Section Ⅰ Use of English Directions: Read the following text. Choose the best word(s) for each numbered blank and mark A, B, C or D on the ANSWER SHEET. Pain Reprocessing Therapy (PRT) is a mind-body protocol. It 1 chronic pain in a surprising number of patients, according to a study published in JAMA Psychiatry. Chronic pain is usually "neuroplastic"—that is, it is not caused by 2 damage but is a learned response. If chronic pain is 3 a learned response, then suffering is also a (n) 4 response to a certain stimulus. 5 , it's a habit. Every habit needs a trigger. A trigger can come in the form of a cue in the outside environment. But sometimes triggers can come from 6 These are called "internal triggers," and they take the form of feelings, urges, or 7 . For example, worrying, putting pressure on yourself, and self-criticism all trigger fear, an uncomfortable feeling that can 8 neuroplastic pain. The pain isn't 9 by the position or activity; 10 , the brain creates an association between the two. And this association can make us think that there's something structurally 11 If learned associations can cause chronic pain, what other forms of suffering might they 12 ? Sometimes certain cues, such as being around certain people, can make you feel ways you don't always like or can't seem to 13 . It's not your 14 that you feel a certain way. But it is your responsibility to control what you do with that 15 . To 16 chronic pain, PRT breaks down those learned associations and, 17 , the "habit" of pain. If we learn to 18 the triggers that lead to our suffering habit, we can take steps to 19 the cue that leads to chronic pain or action we later regret. We can learn to 20 our uncomfortable feelings and emotions in a healthy, rather than hurtful manner.
Part A Directions: Read the following four texts. Answer the questions below each text by choosing A, B, C or D. Mark your answers on the ANSWER SHEET.
Text 1 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 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.
1. According to the first two paragraphs, the current research assessments ______.
2. The author suggests that the UK Research Excellence Framework is ______.
A.behind the times.
B.burdensome for universities.
C.complicated in procedures.
D.favorable to smaller institutions.
A B C D
B
[解析] 第三段首句指出当前评估体系的评估成本偏高，接着以英国的REF为例予以论证：该项目耗资大约2.46亿英镑，且大部分由大学承担(The lion's share意为the largest part of something“最大份额”)，其中包括参加审查小组的人员开支以及科研机构的培训成本，可见REF确实对大学造成了一定的经济负担，B项正确。 A项由第三段中的年份2014以及负面情感表达the question of costs、lack the resources过度引申出“REF落后于时代”，但文中并无相关信息支撑。C项由第三段④句中的碎片信息It included...and...including...、go to great lengths to prepare their staff臆测出“REF的流程复杂”，文意实际强调项目开支之大。D项与第三段⑤句“小型科研机构的资金资源有限，无力开展同级别评估”相悖。
3. 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.
A B C D
C
[解析] 第四段⑤句指出SCOPE框架建议资助者与被评估者携手设计评估内容，并敦促资助者与某一确定研究领域的评估专家合作，即SCOPE框架意在让所有研究利益相关者(funders、people being evaluated、experts)都能协同参与设计评估标准，C项正确。 A项将第四段④句所述主体由“科研竞争vs科研合作”窜改为“独立工作vs团队合作”。B项与第四段④句“科研竞争与科研合作需设置不同的评估标准(require a different set of criteria)”相悖。D项将第四段⑤句所述“与评估专家合作开展设计”夸大为“优先考虑专家建议”。
4. 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.
A B C D
B
[解析] 第五段强调指出各大学及科研机构协同参与设计评估标准具有重要意义——评估标准更具代表性，且能防止偏倚大型科研机构。第六段进一步说明建立多样化评估标准的重要性“可以确保弱势科研机构平等参与科研竞争”。由此可见，评估标准更具代表性是保障小型科研机构发展的关键所在，B项正确。 A项利用第六段中的research funding以及惯常思维设置干扰，文意实为“降低科研经费获取能力的权重将有利于小型科研机构”，而无关乎公共资金分配。C项将第六段首句中的“奖励科研合作(rewarding collaborations)”窜改为“提高科研合作意识”。D项由第六段中的obtain research funding、A broader range of、have opportunities to do well杂糅捏造而来，文中并未提及“为小型科研机构提供更易获得的资源”。
5. 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.
A B C D
D
[解析] 末段首句承上呼吁大型科研机构无需为这些变化而过分担忧，后三句总结观点“科研文化亟需体系变革，而科研评估则是体系变革的重中之重，科研评估标准应始终兼顾各方时下需求并反映科研本真，方能确保科研文化的不断发展”，也即科研文化的发展需要科研评估标准与时俱进，D项正确。 A项与第五、六段以及末段首句的言外之意“更具包容性/代表性的评估标准将不再偏倚大型科研机构，并将为小型科研机构提供一定保护”相悖。B项将末段论述主体由“评估标准&科研文化”偷换为“评估标准&研究质量”，但research culture≠research quality。C项混淆时态，将作者期盼(If...culture change will move one important step closer)窜改为既定现实。
Text 2 Labour's Nye Bevan came up with a brutally effective method to deal with doctors who opposed the setting up of the NHS in 1948, famously declaring: "I stuffed their mouths with gold." More than 70 years later, it seems that turning on the money tap is still regarded as the best way to get more output from the medical profession, with NHS chief executive Amanda Pritchard setting out an upgraded payment schedule for general practitioners (GPs)—doctors who are trained in general medicine and work in the local community rather than at a hospital. Her decision to reach for a carrot rather than a stick comes as GPs across the country have faced a growing protest from some patients about a collapse in the availability of face-to-face appointments, with claims of a knock-on impact being felt by already-overloaded hospital casualty departments. Anyone hoping to hear a Government minister take a sterner line with family doctors and simply demand they restore pre-Covid working patterns and service levels should probably brace themselves for a very long wait. The high prestige of the NHS and pretty much everyone who works in it has made it very much harder for any government to build up a head of steam for improving healthcare productivity. Ministers are simply no match for medics and their fearsomely well organised professional associations. And in fact it's not that GPs are lazy—given our ageing population, the volume of work is on a steep upward curve. Yet there are plenty of reasons to believe that better productivity could be attained via a more rigorous approach to management. For a start, we have somehow reached a situation where 90 per cent of the nearly four in ten GPs who are salaried, rather than contractors, are working part-time. And contrary to claims that GPs need to be paid more, it could be a sign that pay is now at such a high level that more and more doctors can afford to reduce their working days for lifestyle reasons. It is absolutely right that doctors should expect to be well paid given their immense expertise and life-saving skills. But there must also be a case for rationing the availability of part-time posts. Another aspect of the GP shortage is the sky-rocketing early retirement rate in the profession. Some medical bodies will tell you that this is largely due to excessive workloads. Yet the BMA acknowledges that much of the early retirement is motivated by the understandable desire of GPs not to exceed the pension pot lifetime allowance of a million pounds after which extra tax penalties kick in. So good and experienced GPs are being needlessly lost years early because of a combination of a generous pension scheme on the one hand and an ungenerous tax regime on the other. So long as we continue to see doctors as heroes we are unlikely to break the unhealthy chains that the medical trade unions exert over the healthcare system. Stuffing mouths with gold can clearly get things done. But it is a very expensive way to go on.
1. According to Paragraph 1, the upgraded payment schedule was intended to ______.
Text 3 For decades, campaigners have been clamouring for rewilding, or the restoration of natural ecosystems, as an urgent response to climate breakdown, and as a good in itself. And now it counts more than just environmentalists among its advocates—big business and the wealthy are getting involved too. Across the UK, hundreds of thousands of acres are being snapped up by businesses, billionaires and asset managers. They claimed that their intention was to restore the lands to their former magnificent natural state and repair the harm that man has inflicted on them. Whatever the virtues of their schemes, the practice of environmentally motivated private land purchases has attracted controversy, having been dubbed another form of "greenwashing". In many cases, land is bought and trees are planted to "offset" the owner's carbon emissions from elsewhere. It's easy to see the appeal from the point of view of corporations and the wealthy. But what are the consequences for the rest of us? The race for land to use for this kind of offsetting has been supercharged by a combination of government green subsidies and a global appetite for carbon markets. Land markets in the UK are lightly regulated, and tax breaks encourage investment in both land and property. This system fast-tracks sales of large areas of the UK with little scrutiny. Many of the landowners are colloquially and contemptuously titled "green lairds". Part of the issue lies in offsets themselves. Many activists demand that the UK reaches negative, not net zero, emissions—which will require significant domestic rewilding as well as huge financial flows to the global south. Offsets should be a last resort for residual emissions, reserved only to offset so-called hard to decarbonise sectors such as the steel industry. The current system provides impunity to corporations and the super-rich who can emit as much as they like so long as they plant enough trees later. This race for land will only accelerate and exacerbate the existing rural housing crisis, where prices soared in the pandemic as urban dwellers sought an escape to the country. The land bought for offsetting is often framed as derelict—an empty wilderness devoid of community. Rarely does corporate rewilding consider the displacement of communities living and working on the land. It is also having impacts on UK's agriculture. Rather than empower a generation of green lairds or eco-aristocrats, we should push for the democratisation of land ownership, using mechanisms such as community buyouts and restoring council or country farms, which are run and owned by local authorities and help new farmers get into the industry. Real land reform would root rewilding projects in people, securing good rural jobs in agro-ecology and conservation, producing sustainable food, livelihoods and a common connection to nature. The value of a real, democratic rewilding is that it doesn't just secure a home for beavers and sequestered carbon dioxide—but for people too.
1. What can be learned about rewilding from the first paragraph? ______
A.It has been protested by climate advocates.
B.It has attracted the attention of businesses.
C.It could bring about national land reforms.
D.It may threaten the balance of ecosystems.
A B C D
B
[解析] 首段②句指出，如今，再野化的倡导者不仅仅是环保主义者——大企业和富人也开始参与其中；随后③句介绍其具体表现“数十万英亩的土地正遭到企业、亿万富翁和资产管理人抢购”。可见，再野化引起了各大企业的注意，B项正确。 A项根据对首句中clamouring的理解设置干扰，但由首句后半句句意“气候活动家们将再野化视为应对气候崩溃的紧急措施”可推知，首句的clamouring传达的是气候活动家对再野化的支持态度。C项利用首段③句句意“企业、亿万富翁和资产管理人正纷纷抢购英国的土地”过度推导出“国家要插手管理土地市场并掀起改革”。D项利用首段末句的碎片信息the hatm that man has inflicted on them捏造而来，但根据首句可知，再野化指的是修复自然生态系统，与D项“威胁生态系统平衡”相悖。 [参考译文] 数十年来，活动家们一直吁求再野化，亦即修复自然生态系统，他们将其视为应对气候崩溃的紧急措施，况且其本身也是一件益事。如今，再野化的倡导者不仅仅是环保主义者——大企业和富人也开始参与其中。在英国各地，数十万英亩的土地正遭到企业、亿万富翁和资产管理人抢购。他们声称自己的目的是使这些土地恢复到昔日美丽的原始状态，修复人类给它们造成的伤害。 无论他们的计划有何优点，出于环保动机购买私人土地这一做法已被称为另一种形式的“漂绿”，招致了争议。在许多情况下，购买土地并种植树木是为了“抵消”土地所有者在别处产生的碳排放。从企业和富人的角度看，这其中的吸引力显而易见。但对我们其他人来说，会有什么样的后果呢? 政府的绿色补贴和全球对碳市场的渴求，共同推动了这场对用于抵消碳排放的土地的争夺。英国的土地市场受到的监管较为宽松，税收减免政策又鼓励投资土地和房产。这样的体制由于几乎零审查而加快了英国大片土地的出售。许多土地所有者被轻蔑地俗称为“绿色地主”。 部分问题在于碳抵消本身。许多活动家要求英国达到负排放，而不是净零排放——这就需要在国内大力实施再野化，以及向南半球提供大量的资金。碳抵消应该是用以解决残余排放的最后手段，专用于抵消所谓难以脱碳的行业的碳排放，比如钢铁行业。而现行制度却让企业和超级富豪们可以尽情地排放而不受惩罚，只要他们之后种了足够多的树。 这场土地争夺赛只会加速并恶化当前的农村住房危机——在疫情大流行期间，城市居民设法逃往乡村，从而导致当地房价飙升。为抵消碳排放而购买的土地通常被改造成荒废之地——一片没有社区的空旷荒野。企业实施再野化很少会考虑到在这片土地上生活和工作的社区的搬迁问题。这也对英国的农业产生了影响。 我们不应该赋权于新一代“绿色地主”或“生态贵族”，而是应该利用社区买断以及恢复市建农场或乡村农场(这些农场由地方当局经营和拥有，用来帮助新农民进入这个行业)等机制，推动土地所有权的民主化。真正的土地改革将使再野化项目扎根于人民，确保在农业生态和环境保护方面提供优质的农业岗位，生产可持续食品，实现可持续生计，并与自然建立共同联系。真正且民主的再野化的价值在于，它不仅为河狸和封存起来的二氧化碳提供了容身之处，而且也为人们提供了栖身之所。
2. What does the word "greenwashing" (Line 2, Paragraph 2) most probably mean? ______
A.Inequitable distribution of land.
B.Bad investment decision-making.
C.Hypocritical environmentalism.
D.Unhealthy business competition.
A B C D
C
[解析] 第二段首句先指出，出于环保动机购买私人土地的做法被称为greenwashing；随后②句解释greenwashing引发争议的原因：企业购地种树是为了抵消企业在他处产生的碳排放。总结可知，企业购地种树是以环保为噱头的虚假保护主义，C项是对此的精准概括，故正确。 A项由第二段首句的碎片信息private land purchases臆断出“私人购置土地是不公平的土地分配政策的体现”，但联系语境可知，greenwashing更侧重于指出“企业打环保幌子行排放之实”的做法，并非集中于探究“土地政策是否公平”。B项与第二段③句“从企业和富人的角度看，这其中的吸引力显而易见”所体现出的“购买私人土地对企业来说有利”之意相悖。D项由首段③句所提及的“企业、亿万富翁和资产管理人正纷纷抢购英国的土地”捏造而来，其错误之处同A项，greenwashing更侧重于指出“企业打环保幌子行排放之实”的举动，并非侧重描述购地竞争。
3. The race for land in the UK has been partly driven by ______.
A.the falling interest in carbon markets.
B.the recent decline in property prices.
C.the loose regulation of land markets.
D.the growth of the domestic economy.
A B C D
C
[解析] 第三段②句先指出“英国的土地市场受到的监管较为宽松”，③句进一步提及“这样的体制由于几乎零审查而加快了英国大片土地的出售”。综合推测可知，英国土地市场的监管松散，从而推动了这场购地竞赛，故C项正确。 第三段首句指出“全球对碳市场的渴求推动了这场土地争夺赛”体现了“全球对碳市场的渴求正在增长”的含义，A项与其相悖。B项错将文中的tax breaks...in both land and property理解为“房产价格下降”，文中提及的“税收减免政策鼓励投资土地和房产”实际指投资者在购置房产时可以享受一定的税务优惠政策(如减免财产税或交易税)。D项利用文中多次提及的“企业家、富人正在对英国土地进行抢购”这一现象臆断出“国内经济节节攀升”这一因素，但文中并无明确线索表明购地竞赛的推动因素是国内经济形势一片向好。
4. Part of the problem with the current rewilding projects is that they ______.
A.may prevent the UK from meeting its emissions target.
B.have imposed a significant burden on national finances.
C.could cause a massive increase in urban housing prices.
D.offer little compensation to the displaced communities.
A B C D
A
[解析] 第四段③④句指出，以购地种树抵消碳排放的政策本是专用于抵消难脱碳行业的碳排放，但现行的再野化项目却允许企业家们在种够了树之后尽情地排放。推断可知，英国当前的再野化项目实为掩饰企业碳排放的一种手段，未能帮助英国实现原本的减排目标，A项是对这一结论的合理推断，故正确。 B项根据第四段②句“向南半球提供大量的资金”臆断出“再野化给国家财政造成了巨大的负担”，但原文实为气候活动家的建议(Many activists demand that...)，文中并未明确指出政府是否采纳该建议或政府采取了什么行动。由第五段首句可知，当前的再野化项目促使各大企业家购地种树，致使英国的生活用地大幅缩减，而城市居民迁往农村，更是导致了农村住房紧张，故农村房价一再飙升，C项与该信息不符。D项根据第五段③句中的碎片信息Rarely、the displacement of communities捏造出“对搬迁的社区提供很少的赔偿”，原文实际指企业实施再野化很少会考虑到社区的搬迁问题，并未提及对搬迁的社区的赔偿问题。
5. The author holds in the last paragraph that rewilding projects should ______.
A.be carried out by local businesses.
B.keep nature from human activities.
C.aim at offsetting carbon emissions.
D.return ownership of land to people.
A B C D
D
[解析] 末段首句指出，我们不应该赋权于“绿色地主”或“生态贵族”代表的大企业及富人群体，而是应该充分利用地方当局的权力，推动土地所有权的民主化变革。D项是对原文push for the democratisation of land ownership的同义改写，故正确。 末段②句指出“真正的土地改革将使再野化项目扎根于人民”，可见，作者认为再野化项目应该由人民掌控，而非当地企业，故A项错误。B项与末段②句所体现出的“人类活动应该与自然环境高度融合协调”之意相悖。C项将“企业和富人呼吁再野化的目的是为了抵消碳排放”张冠李戴为作者的观点，作者实际在末段侧重于强调再野化项目应该扎根于人民，实现自然保护、农业发展以及农民就业的协调统一。
Text 4 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 fight 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 ticker 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.
1. 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.
A B C D
B
[解析] 首段①句指出亚马逊的最新举措“宣布年末关闭其医疗服务部门Amazon Care”，②句对这一事件进行评述，点明这是亚马逊尝试进军美国医疗体系的又一次失败。由此可见，亚马逊未能成功进军医疗保健领域，题干+B项是对首段①②句的概括说明，故正确。 A项由首段③句deliver、in 24 hours杂糅捏造出“及时提供服务”，但③句实为对亚马逊未能进军医疗领域的评述，指出亚马逊的商业模式不能顺利应用于医疗保健领域，而非亚马逊未能及时提供远程医疗服务。同理，C项由③句中deliver a pan to someone's apartment错误推导出“定制化服务”，D项由③句中but applying the same approach...a taller order。臆测出进军医疗行业需“翻新商业模式”，但均非文中所提及的亚马逊未能做到之事。 [参考译文] 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)。
2. Amazon Care didn't work out mainly because ______.
3. 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.
A B C D
B
[解析] 第四段①②句指出美国基础医疗的困境“酬劳最低的医疗领域之一”，③④句说明相应后果“独立执业被酬劳更高的大型机构吸纳→医疗保健的花销被推高→美国在医疗保健方面投入高、成效低”。由以上可见，美国基础医疗的成本效益不高，B项正确。 A项混淆主体，受利润驱动的是为提高酬劳而加入大型医疗机构的独立执业者(Independent practices are...absorbed…more easily make money on referrals)，并非整个美国基础医疗。C项由③句所述“大型医疗机构更容易通过向专科医生转诊赚钱”曲解出“基础医疗受到专科医生的强烈竞争”，但文中并未说明竞争关系。D项对③句Independent practices are increasingly being absorbed望文生义，由此得出“基础医疗正抛弃私人诊所”，文中实为独立执业出于盈利需要而被大型医疗机构吸纳。
4. 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.
A B C D
A
[解析] 第五段①句指出美国基础医疗出现困境的深层原因在于其财务体系。②③④句具体展开解释“为享有联邦医疗补助及联邦医疗保险的患者提供服务导致医院亏钱一医院需通过私人保险部分来填补亏空(即对有私人保险的患者收取更高费用)→私人保险公司(因成本上涨而)向投保者收取更高保费”，这一连锁反应导致⑤句所述“富裕地区滋养富裕医院，乡村医院纷纷倒闭”，可见医院正逐渐为富裕的病人服务，A项正确。 B项由第五段③句前半部分所述“数千项医疗服务价格是与保险公司协商的(Prices are negotiated with insurers...)”过度推测出“医院察觉到保险公司如何影响医疗价格”，但由该句后半部分可见，医院并不知道价格和真正成本之间的关联。C项混淆主体特征，由②句可见，医院对有私人保险的患者收取更多费用，并非对未投保的患者收取更高费用。D项与原文相悖，第五段②句中，医院称“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亏钱”，而非获利。
5. 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 C D
D
[解析] 末段①句先指出亚马逊的设想“凭借足够的资金、技术以及物流就能解决所有问题”，后说明现状“亚马逊并无希望解决这个烂摊子(this回指美国基础医疗)”。随后②句给出解释，与大多数在美国销售产品的公司相比，亚马逊确实出众，可被视为行业巨人(Goliath)。③句转折说明，但面对美国健康医疗体系的问题时，亚马逊就像是手拿湿意面做成的弹弓的大卫一样无力解决。划线句对应①句后半句内容，着力阐明亚马逊不能解决美国医疗保健的危机，D项正确。注：在有关大卫的神话故事中，歌利亚(Goliath)是与犹太人为敌的一个巨人。在为王之前，大卫用石头砸死了歌利亚。 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。
Part B Directions: In the following text, some sentences have been removed. For questions 41-45, choose the most suitable one from the list A-G to fit into each of the numbered blanks. There are two extra choices, which do not fit in any of the blanks. Mark your answers on the ANSWER SHEET. Most people seek out experts for health and science information they can trust. 1 They see an MD or PhD as a reliability indicator that distinguishes sound advice from nonsense or potentially dangerous ideas. But a number of individuals, especially an increasingly vocal cadre of social media users, don't always trust physicians and scientists. 2 Conspiracy theories circulate online about mad scientists seeking to control the masses. Showing off one's scientific credentials can do more harm than good when engaging people who hold these beliefs. Initiating conversations from an authoritative position may feel natural to the credentialed, but it can trigger a skeptical defense in some listeners that hinders a productive exchange. The subconscious response to people who doubt established science or medicine is to dismiss their concerns as absurd: trusting in expertise is common sense. But as Voltaire observed, "Common sense is not so common." 3 It also underscores the urgency of addressing rather than ignoring this problem. 4 Some may have had horrible experiences with the healthcare system. Some reject what today's experts say because yesterday's experts said the opposite—a normal occurrence in the process of science but one that nonetheless can come across as inconsistent to people unfamiliar with such dynamics. And then there are issues concerning pharmaceutical companies and governments the world over that have made serious blunders in the past. While these reasons do not justify dismissal of entire professions or of the biomedical enterprise, acknowledging them should engender the empathy you need to have a constructive dialogue with skeptics. According to some researchers, distrust of experts is compounded by coordinated " antiscience" attacks intended to advance political agendas. Certain pundits and politicians have amassed great popularity in their public dismissal of mainstream science and medicine. 5 Unsubstantiated claims gain an air of acceptance simply by being amplified and discussed, which elevates their promoters at the expense of experts. Many people have not had the privilege of learning how to critically evaluate this excess of conflicting information. Rather than blaming the victim for being lured away by a siren's song, we should learn to sing a more appealing tune. We got into science and medicine to help people, and like it or not, that includes those who have turned their back on the establishment. As we are moved to care for the ill or to research biological questions, we should be moved to care for those who have been ill-informed and to study the social phenomenon. When titles, positions, or credentials fail to persuade, we may still be able to make headway by showing more heart and less mind. A. The abundance of fake medicine and science currently succeeding in the marketplace of ideas demonstrates the human proclivity to reject the scientific method in favor of unestablished, or even disreputable, goods and services. B. Continuing to ignore this problem will undoubtedly deepen the disconnect between the public and experts, and will further lead to more potentially adverse situations in people's lives. C. They appreciate that scientists and physicians go through many years of schooling and intensive training to learn the intricacies associated with their specialty. D. Sharing science on social media means dealing with skeptics, but it also provides the opportunity to engage such people in thoughtful and productive science discussions. E. Whether their criticism of expertise is a genuine belief or merely a suspicious trick for attention or political gain, the end result is the same: the public gets confused. F. Rather, they view them as elites and members of the establishment. They are in bed with Big Pharma or spout alarmist news to fund their research. G. The solution lies in recognizing that people do not develop suspicions about scientists and medical experts in a vacuum.
1.
C
[解析] 空格上文指出，大多数人信赖专家，下文阐述人们信赖专家的原因“重视专业学位的权威性”，据此可推测空格内容为对“人们信赖专家”现象的进一步描述或初步原因分析。C项点明该现象的原因为“人们认可专家为获取专业知识而进行的多年学习和训练”，与之契合，且选项中appreciate符合上文seek out...trust所体现的对专家的信赖和理解的态度，many years of schooling and intensive training对应下文MD or PhD，故正确。 [参考译文] 大多数人向专家寻求他们可以信赖的健康资讯及科学信息。他们知道，科学家和医生都需要经历多年的学校教育以及强化训练才能习得与其专业相关的复杂知识。他们将医学博士或者博士学位当作是区辨合理建议与无稽之谈或潜在危险想法的可靠标志。 但也有许多人——尤其是一群言辞日益激烈的社交媒体用户——并不总是信任医生和科学家。相反，他们将医生和科学家视作精英人士和权势集团的成员，(认为)这些人为了筹措研究资金，或与大型制药公司沆瀣一气，或大肆宣扬耸人听闻的消息。疯狂科学家试图控制大众的阴谋论在网上流传。 与持有这些阴谋论观念的人打交道时，炫耀自己的科学资历可能弊大于利。从权威的立场开启对话，对有资历者而言也许很自然，但它可能会引发一些听众的怀疑性防御，进而妨碍有效交流。 对怀疑既定科学或医学的人的下意识反应是，将其忧虑视作荒唐之举而不予理睬：信赖专业知识本就是常识。然而，正如伏尔泰所言：“常识往往并不为大众所知”。目前，大量江湖医术和伪科学在思想市场上取得成功，这表明人们倾向于抗拒科学方法，而青睐未经证实甚至名声不佳的商品和服务。这也强调了解决而不是忽视这一问题的紧迫性。 解决之道在于认识到，人们不会凭空对科学家和医学专家产生怀疑。有些人可能在医疗保健体系中有过可怕的经历。有些人拒绝接受今天的专家的说法，是因为昨天的专家说的正好相反——这是科研过程中的一种正常现象，但对于不熟悉这种“科学证明的动态过程”的人来说，可能显得前后不一。此外，还有一些问题与各国制药公司和政府有关，它们曾在过去犯下严重的错误。这些原因虽然并不能为否定整个行业或否认生物医学事业的行为开脱，但认可这些原因会让你产生必要的同理心，从而与怀疑论者进行建设性的对话。 一些研究人员表示，意在推进政治议程的一致性“反科学”攻击加剧了对专家的不信任。某些专家和政客因公开否定主流科学和医学而广受欢迎。他们对专业知识的抨击无论是出于真实的内心想法，还是只是为了吸引注意力或攫取政治利益而施展的不光彩伎俩，最终的结果都是一样的：公众感到困惑。未经证实的论断仅仅通过被放大和被讨论就会获得一种被接受的感觉，这会以牺牲专家为代价而抬高鼓吹这些论断的人。许多人没有条件去学习如何批判性地评估这些相互矛盾的海量信息。与其责怪受害者被“海妖的歌声”引诱走了，我们不如学会唱出“更动人的曲调”。 我们从事科学和医学事业是为了帮助人们——包括那些抗拒权威的人，不论我们喜欢与否。当我们想要为病人提供救助或者是研究生物学问题时，我们也要给那些信息不畅的人提供关怀，要研究社会现象。当头衔、职位或资历无法说服他人时，我们或许仍然可以通过表现出更多的同理心、更少的逻辑思维来取得进展。
2.
F
[解析] 空格上文指出，许多人并不总是信任专家，下文描述不信任专家的表现“网络上流传着关于专家的负面言论”，由此推知空格内容涉及“关于专家的消极观点”。F项阐明怀疑论者对专家的消极看法，借由Rather与上文always trust physicians and scientists形成转折，且elites and members of the establishment、in bed with Big Pharma or spout alarmist news与下文control the masses语意方向一致，故正确。 虽然D项中social media于空格上文复现，skeptics、such people亦可对应上文提及的“并不总是信任医生和科学家的群体”，但该项的核心义“社交媒体对于分享科学知识和扭转科学怀疑论者的固守观念具有积极功用”恰与空格处应填入的“消极观点”相悖，且与空格下文“网络上流传着关于专家的负面言论”相互矛盾，故排除。
3.
A
[解析] 空格上文指出，“信赖专业知识”这一常识并未被大众普遍知晓，下文表示，空格处提及的信息凸显了解决“大众怀疑专业知识/反科学情绪”这一问题的紧迫性(this problem回指“对既定科学或医学的怀疑”)，据此推测空格内容指向“问题的严重性和普遍性”。A项所述现象“大量江湖医术和伪科学在思想市场上取得成功”恰好论证了问题的严重性和普遍性，且与空格下文构成...demonstrates...It also underscores...的递进衔接，故正确。
4.
G
[解析] 空格上文强调解决“大众怀疑专业知识/反科学情绪”这一问题的紧迫性，下文描述反科学情绪产生的种种原因，据此推测空格内容阐明“解决问题”与“为何产生反科学情绪”之间的关联。G项起到承上启下的作用，选项中The solution lies in...与上段末句the urgency of addressing...this problem构成“指出解决问题的紧迫性一说明解决问题的办法”的逻辑衔接，people do not develop suspicions...in a vacuum是对下文Some...Some...And then there are...的概述(人们的反科学情绪并非凭空产生，而是有诸多原因)，故正确。 B项中Continuing to ignore this problem虽可承接空格上文，但选项所传达的信息“继续忽视这一问题会导致大众面临更多困扰”与空格下文逻辑相悖：下文所述“大众经受的困扰”实际上推动大众产生亟需被解决而非忽视的反科学情绪，而非忽视其反科学情绪才会导致其面临困扰，故排除。
5.
E
[解析] 空格所在段的首句为总述句，指出“与政治相关的反科学论断加剧了对专家的不信任”，下文对其展开详述。空格上文(第二句)介绍某些专家和政客的反科学论断，空格下文点明这种论断带来的影响“反科学论断鼓吹者的地位得到提升，而对专家的信任惨被牺牲”，据此可推测空格内容分析“反科学论断如何影响对专家的信任”。E项的核心义“反科学论断导致公众对各种信息(包括主流专家观点)感到困惑”可解释说明反科学论断导致对专家的信任遭到削弱的原因，选项中their criticism of expertise与空格上文their public dismissal of mainstream science and medicine近义复现，the public gets confused与空格下文at the expense of experts形成因果逻辑，故正确。
Part C Directions: Read the following text carefully and then translate the underlined segments into Chinese. Your translation should be written neatly on the ANSWER SHEET. 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. 1 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. 2 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 isn't 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. 3 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. 4 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. 5 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.
[解析] ①该句采用it is+adj.+to do sth格式，意为“做某事是……的”，此处可根据汉语表达习惯转化为主动形式“我们经常听说……”。②hear的宾语从句中，主语为动名词短语improving...higher education，谓语requires的宾语为and连接的lowering the bar to admission及watering down the curriculum。固定搭配bar to sth表示“某物的障碍；某物的限制”，宾语1(lowering...admission)可结合语境译为“降低人学门槛”；固定搭配water down本义为“稀释”，此处取其引申义“削弱，减少(效果、影响)”，宾语2(watering...curriculum)即“简化课程内容”。③so that在此引导目的状语从句，可译为“这样”与上文完成逻辑顺承。pass意为“通过(考试、测验、课程)”，course of study意为“要学的课程”，pass the course of study可灵活译为“顺利完成学业”。
[解析] ①others与Social psychologist Claude Steele为同级并列，故翻译时可处理为“社会心理学家克劳德·斯蒂尔等人”；demonstrate意为“示范；演示”“证明；表明”，根据本句的学术研究语境可知取义后者。现在完成时描绘已发生的情况，故have demonstrated repeatedly可译为“已经反复证明”。②专有名词stereotype threat意为“刻板印象威胁”。破折号之间的定语从句作插入语，解释刻板印象威胁的特征，可补译出“指的是……”。插入语中，symbols and signals of exclusion为“名词+of+抽象名词”结构，相当于“形容词+名词”，故译为“不包容的符号和信号”。create意为“创造；创作”“引起；导致”，此处结合语境取义后者并灵活处理为“带来……”。
[解析] ①固定搭配on top of意为“除……之外”，此即“教师诸多任务之外的……”，为前后照应可将more work译为“另一项任务”。②such as例举大学应该提供的资源类型，可译为“比如”；动名词短语providing...curricula和doing...work并列举例大学应做出的努力。前缀re-意为“再；重新”redo即“重做；再做”，curricula为curriculum的复数，redo their curricula即“(教师)重新设置课程”。③doing the hard work及其后置定语involved in...changes直译为“付出……所需要的努力”，可省译并转化为主动形式“努力……”。固定搭配have sb do sth意为“使某人做某事”，cultural changes即“文化变革”，后置定语可整体译为“让教师和机构做出学生所需的文化变革”。
Section Ⅲ Writing
Part A
1. Directions: The meeting on garbage sorting in campus was held at your university last Sunday. You were assigned to make a summary of the meeting. In the meeting minutes, you should 1) record the basic information and main contents of the meeting, and 2) other relevant information. You should write about 100 words on the ANSWER SHEET. Do not use your own name. Use "Li Ming" instead.
[范文]
Minutes of the meeting on garbage sorting
Time: From 9 a. m. to 11 a. m. on March 20th, 2022 Place: Lecture Theatre 301 Present: Staff of Student Service Center, student representatives Presided by: Zhang Wei Summary The theme of this meeting was to implement garbage sorting and to build a clean campus. Three measures were put forward during the meeting. To begin with, education efforts stressing the importance of garbage sorting should be made across the campus to encourage students to take the trouble of sorting before throwing away their garbage. In addition, student volunteers should be deployed at garbage collection points for supervising and advising how to properly sort some garbage. Finally, more containers are needed for collection of each sort of garbage and for later processing procedures. The meeting was helpful for students to develop good habits of waste classification and also beneficial to resource conservation, creating a cleaner and more comfortable environment.
1. Directions: Read the following excerpt from an article and write an essay. In your essay, you should explain whether or to what extent you agree with the author. Support your argument with reasons and relevant examples. Write your answer in 160-200 words on the ANSWER SHEET. Generational labels have such a hold in the culture partly because they are a simple shorthand for talking about complex forces. According to a sociologist, the labels are a way to recognize how we are shaped by our times and to understand social change. The problem with the shorthand, though, is that it steers every conversation toward generalization, fairly or not. It flattens out the experiences of tens of millions of very different people, remove subtle differences from conversations, and imply commonality where there may be none. Yes, Gen Z grew up with the internet. No, not all of them think that being a TikTok star is the peak of success.
[范文] This excerpt examines a common social phenomenon: the use of generational labels such as post-90s, post-00s, Millennials and Generation Z. The author argues against using these labels to describe the seemingly shared characteristics of certain groups, saying that doing so will ignore individual differences and lead to sweeping generalizations. I'm in favor of this idea. Admittedly, generational labels provide a shortcut to understanding the socio-economic background of an age group. China's post-00s, for instance, are known to grow up amid the mobile internet boom, with their lives centered around smart devices. However, the indiscriminate use of such labels ends up reinforcing generational stereotypes, which may in turn obscure larger structural problems. As the post-00sgeneration more and more frequently hits the headlines by fighting against a toxic work culture, some employers jump to the conclusion that young people these days are far less industrious than prior generations, without considering whether their workforce management is outdated or how to improve their employees' motivation. In summary, generational labels do more harm than good. This article serves as a timely reminder that when someone is born matters less than generally thought, and that everyone should be treated more as an individual than part of a group.
深色：已答题 浅色：未答题