宫东风教授2016年考研英语课后学习计划

中国西安

第六周：（Week6:2015.10.3—10.9）

配套音频讲解 ：ht /s/1gdEVEGr

配套音频写作精讲 ：ht /s/1o6xdPFG

Ifyoudoubtyourself,you’vealreadylosttherace.——UsainBolt

10.3（周六）

阅读学习计划

收听《读记单词》一书第129页的逐句精讲。

做《考点与常见错误透析》一书第203页的，然后收听此书的相关精讲

写作学习计划

精听《写作突破100题》短文写作第29篇和应用文写作第29篇的。

抄写、背诵和默写《写作突破100题》短文写作第29篇和应用文写作第29篇。

。

10.4（周日）

阅读学习计划

收听《读记单词》一书第123页的逐句精讲。

做《考点与常见错误透析》一书第202页的，然后收听此书的相关精讲

写作学习计划

精听《写作突破100题》短文写作第30篇和应用文写作第30篇的。

抄写、背诵和默写《写作突破100题》短文写作第30篇和应用文写作第30篇。

。

10.5（周一）

阅读学习计划

收听《读记单词》一书第118页的逐句精讲。

做《考点与常见错误透析》一书第200页的，然后收听此书的相关精讲

写作学习计划

精听《写作突破100题》短文写作第31篇和应用文写作第31篇的。

抄写、背诵和默写《写作突破100题》短文写作第31篇和应用文写作第31篇。

。

10.6（周二）

阅读学习计划

收听《读记单词》一书第112页的逐句精讲。

做《考点与常见错误透析》一书第199页的，然后收听此书的相关精讲

写作学习计划

精听《写作突破100题》短文写作第32篇和应用文写作第32篇的。

抄写、背诵和默写《写作突破100题》短文写作第32篇和应用文写作第32篇。

。

10.7（周三）

阅读学习计划

收听本周英语二阅读2-12-1的逐句精讲。（请见本周所附的原文）

做英语二阅读2-12-1的，然后收听此文的相关精讲。

写作学习计划

精听《写作突破100题》短文写作第40篇和应用文写作第40篇的。

抄写、背诵和默写《写作突破100题》短文写作第40篇和应用文写作第40篇。

10.8（周四）

阅读学习计划

收听本周英语二阅读2-12-2的逐句精讲。（请见本周所附的原文）

做英语二阅读2-12-2的，然后收听此文的相关精讲。

写作学习计划

精听《写作突破100题》短文写作第41篇和应用文写作第41篇的。

抄写、背诵和默写《写作突破100题》短文写作第41篇和应用文写作第41篇。

10.9（周五）

阅读学习计划

收听本周英语二阅读2-12-3的逐句精讲。（请见本周所附的原文）

做英语二阅读2-12-3的，然后收听此文的相关精讲。

写作学习计划

精听《写作突破100题》短文写作第42篇和应用文写作第42篇的。

抄写、背诵和默写《写作突破100题》短文写作第42篇和应用文写作第42篇。

附：英语二2012阅读

Text1

hasneverbeenterriblypopularwithstudentsandevenmanyparents,butinrecentyearsithasbeenparticularlyscorned.Schooldistrictsacrossthecountry,mostrecentlyLosAngelesUnified,arerevisingtheirthinkingonthiseducationalritual.Unfortunay,L.A.Unifiedhasproducedaninflexiblewhichmandatesthatwiththeexceptionofsomeadvancedcourses,maynolongercountformorethan10%ofastudent’sacademicgrade.

Thisruleismeanttoaddressthedifficultythatstudentsfromimpoverishedorchaotichomesmighthaveincompletingtheir.Buttheisunclearandcontradictory.Certainly,noshouldbeassignedthatstudentscannotcompleteontheirownorthattheycannotdowithoutexpensiveequipment.Butifthedistrictisessentiallygivingapasstostudentswhodonotdotheirbecauseofcomplicatedfamilylives,itisgoingriskilyclosetotheimplicationthatstandardsneedtobeloweredforpoorchildren.

Districtadministratorssaythatwillstillbeapartofschooling;teachersareallowedtoassignasmuchofitastheywant.Butwithcountingfornomorethan10%oftheirgrades,studentscaneasilyskiphalftheirandseeverylittledifferenceontheirreportcards.Somestudentsmightdowellonstatetestswithoutcompletingtheir,butwhataboutthestudentswhoperformedwellonthetestsanddidtheir?Itisquitepossiblethatthehelped.Yetratherthanempoweringteacherstofindwhatworksbestfortheirstudents,theimposesaflat,across-the-boardrule.

Atthesametime,theaddressesnoneofthetrulythornyquestionsabout.Ifthedistrictfindstobeunimportanttoitsstudents’academicachievement,itshouldmovetoreduceoreliminatetheassignments,notmakethemcountforalmostnothing.Conversely,ifmatters,itshouldaccountforasignificantportionofthegrade.Meanwhile,thisdoesnothingtoensurethatthestudentsreceiveismeaningfulorappropriatetotheirageandthesubject,orthatteachersarenotassigningmorethantheyarewillingtoreviewandcorrect.

Therulesshouldbeputonholdwhiletheschoolboard,whichisresponsibleforsettingeducational,looksintothematterandconductspublichearings.ItisnottoolateforL.A.Unifiedtodoright.

ItisimpliedinParagraph1thatnowadays .

isreceivingmorecriticism

isgainingmorepreferences

isnolongeraneducationalritual

isnotrequiredforadvancedcourses

L.A.Unifiedhasmadetheruleaboutmainlybecausepoorstudents .

tendtohavemoderateexpectationsfortheireducation

haveaskedforadifferenteducationalstandard

mayhaveproblemsfinishingtheir

havevoicedtheircomintsabout

AccordingtoParagraph3,oneproblemwiththeisthatitmay .

resultinstudents’indifferencetotheirreportcards

underminetheauthorityofstatetests

restrictteachers’powerineducation

discouragestudentsfromng

AsmentionedinParagraph4,akeyquestionunansweredaboutiswhether .

itshouldbeeliminated

itcountsmuchinschooling

itcesextraburdensonteachers

itisimportantforgrades

Asuitabletitleforthistextcouldbe .

AFaultyApproachto

A edforPoorStudents

ThornyQuestionsabout

WrongInterpretationsofanEducational

Text2

Prettyinpink:adultwomendonotrememberbeingsoobsessedwiththecolour,yetitispervasiveinouryounggirls’lives.Itisnotthatpinkisintrinsicallybad,butitissuchatinysliceoftherainbowand,thoughitmaycelebrategirlhoodinoneway,italsorepeatedlyandfirmlyfusesgirls’identitytoappearance.Thenitpresentsthatconnection,evenamongtwo-year-olds,betweengirlsasnotonlyinnocentbutasevidenceofinnocence.Lookingaround,Idespairedatthesingularlackofimaginationaboutgirls’livesandinterests.

Girls’attractiontopinkmayseemunavoidable,somehowencodedintheirDNA,butaccordingtoJoPaoletti,anassociateprofessorofAmericanStudies,itisnot.Childrenwerenotcolour-codedatalluntiltheearly20thcentury:intheerabeforedomesticwashingmachinesallbabiesworewhiteasapracticalmatter,sincetheonlywayofgettingclothescleanwastoboilthem.What’smore,bothboysandgirlsworewhatwerethoughtofasgender-neutraldresses.Whennurserycolourswereintroduced,pinkwasactuallyconsideredthemoremasculinecolour,apasversionofred,whichwasassociatedwithstrength.Blue,withitsintimationsoftheVirginMary,constancyandfaithfulness,symbolisedfemininity.Itwasnotuntilthemid-1980s,whenamplifyingageanddifferencesbecameadominantchildren’smarketingstrategy,thatpinkfullycameintoitsown,whenitbegantoseeminherentlyattractivetogirls,partofwhatdefinedthemasfemale,atleastforthefirstfewcriticalyears.

Ihadnotrealisedhowprofoundlymarketingtrendsdictatedourperceptionofwhatisnaturaltokids,includingourcorebeliefsabouttheirpsychologicaldevelopment.Takethetoddler.Iassumedthatphasewassomethingexpertsdevelopedafteryearsofresearchintochildren’sbehaviour:wrong.Turnsout,accordingtoDanielCook,ahistorianofchildhoodconsumerism,itwaspopularisedasamarketingtrickbyclothingmanufacturersinthe1930s.

Tradepublicationscounselleddepartmentstoresthat,inordertoincreasesales,theyshouldcreatea“thirdstepstone”betweeninfantwearandolderkids’clothes.Itwasonlyafter“toddler”becameacommonshoppers’termthatitevolvedintoabroadlyaccepteddevelopmentalstage.Splittingkids,oradults,intoever-tiniercategorieshasprovedasure-firewaytoboostprofits.Andoneoftheeasiestwaystosegmentamarketistomagnifygenderdifferences–orinventthemwheretheydidnotpreviouslyexist.

Bysaying“itis…therainbow”(Line3,Para.1),theauthormeanspink .

cannotexingirls’lackofimagination

shouldnotbeassociatedwithgirls’innocence

shouldnotbethesolerepresentationofgirlhood

cannotinfluencegirls’livesandinterests

AccordingtoParagraph2,whichofthefollowingistrueofcolours?

Coloursareencodedingirls’DNA.

Blueusedtoberegardedasthecolourforgirls.

Whiteispreferredbybabies.

Pinkusedtobeaneutralcolourinsymbolisinggenders.

Theauthorsuggeststhatourperceptionofchildren’spsychologicaldevelopmentwasmuchinfluencedby

.

theobservationofchildren’snature

themarketingofproductsforchildren

researchesintochildren’sbehaviour

studiesofchildhoodconsumption

WemaylearnfromParagraph4thatdepartmentstoreswereadvisedto .

classifyconsumersintosmallergroups

attachequalimportancetodifferentgenders

focusoninfantwearandolderkids’clothes

createsomecommonshoppers’terms

Itcanbeconcludedthatgirls’attractiontopinkseemstobe .

fullyunderstoodbyclothingmanufacturers

clearlyexinedbytheirinborntendency

mainlyimposedbyprofit-drivenbusinessmen

wellinterpretedbypsychologicalexperts

Text3

In2010,afederaljudgeshookAmerica’sbiotechindustrytoitscore.CompanieshadwonpatentsforisolatedDNAfordecades–by2005some20%ofhumangeneswerepatented.ButinMarch2010ajudgeruledthatgeneswereunpatentable.Executiveswereviolentlyagitated.TheBiotechnologyIndustryOrganisation(BIO),atradegroup,assuredmembersthatthiswasjusta“preliminarystep”inalongerbattle.OnJuly29ththeywererelieved,atleasttemporarily.Afederalappealscourtoverturnedthepriordecision,rulingthatMyriadGeneticscouldindeedholdpatentstotwogenesthathelpforecastawoman’sriskofbreastcancer.ThechiefexecutiveofMyriad,a inUtah,saidtherulingwasablessingtofirmsandpatients

alike.

Butascompaniescontinuetheirattemptsat alisedmedicine,thecourtswillremainratherbusy.TheMyriadcaseitselfisprobablynotover.Criticsmakethreemainargumentsagainstgenepatents:ageneisaproductofnature,soitmaynotbepatented;genepatentssuppressinnovationratherthanrewardit;andpatents’monopoliesrestrictaccesstogenetictestssuchasMyriad’s.Agrowingnumberseemtoagree.Lastyearafederaltask-urgedreformforpatentsrelatedtogenetictests.InOctobertheDepartmentofJusticefiledabriefintheMyriadcase,arguingthatanisolatedDNAmolecule“isnolessaproductofnature…thanarecottonfibresthathavebeenseparatedfromcottonseeds.”

Despitetheappealscourt’sdecision,bigquestionsremainunanswered.Forexample,itisunclearwhetherthesequencingofawholegenomeviolatesthepatentsofindividualgeneswithinit.Thecasemayyetreach

theSupremeCourt.

Astheindustryadvances,however,othersuitsmayhaveanevengreaterimpact.CompaniesareunlikelytofilemanymorepatentsforhumanDNAmolecules–mostarealreadypatentedorinthepublic.Firmsarenowstudyinghowgenesinct,lookingforcorrelationsthatmightbeusedtodeterminethecausesofdiseaseorpredictadrug’sefficacy.Companiesareeagertowinpatentsfor“connectingthedots,”exinsHansSauer,alawyerfortheBIO.

Theirsuccessmaybedet