单选题In 1975 the Congress of the United States passed the Education of All Handicapped Children Act, a (1) document in special education that has since (2) numerous amendments. A 1990 amendment renamed the law the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). IDEA requires public schools (3) a free and appropriate education to all disabled children. The law also requires that all children with disabilities between the ages of 3 and 21 receive support services, such as (4) or physical therapy, (5) the type or seriousness of their disability. (6) the provisions of IDEA, schools must (7) all children with disabilities. To do this school officials provide each child with a comprehensive (8) conducted by teachers, the parents, and appropriate specialists, such as children with speech difficulties. IDEA also requires schools to give parents the opportunity to assist in the development and (9) of their child's education plan. The plan specifies goals for the student's education, methods to achieve those goals, and services to be provided. Each student's education plan is reviewed (10) . To the maximum extent appropriate, a child with a disability must be educated with children who do not have disabilities. In addition, IDEA requires that older children with disabilities receive transition services to assist in the change from school to adult activities, (11) employment, continuing education, and finding a place to live. IDEA provides federal financial support for schools to develop special education programs. Other federal laws prohibit discrimination (12) disability. Section 504 of the Act of 1973 (13) discrimination against individuals with disabilities in public schools and any other federally supported programs. The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 ensures (14) for individuals with disabilities in all (15) life, including education, the workplace, transportation, and telecommunications.

单选题The newly elected president has Upledged/U $13 million to the automobile industry for its survival.

单选题The new government {{U}}embarked upon{{/U}} a program of radical economic reform.

单选题He became ______ with the girl reporter who questioned him at the press conference.

单选题In a sense, farmers began primitive genetic engineering (at the dawn of) agriculture, (which) they kept seeds (from) their best plants, gradually (improving) the quality of successive generations.

单选题A: ______ B: I've got a feeling there's a documentary about animals.

单选题Terry boasted that he could finish the project by himself in no time.

单选题{{B}}Passage Three{{/B}} Scraps of food could soon be helping power your home, thanks to an ultra-cheap bacteria-driven battery. Its developers hope that instead of feeding the dog or making garden compost(混合肥料) ,organic household waste could top up your home's electricity. Although such "microbial fuel cells" (MFCs)have been developed in the past, they have always proved extremely inefficient and expensive. Now Chris Melhuish and technologists at the University of the West of England(UWE)in Bristol have come up with a simplified MFC that costs as little as ￡10 to make. Right now, their fuel cell runs only on sugar cubes, since these produce almost no waste when broken down, but they aim to move on to carrot power. "It has to be able to use raw materials, rather than giving it a refined fuel," says Melhuish. Inside the Walkman-sized battery, a colony of E. coil bacteria produce enzymes that break down carbohydrates, releasing hydrogen atoms. The cell also contains chemicals that drive a series of redox, or reduction and oxidation reactions, stripping electrons from the hydrogen atoms and delivering them steadily to the fuel cell's anode(正极). This creates a voltage that can be used to power a circuit. To prove the MFC works, the researchers are using it to power a small light-sensitive robot. And when a number of the cells are connected in series, they could power domestic appliances, running a 40-watt bulb for eight hours on about 50 grams of sugar. Earlier MFCs were inefficient because they relied on energy-hungry filters and pumps. By experimenting with different anode materials, the UWE team have figured out how to make their system work: they dump the bacteria and redox chemicals directly into the cell. In its current form, the UWE team says its organic battery can produce eight times as much power as any previous MFC. But Melhuish wants to improve this, both by scaling it up and finding a better mix of redox chemicals.

单选题Some scientists have suggested that earth is a kind of zoo or wildlife______for intelligent space beings, like the wilderness areas we have set up on earth to allow animals to develop naturally while we observe them.

单选题{{B}}Passage Four{{/B}} Does money buy happiness? It's sometimes said that scientists have found no relationship between money and happiness, but that's myth, says University of Illinois psychologist Ed Diener. The connection is complex. In fact, very rich people rate substantially higher in satisfaction with life than very poor people do, even within wealthy nations, he says. "There is overwhelming evidence that money buys happiness," said economist Andrew Oswald of University of Warwick in England. The main debate, he said, is how strong the effect is. Oswald recently reported a study of Britons who won between ＄ 2,000 and ＄ 250,000 in a lottery (彩票拍奖). As a group, they showed a boost in happiness averaging a bit more than one point on a 36-point scale when surveyed two years after their win, compared to their levels two years before they won. Daniel Kahnman, a Nobel-Prize winner and Princeton economist, and colleagues, recently declared that the notion that making a lot of money will produce good overall mood is "mostly illusory". They noted that in one study, members of the high-income group were almost twice as likely to call themselves "very happy" as people from households with incomes below ＄ 20,000. But other studies, rather than asking for a summary estimate of happiness, follow people through the day and repeatedly record their feeling. These studies show less effect of income on happiness. Kahneman and colleagues said. There is still another twist to the money-happiness story. Even though people who make＄150,000 are considerably happier than those who make ＄ 40,000, It's not clear why, says psychologist Richard E. Lucas of Michigan State University. Researchers conclude that any effect of money on happiness is smaller than most daydreamers assume. "People exaggerate how much happiness is bought by an extra few thousand," Oswald said. "The quality of relationships has a far bigger effect than quite large rises in salary. It's much better advice, if you're looking for happiness in life, try to find the right husband or wife than to try to double your salary."

单选题According to a survey, which was based on the responses of over 188,000 students, today's traditional-age college freshmen are "more materialistic and less altruistic (利他主义的)" than at any time in the 17 years of the poll. Not surprising in these hard times, the students' major objective " is to be financially well off. Less important than ever is developing a meaningful philosophy of life. " It follows then that today the most popular course is not literature or history but accounting. Interest in teaching, social service and the "altruistic" fields is at a low. On the other hand, enrollment in business programs, engineering and computer science is way up. That's no surprise either. A friend of mine (a sales representative for a chemical company) was making twice the salary of her college instructors her first year on the job—even before she completed her two-year associate degree. While it's true that we all need a career, it is equally true that our civilization has accumulated an incredible amount of knowledge in fields far removed from our own and that we are better for our understanding of these other contributions—be they scientific or artistic. It is equally true that, in studying the diverse wisdom of others, we learn how to think. More important, perhaps, education teaches us to see the connections between things, as well as to see beyond our immediate needs. Weekly we read of unions who went on strike for higher wages, only to drive their employer out of business. No company; no job. How shortsighted in the long run! But the most important argument for a broad education is that in studying the accumulated wisdom of the ages, we improve our moral sense. I saw a cartoon recently which shows a group of businessmen looking puzzled as they sit around a conference table; one of them is talking on the intercom (对讲机) :"Miss Baxter," he says, "could you please send in someone who can distinguish right from wrong?" From the long-term point of view, that's what education really ought to be about.

单选题According to the author, the primary role of the major community in helping the neighborhoods of poverty is ______.

单选题For more than thirty years after astronauts first set foot on the Moon, scientists have been unable to unravel the mystery of where the Earth's only satellite came from. But now there is direct evidence that the Moon was born after a giant collision between the young Earth and another planet. Previous studies of rocks from the Earth and the Moon have been unable to distinguish between the two, suggesting that they formed from the same material. But this still left room for a number of theories explaining how—for example, that the Moon and Earth formed from the same material at the same time. It was even suggested that the early Earth spun so fast it formed a bulge that eventually broke off to form the Moon. Franck Poitrasson, and his colleagues at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology have compared Moon rocks with rocks from Earth and discovered a surprising difference. They analysed the weight of the elements present in the rock using a highly accurate form of mass spectroscopy(光谱研究) that involves vaporising a sample by passing it through an argon (氩) flame. Although they appeared very similar in most respects, the Moon rocks had a higher ratio of iron-57 to iron-54 isotopes(同位素)than the Earth rocks. "The only way we could explain this difference is that the Moon and the Earth were partly vaporised during their formation," says Poitrasson. Only the popular "giant planetary impact" theory could generate the temperatures of more than 1700℃ needed to vaporise iron. In this scenario, a Mars-sized planet known as Theia crashed into Earth 50 million years after the birth of the Solar System. This catastrophic collision would have released 100 million times more energy than the impact believed to have wiped out the dinosaurs—enough to melt and vaporise a large portion of the Earth and completely destroy Theia. The debris from the collision would have been thrown into orbit around the Earth and eventually coalesced to form the Moon. When iron is vaporised, the lighter isotopes burn off first. And since the ejected debris that became the Moon would have been more thoroughly vaporised, it would have lost a greater proportion of its lighter iron isotopes than Earth did. This would explain the different ratios that Poitrasson has found.

单选题{{B}}Passage Five{{/B}} Wilmut maintains that cloning animals has tremendous potential for helping people. Cloned Sheep, he says, could be used as living drug factories. Scientists could "engineer" sheep that produce drugs in their milk. And by altering the proteins on the surfaces of animal organs to make them more like human organs, scientists believe they may be able to create a plentiful source of organ donors for people. Why not clone humans as organ donors? Theoretically, Wilmut says, there is no reason his techniques couldn't someday be used to clone people. Think about the possibilities: a whole basketball team of Michael Jordans, a scientific panel of Albert Einsteins, a movie starring and co-starring Brad Pitts. On a more serious note, some experts argue that couples who have difficulty having a baby could make copies of themselves. And parents whose child has a fatal disease like cancer might be able to clone the child, creating a twin who could be a bone-marrow (骨髓) donor. But even Ian Wilmut draws the line at cloning humans. "All of us would find that offensive," he says. Several countries, including Britain, Denmark, Germany and Australia, have made all scientific work on cloning humans illegal. The U.S. has no such law, but President Clinton has set up a panel of scientists and philosophers to study the issue. In the meantime, Clinton has imposed a ban on using federal money to clone humans. Humans are more than the sum of their genes, argues a philosopher at one research institute. Though they look exactly the same, clones are not necessarily exact copies. The younger twin might grow up with different influences—say, unusual friends or special teachers. A cloned Albert Einstein might fail his physics class. A cloned pop star might sing terribly. Say you were cloned. Would your twin live a shorter life because he or she started out with DNA that was already 10, 20 or 30 years old? Scientists aren't sure. And how could you prevent someone from taking a sample of your hair and making a clone of you? Again, no solutions. What do you think? Should scientists be allowed to clone animals? How about humans?

单选题In spite of the Uadverse/U circumstances, this young athlete turned out to be a great success.

单选题Many things make people think artists are weird—the odd hours, the nonconformity, the clove cigarettes. However, the weirdest may be this: artists' only jobs are to explore emotions, and yet they choose to focus on the ones that feel lousy. This wasn't always so. The earliest forms of art, like painting and music, are those best suited for expressing joy. But somewhere in the 19th(上标) century, more artists began seeing happiness as insipid, phony or, worst of all, boring. In the 20th(上标) century, classical music became more atonal, visual art more unsettling. Sure, there have been exceptions, but it would not be a stretch to say that for the past century or so, serious art has been at war with happiness. In 1824, Beethoven completed his "Ode to Joy". In 1962, novelist Anthoy Burgess used it in A Clockwork Orange as the favorite music of his ultra-violent antihero. You could argue that art became more skeptical of happiness because modern times have seen such misery. But the reason may actually be just the opposite: there is too much damn happiness in the world today. 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. Today the messages that the average Westerner is bombarded with are not religious but commercial, and relentlessly happy. Since these messages have an agenda—to prey our wallets from our pockets—they make the very idea of happiness seem bogus(假的). "Celebrate!" commanded the ads for the arthritis drug Celebrex, before we found out it could increase the risk of heart attack. What we forget—what our economy depends on us forgetting—is that happiness is more than pleasure without pain. The things that bring the greatest joy carry the greatest potential for loss and disappointment. Today, surrounded by promises of easy happiness, we need someone to tell us that it is OK not to be happy, that sadness makes happiness deeper. As the wine-connoisseur movie Sideways tells us, it is the kiss of decay and mortality that makes grape juice into Pinot Norway need art to tell us, as religion once did, that you will 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, is a breath of fresh air.

单选题A: It’s not like George to be late for an appointment. B: _____ He’s always punctual.

单选题Many disciplines of science are actually ______ rather than becoming farther apart.

单选题{{B}}Passage One{{/B}} The worst thing about television and radio is that they entertain us, saving us the trouble of entertaining ourselves. A hundred years ago, before all these devices were invented, if a person wanted to entertain himself with a song or a piece of music, he would have to do the singing himself or pick up a violin and play it. Now, all he has to do is turn on the radio or TV. As a result, singing and music have declined. Italians used to sing all the time. Now, they only do it in Hollywood movies. Indian movies are mostly a series of songs and dances wrapped around silly stories. As a result, they don't do much singing in Indian villages anymore. Indeed, ever since radio first came to life, there has been a terrible decline in amateur singing throughout the world. There are two reasons for this sad decline: One, human beings are astonishingly lazy. Put a lift in a building, and people would rather take it than climb even two flights of steps. Similarly, invent a machine that sings, and people would rather let the machine sing than sing themselves. The other reason is people are easily embarrassed. When there is a famous, talented musician readily available by pushing a button, which amateur violinist or pianist would want to try to entertain family or friends by himself? These earnest reflections came to me recently when two CDs arrived in the mail: They are historic recordings of famous writers reading their own works. It was thrilling to hear the voices from a long dead past in the late 19th century. But today, reading out loud anything is no longer common. Today, we sing songs to our children until they are about two, we read simple books to them till they are about five, and once they have learnt to read themselves, we become deaf. {{U}}We're alive only to the sound of the TV and the stereo.{{/U}} I count myself extremely lucky to have been born before TV became so common. I was about six before TV appeared. To keep us entertained, my mother had to do a good deal of singing and tell us endless tales. It was the same in many other homes. People spoke a language; they sang it, they recited it; it was something they could feel. Professional actors' performance is extraordinarily revealing. But I still prefer my own reading. Because it's mine. For the same reason, people find karaoke liberating. It is almost the only electronic thing that gives them back their own voice. Even if their voices are hoarse and hopelessly out of tune. At least it is meaningful self-entertainment.