单选题 The Supreme Court will hear arguments about the use of public money for the private schooling of children with special needs. It's interesting to note what's not at issue: namely, that when a public school system is unable to provide an appropriate education, it is obligated to pay the costs of private school. Too bad poor children don't have that unshakable right; if they did, there would be no controversy about the District program that gives vouchers to low-income children to attend private schools.
The case to be heard by the court hinges on whether parents have to enroll a child with special needs in public school before the child can attend private school at public expense. Special-education advocates say students shouldn't have to waste time before being placed in a setting that best suits their needs, while school boards worry about a ruling that could amount to an unfettered fight to private schooling at public expense. What strikes us about the emotionally charged debate is the acceptance by both sides that sometimes it is appropriate to use public money to pay for a child to go to a private school. So, why all the arguments about the approximately$14 million for a federally funded program that lets 1,700 D. C. students attend private schools instead of failing public schools?
To hear critics of the D. C. Opportunity Scholarship Program tell it, the use of public money for private schooling is as unprecedented as it is undesirable. In addition to the billions of dollars spent annually on private school tuitions for students with disabilities, private schools get public money for books, technology and teacher training. As long as the money is seen as benefiting the child, it is considered a proper, even desirable, use of public dollars.
Don't get us wrong. We're not arguing for the unilateral right of parents to enroll their sons and daughters in any school they wish with the taxpayers picking up the bill. Abuse of special-education policies has contributed to increased costs that threaten to take needed money from general public education funds. Safeguards are needed. Public schools should be pressed to do a better job for students with disabilities and students without. But there are schools in Washington where statistics show that failure is almost guaranteed. If a school system can't educate a child—whether because of acute special needs or its own historical failings—why should that child not have options for a " free appropriate public education " ?

单选题 What can be inferred from the arguments at the Supreme Court?
[A] Too much public money is put into the private schools for children with special needs.
[B] Public schools are of very poor education quality.
[C] People consider it is reasonable to use public money for certain students' private schooling.
[D] People find it is amusing arguing about spending public money for private schooling.

单选题 Which of the following is TRUE about the special-education advocates' opinion?
[A] They strongly believe that children should be put directly into the private schools.
[B] They think that children should try out both places before making decisions.
[C] They don't feel there is still a need to argue about this problem any more.
[D] They hold the opinion that parents can make decisions for their children.

单选题 What does the word " unfettered " (Line 4, Para. 2)mean?
[A] Unlimited. [B] Extreme. [C] Unwanted. [D] Ultimate.

单选题 What can we infer from the last paragraph?
[A] While putting public money in private schools, public schools can also benefit.
[B] Public schools only consider the need of students without disabilities.
[C] It is children's right to choose private schools when public ones aren't good enough.
[D] There is evidence to show that public schools in Washington D. C. are terrible.

单选题 What is the author's attitude toward using public money to pay for the private schooling of the disabled students?
[A] Passionate. [B] Supportive. [C] Confused. [D] Hesitant.