Question

【題目】 In 1968 Robert Rosenthal and Lenore Jacobson set an intelligence test for a class of primary school children at "Oak School" (an invented name) in San Francisco. The teachers were told that the intelligence test bad two purposes. Firstly, it would measure the IQ of the children and secondly it would predict 20% of students who, no matter what their performance to date was like, would be likely to make the most progress during the next school year. The teachers were then told who the predicted top improvers would be.

At the end of the school year, eight months later, the intelligence test was carried out again and, perhaps not surprisingly, the results showed that the 20% of children who had been predicted to improve the most, did in fact do so. They showed, on average, an increase of 12 IQ points on the test, compared with an increase of only 8 points for the other children.

But the fact is that no results of any test were used to predict who would be the top performers. Instead, the lucky children who the teachers were told would be the top improvers were given this label as a matter of chance. This study shows that the label that you are given, and your interaction(互動(dòng)) with others who notice that label, can have a big influence on the results that you achieve. This phenomenon(現(xiàn)象)has been called the Rosenthal effect. It is also known as the Pygmalion effect, related most famously to the George Bernard Show play Pygmalion , which shows the effect that two men have in changing an untidy flower girl into a well-spoken lady.

For ethical (道德的)reasons the researchers at "Oak School!" only concentrated on trying to produce positive results in the children's performance. However, it is worth asking yourself what the effects on 20% of students considered least likely to improve in the following school year might have been. A frightening thought.

【1】What did the study find about the predicted top performers at the end of the school year?

A.They showed more interest in tests.B.They really made the most progress.

C.They became less confident than before.D.They were as intelligent as the other children.

【2】How were the top performers chosen?

A.According to the teachers' judgement.B.Based on the test results.

C.By chance.D.Openly.

【3】What can we infer about the 20% of students mentioned in the last paragraph?

A.They might be willing to accept positive results.

B.They would likely have frightening thoughts.

C.They would likely make the least progress.

D.They might work much harder than before.

【4】What is the text mainly about?

A.The Rosenthal effectB.A play by Bernard Shaw.

C.A school in San Francisco.D.The labels given to children.

Answer 1

【答案】

【1】B

【2】C

【3】C

【4】A

【解析】

本文是說明文。文章介紹了賞識(shí)教育的理論基礎(chǔ)——羅森塔爾效應(yīng)。

【1】細(xì)節(jié)理解題。由第二段中的At the end of the school year ... the results showed that the 20% of children who had been predicted to improve the most, did in fact do so可知，那個(gè)學(xué)年結(jié)束之后，研究發(fā)現(xiàn)那20%的孩子確實(shí)取得了最大的進(jìn)步，和預(yù)測的一樣。故選B。

【2】細(xì)節(jié)理解題。由第三段中的the top improvers were given this label as a matter of chance可知，這些研究者隨機(jī)選擇了那些被說成是進(jìn)步最大的學(xué)生。故選C。

【3】推理判斷題。根據(jù)全文，特別是最后一段首句和末句可推斷，如果把這種賞識(shí)效應(yīng)反其道用之：預(yù)言20%的學(xué)生取得進(jìn)步的可能性最小，那么這種預(yù)言所帶來的后果讓人細(xì)思極恐。故選C。

【4】主旨大意題。本文第一、二段介紹了實(shí)驗(yàn)的過程，第三、四段解釋了實(shí)驗(yàn)的真相和效果，最后一段是作者對這一實(shí)驗(yàn)的反思。全文圍繞羅森塔爾效應(yīng)這一主旨展開。故選A。