题目
单选题 请阅读Passage 2。完成第小题。 The relationship between formal education and economic growth in poor countries is widely misunderstood by economists and politicians alike. Progress in both area is undoubtedly necessary for the social, political and intellectual development of these and all other societies; however, the conventional view that education should be one of the very highest priorities for promoting rapid economic development in poor countries is wrong. We are fortunate that is it, because new educational systems there and putting enough people through them to improve economic performance would require two or three generations. The findings of a research institution have consistently shown that workers in all countries can be trained on the job to achieve radical higher productivity and, as a result, radically higher standards of living. Ironically, the first evidence for this idea appeared in the United States. Not long ago, with the country entering a recessing and Japan at its pre-bubble peak, the U.S. workforce was derided as poorly educated and one primary cause of the poor U.S. economic performance. Japan was, and remains, the global leader in automotive-assembly productivity. Yet the research revealed that the U.S. factories of Honda, Nissan, and Toyota achieved about 95 percent of the productivity of their Japanese counterparts--a result of the training that U.S. workers received on the job. What is the real relationship between education and economic development? We have to suspect that continuing economic growth promotes the development of education even when governments don't force it. After all, that's how education got started. When our ancestors were hunters and gatherers 10,000 years ago, they didn't have time to wonder much about anything besides finding food. Only when humanity began to get its food in a more productive way was there time for other things. As education improved, humanity's productivity potential increased as well. When the competitive environment pushed our ancestors to achieve that potential, they could in turn afford more education. This increasingly high level of education is probably a necessary, but not a sufficient, condition for the complex political systems required by advanced economic performance. Thus poor countries might not be able to escape their poverty traps without political changes that may be possible only with broader formal education. A lack of formal education, however, doesn't constrain the ability of the developing world's workforce to substantially improve productivity for the foreseeable future. On the contrary, constraints on improving productivity explain why education isn't developing more quickly there than it is. The author holds in Paragraph I that the importance of education in poor countries_________. A． is subject to groundless doubts B． has fallen victim to bias C． is conventionally downgraded D． has been overestimated
单选题
请阅读Passage 2。完成第小题。
The relationship between formal education and economic growth in poor countries is widely misunderstood by economists and politicians alike. Progress in both area is undoubtedly necessary for the social, political and intellectual development of these and all other societies; however, the conventional view that education should be one of the very highest priorities for promoting rapid economic development in poor countries is wrong. We are fortunate that is it, because new educational systems there and putting enough people through them to improve economic performance would require two or three generations. The findings of a research institution have consistently shown that workers in all countries can be trained on the job to achieve radical higher productivity and, as a result, radically higher standards of living.
Ironically, the first evidence for this idea appeared in the United States. Not long ago, with the country entering a recessing and Japan at its pre-bubble peak, the U.S. workforce was derided as poorly educated and one primary cause of the poor U.S. economic performance. Japan was, and remains, the global leader in automotive-assembly productivity. Yet the research revealed that the U.S. factories of Honda, Nissan, and Toyota achieved about 95 percent of the productivity of their Japanese counterparts--a result of the training that U.S. workers received on the job.
What is the real relationship between education and economic development? We have to suspect that continuing economic growth promotes the development of education even when governments don't force it. After all, that's how education got started. When our ancestors were hunters and gatherers 10,000 years ago, they didn't have time to wonder much about anything besides finding food. Only when humanity began to get its food in a more productive way was there time for other things.
As education improved, humanity's productivity potential increased as well. When the competitive environment pushed our ancestors to achieve that potential, they could in turn afford more education. This increasingly high level of education is probably a necessary, but not a sufficient, condition for the complex political systems required by advanced economic performance.
Thus poor countries might not be able to escape their poverty traps without political changes that may be possible only with broader formal education. A lack of formal education, however, doesn't constrain the ability of the developing world's workforce to substantially improve productivity for the foreseeable future. On the contrary, constraints on improving productivity explain why education isn't developing more quickly there than it is.
The author holds in Paragraph I that the importance of education in poor countries_________.
请阅读Passage 2。完成第小题。
The relationship between formal education and economic growth in poor countries is widely misunderstood by economists and politicians alike. Progress in both area is undoubtedly necessary for the social, political and intellectual development of these and all other societies; however, the conventional view that education should be one of the very highest priorities for promoting rapid economic development in poor countries is wrong. We are fortunate that is it, because new educational systems there and putting enough people through them to improve economic performance would require two or three generations. The findings of a research institution have consistently shown that workers in all countries can be trained on the job to achieve radical higher productivity and, as a result, radically higher standards of living.
Ironically, the first evidence for this idea appeared in the United States. Not long ago, with the country entering a recessing and Japan at its pre-bubble peak, the U.S. workforce was derided as poorly educated and one primary cause of the poor U.S. economic performance. Japan was, and remains, the global leader in automotive-assembly productivity. Yet the research revealed that the U.S. factories of Honda, Nissan, and Toyota achieved about 95 percent of the productivity of their Japanese counterparts--a result of the training that U.S. workers received on the job.
What is the real relationship between education and economic development? We have to suspect that continuing economic growth promotes the development of education even when governments don't force it. After all, that's how education got started. When our ancestors were hunters and gatherers 10,000 years ago, they didn't have time to wonder much about anything besides finding food. Only when humanity began to get its food in a more productive way was there time for other things.
As education improved, humanity's productivity potential increased as well. When the competitive environment pushed our ancestors to achieve that potential, they could in turn afford more education. This increasingly high level of education is probably a necessary, but not a sufficient, condition for the complex political systems required by advanced economic performance.
Thus poor countries might not be able to escape their poverty traps without political changes that may be possible only with broader formal education. A lack of formal education, however, doesn't constrain the ability of the developing world's workforce to substantially improve productivity for the foreseeable future. On the contrary, constraints on improving productivity explain why education isn't developing more quickly there than it is.
The author holds in Paragraph I that the importance of education in poor countries_________.
A． is subject to groundless doubts
B． has fallen victim to bias
C． is conventionally downgraded
D． has been overestimated
题目解答
答案
参考答案：D
解析
考查要点：本题主要考查学生对作者在特定段落中的观点态度的准确把握能力，需要结合上下文理解隐含含义。
解题核心思路：
- 定位关键句：第一段中作者明确指出“传统观点将教育列为促进经济快速发展的最高优先级之一是错误的”。
- 对比选项：需区分“传统观点”与“作者观点”，注意作者对传统观点的否定态度。
- 排除干扰项：注意选项中“downgrade（低估）”与“overestimate（高估）”的语境差异，避免混淆。
破题关键点：
- 核心矛盾点：传统观点认为教育是经济发展的首要任务，但作者认为这一观点错误，强调“教育的作用被夸大”。
- 逻辑关系：通过“however”转折引出作者观点，后续内容（如“需要两代人才能见效”“工人可直接培训上岗”）均支持此结论。
关键句分析：
-
“the conventional view that education should be one of the very highest priorities for promoting rapid economic development in poor countries is wrong”
- 否定传统观点：直接指出将教育列为“最高优先级”是错误的。
- 隐含结论：传统观点高估了教育的作用，作者认为教育并非促进经济发展的关键。
-
“We are fortunate that is it, because new educational systems there and putting enough people through them to improve economic performance would require two or three generations.”
- 时间成本高：建立新教育体系需要两代人时间，无法快速见效。
- 反衬核心观点：说明传统观点对教育的期待不切实际，进一步支持“高估”论点。
-
“The findings...radically higher standards of living”
- 实证支持：通过“在职培训提升生产力”的研究结果，证明教育并非必要条件，间接否定传统观点。
选项对比：
- D选项“has been overestimated”：与“conventional view is wrong”“需要两代人时间”“可直接培训上岗”完全一致。
- C选项“is conventionally downgraded”：与“conventional view强调教育重要性”矛盾，错误。
- A、B选项：未抓住“传统观点与作者观点对立”的核心矛盾。