考研英语阅读：你真的会“读”文章吗？-毙考题

合集下载

2013考研英语阅读真题：考研英语(一)第3篇_毙考题

2013考研英语阅读真题：考研英语（一）第3篇Up until a few decades ago, our visions of the future were largely——though by no means uniformly——glowingly positive. Science and technology would cure all the ills of humanity, leading to lives of fulfillment and opportunity for all.Now utopia has grown unfashionable, as we have gained a deeper appreciation of the range of threats facing us, from asteroid strike to epidemic flu and to climate change. You might even be tempted to assume that humanity has little future to look forward to.But such gloominess is misplaced. The fossil record shows that many species have endured for millions of years ——so why shouldn’t we? Take a broader look at our species’ place in the universe, and it becomes clear that we have an excellent chance of surviving for tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of years. Look up Homo sapiens in the “Red List” of threatened species of the International Union for the Conversation of Nature (IUCN) ,and you will read: “Listed as Least Concern as the species is very widely distributed, adaptable, currently increasing, and there are no major threats resulting in an overall population decline.”So what does our deep future hold? A growing number of researchers and organizations are now thinking seriously about that question. For example, the Long Now Foundation has its flagship project a medical clock that is designed to still be marking time thousands of years hence.Perhaps willfully, it may be easier to think about such lengthy timescales than about the more immediate future. The potential evolution of today’s technology, and its social consequences, is dazzlingly complicated, and it’s perhaps best left to science fiction writers and futurologists to explore the many possibilities we can envisage. Th at’s one reason why we have launched Arc, a new publication dedicated to the near future.But take a longer view and there is a surprising amount that we can say with considerable assurance. As so often, the past holds the key to the future: we have now identified enough of the long-term patterns shaping the history of the planet, and our species, to make evidence-based forecasts about the situations in which our descendants will find themselves.This long perspective makes the pessimistic view of our prospects seem more likely to be a passing fad. To be sure, the future is not all rosy. But we are now knowledgeable enough to reduce many of the risks that threatened the existence of earlier humans, and to improve the lot of those to come.几十年前，我们对于未来的看法尽管并不一致，但总的来说颇为乐观。

2021考研英语阅读真题：考研英语(一)第3篇 - 毙考题

2021考研英语阅读真题：考研英语（一）第3篇 - 毙考题毙考题APP2021考研英语阅读真题：考研英语（一）第3篇The journal Science is adding an extra round of statistical checks to its peer-review process, editor-in-chief Marcia McNutt announced today.The policy follows similar efforts from other journals, after widespread concern that basic mistakes in data analysis are contributing to the irreproducibility of many published research findings.“Readers must have confidence in the conclusions pu blished in our journal,” writes McNutt in an editorial.Working with the American Statistical Association, the journal has appointed seven experts to a statistics board of reviewing editors(SBoRE).Manuscript will be flagged up for additional scrut iny by the journal’s internal editors, or by its existing Board of Reviewing Editors or by outside peer reviewers.The SBoRE panel will then find external statisticians to review these manuscripts.Asked whether any particular papers had impelled the change, McNutt said:“The creation of the ‘statistics board’ was motivated by concerns broadly with the application of statistics and data analysis in scientific research and is part of Science’s overall drive to increase reproducibility in the rese arch we publish.”Giovanni Parmigiani, a biostatistician at the Harvard School of Public Health, a member of the SBoRE group.He says he expects the board to “play primarily an advisory role.”He agreed to join because he “found the foresight b ehind the establishment of the SBoRE to be novel, unique and likely to have a lasting impact.考试使用毙考题，不用再报培训班邀请码：8806毙考题APPThis impact will not only be through the publications in Science itself, but hopefully through a larger group of publishing places that may want to model their approach after Science.”John Ioannidis, a physician who studies research methodology, says that the policy is “a most welcome step forward” and “long overdue.”“Most journals are weak in stat istical review, and this damages the quality of what they publish.I think that, for the majority of scientific papers nowadays, statistical review is more essential than expert review,” he says.But he noted that biomedical journals such as Annals of Internal Medicine, the Journal of the American Medical Association and The Lancet pay strong attention to statistical review.Professional scientists are expected to know how to analyze data, but statistical errors are alarmingly common in published research, according to David Vaux, a cell biologist.Researchers should improve their standards, he wrote in 2021, but journals should also take a tougher line, “engaging reviewers who are statistically literate and editors who can verify the process”.Vaux says that Science’s idea to pass some papers to statisticians “has some merit,but a weakness is that it relies on the board of reviewing editors to identify ‘the papers that need scrutiny’ in the first place”.总主编马西娅・麦克娜特今天宣布：《科学》杂志在同行评阅之外又增加一轮数据审查。

考研英语阅读材料汇编之科技类(2)-毙考题

考研英语阅读材料汇编之科技类(2)阅读是考研英语的重要题型之一，也是保障英语成绩的关键题目。

因此，考研学子们要充分重视英语阅读，除了平时多多阅读英语杂志、报纸外，还需要针对阅读进行专项训练。

小编整理了关于考研英语阅读题源的系列文章考研英语阅读材料汇编之科技类(2)，请参考!Who s the Smart Sibling?Ten weeks ago, Bo Cleveland and his wife embarked on a highly unscientific experiment-they gave birth to their first child. For now, Cleveland is too exhausted to even consider having another baby, but eventually, he will. In fact, hes already planned an egalitarian strategy for raising the rest of his family. Little Arthur won t get any extra attention just because he s the firstborn, and, says his father, he probably won t be much smarter than his future .siblings; either. It s the sort of thing many parents would say, but it s a bit surprising coming from Cleveland,who studies birth order and IQ at Pennsylvania State University. As he knows too well, a study published recently in the journal Science suggests that firstborns do turn out sharper than their brothers and sisters, no matter how parents try to compensate. Is Cleveland wrong? Is Arthur destined to be the smart sibling just because he had the good luck to be born first?For decades, scientists have been squabbling over birth order like siblings fighting over a toy. Some of them say being a first-, middle- or lastborn has significant effects on intelligence. Others say that s nonsense, The spat goes back at least as far as Alfred Adler, a Freud-era psychologist who argued that firstborns had an edge. Other psychologists found his theory easy to believemiddle and youngest kids already had a bad rap, thanks to everything from primogeniture laws to the Prodigal Son. When they set out to confirm the birth-order effects Adler had predicted, they found some evidence. Dozens of studies over the next several decades showed small differences in IQ; scholastic-aptitude tests and other measures of achievement So did anecdata suggesting that firstborns were more likely to win Nobel Prizes or become (ahem) prominent psychologists.But even though the scientists were turning up birth-order patterns easily, they couldn tpin down a cause. Perhaps, one theory went, the mother s body was somehow attacking the lateroffspring in uterus. Maternal antibody levels do increase with each successive pregnancy. Butthere s no evidence that this leads to differences in intelligence, and the new study in Silence,based on records from nearly a quarter of a million young Norwegian men, strikes down theantibody hypothesis. It looks at kids who are the eldest by accident-those whose older siblingsdie in infancy--as well as those who are true firstborns. Both groups rack up the same highscores on IQ tests. Whatever is lowering the latterborns scores, it isn t prenatal biology, sincebeing raised as the firstborn, not actually being the firstborn, is what counts.The obvious culprits on the nurture side are parents. But it s hard to think that favoritism toward firstborns exists in modem society. Most of us no longer view secondborn as second best, and few parents will admit to treating their kids differently. In surveys, they generally say they give their children equal attention. Kids concur, reporting that they feel they re treated fairly.Maybe, then, the problem with latterborns isn t nature or nurture-maybe there simply isn t a problem. Not all the research shows a difference in intelligence. A pivotal 2000 study by Joe Rodgers ,now a professor emeritus at the University of Oklahoma, found no link between birth order and smarts. And an earlier study of American families found that the youngest kids, not theoldest, did best in school. From that work, say psychologist Judith Rich Harris, a prominent critic of birth-order patterns, it s clear that the impression that the firstborn is more often the academic achiever is false.Meanwhile, many of the studies showing a birth-order pattern in IQ have a big, fat,methodological flaw. The Norwegian Science study is an example, says Cleveland: It scomparing Bill, the first child in one family; to Bob, the second child in another family. Thatwould be fine if all families were identical, but of course they aren t. The study controls forvariables such as parental education and family size. But Rodgers, the Oklahoma professor,notes that there are hundreds of other factors in play; and because it s so hard to discountall of them, he s not sure whether the patterns in the Science article are real.No one is more sensitive to that criticism than the Norwegian scientists. In fact, theyalready have an answer ready in the form of a second paper. Soon to be published in thejournal Intelligence, it s, similar to the Science study except for one big thing: instead ofcomparing Bill to Bob, it compares Bill to younger brothers Barry and Barney. The samebirth- order pattern shows up: the firstborns, on average, score about two points higher thantheir secondborn brothers, and hapless thirdborns do even worse. The purpose of thetwo papers was exactly the same, says Petter Kristensen of Norway s National Instituteof Occupational Health, who led both new studies. But this second one is much more comprehensive, and in a sense it s better than the Science paper. The data are there--within families, birth order really does seem linked to brain power. Even the critics have to soften their positions a little. The Intelligence study must be taken very seriously says Rodgers.No one, not even Kristensen, thinks the debate is over For one thing, there s still that argument about what s causing birth-order effects. It s possible, says UC Berkeley researcher Frank Sulloway, that trying .to treat kids in an evenhanded way in fact results in inequity. Well-meaning parents may end up shortchanging middleborns because there s one thing they can t equalize: at no point in the middle child s life does he get to be the only kid inthe house. Alternatively, says Sulloway; there s the theory he has his money on, the family- niche hypothesis Older kids, whether out of desire or necessity axe often called on to be assistant parents, he notes. Getting that early- taste of responsibility may prime them for achievement later on. If they think Oh, I m supposed to be more intelligent so I d betterdo my homework, it doesn t matter if they actually are more-intelligent, says Sulloway, Itbecomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. If the firstborns homework involves reading Science and Intelligence, there ll be no stopping them now.词汇注解重点单词embark / im ba:k/【文中释义】v.着手，从事【大纲全义】v. (使)上船(或飞机，汽车等)：着手，从事extra / ekstr /【文中释义】adj.额外的【大纲全义】adj额外的，附加的n.附加物，额外的东西adv.特别地compensate / kɔmpənseit/【文中释义】v.补偿，弥补【大纲全义】v.(for)补偿，赔偿，抵消nonsense / nɔnsəns/【文中释义】n.荒谬的言行，胡话【大纲全义】n.胡说，废话;冒失(或轻浮)的行为rap / r p/【文中释义】n.不公正的判决，苛评【大纲全义】n.叩击，轻拍，斤责，急敲(声);不公正的判决，苛评，v. 敲，拍，打，斤责，使着迷predict / pri dikt/【文中释义】v.预言【大纲全义】v.预言，预测，预告prominent / prɔminənt/【文中释义】adj杰出的【大纲全义】adj.突起的，凸出的;突出的，杰出的offspring /ɔfspriŋ; (us) ɔ:f-/【文中释义】n..子孙,后代【大纲全义】n. 子孙,后代,结果，产物;(动物的)崽successive /sək sesiv/【文中释义】adj.连续的【大纲全义】adj.接连的，连续的pregnancy / Pregnənsi/【文中释义】n.怀孕【大纲全义】n.妊振;怀孕(期);(事件等的)酝酿;(内容)充实，富有意义nurture / nə: tʃə/【文中释义】n.养育，教育【大纲全义】n.营养品;养育，培养，滋养v. 给予营养物，养育，培养，滋养超纲单词egalitarian n. 平等主义sibling n. 兄弟妞妹squabble v. 为争吵spat n. 争吵primogeniture n. 长子身份aptitude n. 才能，资质anecdata n. 二逸事证据prenatal adj. 产前的，出生前的重点段落译文两周前，伯克利夫兰和他的妻子进行了一项非常不科学的实验他们生下了他们的第一个孩子。

2014考研英语阅读真题：考研英语(一)第1篇-毙考题

2014考研英语阅读真题：考研英语(一)第1篇-毙考题2014考研英语阅读真题：考研英语（一）第1篇In order to “change lives for the better” and reduce “dependency,”George Osborne, Chancellor of the Exchequer, introduced the “upfront work search” scheme.Only if the jobless arrive at the job-center with a CV, register for online job search,and start looking for work will they be eligible for benefit —and then they should report weekly rather than fortnightly.What could be more reasonable? More apparent reasonableness followed.There will now be a seven-day wait for the job-seeker’s allowance.“Those first few days should be spent looking for work, not looking to sign on,” he claimed.“We’re doing these things because we know they help people stay off benefits and help those on benefits get into work faster.”Help? Really? On first hearing, this was the socially concerned chancellor, trying to change lives for the better,complete with “reforms” to an obviouslyindulgent system that demands too little effort from the newly unemployed to find work, and subsidises laziness.What motivated him, we were to understand, was his zeal for “fundamental fairness”protecting the taxpayer, controlling spending and ensuring that only the most deserving claimants received their benefits.Losing a job is hurting: you don’t skip down to the job centre with a song in your heart,delighted at the prospect of doubling your income from the generous state.It is financially terrifying, psychologically embarrassing and you know that support is minimal and extraordinarily hard to get.You are now not wanted; you are now excluded from the work environment that offers purpose and structure in your life.Worse, the crucial income to feed yourself and your family and pay the bills has disappeared.Ask anyone newly unemployed what they want and the answer is always: a job.But in Osborne land, your first instinct is to fall into dependency--permanent dependency if you can get itsupported by a state only too ready to indulge your falsehood.It is as though 20 years of ever-tougher reforms of the job search and benefit administration system never happened.The principle of British welfare is no longer that you can insure yourself against the risk of unemployment and receive unconditional payments if the disaster happens.Even the very phrase “job-seeker’s allowance” is about redefining the unemployed as a “job-seeker” who had no fundamental right to a benefit,he or she has earned through making national insurance contributions.Instead, the claimant receives a time-limited “allowance,” conditional on actively seeking a job;no entitlement and no insurance, at 71.70 pounds a week, one of the least generous in the EU.为了”让生活变得更好”，减少”依赖”，财政大臣乔治·奥斯本引进了”前期工作搜索”方案。

2016考研英语阅读真题：考研英语(一)第4篇-毙考题

2016考研英语阅读真题：考研英语（一）第4篇There will eventually come a day when The New York Times ceases to publish stories on newsprint.Exactly when that day will be is a matter of debate.“Sometime in the future,” the paper’s publisher said back in 2010.Nostalgia for ink on paper and the rustle of pages aside, there’s plenty of incentive to ditch print.The infrastructure required to make a physical newspaper — printing presses, delivery trucks —isn’t just expensive; it’s excessive at a time when o nline —only competitors don’t have the same set of financial constraints.Readers are migrating away from print anyway.And though print ad sales still dwarf their online and mobile counterparts, revenue from print is still declining.Overhead may be high and circulation lower, but rushing to eliminate its print edition would be a mistake, says BuzzFeed CEO Jonah Peretti.Peretti says the Times shouldn’t waste time getting out of the print business, but only if they go about doing it the right way.“Figuring out a way to accelerate that transition would make sense for them,” he said, “but if you discontinue it, you’re going have your most loyal customers really upset with you.”Sometimes that’s worth making a change anyway.Peretti gives the example of Netflix discontinuing its DVD-mailing service to focus on streaming.“It was seen as blunder,” he said.The move turned out to be foresighted.And if Peretti were in charge at the Times?“I wouldn’t pick a year to end print,” he said “I would raise prices and make it into more of a legacy product.”The most loyal customers would still get the product they favor, the idea goes, and they’d feel like they were helping sustain the quality of something they believe in.“So if you’re overpaying for print, you could feel like you were helping,” Peretti said.“Then increase it at a higher rate each year and essentially try to generate additional revenue.”In other words, if you’re going to make a print product, make it for the people who are already obsessed with it.Which may be what the Times is doing already.Getting the print edition seven days a week costs nearly $500 a year — more than twice as much as a digital — only subscription.“It’s a really hard thing to do and it’s a tremendous luxury that BuzzFeed doesn’t have a legacy business,” Peretti remarked.“But we’re going to have questions like that where we have things we’re doing that don’t make sense when the market changes and the world changes.In those situations, it’s better to be more aggressive that less aggressive.”终有那么一天，《纽约时报》会停止在报纸上出版新闻报道。

2015考研英语阅读真题：考研英语(一)第3篇-毙考题

2015考研英语阅读真题：考研英语(一)第3篇-毙考题2015考研英语阅读真题：考研英语（一）第3篇The journal Science is adding an extra round of statistical checks to its peer-review process, editor-in-chief Marcia McNutt announced today.The policy follows similar efforts from other journals, after widespread concern that basic mistakes in data analysis are contributing to the irreproducibility of many published research findings.“Readers must have confidence in the conclusions published in our journal,” writes McNutt in an editorial.Working with the American Statistical Association, the journal has appointed seven experts to a statistics board of reviewingeditors(SBoRE).Manuscript will be flagged up for additional scrutiny by the journal’s internal editors, or by its existing Board of Reviewing Editors or by outside peer reviewers.The SBoRE panel will then find external statisticians to review these manuscripts.Asked whether any particular papers had impelled the change, McNutt said:“The creation of the ‘statistics board’ was motivated by concerns broadly with the application of statistics and data analysis in scientific research and is part of Science’s overall drive to increase reproducibility in theresearch we publish.”Giovanni Parmigiani, a biostatistician at the Harvard School of Public Health, a member of the SBoRE group.He says he expects the board to “play primarily an advisory role.”He agreed to join because he “found the foresight behind the establishment of the SBoRE to be novel, unique and likely to have a lasting impact.This impact will not only be through the publications in Science itself, but hopefully through a larger group of publishing places that may want to model their approach afterScience.”John Ioannidis, a physician who studies research methodology, says that the policy is “a most welcome step forward” and “long overdue.”“Most journals are weak in statistical review, and this damages the quality of what they publish.I think that, for the majority of scientific papers nowadays, statistical review is more essential than expert review,” he says.But he noted that biomedical journals such as Annals of Internal Medicine, the Journal of the American Medical Association and TheLancet pay strong attention to statistical review.Professional scientists are expected to know how to analyze data, but statistical errors are alarmingly common in published research, according to David Vaux, a cell biologist.Researchers should improve their standards, he wrote in 2012, but journals should also take a tougher line, “engaging reviewers who are statistically literate and editors who can verify the process”.Vaux says that Science’s idea to pass some papers to statisticians “has some merit,but a weakness is that it relies on the board of reviewing editors to identify ‘the papers thatneed scrutiny’ in the first place”.总主编马西娅·麦克娜特今天宣布：《科学》杂志在同行评阅之外又增加一轮数据审查。

考研英语超级实用的英语阅读提升方法毙考题精修订

考研英语超级实用的英语阅读提升方法毙考题 SANY标准化小组 #QS8QHH-HHGX8Q8-GNHHJ8-HHMHGN#2018考研英语：超级实用的英语阅读提升方法！阅读是考研英语的重中之重，做好了阅读，可以说你的英语就基本上没大问题了。

嘿嘿，但是阅读复习起来也是难度最大的，很多同学往往是一本书看下来，几十篇文章甚至是几百篇文章的看下来，感觉阅读水平提高不大，做题时还是不稳定，不能保证较好的正确率，非常困惑，不知道该如何是好。

我觉得可以从以下几个方面去尝试突破，到时候相信你的阅读能力应该能得到真正的提高。

第一步，词汇关：解决好单词问题，并非简单的背一背，也不是那种一味追求惊人的单词量。

而是结合自身实际情况，找出你阅读中的一些所谓的抽象词，也就是那种你在阅读中常见到的，但却反映不过来的，要反复的看上几遍，才能理解的，这个需要你不断积累，坚持不懈，直到考试的那天。

下面这篇文章具体的说了该如何来做这个，虽然是用来学习GRE的，但对于考研，同样适用，认真体会，对你肯定有帮助!阅读抽象词提速法从某种意义上来说，我们在考试现场大脑的运作方式与我们那时要面对的电脑运作方式有类似之处，都要根据一些数据和信息进行运算，然后得出计算结果，也就是答案。

因此，提高阅读速度就涉及到提高大脑的运算速度问题。

当然，不同的人之间，这种绝对运算速度是有差异的，但是所有的人都可以通过一个方法来提高其阅读速度，也就是通过消除一些延误我们大脑运转速度因素来提高我们的阅读速度。

GRE和GMAT文章的特殊性就在于涉及的因素之多，是其他任何部分都无法与之相比的，因此才在两种考试中都成为最难的一个部分。

如果说文章是高楼大厦，段落就是房间，句子就是一面面的墙，单词就是一块块的砖。

以上几个环节中的任何一个环节出了问题，都会影响我们对整篇文章的理解。

为了解决上述问题，本书着重研究了如何克服GRE或GMAT难句的问题，这里来谈一谈单词的问题。

刚才我们把人脑和电脑作了一个类比。

2012考研英语阅读真题：考研英语(一)第3篇-毙考题

2012考研英语阅读真题：考研英语(一)第3篇-毙考题2012考研英语阅读真题：考研英语（一）第3篇In the idealized version of how science is done,facts about the world are waiting to be observed and collected by objective researchers who use the scientific method to carry out their work.But in the everyday practice of science, discovery frequently follows an ambiguous and complicated route.We aim to be objective, but we cannot escape the context of our unique life experience.Prior knowledge and interest influence what we experience, what we think our experiencesmean, and the subsequent actions we take.Opportunities for misinterpretation, error, and self-deception abound.Consequently, discovery claims should be thought of as protoscience.Similar to newly staked mining claims, they are full of potential.But it takes collective scrutiny and acceptance to transform a discovery claim into a mature discovery.This is the credibility process, through which the individual researcher’s me, here,editors and reviewers act as gatekeepers by controlling the publication process;other scientists use the new finding to suit their own purposes;and finally, the public (including other scientists) receives the new discovery and possibly accompanying technology.As a discovery claim works it through the community,the interaction and confrontation between shared and competing beliefs about the science and the technology involvedtransforms an individual’s discovery claim into the communit y’s credible discovery.Two paradoxes exist throughout this credibility process.First, scientific work tends to focus on some aspect of prevailing knowledge that is viewed as incomplete or incorrect.Little reward accompanies duplication and confirmation of what is already known and believed.The goal is new-search, not re-search.Not surprisingly, newly published discovery claims and credible discoveries that appear to be important and convincingwill always be open to challenge and potential modification or refutation by future researchers.Second, novelty itself frequently provokes disbelief.Nobel Laureate and physiologist Albert Azent-Gyorgyi once described discovery as“seeing what everybody has seen and th inking what nobody has thought.”But thinking what nobody else has thought and telling others what they have missed may not change their views.Sometimes years are required for truly novel discovery claims to be accepted and appreciated.In the end, credibility “happens” to a discovery claima process that corresponds to what philosopher Annette Baier has described as the commons of the mind.“We reason together, challenge, revise, and complete each other’s reasoning and each other’s conceptions of reason.”在科学研究的理想状态下，关于世界的事实正在等待着那些客观的研究者来观察和搜集，研究者们会用科学的方法来进行他们的工作。

2014考研英语阅读真题：考研英语(一)第4篇-毙考题

2014考研英语阅读真题：考研英语(一)第4篇-毙考题Dreport calls for increased investment in research,the crafting of coherent curricula that improve students’ ability to solve problems and communicate effectively in the 21st century,increased funding for teachers and the encouragement of scholars to bring their learning to bear on the great challenges of the day.The report also advocates greater study of foreign languages, international affairs and the expansion of study abroad programs.Unfortunately, despite 2? years in the making, “The Heart of the Matter” never gets tothe heart of the matter:the illiberal nature of liberal education at our leading colleges and universities.The commission ignores that for several decades America’s colleges and universitieshave produced graduates who don’t know the content and character of liberal education and are thus deprived of its benefits.Sadly, the spirit of inquiry once at home on campus has been replaced by the use of the humanities and social sciencesas vehicles for publicizing “progressive,” orleft-liberal propaganda.Today, professors routinely treat the progressive interpretation of history and progressive public policy as the proper subject of studywhile portraying conservative or classical liberal ideas--such as free markets and self-relianceas falling outside the boundaries of routine, and sometimes legitimate, intellectual investigation.The AAAS displays great enthusiasm for liberal education.Yet its report may well set back reform by obscuring the depth and breadth of the challenge that Congress asked it to illuminate.美国艺术和科学研究院刚发布的”问题核心”报告，肯定了人文和社会科学对美国的繁荣和保障自由民主的重要性，这一点是值得赞扬的。

背了那么多英语作文模板-你真的会用吗？-毙考题

背了那么多英语作文模板，你真的会用吗？摘要：大家都知道：临阵磨枪，不快也光。

特别是针对于英语作文，考前背模板成了所有考生不约而同都要做的事。

你背我也背，大家都在背，单单只知道傻傻的背，真的有用吗？随着2018考研时间的临近，很多同学都已经开始把复习的精力转移到比较容易得分的专项上，对于英语来说，最容易提分的部分仍然是写作部分。

大部分同学都认为只要考前背诵一些范文、模板就能考出不错的分数，但是事实并非如此。

很多同学阅读过无数篇考研经验帖子，有些学姐学长告诉你考研英语作文套用模板就可以。

但是大家在使用写作模板这个问题上是存在很大的误区的，经常出现这样那样的问题。

►套用模板的几种常见错误易犯错误一：模板中的句型套用不正确，不完整。

比如：我们在书信结尾的时候会说I am looking forward to hearing from you. 而学生却把这句话写成了I am looked forward to hear from you. 这种现象非常普遍，可见，学生的写作态度并不是很端正，很认真。

易犯错误二：模板中的句型和实际写作内容不匹配。

比如：有的图画作文第二段要求根据图画所表达的含义进行深层次的论证，而学生套用的句型却是第二段写对比的句型，显然是没有正确理解句型使用的语言背景。

再比如：小作文的摘要，是要根据汉语文章归纳出中心内容进行英语写作，这个一般都是客观的描述，而学生却用了一个写图画作文的模板，通篇都是我认为，这如何又能得高分呢?易犯错误三：模板套用千篇一律，没有新意。

再好的模板，如果所有的学生都是用也就变成了一张白纸，没有任何亮点。

而这个错误也正是急功近利的学生容易犯的。

那么，英语作文模板到底可不可以用?可以用。

模板给我们预先规定好写作的框架，可以帮助我们很快构思出每一段大致写什么内容。

再者，通过背诵模板，可以有效弥补我们的词汇和句式多样性的匮乏，从遣词造句上迅速提升作文的水准。

但是要注意方法，只靠通用的模板本身是很难在阅卷老师那里蒙混过关的，尤其是近年考研阅卷已经十分重视反模板化。

考研英语阅读真题考研英语(一)4篇毙考题

2012考研英语阅读真题：考研英语（一）第4篇If the trade unionist Jimmy Hoffa were alive today, he would probably represent civil servant.When Hoffa’s Teamsters were in their prime in 1960, only one in ten American government workers belonged to a union。

now 36% do.In 2009 the number of unionists in America’s public sector passed that of their fellow members in the private sector.In Britain, more than half of public-sector workers but only about 15% of private-sector ones are unionized.There are three reasons for the public-sector unions’ thriving.First, they can shut things down without suffering much in the way of consequences.Second, they are mostly bright and well-educated.A quarter of America’s public-sector workers have a university degree.Third, they now dominate left-of-centre politics.Some of their ties go back a long way.Britain’s Labor Party, as its name implies, has long been associated with trade unionism.Its current leader, Ed Miliband, owes his position to votes from public-sector unions.At the state level their influence can be even more fearsome.Mark Baldassare of the Public Policy Institute of California points out that much of the state’sbudget is patrolled by unions.The teache rs’ unions keep an eye on schools, the CCPOA on prisons and a variety of labor groups on health care.In many rich countries average wages in the state sector are higher than in the private one.But the real gains come in benefits and work practices.Politicians have repeatedly “backloaded” public-sector pay deals,keeping the pay increases modest but adding to holidays and especially pensions that are already generous.Reform has been vigorously opposed, perhaps most egregiously in education,where charter schools, academies and merit pay all faced drawn-out battles.Even though there is plenty of evidence that the quality of the teachers is the most important variable,teachers’ unions have fought against getting rid of bad ones and promoting good ones.As the cost to everyone else has become clearer, politicians have begun to clamp down.In Wisconsin the unions have rallied thousands of supporters against Scott Walker, the hardline Republican governor.But many within the public sector suffer under the current system, too.John Donahue at Harvard’s Kennedy School points out that the norms of culture in Westerncivil servicessuit those who want to stay put but is bad for high achievers.The only American public-sector workers who earn well above $250,000 a year are university sports coaches and the president of the United States.Bankers’ fat pay packets have attracted much criticism,but a public-sector system that does not reward high achievers may be a much bigger problem for America.如果工会会员Jimmy Hoffa今天还活着，他也许会是公务员的代表。

2014考研英语阅读真题：考研英语(一)第2篇-毙考题

2014考研英语阅读真题：考研英语(一)第2篇-毙考题DOne idea is to allow people to study law as an undergraduate degree.Another is to let students sit for the bar after only two years of law school.If the bar exam is truly a stern enough test for a would-be lawyer, those who can sit it earlier should be allowed to do so.Students who do not need the extra training could cut their debt mountain by a third.The other reason why costs are so high is the restrictive guild-like ownership structure of the business.Except in the District of Columbia, non-lawyers may not own any share of a law firm.This keeps fees high and innovation slow.There is pressure for change from within the profession,but opponents of change among the regulators insist thatkeeping outsiders out of a law firm isolates lawyers from the pressure to make money rather than serve clients ethically.In fact, allowing non-lawyers to own shares in law firms would reduce costs and improve services to customers,by encouraging law firms to use technology and to employ professional managers to focus on improving firms’ efficiency.After all, other countries, such as Australia and Britain, have started liberalizing their legal professions. America should follow.整个世界范围内，律师比起其他任何职业的人员引起更多的敌意--可能除了新闻业人员。

2024年全国硕士研究生入学考试英语一试卷

2024年全国硕士研究生入学考试英语一试卷一、阅读理解阅读下面的短文，然后回答问题。

The Power of ReadingReading is a valuable skill that can open up a whole new world for us. Whether it's for pleasure or for learning, reading has the ability to transport us to places we've never been and introduce us to people and ideas we've never encountered. Books provide a window into different cultures, historical periods, and ways of thinking. They allow us to step outside our own lives and experiences and gain a deeper understanding of the world. Reading can also be a source of inspiration, encouraging us to pursue our dreams and aspire to greater things.Moreover, reading is a great way to improve our vocabulary and language skills. It helps us to develop a stronger grasp of grammar and sentence structure, and it exposes us to new words and phrases that we can use in our own writing and speaking.However, the benefits of reading are not just intellectual. It can also have a positive impact on our emotional well-being. Reading can be a relaxing activity that helps us to unwind after a stressful day. It can provide a sense of escape from the realities of our daily lives and allow us to enter into a different world where we can forget our worries for a while.In conclusion, the power of reading is immense. It has the ability to transform our lives in countless ways, both intellectually and emotionally. So why not make a habit of reading and discover the wonders that lie within the pages of a book?What does reading allow us to do?How does reading help us understand the world better?List two intellectual benefits of reading mentioned in the passage.How can reading benefit our emotional well-being?Why should we make a habit of reading?二、完形填空阅读下面的短文，从每题所给的A、B、C、D四个选项中，选出可以填入空白处的最佳选项。

2013考研英语阅读真题：考研英语(二)第4篇-毙考题

2013考研英语阅读真题：考研英语(二)第4篇-毙考题DBut, when one considers the obstacles to achieving the meritocratic ideal,it does look as if a fairer world must be temporarily ordered.After all, four decades of evidence has now shown thatcorporations in Europe as well as the US are evading the meritocratic hiring and promotion of women to top positionno matter how much “soft pressure” is put upon them.When women do break through to the summit of corporate power —as, for example, Sheryl Sandberg recently did at Facebookthey attract massive attention precisely because they remain the exception to the rule.If appropriate pubic policies were in place to help all women---whether CEOs or their children’s caregivers--and all families,Sandberg would be no more newsworthy than any other highly capable person living in a more just society.欧洲并不是男女平等的天堂。

2013考研英语阅读真题：考研英语(二)第2篇-毙考题

2013考研英语(yīnɡ yǔ)阅读真题：考研英语（二）第2篇A century ago, the immigrants from across the Atlantic inclued settlers and sojourners.Along with the many folks looking to make a permanent home in the United States came those who had no intention to stay,and who would make some money and then go home.Between 1908 and 1915, about 7 millin people arrived while about 2 million departed.About a quarter of all Italian immigrants, for exanmle, eventually returned to Italy for good.They even had an affectionate nickname, “uccelli di passaggio,” birds of passage. Today, we are much more rigid about immigrants.We divide nemcomers into two categories: legal or illegal, good or bad.We hail them as Americans in the making, or brand them as aliens fit for deportation.That framework has contributed mightily to our broken immigrantion system and the long political paralysis over how to fix it.We don’t need more categories, but we need to change the way we think about categories.We need to look beyond strick definitions of legal and illegal.To start, we can recognize the new birds of passage, those living and thriving in the gray areas.We might then begin to solve our immigration challenges.Crop pickers, violinists, construction workers, entrepreneurs, engineers,home health-care aides and physicists are among today’s birds of passage.They are energetic participants in a global economy driven by the flow of work, money and ideas.They prefer to come and go as opportunity calls them.They can manage to have a job in one place and a family in another.With or without permission, they straddle laws, jurisdictions and identities with ease.We need them to imagine the United States as a placewhere they can be productive for a while without committing themselves to staying forever.We need them to feel that home can be both here and there and that they can belong to two nations honorably.Accommodating this new world of people in motion will require new attitudes on both sides of the immigration battle.Looking beyond the culture war logic of right or wrong means opening up the middle groundand understanding that managing immigration today requires multiple paths and multiple outcomes.Including some that are not easy to accomplish legally in the existing system.一个世纪前，来自大西洋的移民包括定居者和旅居者。