Passage One
Schools are not just a microcosm of society: they mediate it too. The best seek to alleviate the external pressures on their pupils while equipping them better to understand and handle the world outside—— at once sheltering them and broadening their horizons. This is ambitious in any circumstances and in a divided and unequal society the two ideals can clash outright.
Trips that many adults would consider the adventure of a lifetime—treks in Borneo, a sports tour to Barbados—appear to have become almost routine at some state schools. Parents are being asked for thousands of pounds. Though schools cannot profit from these trips, the companies that arrange them do. Meanwhile, pupils arrive at school hungry because their families can't afford breakfast. The Child Poverty Action Group says nine out of 30 in every classroom fall below the poverty line. The discrepancy is startlingly apparent. Introducing a fundraising requirement for students does not help, as better-off children can tap up richer aunts and neighbors.
Probing the rock pools of a local beach or practicing French on a language exchange can fire children's passions, boost their skills and open their eyes to life's possibilities. Educational outings help bright but disadvantaged students to get better scores in A-level tests. In this globalised age, there is a good case for international travel and some parents say they can manage the cost of a school trip abroad more easily than a family holiday. Even in the face of immense and mounting financial pressures some schools have shown remarkable determination and ingenuity in ensuring that all their pupils are able to take up opportunities that may be truly life-changing. They should be applauded. Methods such as whole-school fundraising, with the proceeds pooled, can help to extend opportunities and fuel community spirit.
But ￡3,000 trips cannot be justified when the average income for families with children is just over ￡30,000. Such initiatives close doors for many pupils. Some parents pull their children out of school because of expensive field trips. Even parents who can see that a trip is little more than a party or celebration may well feel guilt that their child is left behind.
The Department for Education's guidance says schools can charge only for board and lodging if the trip is part of the syllabus, and that students receiving government aid are exempt from these costs. However, many schools seem to ignore the advice; and it does not cover the kind of glamorous, exotic trips, which are becoming increasingly common. Schools cannot be expected to bring together communities single-handed. But the least we should expect is that they do not foster divisions and exclude those who are already disadvantaged.
What does the author say best schools should do?
该句指出，最好的学校寻求减轻学生的外部压力，同时让他们更好地了解和应对外部世界——同时保护他们，并拓宽他们的视野。句中的alleviate the external pressures替换B项中的protect…from social pressures，句中的better to understand and handle the world outside替换B项中的 enable them to face the world, 由此可知B项符合文意，是正确答案。第一段最后一句提到了阶层分化的不平等的社会，但并没有提及学校 应该让学生准备好挑战和改变这样的社会，A项属于无中生有，故排除。第三段的第一句和第二句提到 了出游可以提高孩子们的技能（skills），有助于聪明（bright）但经济条件不好的学生在A级考试中取得更好的成绩，但并没有提及最好的学校应该激发学生的聪明才智，文中也没有提到发展学生的体能，C项属于主观推断，故排除。第一段第三句提到这（寻求减轻学生的外部压力，同时让他们更好地了解和应对外部世界——同时保护他们，并拓宽他们的视野）在任何情况下都是一个宏伟（ambitious）的目标， 并没有提及最好的学校应该鼓励学生有雄心壮志，D项属于主观推断，故排除。
What does the author think about school field trips?
第三段提到，学习性质的出游有助于聪明但经济条件不好的学生在A 级考试中取得更好的成绩 ，但紧接着第四段首句提出转折（But）该段第二句提到，这样的旅行计划将许多（旅行费用占家庭平均收入比例较高的）学生拒之门外。第五段第二句提到许多学校似乎对教育部出台的在旅行方面有利于贫困学生的指导意见不予理睬，并且该指导意见也没有涵盖异国旅行，即费用较高的旅行。综上所述，作者认为学校组织的实地考察旅行会扩大经济条件优越和经济困难的学生之间的差距，故B 项正确。根据第五段最后两句可知，学校不能凭一己之力使各个社区（即不同经济背景的学生家庭）融合，但不应助长社会分化和排斥那些处于贫困中的人，因此A 项属于过度推断，故排除。第三段第一句提到实地考察旅行可以让学生发现生活中的各种可能，并且有助于提高经济困难家庭学生的成绩，但这不是作者的态度，由第三段中的a good case可知，这是家长和学校的想法，C 项属于答非所问，故排除。第二段最后一句提到富裕的孩子可以找到富有的阿姨和邻居帮忙，是指经济条件好的孩子可以向更富有的阿姨和邻居求助来获得捐款，从而达到校方的募捐要求，实现全校学生旅行的计划，因此D 项错误。
What does the author suggest can help build community spirit?
第三段最后两句提到，学校确保所有学生都能抓住可能真正改变人生的机会，全校募捐等方式 有助于激发集体主义精神，其中whole-school和all their pupils与D项中的all students on campus属于同义替换 ，因此D项是正确答案。需要注意的是正确答案中出现了表意绝对的all , 虽然一般情况下选项中如果 包含绝对的信息，则不选，但本题的绝对词能够在原文中找到依据，即原文中有同样绝对的信息出现， 因此看到表意绝对的词时，我们要依据原文做出判断：A项、B项和C项原文均未提及，故均排除。
What do we learn about low-income parents regarding school field trips?
第四段首句中的“家庭的平均收入刚刚超过3万英镑”提示接下来提到的 parents指的是低收入的家长。最后一句提到，即使是那些认为旅行只不过是聚会或者庆祝活动的父母也会因为孩子被落在后面而感到内疚，即这些家长认为旅行没有多大的好处，但也希望孩子参加，故A项是正确答案。原又第四段第三句提到了一些家长因为费用昂贵的实地考察旅行而把孩子从学校带走，但没有提及他们很难阻止孩子参加旅行，故B项属无中生有，应排除。C项利用cost作为干扰词，但与文中出现cost的两处信息均无关，属于无中生有，故排除。D项是利用第二段首句中的adventure设置的干扰项，与原文提到的许多成年人认为的人生中的冒险旅行在一些公立学校几乎成了常规这一信息没有关联，故排除。
What is the author's expectation of schools?
该句指出，至少我们应该期待的是，学校不会助长社会分化，排斥那些已经处于贫困中的人。 题干中的the author's expectation与原文中的we should expect属于同义替换，C项中的avoid…gaps与原文中的do not foster divisions都表示否定分化加剧，故C项是正确答案。第五段倒数第二句提到我们不能指望学 校单枪匹马把各个社区团结起来，故A 项属于正反混淆，并且原文中指的是将多个社区团结起来，而非将一个社区聚集在一起，故排除。B项原文未提及，故排除；D项的给予贫困学生优待是教育部的指导意见，不是作者的期望，应排除。