2027年硕士研究生《英语一》考前点题卷一
英语一
考前点题
共 48 题
3401 次浏览
更新于 2026-09-26
一、完形填空
下列每小题的四个选项中，只有一项是最符合题意的正确答案，多选、错选或不选均不得分。
Psychological research can help shine a light on why humans think, feel, and act the way we do.Yet when a finding doesn’t match up with someone’s identity or personality, new research 1, that person may be more likely to discredit it.In one study, participants 2 to two personality psychology findings.They 3 how closely their lived experience matched up with the findings, how comfortable they were with them, and how much they denied their 4.They 5 completed measures of the Big Five and other relevant traits.Participants who perceived their personal experience as 6 the research were more likely to feel uncomfortable with it and to deny it than those who found the findings align with their personality.How much their 7 personality scores matched up was a less consistent 8 of discomfort and denialism.“Perceptions are everything,” says study author Nicholas Evans.Feeling 9 everyone else—10 that’s based more on perception than fact—can be mentally uncomfortable.“A natural reaction to 11 the discomfort is to deny the science.” This could 12 pre-existing distrust in psychology, Evans argues, with 13 that extend far beyond personality science.If people are 14 of findings on the importance of mental health, they may not take mental health issues seriously or could 15 the negative impact of mental illness.Scientists and journalists should be conscious of their 16 when sharing discoveries, noting how strong effects are and if there are caveats.17, people may believe that the findings do or should apply to everyone—and that’s 18 ever the case.Psychological research 19 lived experience doesn’t make either invalid.We’re all unique.Having experiences that don’t align with research simply 20 that.
1
第1题答案是
- A.confirms
- B.warns
- C.denies
- D.promises
2
第2题答案是
- A.resorted
- B.adapted
- C.responded
- D.adhered
3
第3题答案是
- A.wondered
- B.observed
- C.valued
- D.rated
4
第4题答案是
- A.authenticity
- B.availability
- C.productivity
- D.sensitivity
5
第5题答案是
- A.still
- B.again
- C.instead
- D.also
6
第6题答案是
- A.peculiar to
- B.related to
- C.inconsistent with
- D.parallel with
7
第7题答案是
- A.normal
- B.special
- C.actual
- D.common
8
第8题答案是
- A.predictor
- B.pattern
- C.standard
- D.response
9
第9题答案是
- A.dubious about
- B.different from
- C.jealous of
- D.inferior to
10
第10题答案是
- A.given that
- B.even if
- C.as if
- D.so long as
11
第11题答案是
- A.reduce
- B.expose
- C.reject
- D.endure
12
第12题答案是
- A.restore
- B.eliminate
- C.diminish
- D.bolster
13
第13题答案是
- A.expectations
- B.consequences
- C.reasons
- D.approaches
14
第14题答案是
- A.tolerant
- B.nervous
- C.ashamed
- D.skeptical
15
第15题答案是
- A.alleviate
- B.overcome
- C.downplay
- D.overrate
16
第16题答案是
- A.language
- B.standpoint
- C.purpose
- D.identity
17
第17题答案是
- A.Moreover
- B.Otherwise
- C.However
- D.Therefore
18
第18题答案是
- A.never
- B.already
- C.rarely
- D.almost
19
第19题答案是
- A.contradicting
- B.involving
- C.counteracting
- D.duplicating
20
第20题答案是
- A.minimizes
- B.controls
- C.enhances
- D.highlights
二、阅读理解Part A
下列每小题的四个选项中，只有一项是最符合题意的正确答案，多选、错选或不选均不得分。
Last November, the European Commission announced plans to put together a European Union-wide agreement on research assessment.It is proposing that assessment criteria reward ethics and integrity, teamwork and a diversity of outputs in addition to research quality and impact.The UK Future Research Assessment Programme, due to report by the end of this year, has also been tasked with proposing ways to ensure that assessments become more inclusive. Research-assessment systems are the nearest thing that universities have to the performance metrics that are common in business.UK public funding goes preferentially to the university departments with the highest-performing researchers.But assessments that measure individual performance make it harder for institutions to recognize science conducted in teams—both within and between disciplines.Moreover, research assessments have tended to focus on final published results, whereas researchers are increasingly producing more diverse outputs, including data sets, reproducibility studies and registered reports, in which researchers publish study designs before starting experiments.And then there’s the question of costs.The 2014 iteration of the UK Research Excellence Framework—the exercise takes place roughly every seven years—cost somewhere in the region of £246 million.The lion’s share (£232 million) was borne by universities.It included the costs of academic staff who served on the review panels; and the costs to institutions, which go to great lengths to prepare their staff, including running mock assessment exercises.Here, smaller institutions lack the resources to compete with better-funded ones.Researchers who study assessment methods regularly put forward ideas for how evaluations could change for the better.Last August, a working group from the International Network of Research Management Societies fleshed out a framework called SCOPE.This encourages funders to design evaluation systems around the ‘values’ they wish to assess.For example, rewarding competitive behaviour might require a different set of criteria from incentivizing collegiality.The SCOPE framework also proposes that funders collaborate with the people being evaluated to design the assessment, and urges them to work with experts in research evaluation—a defined research field.The importance of co-design cannot be overstated: it will enable the views of different research stakeholders to be represented, and ensure that no single voice dominates.Large, research-intensive institutions often do well in conventional evaluations, because they focus their multi-year strategies on attracting and retaining researchers who meet the criteria of success at publishing results and bringing in income, among other things.Smaller institutions cannot always compete on these grounds—but could gain if future assessments include new criteria, such as rewarding collaborations, or if assessments put less weight on ability to obtain research funding.A broader range of evaluation criteria could ensure that a greater diversity of institutions have opportunities to do well.Larger institutions should not in any way feel threatened by these changes.It is often said that making research culture more welcoming requires systemic change.Research evaluation is core to the research system.If evaluation criteria can be made more representative of how research is done, that much-needed culture change will move one important step closer.
21
According to the first two paragraphs, the current research assessments
- A.reward inter- and trans- disciplinary collaboration.
- B.consider the diversity of contributions in research.
- C.put due weight on ethics and integrity in research practices.
- D.allow research-intensive universities to get more public funding.
22
The author suggests that the UK Research Excellence Framework is
- A.behind the times.
- B.burden some for universities.
- C.complicated in procedures.
- D.favorable to smaller institutions.
23
The SCOPE framework proposes that funders
- A.incentivize individuality rather than collegiality.
- B.develop a unified set of evaluation criteria.
- C.engage all stakeholders in conversation.
- D.prioritize expertise in evaluation design.
24
To ensure the development of smaller institutions, it is crucial to
- A.increase the allocation of public funding to them.
- B.make evaluation criteria more representative.
- C.raise their awareness of research collaboration.
- D.provide them with easier access to resources.
25
What does the author argue in the last paragraph?
- A.Larger institutions’ rights should be protected.
- B.Evaluation criteria should reflect research quality.
- C.A positive change in research culture is underway.
- D.Research evaluation needs to change with the times.
Last week, Amazon announced it would shut down Amazon Care at the end of this year.For the second time in two years, Amazon has had to concede failure in an effort to take on the American health care system.It might be possible to deliver a pan to someone’s apartment in 24 hours, but applying the same approach to health care seems a taller order.Amazon Care hoped businesses would pay for their employees to have on-demand telehealth and in-home care, allowing them to skip the process of finding a provider in their insurance network, making an appointment that may be weeks away and taking time off work to go to it.Amazon would send a nurse to you, to “give people back valuable time in their day”, its website promised.But those promises exceeded reality.Shortly before the announcement of Amazon Care’s closing, The Washington Post reported that former clinical employees alleged that the service had “prioritized pleasing patients over providing the best standard of care”, trying to scale up too quickly to establish good practices.Replacing the easy parts of primary care is easy.But part of why Amazon Care had difficulties is that not all aspects of primary care are so simple that they can be performed in your home or through a video consultation.For anything more complicated, patients would still have to visit a traditional clinic, meaning they would have to contend with all the things that are most tiresome about American health care: insurance, phone calls and drug prices—if they can get the time off to visit the doctor at all.Amazon is right about one thing: American primary care is troubled.Reams of evidence show that good primary care improves health and lowers costs, yet primary care is one of the worst-paying fields in medicine.Independent practices are increasingly being absorbed by larger hospital systems, which can more easily make money on referrals to their specialists; this process further drives up health care costs.America spends more than twice what other wealthy countries spend on health care, while also having worse health outcomes.This imbalance results from a thicket of incomprehensible financing systems.Hospitals say they lose money on treating Medicaid and Medicare patients, and therefore must charge private insurance more to make up the shortfall.Prices are negotiated with insurers for thousands of individual procedures and services, but even the hospitals themselves might not know how those numbers relate to any real costs incurred.Insurance companies make an increasing portion of their huge profits running Medicare Advantage plans, which have received billions in inflated payments for claiming their patients are sicker than they are.Wealthy hospitals abound in rich areas while rural hospitals close.Amazon might think it can fix anything with enough money, technology and logistics, but Amazon Care didn’t have a hope of fixing this mess.Against most companies that sell products in America, Amazon is a Goliath[.Put it up against the problems of the American health care system, and it looks like David with a slingshot made of wet spaghetti.]
26
According to Paragraph 1, Amazon failed to
- A.deliver telehealth on time.
- B.penetrate the health care sector.
- C.provide customized health care.
- D.renovate its business model.
27
Amazon Care didn’t work out mainly because
- A.it scaled up too quickly.
- B.it disappointed patients.
- C.it cannot simplify primary care.
- D.it ignored employee satisfaction.
28
What does the author say about American primary care?
- A.It is too profit-driven.
- B.It is not cost-effective.
- C.It faces fierce competition.
- D.It is abandoning private practices.
29
We can learn from Paragraph 5 that hospitals
- A.are increasingly serving affluent patients.
- B.notice how insurers influence medical prices.
- C.charge uninsured patients with swollen prices.
- D.profit from Medicaid and Medicare patients.
30
The underlined sentence (Para.6) most probably means that
- A.Amazon’s ambition in health care is dangerous.
- B.Amazon has the potential to disrupt health care.
- C.Amazon’s growth in health care is unparalleled.
- D.Amazon can’t fix America’s health care crisis.
- A、B项与原文相悖。末段中存在两组比较关系“大多数在美国销售产品的公司vs亚马逊”“亚马逊vs美国医疗保健体系”，在后一组对比中，对美国医疗保健体系而言，亚马逊不过是手持毫无威胁性工具的大卫。因此亚马逊在医疗保健方面的野心并不危险，它也不能扰乱医疗保健。
C项由末段①句中的fix anything、enough money、technology and logistics错误理解出亚马逊在医疗保健方面成绩斐然，但这与文中事实相反。
【全文翻译】
上周，亚马逊宣布将在今年年末关闭Amazon Care（亚马逊医疗服务部门）。这是两年来第二次亚马逊不得不承认，自己进军美国医疗保健体系的努力失败了。要在24小时内将一把平底锅送到某人的公寓是可以办到的，但要将同样的模式运用到医疗服务上似乎就难了。
Amazon Care希望企业可以为员工支付按需远程医疗和居家护理的费用，免去他们求找医疗保险提供者、提前几周预约以及请假就医这些流程。亚马逊会给你派护士，“把平日里宝贵的时间还给大家”。亚马逊网站这么承诺。但是，这些承诺超出了现实。就在亚马逊宣布关闭Amazon Care前不久，《华盛顿邮报》曾报道称，亚马逊前临床医生指出这一医疗服务“将取悦病人置于提供最高标准的护理之上”，太想扩大规模而无法建立良好的实践规范。
取代基础医疗中简单的部分是容易的。但是，Amazon Care碰到困难的部分原因是，并非所有的基础医疗都是简单的，能够在家或者通过视频问诊可以完成的。对于任何复杂些的情况，病人依然还是得去线下诊所就诊，这就意味着他们必须去应对美国医疗保健体系中最恼人的那些事情：保险、电话、药价——如果他们能够抽出时间去看医生的话。
亚马逊在一件事上是对的：美国基础医疗陷入了困境。大量证据表明，健全的基础医疗可以改善健康、降低成本，但基础医疗却是酬劳最低的医疗领域之一。独立执业日益被大型医疗机构吸纳，它们更容易通过向专科医生转诊赚钱，但这一过程却又推高了医疗保健的花销。美国在医疗保健上的支出是其他富裕国家的两倍不止，然而健康状况却更糟。
这种不平衡源于复杂而又费解的财务系统。医院称，它们给享有联邦医疗补助(Medicaid)和联邦医疗保险(Medicare)的患者提供医疗服务是亏钱的，因此必须收取更多的私人保险费用来填补亏空。数千项独立的手术和医疗服务的价格是与保险公司协商的，就连医院自己都不清楚这些价格与实际成本之间的关联。保险公司通过运营联邦医疗保险优良计划(Medicare Advantage plans)赚取的利润在其巨额利润中占比越来越高，它们把病人病情说得比实际情况更严重，从而获得数十亿美元的虚高款额。富裕地区滋养富裕医院，乡村医院却纷纷倒闭。
亚马逊可能认为，凭借足够的资金、技术以及物流就能解决所有问题，但Amazon Care并没有希望解决这个（医疗）烂摊子。与大多数在美国销售产品的公司相比，亚马逊就是一个巨人。但将其置于美国医疗保健体系的问题之前，亚马逊就像是手拿湿意面做成的弹弓的大卫一样（无能为力）。
On Wednesday, in a landmark privacy case, the UK supreme court ruled that suspects in a criminal investigation have the fight not to be named in the media, prior to charges being brought against them.On that basis, it rejected an appeal against a previous high court judgment by Bloomberg News, which was found to have breached the privacy rights of a US business executive by naming him as the subject of a criminal inquiry.In one sense, this was nothing new.The judgment merely confirmed a direction of travel that began a decade ago with the Leveson inquiry.The phone-hacking scandal that led to Leveson came to symbolise the excesses of intrusive reporting by the tabloid press in particular.In its wake, the concept of privacy has been interpreted ever more broadly and generously by courts.The right to free expression—and the freedom of the press to report—has correspondingly taken a back seat.The potential harm to named suspects who are never charged was always capable of being recognized through a defamation claim.But in the way they choose to balance the competing fights of privacy and freedom of expression, these legal judgments reflect the changed perspectives and priorities of the post-Leveson decade.Wednesday’s ruling was a sign that the pendulum has swung too far towards the suppression of information which is of legitimate public interest.The Bloomberg case concerned a criminal investigation into the business activities of an executive in a large public company with investors, customers and shareholders.As the news organization’s editor-in-chief pointed out in a written response, extending the scope of privacy law to this extent will hinder investigative journalism into corporate wrongdoing.From the Libor banking scandal to the exposure of accounting fraud at Wire card, the public value of such reporting has been repeatedly demonstrated.Nor is it advisable to throw a cloak of secrecy over police investigations, shielding them from the public gaze and accountability.Perhaps most importantly, an excessive legal presumption in favour of privacy removes the possibility of publicity leading to new testimony, as members of the public come forward.The Bloomberg verdict made it clear that there may be cases in which the naming of suspects is in the public interest.But this judgment sends an unequivocal message that the threshold of justification will be fearfully, prohibitively high.The fight to privacy and protection from reputational damage is in danger of becoming a catch-all instrument with which the powerful and wealthy can erect a screen around the entirety of their lives and shut down scrutiny.A healthy democracy requires a better balance to be struck between the freedom of the press and the right to privacy.
31
According to Paragraph 1, Bloomberg News
- A.reported a criminal inquiry without authorisation.
- B.gave an unfaithful report on a criminal inquiry.
- C.identified an executive as being under investigation.
- D.exposed an executive accused of privacy violation.
- A、B两项利用首段关键词criminal inquiry和breached the privacy rights并结合相关背景信息捏造出彭博社“未经授权进行报道”和“进行了不实报道”。
D项将“彭博社被判侵犯了一位高管的隐私权”窜改为“曝光了一位侵犯他人隐私的高管”。
32
The author mentions the Leveson inquiry to
- A.offer an example of privacy violation.
- B.illustrate a trend in legal judgments.
- C.condemn the intrusiveness of the press.
- D.emphasise the fight to free expression.
- A、C两项均利用文中事实信息“莱韦森调查针对的是媒体对他人隐私的侵犯”设置干扰，但这并非作者提及调查的目的；结合第二段首句（主旨句／例证对象）和末两句（示例阐述的语义重点）可知，作者并非意在列举媒体侵犯隐私的实例，也并非意在对媒体发起谴责。
D项利用第二段末句关键词The right to free expression捏造干扰，实际上与文意完全相反：文中指出的是“调查之后自由表达的权利退居次位／不被重视”。
33
It can be learned from Paragraph 3 that the post-Leveson decade perspectives may
- A.run counter to public interests.
- B.cause harm to uncharged suspects.
- C.extend the freedom of expression.
- D.produce increased defamation claims.
34
It can be inferred that the Bloomberg case
- A.is a deterrent to corporate wrongdoing.
- B.forms a threat to investigative reporting.
- C.has aroused public resistance to police investigations.
- D.has manifested the value of public testimony.
35
In the last paragraph, the author suggests that
- A.the powerful and wealthy care most about their privacy.
- B.naming criminal suspects is rarely in the public interest.
- C.press freedom and privacy conflicts can hardly be settled.
- D.the protection of privacy and reputation can be misused.
It’s a good time to be a female business executive in America.Earlier this year, Nasdaq introduced a rule requiring that listed companies have at least one woman on their board.Nasdaq leadership cited multiple studies and reports to support its contention that gender and ethnic diversity of corporate boards was not just socially desirable but good for business.A detailed analysis by the Heritage Foundation’s David Burton, however, found that Nasdaq’s argument was exaggerated and misleading.
Many “business case” claims about the advantages of women on corporate boards use market capitalization as a measure of firm performance; but market cap is typically a measure of firm size, and bigger firms always have bigger boards and thus more female directors.A recent study published in The Leadership Quarterly actually found that Norway’s mandatory 40 percent increase in female directors corresponded with a significant adverse effect on firm performance relative to similar firms in Sweden, Denmark and Finland that did not face a mandatory quota.
A study examining France’s mandate for 40 percent female representation on public firms’ corporate boards found that 25 percent of newly appointed female directors had close family ties to the company.By contrast, about 28 percent had degrees from prestigious academic institutions.Research also identified the possibility that some firms that fall under the quota will shift their organizational form; in Norway, some publicly listed firms simply delisted to avoid the quota.
While the case that mandated gender diversity will improve corporate financial performance is weak, the negative social effects on women themselves could prove significant.The nonprofit Independent Women’s Forum opposed the adoption of the Nasdaq rule, warning that it would “threaten the progress made by millions of women and minorities by giving them special treatment, thus implying that they cannot succeed without it.”
Tokenism and concerns about hiring-by-quota have plagued members of underrepresented groups for decades, at times significantly undermining their professional status and reputation.A recent report by the Diligent Institute also questioned whether female board members are being welcomed to exercise leadership, rather than just membership, in their new roles.This suggests female directors brought on merely to satisfy a diversity quota might not gain positions consistent with full-fledged board membership.
While there is now a pipeline of qualified female board candidates rising through the ranks in many industries, there are still significant differences between the number of men and women specializing in, for example, petroleum engineering versus consumer retail.A recent law review article also noted that directors increasingly face significant legal liabilities—the status of board membership carries risks that not every executive candidate will welcome.
All of this omits the basic question of whether diversity requirements like those adopted by Nasdaq are consistent with the U.S.Constitution and existing laws.Nevertheless, this is an exciting time for women to lead companies as executives and as board directors; but the best real-world data we have supports a system based on merit, not mandatory quotas.
Many “business case” claims about the advantages of women on corporate boards use market capitalization as a measure of firm performance; but market cap is typically a measure of firm size, and bigger firms always have bigger boards and thus more female directors.A recent study published in The Leadership Quarterly actually found that Norway’s mandatory 40 percent increase in female directors corresponded with a significant adverse effect on firm performance relative to similar firms in Sweden, Denmark and Finland that did not face a mandatory quota.
A study examining France’s mandate for 40 percent female representation on public firms’ corporate boards found that 25 percent of newly appointed female directors had close family ties to the company.By contrast, about 28 percent had degrees from prestigious academic institutions.Research also identified the possibility that some firms that fall under the quota will shift their organizational form; in Norway, some publicly listed firms simply delisted to avoid the quota.
While the case that mandated gender diversity will improve corporate financial performance is weak, the negative social effects on women themselves could prove significant.The nonprofit Independent Women’s Forum opposed the adoption of the Nasdaq rule, warning that it would “threaten the progress made by millions of women and minorities by giving them special treatment, thus implying that they cannot succeed without it.”
Tokenism and concerns about hiring-by-quota have plagued members of underrepresented groups for decades, at times significantly undermining their professional status and reputation.A recent report by the Diligent Institute also questioned whether female board members are being welcomed to exercise leadership, rather than just membership, in their new roles.This suggests female directors brought on merely to satisfy a diversity quota might not gain positions consistent with full-fledged board membership.
While there is now a pipeline of qualified female board candidates rising through the ranks in many industries, there are still significant differences between the number of men and women specializing in, for example, petroleum engineering versus consumer retail.A recent law review article also noted that directors increasingly face significant legal liabilities—the status of board membership carries risks that not every executive candidate will welcome.
All of this omits the basic question of whether diversity requirements like those adopted by Nasdaq are consistent with the U.S.Constitution and existing laws.Nevertheless, this is an exciting time for women to lead companies as executives and as board directors; but the best real-world data we have supports a system based on merit, not mandatory quotas.
36
According to Paragraph 1, the new rule introduced by Nasdaq
- A.aimed to broaden women’s career options.
- B.has met the demands of public companies.
- C.has drawn doubts about its effectiveness.
- D.overestimated the degree of gender bias.
37
It can be learned that firms faced with a board quota
- A.may suffer a decline in financial performance.
- B.will avoid appointing directors by favoritism.
- C.will see an increase in well-educated directors.
- D.may move their headquarters to other countries.
38
Mandated gender diversity will expose female directors to
- A.a substantial decrease in financial security.
- B.a societal underestimation of their abilities.
- C.widespread accusations of abuse of power.
- D.the stress of holding several board positions.
39
It can be inferred from Paragraph 6 that gender quotas
- A.result in more female-friendly corporate policies.
- B.could cause gender imbalance in some industries.
- C.ignore the gender composition of different industries.
- D.have forced directors to face more legal liabilities.
40
The author’s attitude toward diversity requirements is one of
- A.strong disapproval.
- B.enthusiastic support.
- C.passive acceptance.
- D.slight hesitancy.
- B、C项均曲解第七段②句前半句信息“当下是女性担任高管和董事来领导公司的激动人心的时刻”（现实情形）：B项将作者对该现实情形的赞同曲解为对“多样性要求”的赞同；C项强加因果关系，该现实情形并非导致作者被动接受了“多样性要求”。
D项利用②句前半句让步转折词Nevertheless设障，而后半句作者明确表示对“强制配额制”（即性别多样性要求）的反对。
【全文翻译】
在美国，现在是女性担任企业高管的好时候。今年早些时候，纳斯达克出台了一项规定，要求上市公司董事会中至少有一名女性。纳斯达克领导层引用了多项研究和报告来支撑以下论点：公司董事会的性别和种族多样性不仅符合社会期许，而且还对企业有利。然而，美国传统基金会的大卫·伯顿进行的一项详细分析发现，纳斯达克的论点具有夸大性和误导性。
许多所谓证明女性担任公司董事的好处的“商业案例”都将市值作为衡量公司业绩的指标；但市值通常是衡量公司规模的指标，而大公司总是有更大的董事会，因而会有更多的女性董事。实际上，最近发表在《领导力季刊》上的一项研究发现，与瑞典、丹麦和芬兰未面临强制配额制的类似公司相比，挪威公司的业绩反而因强制增加40%的女性董事而受到了显著不利影响。
一项研究对法国“要求上市公司董事会中女性代表人数占40%”的规定展开了调查，发现25%的新任女性董事的家庭与公司有着密切的联系。相比之下，拥有知名学术机构学位的女性董事占比约为28%。研究还发现，一些受性别配额制约束的公司可能会改变其组织形式；在挪威，一些上市公司仅仅为了避免实行性别配额制而退市。
强制实行性别多样化政策将改善公司财务业绩这一观点证据不足，而这给女性本身带来的负面社会影响却非常显著。非营利组织“独立女性论坛”反对纳斯达克实行这项规定，并警告道：该规定将会“使数百万女性和少数族裔所取得的进步大打折扣，因为它给予女性和少数族裔特殊对待，由此暗示若没有配额规定，他们就不可能成功”。
几十年来，形式主义政策以及对招聘配额制的担忧让代表性不足的群体成员饱受折磨，这些政策有时还会严重损害他们的职业地位和声誉。Diligent研究院最近的一份报告也发出质疑：新任女性董事会成员是否被欢迎行使其领导权力，而不仅是有个成员身份。结果表明，仅仅为了满足多样性配额要求而聘用的女性董事，可能无法获得与全权的董事会成员身份相应的职位。
尽管如今许多行业都有一大批合格的女性董事候选人顺利晋升，但是不同行业(比如石油工程行业和消费零售业)的男女从业人数仍然存在着显著差异。最近，一篇法律评论文章还指出，董事们日益面临重大的法律责任——并非每个高管候选人都会乐意接受伴随董事会成员身份而来的各种风险。
所有以上这些都忽略了一个基本问题，那就是类似于纳斯达克所采用的这类多样性要求是否符合美国宪法和现行法律。尽管如此，当下依然是女性担任高管和董事来领导公司的激动人心的时刻；不过我们所掌握的最佳现实数据证明，可取的是任人唯才制，而非强制配额制。
三、阅读理解Part B
下列每小题的四个选项中，只有一项是最符合题意的正确答案，多选、错选或不选均不得分。
On January 11, 2022, the journal Nature Neuroscience announced its article processing charge for open-access (OA) papers in 2022.A tweet about the substantial fees of 9,500 euros/ $11,390 / £8,290 immediately triggered more than 400 replies, 2,300 retweets, and of course, memes, most of which conveyed a single sentiment: “How dare you charge so much!” As customers—the scientists who author papers to flesh out the corpus of the open access literature—what are we buying from the publishers? What researchers are paying for is a certification service—the credibility lent to research when it is published in a peer-reviewed journal.This was not financially clear in the pay-to-read era, but such services are backed by a collection of key components, including the journal’s branding/reputation, the editorial and review services, and broader multimedia promotion.In particular, studies in life or physical sciences are usually not easily reproducible by peers without considerable human resources and money.41._______________________ Likewise, readers tend to choose references carrying a trustworthy reputation so they do not have to verify every conclusion on their own benchtop.Things are slightly different in computer science, mathematics, and theoretical physics, where openly sharing preprints, source code, and data is a common practice.In these fields, audience scan usually verify and build upon the results published by others via standardized toolsets: programs should run in the same way on any computer, and derivations should follow the same norms in a chosen theoretical framework.42._______________________ Computer scientists’ discontent with commercial journals eventually led to a boycott of the journal Nature Machine Intelligence, which was founded in 2018.The subscription model was inherited from the paper media era when communicating knowledge was expensive, and readers chose to pay for what they could read.43._______________________ Under this new model, grant money is now used to certify and publish resulting studies in a journal, whether it be society-run or commercial, meaning that funders and employers, not readers, are responsible for the cost of evaluating research.Before the transformation fully concludes, journals will still court allegations of “double-dipping,” that is, receiving money from both the libraries and authors when OA and paywalled articles coexist in an issue.44._______________________ However, establishing a fee model that satisfies all parties remains a challenge.There is more need now than ever for high-quality certification and validation services provided by publishers.Funders and institutions must recognize the urgency of shifting resources from subscription to publication, and play an active role in negotiation with publishers on fees and benefits.Most importantly, resources should only be allocated to publishers that offer exemplary service and value in the market.45._______________________ By urging grant providers and institutions to allocate sufficient budgets toward publication and providing feedback on each publisher’s service quality, we will be able to navigate this pay-to-publish landscape as a cohesive research ecosystem.
[A] Preprints are becoming an increasingly important part of the research communications landscape and posting preprints allows researchers to share their research freely and rapidly with their colleagues and the broader organizations.
[B] In this internet age, the ongoing evolution to OA publishing is more compatible with the needs of both authors and funding agencies, at least in experimental sciences.
[C] And please don’t forget that scientists’ voices make a difference in decision-making processes, even at large, well-established publishers and funders.
[D] Therefore, rather than seeking post-publication judgment, most researchers want to get a stamp of approval from a recognized journal to certify that their manuscript meets the novelty and quality requirements associated with the brand name.
[E] While traditional publishers have long argued that screening, publishing, and distributing scientific work is expensive business, the Internet has made it easy and cheap to share that knowledge.[
F] Consequently, there is less need for a third-party authority, such as a pricey high-profile journal, to certify the quality of a study.
[G] Several publishers have responded by either reducing the subscription fee or providing discounted or fully waived article processing charges to institutional subscribers.
[A] Preprints are becoming an increasingly important part of the research communications landscape and posting preprints allows researchers to share their research freely and rapidly with their colleagues and the broader organizations.
[B] In this internet age, the ongoing evolution to OA publishing is more compatible with the needs of both authors and funding agencies, at least in experimental sciences.
[C] And please don’t forget that scientists’ voices make a difference in decision-making processes, even at large, well-established publishers and funders.
[D] Therefore, rather than seeking post-publication judgment, most researchers want to get a stamp of approval from a recognized journal to certify that their manuscript meets the novelty and quality requirements associated with the brand name.
[E] While traditional publishers have long argued that screening, publishing, and distributing scientific work is expensive business, the Internet has made it easy and cheap to share that knowledge.[
F] Consequently, there is less need for a third-party authority, such as a pricey high-profile journal, to certify the quality of a study.
[G] Several publishers have responded by either reducing the subscription fee or providing discounted or fully waived article processing charges to institutional subscribers.
41
第41题答案是
- A.Preprints are becoming an increasingly important part of the research communications landscape and posting preprints allows researchers to share their research freely and rapidly with their colleagues and the broader organizations.
- B.In this internet age, the ongoing evolution to OA publishing is more compatible with the needs of both authors and funding agencies, at least in experimental sciences.
- C.And please don’t forget that scientists’ voices make a difference in decision-making processes, even at large, well-established publishers and funders.
- D.Therefore, rather than seeking post-publication judgment, most researchers want to get a stamp of approval from a recognized journal to certify that their manuscript meets the novelty and quality requirements associated with the brand name.
- E.While traditional publishers have long argued that screening, publishing, and distributing scientific work is expensive business, the Internet has made it easy and cheap to share that knowledge.
- F.Consequently, there is less need for a third-party authority, such as a pricey high-profile journal, to certify the quality of a study.
- G.Several publishers have responded by either reducing the subscription fee or providing discounted or fully waived article processing charges to institutional subscribers.
42
第42题答案是
- A.Preprints are becoming an increasingly important part of the research communications landscape and posting preprints allows researchers to share their research freely and rapidly with their colleagues and the broader organizations.
- B.In this internet age, the ongoing evolution to OA publishing is more compatible with the needs of both authors and funding agencies, at least in experimental sciences.
- C.And please don’t forget that scientists’ voices make a difference in decision-making processes, even at large, well-established publishers and funders.
- D.Therefore, rather than seeking post-publication judgment, most researchers want to get a stamp of approval from a recognized journal to certify that their manuscript meets the novelty and quality requirements associated with the brand name.
- E.While traditional publishers have long argued that screening, publishing, and distributing scientific work is expensive business, the Internet has made it easy and cheap to share that knowledge.
- F.Consequently, there is less need for a third-party authority, such as a pricey high-profile journal, to certify the quality of a study.
- G.Several publishers have responded by either reducing the subscription fee or providing discounted or fully waived article processing charges to institutional subscribers.
43
第43题答案是
- A.Preprints are becoming an increasingly important part of the research communications landscape and posting preprints allows researchers to share their research freely and rapidly with their colleagues and the broader organizations.
- B.In this internet age, the ongoing evolution to OA publishing is more compatible with the needs of both authors and funding agencies, at least in experimental sciences.
- C.And please don’t forget that scientists’ voices make a difference in decision-making processes, even at large, well-established publishers and funders.
- D.Therefore, rather than seeking post-publication judgment, most researchers want to get a stamp of approval from a recognized journal to certify that their manuscript meets the novelty and quality requirements associated with the brand name.
- E.While traditional publishers have long argued that screening, publishing, and distributing scientific work is expensive business, the Internet has made it easy and cheap to share that knowledge.
- F.Consequently, there is less need for a third-party authority, such as a pricey high-profile journal, to certify the quality of a study.
- G.Several publishers have responded by either reducing the subscription fee or providing discounted or fully waived article processing charges to institutional subscribers.
44
第44题答案是
- A.Preprints are becoming an increasingly important part of the research communications landscape and posting preprints allows researchers to share their research freely and rapidly with their colleagues and the broader organizations.
- B.In this internet age, the ongoing evolution to OA publishing is more compatible with the needs of both authors and funding agencies, at least in experimental sciences.
- C.And please don’t forget that scientists’ voices make a difference in decision-making processes, even at large, well-established publishers and funders.
- D.Therefore, rather than seeking post-publication judgment, most researchers want to get a stamp of approval from a recognized journal to certify that their manuscript meets the novelty and quality requirements associated with the brand name.
- E.While traditional publishers have long argued that screening, publishing, and distributing scientific work is expensive business, the Internet has made it easy and cheap to share that knowledge.
- F.Consequently, there is less need for a third-party authority, such as a pricey high-profile journal, to certify the quality of a study.
- G.Several publishers have responded by either reducing the subscription fee or providing discounted or fully waived article processing charges to institutional subscribers.
45
第45题答案是
- A.Preprints are becoming an increasingly important part of the research communications landscape and posting preprints allows researchers to share their research freely and rapidly with their colleagues and the broader organizations.
- B.In this internet age, the ongoing evolution to OA publishing is more compatible with the needs of both authors and funding agencies, at least in experimental sciences.
- C.And please don’t forget that scientists’ voices make a difference in decision-making processes, even at large, well-established publishers and funders.
- D.Therefore, rather than seeking post-publication judgment, most researchers want to get a stamp of approval from a recognized journal to certify that their manuscript meets the novelty and quality requirements associated with the brand name.
- E.While traditional publishers have long argued that screening, publishing, and distributing scientific work is expensive business, the Internet has made it easy and cheap to share that knowledge.
- F.Consequently, there is less need for a third-party authority, such as a pricey high-profile journal, to certify the quality of a study.
- G.Several publishers have responded by either reducing the subscription fee or providing discounted or fully waived article processing charges to institutional subscribers.
四、翻译题
根据题干要求，将材料翻译成中文。
46
The cultural wars raging across the United States have sadly found their way into the world of science.Some university science faculty and administrators are resistant to making changes that would allow more students from underrepresented groups to participate and thrive in the sciences.(46)[
The rationale for this opposition is often that “accommodating” legitimate social and academic needs of marginalized groups will lower the standards of mastery and excellence in these fields.]But this concern is just an excuse that protects faculty and institutions from having to do the work of correcting social injustices in higher education.(47)[
It’s common to hear that improving student diversity in higher education requires lowering the bar to admission and watering down the curriculum so that all students can pass the course of study.]But there are known methods of teaching that allow more people from different backgrounds to master scientific material without compromising the quality of education.These include a greater use of active learning methods that engage students with course material through discussions and problem solving.Making such reforms may require faculty to learn new ways of teaching.But is not that the job—to foster education for everyone? Another common refrain is that understanding science requires a high degree of skill in mathematics.Some faculty members said that students can’t pass their classes unless they have previously achieved a high score on standardized tests in math such as the SAT or ACT.That is a breathtakingly pessimistic view.(48)[
These high scorers are often students who’ve had the opportunities and resources to prepare for pre-college exams, which vast numbers of students have difficulty accessing.](49)[
Social psychologist Claude Steele and others have demonstrated repeatedly that stereotype threat—in which symbols and signals of exclusion create negative psychological effects—measurably impairs learning.]The most corrosive aspect of faculty members’ resistance to change is their sarcastic response to students’ requests for the use of inclusive language and terminology.Apparently, faculty cannot be inconvenienced to modify language in a way that creates a supportive learning environment.Rather than mocking the students for asking, educators should be inspired to learn new ways of communicating that make it easier for all students to learn.Institutions need to take responsibility for the needed changes and not put the burden on students.Opening the doors to science for everyone requires that faculty learn the most effective methods for teaching a diverse student body.(50)[
It’s more work on top of the many other faculty duties, so universities must provide resources to make the adjustments, such as providing time for faculty to redo their curricula and doing the hard work involved in having the faculty and institution make the cultural changes that students need.]And everyone should have more optimism about who can become a scientist.
（46）.第46题答案是
（47）.第47题答案是
（48）.第48题答案是
（49）.第49题答案是
（50）.第50题答案是
The rationale for this opposition is often that “accommodating” legitimate social and academic needs of marginalized groups will lower the standards of mastery and excellence in these fields.]But this concern is just an excuse that protects faculty and institutions from having to do the work of correcting social injustices in higher education.(47)[
It’s common to hear that improving student diversity in higher education requires lowering the bar to admission and watering down the curriculum so that all students can pass the course of study.]But there are known methods of teaching that allow more people from different backgrounds to master scientific material without compromising the quality of education.These include a greater use of active learning methods that engage students with course material through discussions and problem solving.Making such reforms may require faculty to learn new ways of teaching.But is not that the job—to foster education for everyone? Another common refrain is that understanding science requires a high degree of skill in mathematics.Some faculty members said that students can’t pass their classes unless they have previously achieved a high score on standardized tests in math such as the SAT or ACT.That is a breathtakingly pessimistic view.(48)[
These high scorers are often students who’ve had the opportunities and resources to prepare for pre-college exams, which vast numbers of students have difficulty accessing.](49)[
Social psychologist Claude Steele and others have demonstrated repeatedly that stereotype threat—in which symbols and signals of exclusion create negative psychological effects—measurably impairs learning.]The most corrosive aspect of faculty members’ resistance to change is their sarcastic response to students’ requests for the use of inclusive language and terminology.Apparently, faculty cannot be inconvenienced to modify language in a way that creates a supportive learning environment.Rather than mocking the students for asking, educators should be inspired to learn new ways of communicating that make it easier for all students to learn.Institutions need to take responsibility for the needed changes and not put the burden on students.Opening the doors to science for everyone requires that faculty learn the most effective methods for teaching a diverse student body.(50)[
It’s more work on top of the many other faculty duties, so universities must provide resources to make the adjustments, such as providing time for faculty to redo their curricula and doing the hard work involved in having the faculty and institution make the cultural changes that students need.]And everyone should have more optimism about who can become a scientist.
（46）.第46题答案是
（47）.第47题答案是
（48）.第48题答案是
（49）.第49题答案是
（50）.第50题答案是
五、写作Part A
根据材料要求写一篇作文。
47
You are supposed to write for the Postgraduates’ Association a notice to recruit an international student for a live-stream show held on your campus intended to promote traditional Chinese products to foreign viewers.The notice should include required qualifications for applicants and other information you think relevant.
You should write about 100 words on the ANSWER SHEET.
Do not use your own name in the notice.Use “Postgraduates’ Association” instead.(10 points)
You should write about 100 words on the ANSWER SHEET.
Do not use your own name in the notice.Use “Postgraduates’ Association” instead.(10 points)
六、写作Part B
根据材料要求写一篇作文。
48
Directions：
Write an essay of 160-200 words based on the picture below.In your essay, you should
1) describe the picture briefly,
2) interpret the implied meaning, and
3) give your comments.
Write your answer on the ANSWER SHEET.(20 points)
Write an essay of 160-200 words based on the picture below.In your essay, you should
1) describe the picture briefly,
2) interpret the implied meaning, and
3) give your comments.
Write your answer on the ANSWER SHEET.(20 points)
输入阅读码
查看答案与解析需要输入阅读码