单选题 Is there any evidence that the standard of English as a foreign language has improved in the years since the Second World War? Naturally, as it is the world language, more and more people are taught it and use it. But do they speak it or write it or understand it better than their parents' or grandparents' generations?
Have standards declined? There is no objective way of answering this question. Tests of the traditional sort- compositions, precis writing, and so on--have always been subjective, so they cannot be used to judge whether people have got better or not over the years. But so-called objective tests are useless as a measure of progress too. They have not been used consistently in the same "concentration" over the period they have been in use, so there is no way of comparing exams "now" and "then". Moreover, usually in the form of multiple choice questions, they do not, by and large, test the things that really count in mastering a language. Even comprehension is a partly "creative" activity in real life, as we have to think of possible meanings for ourselves rather than have them suggested for us from outside. And people can be trained in the techniques of multiple choice, while others fail the tests because they have been led astray precisely by their "suggestive" nature, so they are not really objective at all. Weare left with only personal impression to go on.
My own is that, if anything, standards have declined somewhat in the last thirty or forty years, despite all the new theories, tools and techniques that have been developed. I am not alone in this judgment. In Sweden, for instance, Professors Johannes Hedberg and Gustav Korlen, two of the most experienced workers in the field; have on several occasions drawn attention to the lack of progress in the teaching of foreign languages since the late fifties. Yet Sweden is a sophisticated society with extremely high educational and academic standards, and very concerned not to be cut off from the rest of the world. If such a country cannot achieve advances in the study of foreign languages, it is unlikely that many, if any, others have done so.
Japan is another community where remarkably little progress has been made in the learning of English. It is probably as important for Japan as for Sweden to master that language, and there is much academic effort put into linguistic research of various kinds. Yet the average standard of language learning is abysmally low, particularly for such a highly literate and educated society. This is no doubt in part the result of a vicious circle: many of the professors of English at Japanese universities are themselves incapable of speaking or writing or even understanding the language well.

单选题 Which of the following is TRUE according to the passage?
A. Multiple choice questions are objective because people cannot be trained any techniques.
B. Sweden emphasizes the teaching of English without paying attention to other countries.
C. We have to depend on our own impression to judge the English standards.
D. Compositions are useful to test people's English ability because people have to write out their viewpoints.

单选题 The passage indicates that those who failed tests may be misled by the "suggestive nature" of
A. the choices. B. the leading materials.
C. the objective tests. D. the techniques of multiple choice.

单选题 The so-called objective tests cannot be used as a measure of progress because
A. the contents are changing all the time.
B. the tests do not always focus on the same thing.
C. the processes of scoring are different.
D. they contain too many reading comprehension questions.

单选题 What is the author's attitude towards present English standards?
A. Positive. B. Indifferent. C. Objective. D. Negative.

单选题 What might the author most probably continue to talk about in the following passage?
A. What's the most objective way to test one's English standards?
B. How to improve the present low level of language learning?
C. Why have the English standards declined?
D. What are the benefits if Japanese people can learn English well?