{{B}}Passage Two{{/B}} Lead deposits, which accumulated in soil and snow during the 1960's and 70's,were primarily the result of leaded gasoline emissions originating in the United States. In the twenty years that the Clean Air Act has mandated unleaded gas use in the United States, the lead accumulation worldwide has decreased significantly. A study published recently in the journal Nature shows that air-borne leaded gas emissions from the United States were the leading contributor to the high concentration of lead in the snow in Greenland. The new study is a result of the continued research led by Dr. Charles Boutron, an expert on the impact of heavy metals on the environment at the National Center for Scientific Research in France. A study by Dr. Boutron published in 1991 showed that lead levels in arctic(北极的) snow were declining. In his new study, Dr. Boutron found the ratios of the different forms of lead in the leaded gasoline used in the United States were different from the ratios of European, Asian and Canadian gasolines and thus enabled scientists to differentiate(区分) the lead sources. The dominant lead ratio found in Greenland snow matched that found in gasoline from the United States. In a study published in the journal Ambio, scientists found that lead levels in soil in the Northeasten United States had decreased markedly since the introduction of unleaded gasoline. Many scientists had believed that the lead would stay in soil and snow for a longer period. The authors of the Ambio study examined samples of the upper layers of soil taken from the same sites of30 forest floors in New England, New York and Pennsylvania in 1980 and in 1990. The forest environment processed and redistributed the lead faster than the scientists had expeeted. Scientists say both studies demonstrate that certain parts of the ecosystem(生态系统) respond rapidly to reductions in atmospheric pollution, but that these findings should not be used as a license to pollute.

{{B}}Passage Three{{/B}} In recent years, railroads have been combining with each other, merging into super systems, causing heightened concerns about monopoly. As recently as 1995, the top four railroads accounted for under 70 per cent of the total ton-miles moved by rails. Next year, after a series of mergers is completed, just four rail roads will control well over 90 percent of all the freight moved by major rail carriers. Supporters of the new super systems argue that these mergers will allow for substantial cost reductions and better coordinated service. Any threat of monopoly, they argue, is removed by fierce competition from trucks. But many shippers complain that for heavy bulk commodities traveling long distances, such as coal, chemicals, and grain, trucking is too costly and the railroads therefore have them by the throat. The vast consolidation within the rail industry means that most shippers are served by only one rail company. Railroads typically charge such "captive" shippers 20 to 30 percent more than they do when another railroad is competing for the business. Shippers who feel they are being overcharged have the right to appeal to the federal government's Surface Transportation Board for rate relief, but the process is expensive, time consuming, and will work only in truly extreme cases. Railroads justify rate discrimination against captive shippers on the grounds that in the long nm it reduces everyone's cost. If railroads charged all customers the same average rate, they argue, shippers who have the option of switching to trucks or other forms of transportation would do so, leaving remaining customers to shoulder the cost of keeping up the line. It% theory to which many economists subscribe, but in practice it often leaves railroads in the position of determining which companies will flourish and which will fail. "Do we really want railroads to be the arbiters of who wins and who loses in the marketplace?" asks Mar- tin Bercovici, a Washington lawyer who frequently represents shipper. Many captive shippers also worry they will soon be his with a round of huge rate increases. The railroad industry as a whole, despite its brightening fortuning fortunes, still does not earn enough to cover the cost of the capital it must invest to keep up with its surging traffic. Yet railroads continue to borrow billions to ac- quire one another, with Wall Street cheering them on. Consider the $10. 2 billion bid by Norfolk Southern and CSX to acquire Conrail this year. Conrail's net railway operating income in 1996 was just $ 427 million, less than half of the carrying costs of the transaction. Who% going to pay for the rest of the bill? Many captive shippers fear that they will, as Norfolk Southern and CSX increase their grip on the market.

{{B}}Passage Four{{/B}} Many things make people think artists are weird and the weirdest may be this: artists' only job is to explore emotions, and yet they choose to focus on the ones that feel bad. This wasn't always so. The earliest forms of art, like painting and music, are those best suited for ex- pressing ioy. But somewhere in the 19th century, more artists began seeing happiness as insipid, phony or, worst of all, boring as we went from Wordsworth's daffodils to Baudelaire' s flowers of evil You could argue that art became more skeptical of happiness because modern times have seen such misery. But it's not as if earlier times didn't know perpetual war, disaster and the massacre of innocents. The reason, in fact, may be just the opposite: there is too much damn happiness in the world today. After all, what is the one modern form of expression almost completely dedicated to depicting happiness? Advertising. The rise of anti-happy art almost exactly tracks the emergence of mass media, and with it, a commercial culture in which happiness is not just an ideal but an ideology. People in earlier eras were surrounded by reminders of misery. They worked until exhausted, lived with few protections and died young. In the West, before mass communication and literacy, the most powerful mass medium was the church, which reminded worshippers that their souls were in peril and that they would someday be meat for worms. Given all this, they did not exactly need their art to be a bummer too. Today the messages your average Westerner is bombarded with are not religious but commercial, and forever happy. Fast-food eaters, news anchors, text messengers, all smiling, smiling. Our magazines feature beaming celebrities and happy families in perfect homes. And since these messages have an agenda--to lure us to open our wallets to make the very idea of happiness seem unreliable. "Celebrate!" commanded the ads for the arthritis drug Celebrex, before we found out it could increase the risk of heart attacks. What we forget—what our economy depends on is forgetting—is that happiness is more than pleasure without pain. The things that bring tile greatest joy carry the greatest potential for loss and disappointment. Today, surrounded by promises of easy happiness, we need someone to tell us as religion once did, Memento mori: remember that you wiI1 die, that everything ends, and that happiness comes not in denying this but in living with it. It's a message even more bitter than a clove cigarette, yet, somehow, a breath of fresh air.

Ireland is the best place in the world to live for 2005, (31) a life quality ranking that appeared in Britain's Economist magazine last .week. The ambitious (32) to compare happiness levels around the world is based on the principle that wealth is not the only (33) of human satisfaction and well-being. The index of 111 countries uses (34) on incomes, health, unemployment, climate, political stability, job security equality between men and women as well as what the magazine calls "freedom, family and community life". Despite the bad weather troubled health service, traffic problems, and the high cost of living, Ireland scored an impressive 8.33 points (35) 10. That put it well ahead of second-place Switzerland, which man- aged 8,07. Zimbabwe (津巴布韦), troubled by political insecurity and hunger, is'rated the lowest, (36) only 3.89 points. "Although rising incomes and increased individual choices in developed countries are (37) valued," the report said, "some of the factors associated with (38) such as the breakdown in traditional institutions and family values in part take away from a positive impact. "Ireland wins because it successfully combines the most desirable elements of the new—the fourth high- est gross domestic product per head in the world in 2005, low unemployment, political (39) —with the preservation of certain warm elements of the old, such as (40) family and community life./

There is no living creature that does not need sleep or complete rest every day. If you want to know why, just try (41) without sleep for a long period of time! You (42) discover that your mind and body would become (43) tired to work properly. You would become irritable and find it hard to think clearly or (44) on your work. So sleep is quite (45) the time when the cells of your body (46) from the work of the day and (47) supplies of energy for the next (48) of activity. One of the things we all know about sleep is that we are (49) in sleep. We do not know what is (50) on around us. But that does not mean the body stops (51) activity. The vital organs continue to work during sleep, but most of the body functions are (52) down. For example, our breathing becomes slower and deeper. The heart beats (53) slowly, and the blood pressure is lower. Our arms and legs become limp(软弱的), and muscles that control our posture(姿势) are (54) . It would be impossible for our body to relax to such an (55) if we were awake. So sleep does for us (56) the most quiet rest cannot do. Your body temperature becomes lower when you are asleep, (57) is the reason people go to sleep under some kind of (58) . And even though you are unconscious, ninny of your reflexes (反射作用) still work. (59) , if some one tickles your foot, you will pull it away in your sleep, or even (60) a fly from your forehead. You do these things without knowing it.

{{B}}Directions:{{/B}} For each blank in the following passage, choose the best answer from the choices given below. Mark your answer on the Answer Sheet by drawing with a pencil a short bar across the corresponding letter in the brackets. The United States has historically higher rates of marriage than those of other industrialized countries. The current annual marriage{{U}} (31) {{/U}}in the United States--about 9 new marriages for every 1,000 people—is substantially higher than it is in other industrialized countries. However, marriage is{{U}} (32) {{/U}}as widespread as it was several decades ago. The proportion of American adults who are married{{U}} (33) {{/U}}from 72 percent in 1970 to 60 percent in 2002. This does not mean that large numbers of people will remain unmarried{{U}} (34) {{/U}}their lives. Thronghout the 20th century, about 90 percent of Americans married at some point in their lives. Experts{{U}} (35) {{/U}}that about the same proportion of today' s young adults will eventually marry. The timing of marriage has varied{{U}} (36) {{/U}}over the past century. In 1995 the average age of women in the United States at the time of their first marriage was 25. The average age of men was about 27. Men and women in the United States marry for the first time at an average of five years later than people did in the 1950s.{{U}} (37) {{/U}},young adults of the 1950s married younger than did any previous{{U}} (38) {{/U}}in U.S. history. Today's later age of marriage is in line with the age of marriage between 1890 and 1940. Moreover, a greater proportion of the population was married (95 percent) during the 1950s than at any time before{{U}} (39) {{/U}}. Experts do not agree on why the "marriage rush" of the late 1940s and 1950s occurred, but most social scientists believe it represented a{{U}} (40) {{/U}}to the return of peaceful life and prosperity after 15 years of severe economic depression and war.

{{B}}Directions:{{/B}} In this part there are 4 passages followed by questions or unfinished statements, each with four suggested answers. Choose the one you think is the best answer. Mark your choice on the Answer Sheet by drawing with a pencil a short bar across the corresponding letter in the brackets. {{B}}Passage One{{/B}} The differences in living standards around the world are vast. In 1993, the average American had an in-come of about $ 25,000. In the same year, the average Mexican earned $ 7,000, and the average Nigerian earned $1,500. Not surprisingly, this large variation in average income is reflected in various measures of the quality of life. Changes in living standards over time are also large. In the United States, incomes have historically grown about 2 percent per year (after adjusting for changes in the cost of living). At this rate, average income doubles every 35 years. In some countries, economic growth has been even more rapi D. In Japan, for instance, average income has doubled in the past 20 years, and in South Korea it has doubled in the past 10 years. What explains these large differences in living standards among countries and over time? The answer is surprisingly simple Almost all variation in living standards is attributable to differences in countries' productivity—that is, the amount of goods and services produced from each hour of a worker's time. In nations where workem can produce a large quantity of goods and services per unit of time, most people enjoy a high standard of living; in nations where workers are less productive, most people must endure a more meager existence.. Similarly, the growth rate of a nation's productivity determines the growth rate of its average income. The fundamental relationship between productivity and living standards is simple, but its implications are far-reaching. If productivity is the primary determinant of living standards, uther explanations must be of secondary importance. For example, people might think that labor unions or minimum-wage laws contributed to the rise in living standards of American workers over the past century. Yet the real hero of American workers is their rising productivity. The relationship between productivity and living standards also has great implications for public policy. When thinking about how any policy will affect living standards, the key question is how it will affect our ability to produce goods and services. To improve living standards, policymakers need to raise productivity by ensuring that workers are well educated, have the tools needed to produce goods and services, and have access to the best available technology.

{{B}}Passage Two{{/B}} Jessica Bucknam shouts "tiao! "(tee—ow) and her fourth-grade students jump. "Dun!"(doo—wen) she commands, and they crouch(蹲). They giggle(吃吃地笑) as the commands keep coming in Mandarin Chinese. Half of the 340 students at the K-5 school are enrolled in the program. They can contine studying Chinese in middle and high schools. The goal.. to speak like natives. About 24,000 American students are currently learning Chinese. Most are in high schools. But the number of younger students is growing in response to China's emergence as a global superpower. "China has become a strong partner of the United States," says Mary Patterson, Woodstock's principal. "Children who learn Chinese at a young age will have more opportunities for jobs in the future." Isabel Weiss, 9, isn't thinking about the future. She thinks learning Chinese is fun. "when you hear peo- ple speaking in Chinese, you know what they're saying,' she says. "And they don't know that you know. '

{{B}}Passage Three{{/B}} Could the bad old days of economic decline be about to return? Since OPEC agreed to supply-cuts in March, the price of crude oil has jumped to almost $ 26 a barrel, up from less than $10 last December. This near-tripling of oil prices calls up scary memories of the 1973 oil shock, when prices quadrupled, and 1979 1980, when they also almost tripled. Both previous shocks resulted in double-digit inflation and global economic decline. So where are the headlines warning of gloom and doom this time? The oil price was given another push up this week when Iraq suspended oil exports. Strengthening economic growth, at the same time as winter grips the northern hemisphere, could push the price higher still in the short term. Yet there are good reasons to expect the economic consequences now to be less severe than in the 1970s. In most countries the cost of crude oil now accounts for a smaller share of the price of petrol than it did in the 1970s. In Europe, taxes account for up to four fifths of the retail price, so even quite big changes in the price of crude have a more muted effect on pump prices than in the past. Rich economics are also less dependent on oil than they were, and so lesssensitive to swings in the oil price. Energy conservation, a shift to other fuels and a decline in the importance of heavy, energy intensive industries have reduced oil consumption. Software, consultancy and mobile telephones use far less oil than steel or car production. For each dollar of GDP(in constant prices) rich economics now use nearly 50% less oil than in 1973. The OECD estimates in itslatest Economic Outlook that, it oil prices averaged $ 22 a barrel for a full year, compared with $13 in 1998, this would increase the oil import bill in rich economics by only 0. 25%～0. 50/oo of GDP. That is less than one-quarter of the income loss in 1974 or 1980. On the other hand, oil-importing emerging economics-to which heavy industry has shifted—have become more energy-intensive, and so could be more seriously squeezed. One more reason not to lose sleep over the rise in oil prices is that, unlike the rises in the 1970s, it has not occurred against the background of general commodity-price inflation and global excess demand. A sizableportion of the world is only just emerging from economic decline. The Economist's commodity price index is broadly unchanging from a year ago. In 1973 commodity prices jumped by 70%, and in 1979 by almost 30%.

The United States has historically higher rates of marriage than those of other industrialized countries. The current annual marriage (31) in the United States--about 9 new marriages for every 1,000 people—is substantially higher than it is in other industrialized countries. However, marriage is (32) as widespread as it was several decades ago. The proportion of American adults who are married (33) from 72 percent in 1970 to 60 percent in 2002. This does not mean that large numbers of people will remain unmarried (34) their lives. Thronghout the 20th century, about 90 percent of Americans married at some point in their lives. Experts (35) that about the same proportion of today' s young adults will eventually marry. The timing of marriage has varied (36) over the past century. In 1995 the average age of women in the United States at the time of their first marriage was 25. The average age of men was about 27. Men and women in the United States marry for the first time at an average of five years later than people did in the 1950s. (37) ,young adults of the 1950s married younger than did any previous (38) in U.S. history. Today's later age of marriage is in line with the age of marriage between 1890 and 1940. Moreover, a greater proportion of the population was married (95 percent) during the 1950s than at any time before (39) . Experts do not agree on why the "marriage rush" of the late 1940s and 1950s occurred, but most social scientists believe it represented a (40) to the return of peaceful life and prosperity after 15 years of severe economic depression and war.

It is said that in England death is pressing, in Canada inevitable and in California optional Small wonder. Americans' life expectancy has nearly doubled over the past century. Failing hips can be replaced, clinical depression controlled, cataracts removed in a 30-minutes surgical procedure. Such advances offer the aging population a quality of life that was unimaginable when I entered medicine 50 years ago. But not even a great health-care system can cure death—and our failure to confront that reality now threatens this greatness of OURS. Death is normal; we are genetically programmed to disintegrate and perish, even under ideal conditions. We all understand that at some level, yet as medical consumers we treat death as a problem to be solveD. Shielded by third-party payers from the cost of our care, we demand everything that can possibly be done for us, even if it's useless. The most obvious example is late-stage cancer care. Physicians-frustrated by their in- ability to cure the disease and fearing loss of hope in the patien—too often offer aggressive treatment far be- yond what is scientifically justified. In 1950, the U..S. spent $12. 7 billion on health care. In 2002, the cost will be $1540 billion. Anyone can see this trend is unsustainable. Yet few seem willing to try to reverse it. Some scholars conclude that a government with finite resources should simply stop paying for medical care that sustains life beyond a certain age—say 83 or so. Former Colorado governor Richard Lamm has been quoted as saying that the old and in- firm "have a duty todie and get out of the way" , so that younger, healthier people can realize their potential. I would not go that far. Energetic people now routinely work through their 60s and beyond, and remain dazzlingly productive. At 78, Viacom chairman Sumner Redstone jokingly claims to be 53. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor is in her 70s, and former surgeon general C. Everett Koop chairs an Internet start-up in his 80s. These leaders are living proof that prevention works and that we can manage the health problems that come naturally with age. As a mere 68-year-old, I wish to age as productively as they have. Yet there are limits to what a society can spend in this pursuit. Ask a physician, I know the most costly and dramatic measures may be ineffective and painful. I also know that people in Japan and Sweden, countries that spend far less on medical care, have achieved longer, healthier lives than we have. As a nation, we may be overfunding the quest for unlikelycures while underfunding research on humbler therapies that could improve people's lives.

{{B}}Directions:{{/B}} For each blank in the following passage, choose the best answer from the choices given below. Mark your answer on the Answer Sheet by drawing with a pencil a short bar across the corresponding letter in the brackets. Advertising is a form of selling. For thousands of years there have been individuals who have tried to{{U}} (31) {{/U}}others to buy the food they have produced or the goods they have made or the services they can per form. But in the 19th century the mass production of goods resulting from the Industrial Revolution made per son to person selling inefficient. The mass distribution of goods that{{U}} (32) {{/U}}the development of the rail way and highway made person-to-person selling too slow and expensive. At the same time mass corrmmunication first newspapers and magazines then radio and television made mass selling through{{U}} (33) {{/U}}possible. The objective of any advertisement is to convince people that it is in their best interests to take the action the advertiser is recommending. The action{{U}} (34) {{/U}}be to purchase a product use a service vote for a political candidate or even to join the Army. Advertising as a{{U}} (35) {{/U}}developed first and most rapidly in the United States. The country that uses it to the greatest extent. In 1980 advertising expenditures in the U. S. exceeded 55 billion dollars or{{U}} (36) {{/U}}2 per cent of the gross national product. Canada spent about 1.2 percent of its gross national product{{U}} (37) {{/U}}advertising. {{U}} (38) {{/U}}advertising brings the economies of mass selling to the manufacturer it produces benefits for the consumer as well. Some of those economies are passed along to the purchaser so that the cost of a product sold primarily through advertising is usually far{{U}} (39) {{/U}}than one sold through personal salespeople. Advertising brings people immediate news about products that have just come on the market. Finally advertising{{U}} (40) {{/U}}for the programs on commercial television and radio and for about two thirds of the cost of publishing magazine and newspapers.

{{B}}Passage Four{{/B}} Not so long ago almost any student who successfully completed a university degree could, find a good career quite easily. Companies toured the academic institutions, competing with each other to select graduates. However, those days are gone, even in Hong Kong, and nowadays graduates often face strong competition in the search for jobs. Most careers organizations highlight three stages for graduates to follow in the process of securing a suit- able career: recognizing abilities, matching these to available jobs and presenting them well to possible employers, Job seekers have to make a careful assessment of their own abilities. One area of assessment should be of their academic qualifications, which would include special skills within their subject area. Graduates should also consider their own personal values and attitudes. An honest assessment of personal interests and abilities such as creative skills, or skills acquired from work experience, should also be given careful thought. The second stage is to study the opportunities available for employment and to think about how the general employment situation is likely to develop in the future. To do this, graduates can study job and position information in newspapers, or they can visit a careers office, write to possible employers for information or contact friends or relatives who may already be involved in a particular profession. After studying all the various options, they should be in a position to make informed comparisons between various careers. Good personal presentation is essential in the search for a good career, job application forms and letters should, of course, be filled in carefully and correctly, without grammar or spelling errors. Where additional information is asked for, job seekers should describe their abilities and work experience in more depth, with examples if possible. They should try to balance their own abilities with the employer% needs, explain why they are interested in a career with the particular company and try to show that they-already know somethingabout the company and its activities. When graduates go to an interview, they should prepare properly by finding out all they can about the possible employer. Dressing suitably and arriving for the interview on time are also important. Interviewees should try to give positive and helpful answers and should not be afraid to ask questions about anything they are unsure about. This is much better than pretending to understand a question and giving an unsuitable answer.

When you look at the sky on a clear day, it seems as if the Earth is covered by a blue dome (圆盖). The sky is blue (41) what happens to sunlight as it enters the Earth's atmosphere. Sunlight (42) light rays of all lengths. The longer rays make up red light and the shorter rays make up blue light. (43) sunlight enters the Earth's atmosphere, it strikes the tiny (44) of air and is scattered. The scattered light is made up mostly of violet, blue, a little green, and a little yellow and red. The (45) of these colors is sky blue. Sometimes (46) sunset the sky looks red. The sunlight is coming toward you from a lower (47) in the sky. The lower the sun, the (48) is the path that the light rays must travel through the air. The shorter blue rays (49) immediately when striking molecules of air. The sunlight that you see (50) the blue and violet rays that the air has scattered. As the sun gets (51) in the sky, the light rays must pass through more air, and so the longer orange and red rays also become scattered. At sunset, the shorter blue rays never get through the atmosphere, (52) you do not see them. If you stand at a place (53) the surface of the Earth is flat, the sky seems to meet the Earth (54) any direction you look. The point at which the sky and Earth (55) to "meet" is called the horizon. The horizon is (56) the same distance from you, no matter in what direction you look. If you walk toward the horizon, you do not get (57) to it. No matter (58) you are, the surface of the Earth (59) downward and away from you. The distance at which you can no longer see the Earth's surface (60) it has curved down too far—is the horizon.

{{B}}Passage Two{{/B}} At the end of the U. S. Civil War, about four million slaves were freed. Now, people around the world canhear some of the former slaves' stories for the first time ever, as told in their own voices. "That was inslavery time, "says Charlie Smith in one interview. "They sold the colored people. And they were bringing them from Africa. They brought me from Africa. I was a child." The Library of Congress released the collection of recordings, Voices from the Days of Slavey, in January. The recorrdings were made between 1932 and 1975. Speaking at least 60 years after their emancipation(解放) ,the story teller discuss their experiences as slaves. They also tell about their lives as free men and women. Isom Moseley was just a boy at the time of emancipation, but he recalls that things were slow to change. "It was a year before the folks knowed they was free," he says. Michael Taft, the head of the library's archive of folk culture, says the recordings reveal something that written stores cannot. "The power of hearing someone speak is so much greater than reading someming from the page," Taft says. "It's how something is said—the dialect, the low pitches, the pauses--that helps tell the Story."

Emerson, according to the text, is probably ______.

While it is true that Americans believe climbing the educational ladder leads to success, they are less certain that intellectual achievement is the only important factor leading to success. A competitive personality is seen as important to success, especially in men. The development of social and political skills is also considered to be very important. To help Americans develop these other important skills, schools have added a large number of extracurricular (课程) activities to daily life at school. This is especially true of high schools and colleges and ex tends down into elementary schools as well. Athletics, frequently called "competitive sports," are perhaps the most important of these activities. Football, basketball, and baseball teams are seen as very important in teaching students, particularly boys, the "winning spirit". At times, athletic teams seem to become more important to some students and their parents than the academic programs offered by the schools.

The differences in living standards around the world are vast. In 1993, the average American had an in- come of about $ 25,000. In the same year, the average Mexican earned $ 7,000, and the average Nigerian earned $1,500. Not surprisingly, this large variation in average income is reflected in various measures of the quality of life. Changes in living standards over time are also large. In the United States, incomes have historically grown about 2 percent per year (after adjusting for changes in the cost of living). At this rate, average income doubles every 35 years. In some countries, economic growth has been even more rapi D. In Japan, for instance, average income has doubled in the past 20 years, and in South Korea it has doubled in the past 10 years. What explains these large differences in living standards among countries and over time? The answer is surprisingly simple Almost all variation in living standards is attributable to differences in countries' productivity—that is, the amount of goods and services produced from each hour of a worker's time. In nations where workem can produce a large quantity of goods and services per unit of time, most people enjoy a high standard of living; in nations where workers are less productive, most people must endure a more meager existence.. Similarly, the growth rate of a nation's productivity determines the growth rate of its average income. The fundamental relationship between productivity and living standards is simple, but its implications are far-reaching. If productivity is the primary determinant of living standards, uther explanations must be of secondary importance. For example, people might think that labor unions or minimum-wage laws contributed to the rise in living standards of American workers over the past century. Yet the real hero of American workers is their rising productivity. The relationship between productivity and living standards also has great implications for public policy. When thinking about how any policy will affect living standards, the key question is how it will affect our ability to produce goods and services. To improve living standards, policymakers need to raise productivity by ensuring that workers are well educated, have the tools needed to produce goods and services, and have access to the best available technology.

{{B}}Passage Four{{/B}} Americans today don't place a very high value on intellect. Our heroes are athletes, entertainers, and entrepreneurs, not scholars. Even our schools are where we send our children to get a practical education-not to pursue knowledge for the sake of knowledge. Symptoms of pervasive anti-intellectualism in our schools aren't difficult to find. "Schools have always been in a society where practical is more important than intellectual," says education writer Diane Ravitch. "Schools could be a counterbalance." Razitch's latest bock, Left Back: A Century of Failed School Reforms, traces the roots of anti-intellectualism in our schools, concluding they are anything but a counterbalance to the American distaste for intellectual pursuits. But they could and should be. Encouraging kids to reject the life of the mind leaves them vulnerable to exploitation and control. Without the ability to think critically, to defend their ideas and understand the ideas of others, they cannot fully participate in our democracy. Continuing along this path, says writer Earl Shortis, "We will become a second-rate country. We will have a less civil society." "Intellect is resented as a form of power or privilege," writes historian and professor Richard Hofstadter in Anti-Intellectualism in American life, a Pulitzer Prize winning book on the roots of anti-intellectualism in US politics, religion, and education. From the beginning of our history, says Hofstadter, our democratic and populist urges have driven us to reject anything that smells of elitism. Practicality, common sense, and native intelligence have been considered more noble qualities than anything you could learn from a book. Ralph Waldo Emerson and other Transcendentalist philosophers thought schooling and rigorous book learning put unnatural restraints on children: "We are shut up in schools and college recitation rooms for 10 or 15 years and come out at last with a bellyful of words and do not know a thing." Mark Twain's Huckleberry Firm exemplified American anti-intellectualism. Its hero avoids being civilized—going to school and learning to read so he can preserve his innate goodness. Intellect, according to Hofstadter, is different from native intelligence, a quality we reluctantly admire. Intellect is the critical, creative, and contemplative side of the mind. Intelligence seeks to grasp, manipulate, re-order, and adjust, while intellect examines, ponders, wonders, theorizes, criticizes and imagines. School remains a place where intellect is mistrusted. Hofstadter says our country's educational system is in the grips of people who "joyfully and militantly proclaim their hostility to intellect and their eagerness to identify with children who show the least intellectual promise."

Children live in a world in which science has tremendous importance. During their lifetimes it will affect them more and more. In time, many of them will work at jobs that depend heavily on science—for example, concerning energy sources, pollution control, highway safety, wilderness conservation, and population growth, and population growth. As taxpayers they will pay for scientific research and exploration. And, as consumers, they will Be bombarded(受到轰击) by advertising, much of which is said to be based on science. Therefore, it is important that children, the citizens of the future, become functionally acquainted with science-with the process and spirit of science, as well as with its facts and principles. Fortunately, science has a natural appeal for youngsters. They can relate it to so many things that they encounter—flashlights, tools, echoes, and rainbows. Besides, science is an excellent medium for teaching far more than content. It can help pupils learn to think logically, to organize and analyse ideas. It can provide practice in communication skills and mathematics. In fact, there is no area of the curriculum to which science cannot contribute, whether it is geography, history, language arts, music, or art! Above all, good science teaching leads to what might be called a "scientific attitude." Those who possess it seek answers through ohserving, experimenting, and reasoning, rather than blindly accepting the pronouncements of others. They weigh evidence carefully and reach conclusions with caution. While respecting the opinions of others, they expect honesty, accuracy, and objectivity and are on guard against hasty judgments and sweeping generalizations. All children should be developing this approach to solving problems, but it cannot be expected to appear automatically with the mere acquisition of information. Continual practice, through guided participation, is needed.