its members as possible. Only in that way can you best adapt the level of your language and the content of your talk to your listeners.
41. Speaking to someone you know well. ______
Where are you likely to speak Certainly, in this class you’ll give several talks, and since you know most, if not all, of the students, you should face no major problems in adapting your approach to them. Another speaking possibility exists in your workplace.
A third speaking possibility exists in any organization (social, cultural, athletic, and so on ) that you belong to. You may be asked to speak at the next meeting or at the annual banquet. Here again, you know the people involved, their background, their education level, and their attitudes, and that’s a tremendous advantage for you. Since we’re upbeat and positive in this course, we’ll assume that you’ve given successful talks under all three circumstances, and with this course under your belt, you can do it again. Since good speakers are hard to find and word about them travels fast, suppose that one day you get an invitation to speak to an organization in which you don’t know a soul. What do you do now If you feel able to handle the topic you’re asked to speak on, accept this rare challenge. Here’s where audience analysis comes into play. Be sure to ask the person who invited you for information on the members, information that encompasses a broad spectrum, such as in the following areas.
42. How old are your listeners ______
43. Sex composition of your listeners. ______
44. Interest in topic. ______
45. Interests or hobbies of the listeners. ______
If you’re invited to speak to a women’s or men’s organization, you know the answer to this question at once. Quite often, however, audiences are mixed fairly evenly, although at times one sex may predominate.
Do members of your prospective audience spend evenings watching TV movies and drinking beer at a local tavern, or do they read the Harvard Classics and attend concerts of Beethoven and Mozart Do they play bingo and 21, or do they pursue the questions the intriguing intricacies of contract bridge and chess Answers to these questions can help you choose the most appropriate material and language for your audience. Your choices can be crucial in determining the success or failure of your presentation.
Are the members recent college graduates, senior citizens, or business executives in midcareer Just remember, age exerts a powerful impact on people’s attitudes, values and motivations.
For example, your department manager may ask you to explain and demonstrate a procedure to some fellow employee. Or she may select you to address your department on behalf of the local blood donor drive. In both speech situations--in class and on the job-- you’re familiar with your audience; you speak their language; you have things in common with them.
Are you aware of the educational background of your audience How many of them have doctoral degrees, master degrees or bachelor degrees This will decide what kind of language you should adopt and how much they can understand.
Are the members of the organization interested in the topic or are they required to attend regardless of their interest If the latter is true, what types of material will most likely pique their curiosity
