The new documentary Bully is powerful stuff. Try to get through even just the opening sequence without tearing up. Hopefully it will wake up parents,teachers,and school administrators. But let’s also hope they respond thoughtfully to this burning film, because too often in our rush to address a problem, American educators and politicians have a well-intentioned overreaction that minimizes common sense in favor of blanket solutions.Many schools in the United States are genuinely trying to curb child-on-child abuse and,at long last,are paying more attention to the cruel,unpleasant remarks. But at the same time, we have to remember that not every unpleasant, or even adverse,interaction between students constitutes bullying. In some places, anti-bullying policies are now so expansive that they make eye-rolling a punishable offense,lumping it in with other forms of verbal and physical assault. Doing so not only takes a serious issue to the realm of the absurd,it also dilutes the importance of anti-bullying efforts in general. If everything is bullying, then nothing is.Some kids have already figured out how to turn the new system on its head. In some schools’ zeal to address bullying, every claim is immediately elevated beyond the classroom teacher to a meeting with the principal. A parent in California said that last month that an elementary-school bully began threatening to report her victims as bullies so they would have to suffer through such a meeting—and in effect creating a bullying hall of mirrors.We’ve been here before. Weapons and drugs in schools are a serious problem,too. In response,school districts, states,and the federal government began to favor zero-tolerance policies. In short order, “zero-tolerance” policies became the joking point for late-night comics as kids were suspended for bringing to school aspirin, acne medicine, or a G. I. Joe doll with a small plastic gun.The obvious lesson there and with bullying is that there is no substitute for discretion and judgment by the adults in charge. In some circumstances, eye-rolling could be abusive behavior just as aspirin can be used or abused. But adults shouldn’t give up the hard role of making nuanced judgment calls by creating ridiculously rigid discipline codes. Replacing thoughtless inaction with thoughtless action won’t solve the problem.1.What does the author say about people’s reaction to bullying?2.What is the strategy of the kids in dealing with anti-bullying policies?3.The “zero-tolerance” policies towards drugs and weapons ended up being（ ）.4.The word “there” in the first line of the last paragraph refers to（ ）.

A.They wake up thoughtfully. B.They demonstrate little common sense. C.They attach importance to the film. D.They go too far.
问题2：
A.To assault the principal at the meeting. B.To turn the classroom into a wall of mirrors. C.To pay attention to kids’ verbal remarks. D.To render them ineffective by abusing bullying.
问题3：
A.elevated B.suspended C.ridiculed D.condemned
问题4：
A.with eye-rolling and punishable offenses B.with verbal and physical assaut C.with aspirin and acne medicine D.with drugs and weapons

Many mental institutions throughout the country have been turned into dumping grounds for thousands of oldsters who have no place else to go. Most of them aren’t really mentally ill. In the jargon of the hospital bureaucracy, they are classified as “inappropriate admissions.” But since society has nothing better to offer, they are left to rot without hope, help, or dignity. The usual exit is death.Often through no fault of their own , understaffed and overcrowded mental hospitals handle their “geriatric cases” little better than cattle. There is a recurrent pattern of elderly patients locked into wards to prevent them from wandering about, given steady doses of tranquilizers to keep them “manageable”, left day and night without a trace of human warmth or companionship.Some hospitals have wards full of elderly, tranquilized patients, bodies bloated from their inactive, meaningless existences, sitting listlessly on hard benches or sprawled asleep on the floor. There are women, silent as statues, occupying chairs and rockers in the corridors. While the weather may be beautiful outdoors, old men may indifferently shuffle about a geriatric “cottage” with nowhere to go and nothing to do.Yet many of the people could be restored to human dignity, not by complicated therapeutic procedures, but among other things, by providing good medical care and reaching out a hand of kindness towards them.It is estimated that one half of the old people in state mental hospitals today could leave if proper community resources, services and programs were available. But an indifferent society has not made them available.1.The main idea of this passage is that（ ）.2.“Geriatric”in paragraph 2 refers to people who are（ ） .3.We may infer that the author（ ） .4.The author believes that the real blame lies with（ ）.

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.” Ravitch’s latest book, 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 Shorris, “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 U. S. 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 Finn 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, reorder, and adjust, while intellect examines, thinks, 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.”1.What do American parents expect their children to acquire in school?2.We can learn from the passage that Americans have a history of（ ）.3.The views of Ravitch and Emerson on schooling are（ ）.4.Emerson, according to the passage, is probably （ ）.5.What does the author think of intellect?

Some 4, 000 private importers, exporters and wholesalers were nationalized and（ ）into a huge government monopoly, the State Trading Corp.

Government is an institution resulting from man’s group way of life which maintains a set of social controls in order to prevent chaos. In a small,homogeneous,simple society, these social controls can be imposed and enforced by the family or clan. But in a large, heterogeneous complex society,the institution of government takes over this function.For purposes of analysis,social control may be divided into moral control and political control. Moral control derives from the internalized beliefs and values of a society and regulations, each individual’s behavior without the use of outside enforcement. Political control does involve enforcement from the outside since the individual is not always certain that the rule he is following is just and right. He follows it to conform,to avoid punishment, or to receive social rewards.Political control is an outgrowth of moral control,and its effectiveness depends on the willingness of the members of society to accept the government’s authority as just and right. A government that is forced to coerce or threaten most of its members into accepting political control not backed with moral control will not survive long. In addition,a wide discrepancy between moral and political control will result in a condition of general lawlessness. Such a condition has occurred in the United States on several occasions and is now evident among some groups of society according to “The Roots of Lawlessness” by historian Henry Steele Commander.Government, a major social institution, may be viewed as a set of procedures by which a society realizes a good portion of its goals. Government is further unique as an institution because it serves to reinforce the function of other institutions. Thus,individuals violating the rules and regulation of the economic,educational,or family institutions must ultimately face the punitive power of government.1.A condition characterized by the absence of social organization and social control, and by the belief that political authority is unnecessary is（ ）.2.The internalized form of social control is（ ）.3.Legitimate power rightfully exercised is called（ ）.4.Which statement is NOT correct?

This is the industrialist’s（ ）: invest, and risk going bankrupt, or not invest and risk losing your share of the market.