Imagine you are checking out at a hotel. Play your role according to the clues given in brackets.Receptionist: Good morning. Can I help you, madam? You: 1(表示要结账。)Receptionist: OK. Would you please tell me your name and room number? You: Nancy Birley, Room 4608.Receptionist: Yes,Miss Birley.2(说明客人是三天前入住的。) You: That's right.3(询问每晚的房费是多少。)Receptionist: 59 per night. You stayed here for 3 days,that is 177.4(询问客人如何付款。) You: In cash, please. Here you are, 200.Receptionist: Thank you.5(向客人交代所找的零钱。)

Public health Public health is not just about protecting 1)_ from illness. Public health is about preventing illness through activities like 2) _. It's also about promoting educational programs like 3) _ to encourage healthy behavior. Problems in public health are analyzed at a4)_ level. . If somebody suffers from food poisoning, the treatment they receive belongs to 5)_ rather than public health. It's the responsibility of all 6) _ to make public health programs work. Public health aims to make sure that health care is 7)_.

I. You will watch a video on changes in the job market and skills needed for successful future professionals. Discuss with your partner, anticipate what changes and skills might be mentioned and write down some key words. Then watch the video and check your predictions.Changes in the job market:

During _ borrowed words started to show up which demonstrated the further development of activities involving translation . A the Xia Dynasty B the Shang Dynasty C the Zhou & Qin Dynasties D the Eastern Han Dynasty

Obama’s War on Schools The No Child Left Behind Act has been deadly to public education. So why has the president embraced it Over the past year, I have traveled the nation speaking to nearly 100,000 educators, parents, and school-board members. No matter the city, state, or region, those who know schools best are frightened for the future of public education. They see no one ina position of leadership who understands the damage being done to their schools by federal policies. They feel keenly betrayed by President Obama. Most voted for him, hoping he would reverse the ruinous No Child Left Behind (NCLB) legislation of George W. Bush. But Obama has not sought to turn back NCLB. His own approach, called Race to the Top, is even more punitive than NCLB. And though over the past week the president has repeatedly called on Congress to amend the law, his proposed reforms are largely cosmetic (装点门面的) and would leave the worst aspects of NCLB intact. The theory behind NCLB was that schools would improve dramatically if every child in grades 3 to 8 were tested every year and the results made public. Texas did exactly this, and advocates claimed it had seen remarkable results: test scores went up, the achievement gap between students of different races was closing, and graduation rates rose. At the time, a few scholars questioned the claims of a "Texas miracle," but Congress didn’t listen. In fact, the "Texas miracle" never happened. On federal tests, the state’s reading scores for eighth-grade students were flat from 1998 to 2009. And just weeks ago, former first lady Barbara Bush wrote an opinion piece in the Houston Chronicle opposing education budget cuts on the grounds that Texas students ranked in the bottom 10 percent in math and literacy nationally. After two decades of testing and accountability, Texas students have certainly not experienced a miracle when judged by the very measures that were forced on students across the nation. NCLB required that 100 percent of students be proficient in reading and math by 2014. Any school not on track to meet this utopian goal―one never reached by any nation in the world―would face a series of sanctions, culminating in the firing of the staff and the closing of the school. As 2014 nears, tens of thousands of schools have been branded as failures, thousands of educators have been fired, and schools that were once the anchors of their communities are closing, replaced in many cases by privately managed schools. NCLB turns out to be a timetable for the destruction of public education. Because of the punitive character of the federal law, educators struggle to meet their testing targets. Many districts have reduced time for the arts, history, science, civics, foreign languages, physical education, literature, and geography. They devote more time to preparing students for the state tests in basic skills, which will determine the life or death of their schools. Some districts, such as Atlanta, have experienced cheating scandals. Some states, such as New York, lowered the passing mark on their tests to increase the number of students who were allegedly proficient. Standardized-test scores can provide useful information about how students are doing. But as soon as the scores are tied to firing staff, giving bonuses, and closing schools, the measures become the goal of education, rather than an indicator. So now come President Obama and Education Secretary Arne Duncan with their Race to the Top program. The administration invited the states to compete for 4.3 billion in a time of fiscal distress. To qualify, states had to agree to evaluate teachers by student test scores, to award bonuses to teachers based on student scores, to permit more privately managed charter schools, and to "turn around" low-performing schools by such methods as firing the staffs and closing the schools. Race to the Top went even beyond NCLB in its reliance on test scores as the ultimate measure of educational quality. It asserts that teachers alone―not students or families or economic status―are wholly responsible for whether test scores go up or down. Now teachers rightly feel scapegoated (被当作替罪羊) for conditions that are often beyond their control. They know that if students don’t come to school regularly, if they are chronically ill, if they are homeless or hungry, their test scores will suffer. But teachers alone are accountable. The Obama agenda for testing, accountability, and choice bears a striking resemblance to the Republican agenda of the past 30 years, but with one significant difference. Republicans have traditionally been wary of federal control of the schools. Duncan, however, relishes the opportunity to promote his policies with the financial heft of the federal government. The confluence between the Obama agenda and the Republican agenda became clear in the fall of 2009, when Duncan traveled the country with Newt Gingrich to promote Race to the Top. And on March 5 of this year, President Obama flew to Florida to celebrate the test-score gains at a high school in Miami with former governor Jeb Bush, one of the nation’s most vocal proponents of conservative approaches to education reform. In his recent State of the Union address, Obama rightly asserted that we must encourage innovation, imagination, and creativity so we can "win the future". But the federal government’s emphasis on standardized tests subverts (破坏) that lofty goal. Drilling children on how to take tests discourages innovation and creativity, punishes divergent thinking, and prioritizes skills over knowledge. And the endless hours devoted to test preparation certainly deaden students’ interest in school. Emboldened (鼓励) by the Obama administration, as well as by hundreds of millions of dollars from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, many districts and states now plan to use test scores to evaluate teachers. Most of our nation’s leading testing experts think this is a risky path. Teachers see these measures as an attack on their profession. Recently elected governors such as Scott Walker in Wisconsin and John Kasich in Ohio are ratcheting up the attack, pushing hard to end teachers’ collective-bargaining rights, while Mayor Michael Bloomberg in New York City, Gov. Chris Christie in New Jersey, and Gov. Rick Scott in Florida would like to eliminate seniority and due-process rights for teachers. Destroying the unions will silence the only organized voice that opposes draconian cuts to education budgets. Without that voice, schools can expect larger class sizes and reduced funding for the arts, school nurses, libraries, and other programs. Many of our nation’s top teachers―some with National Board Certification―are so disgusted by the attacks on public education that they are planning a march on Washington in July. They plan to demand equitable funding for all public schools, an end to using test scores to punish schools and teachers, and involvement of parents and teachers in the decisions that affect their schools. The only question is whether President Obama, Secretary Duncan, and Congress will hear their message about what’s best for our children―and best for our country.What is said in Barbara Bush’s opinion piece A. Test scores of Texas students have gone up surprisingly.B. Texas students performed poorly in math and literacy.C. Testing is efficient in improving students’ math and literacy.D. Students were heavily burdened with local and national tests.

For-Profit Colleges Clean Up Their Acts... Sort Of The image of the nation’s for-profit colleges has taken a beating in recent months. Senate hearings and the media have been filled with stories of schools engaging in questionable business practices, including accusations that some colleges pushed students to take loans they couldn’t afford and misled applicants about the potential for getting a high-paying job after receiving a degree. And the bad press isn’t over yet. Last week the Florida attorney general’s(检察长) office announced an investigation into whether for-profit higher-education schools―including Kaplan Inc., the University of Phoenix, Everest University, Med Vance Institute, and Argosy University―had made misrepresentations to students. Faced with mounting criticism, two of the largest for-profit colleges have announced reforms. Starting in September the 470,000-student-strong University of Phoenix stopped paying its admissions officers based on the number of students they sign up, eliminating an incentive some see for those officers to mislead applicants or pressure them to sign paperwork. The school will also put all prospective new students through a three-week, tuition-free "orientation" course designed to help them decide whether they’re ready for the commitments that come with their studies. In the past there have been reports of cash-strapped students talked into signing up when they may not have been ready―many may be behind financially or educationally, but they still end up on the hook for making school payments they can’t really afford. "The orientation program enables incoming students to make an informed decision about attending University of Phoenix and experience the strictness of the college classroom without incurring a financial burden," says University of Phoenix spokesman Manny Rivera. Kaplan, one of the University of Phoenix’s larger competitors, announced a similar free orientation course in September. New Kaplan students must take the course and pass an "academic assessment" in order to enroll in a degree program. The federal government is also stepping in: on Nov. 1 the Department of Education will announce a set of new rules that for-profit schools must follow, including an industry wide prohibition against incentives to admissions officers for recruiting more students and a revision to policies that have allowed schools to change the way they count credit hours in order to let students borrow more federal cash. Advocates praise these reforms. "It’s inspiring to see the Education Department regulating this industry, whereas for a very long time there was no supervision," says Steve Burd of the New America Foundation’s watchdog blog, Higher Ed Watch. The changes proposed by the schools are "a step in the right direction," adds Ben Miller, of the think tank Education Sector. But it’s unclear whether the rest of the industry will follow the lead of these bigger for-profit schools, and whether the latest reforms will effectively address the industry’s core problem: graduates with high debt and, critics say, an education that doesn’t adequately prepare them for the workplace. Trade associations that represent the schools are lobbying against further changes the Department of Education is considering, including tighter monitoring of how students develop after graduation. Schools say changes of this sort are unnecessary, but Education Secretary Arne Duncan argues they are needed "to make sure that taxpayer dollars are well spent" (taxpayer-backed student loans are by far the largest revenue source for the industry). "These schools―and their investors―benefit from billions of dollars in subsidies from taxpayers and, in return, taxpayers have a right to know that these programs are providing solid preparation for a job," Duncan said in a July statement. Reforms like orientation programs end up reducing the number of students who enter a school, and that’s not usually good for business. University of Phoenix and Kaplan have made these changes anyway, but that’s in part because they have a financial motivation to do so. both receive federal loans and grants at a rate that approaches 90 percent of their revenues. If they exceed that 90 percent threshold two years in a row, the government will stop approving loans for their new students. "Essentially the school would have to shut down," explains industry analyst Matt Snowling of FBR Capital Markets. In order to avoid that scene, schools have to reduce the number of high-debt students on their rolls, and orientation courses that force students to consider their ability to pay are one way to do that. The news that the University of Phoenix would slow its enrollment has understandably worried investors. When the company acknowledged on a call with analysts this month that its new policies would cause student enrollment to decline, its stock price dipped 23 percent in a single day. "University of Phoenix appears to be engaged in a serious effort to reform itself," says Burd. "It is admirably doing this in the face of fierce resistance from Wall Street, making it extremely unlikely that the rest of the industry will follow suit." Miller, the policy analyst, notes that all for-profit schools could require that students take a cooling-off period of a few days before they enroll, which, like University of Phoenix’s and Kaplan’s reforms, would ensure that they think it over before borrowing for school, but that hasn’t happened yet. Other federally required changes that could happen down the road include so-called gainful-employment rules that would force colleges to monitor how many of their graduates are actually employed and can afford to pay back their loans. If a college is graduating too many students who can’t, it might not be able to get federal loans for new students the following year (loans for existing students would not be affected) . Under these regulations, the system would also limit the amount of debt for students who graduate from for-profit colleges, but it would also limit the number of low-income students who can attend them. Under pressure from for-profit schools, the Department of Education has agreed to delay the "gainful employment" rules at least until next year while it holds more public hearings. In the meantime, students ought to remain cautious about the commitment they’re making in signing up for a for-profit college. Though Kaplan and University of Phoenix’s orientation programs provide students with some time to reconsider their decision, no industry wide rule is laid down. So students looking to start careers with degrees from for-profit institutions should take their time before signing that promissory note.In the set of new rules, the for-profit schools will revise policies about credit hours so that ______. A. students can graduate earlier with less loans to payB. students will not be able to borrow more federal cashC. students can transfer to cheaper schools more easilyD. students will have more time to work part-time jobs

请结合写作要求对材料中出现的主体段内容进行排序。Directions: For this part, you are allowed 30 minutes to write an essay commenting on short-video platforms, such as TikTok. You should write at least 120 words but no more than 180 words.①Some advantages of short-video platforms will be listed in this paragraph. ②Secondly, short-video platforms open up a new channel for sellers to sell goods. ③With short-video platforms, sellers can make videos related to their products and upload them to the platforms, which can clearly show the goods to customers in a short time. ④Firstly, short-video platforms provide people with a free way to learn. Quite a lot of free video resources are available on the platforms, which creates conditions for acquiring new knowledge at zero cost. ⑤In this way, their products may be sold to their fans or people who watch the video very quickly.请根据写作要求作答。A、①⑤②③④B、①③②④⑤C、①④②③⑤

Use the word “like” or “unlike” to rewrite the following sentences after the models.Model 1: The coelacanth was thought to have gone extinct, but we have known for centuries that giant squid have existed in our oceans’ depths.→ Unlike the coelacanth, which was thought to have gone extinct, we have known for centuries that giant squid have existed in our oceans’ depths. (Para. 2)Model 2: Many of his peers wanted to pursue an American Dream in the late 1980s…, and Yu wanted to do that too…→ Like many of his peers, Yu wanted to pursue an American Dream in the late 1980s … (Reading 2, Unit 1, Book 1)(1) His father is intelligent. But he lacks intelligence.________________________________________(2) Most computer systems on the list are easy to install. But this one is not.____________________________________________________________(3) Most rivers in China run from west to east, and the Yellow River runs that way too._________________________________________________________(4) In their early youth, Tom’s two brothers showed an interest in politics. But Tom took an interest in music.__________________________________________________________

dispatchA. 派遣；发送B. 拆开；拆卸C. 破坏，毁掉，摧毁D. 分发，分配，发放

*本题备选项需点击原文处获取，在列表上点选即可。 Children are natural-born scientists. They have (36)_____ minds, and they aren’t afraid to admit they don’t know something. Most of them, (37)_____, lose this as they got older. They become self-conscious and don’t want to appear stupid. Instead of finding things out for themselves they make (38)_____ that often turn to be wrong. So it’s not a case of getting kids interested in science. You just have to avoid killing the (39)_____ for learning that they were born with. It’s no coincidence that kids start deserting science once it becomes formalised. Children naturally have a blurred approach to (40)_____ knowledge. They see learning about science or biology or cooking as all part of the same act—it’s all learning. It’s only because of the practicalities of education that you have to start breaking down the curriculum into specialist subjects. You need to have specialist teachers who (41)_____ what they know. Thus once they enter school, children begin to define subjects and erect boundaries that needn’t other-wise exist. Dividing subjects into science, maths, English, etc. is something we do for (42)_____. In the end it’s all learning, but many children today (43)_____ themselves from a scientific education. They think science is for scientists, not for them. Of course we need to specialise (44)_____. Each of us has only so much time on Earth, so we can’t study everything. At 5 years old, our field of knowledge and (45)_____ is broad, covering anything from learning to walk to learning to count. Gradually it narrows down so that by the time we are 45, it might be one tiny little comer within science.