泽熙美文Ⅱ Reading Comprehension
Open Education?
During the 1960s teacher education began to deemphasize the traditional teacher-directed, self-contained classroom and to stress open education. Classrooms and indeed entire buildings were rebuilt to accommodate the new approach. Learning centers, reading corners, and science (kitchen physics) areas were installed. Children moved freely through a sequence of activities individually and in small groups. The lock-step approach of twenty-five or so pupils all learning the same material at the same time was abandoned. Excitement was high. It seemed as if the old mold for education was at last about to break. Optimism was further increased by some early research findings that suggested positive outcomes in academic achievement. Equally if not more important was the suggestion of gains in pupil autonomy and responsibility. It seemed as if open education was able to achieve two simultaneous objectives, achievement and growth in selfconcept.
Then the bomb fell. In 1976 Neville Bennett, a British psychologist, published the results of a single study that concluded that open education was a failure. Since England itself had been a prime mover in the innovation, it seemed as if the home ground was now fatally shaken. One of our country’s most prestigious newspapers, the New York Times, did a feature giving the claim even greater exposure and, indirectly at least, validity. In addition, Nathaniel Gage, one of our country’s most respected educational psychologists, published a summary in 1978 that also concluded that open education was a failure.
Of course, these three events by themselves could not account for the shift away from open education. The country as a whole was moving forward a more conservative viewpoint. Both conservative politicians and conservative educators happily seized upon these findings. We should return to the basics in education—no more “frills”, no more experimentation, no more “liberal” philosophy. Open education became almost a lightning rod, a convenient target for those in both arenas who wanted to keep schools as they were in the “good old days.” The results of their efforts were all too successful. In the publics mind open education was just another failed innovation.
Although the public and conservative politicians may still adhere to that view, educational psychologists don’t. A careful reanalysis of Bennett’s original findings uncovered basic statistical errors. Then Gage himself undertook a more complete and careful review. He also noted his earlier errors:” I reviewed a small and regrettably haphazard set of some seven of those studies and concluded that they showed that students learned less.” His more complete review of 150 studies came to the opposite conclusion. He found that there were no real differences in academic achievement. The students did not learn less. Also the open-education students demonstrated greater creativity, more independence as problem solvers, and had more positive attitudes toward school and teachers.
Whether the general public will again accept and support open education remains to be seen. Fortunately, the integrity of educational psychologists shows through clearly in this case. Errors in analysis can be corrected and policy issues reevaluated.
1. According to the passage, the traditional classrom is characterized by its ______
A.less provision of opening space for the students.
B.less freedom and flexibility for the students’ learning.
C.more emphasis on the classroom than the reading space.
D.more restrictions and regulations on the teacher.
正确答案：B
文中提到的“learning centers, reading comers, and science areas”以及“children moved freely…”均暗示“传统课堂”缺乏这样的灵活性和自由。所以B是唯一的正确选择。
2. Which of the following is NOT mentioned as a feature of the traditional education?
A.Teacher played leader instead of organizer in the classroom.
B.All the students learned the same material at the same classroom.
C.There were about 25 pupils in one class, which was a standard mold.
D.There were independent learning centers and science areas on the campus.
正确答案：D
该文一直强调说，open education向学生的自主学习提供了learning centers，这正是传统教学所缺乏的。所以D项才是正确答案。
3. What was the author’s purpose of presenting Neville Bennett’s idea?
A.To publicize the knowledge.
B.To show respect.
C.To aknowledge.
D.To make a comparison.
正确答案：A
本文作者明显是赞同Bennett的教育理念，所以答案A才是正确的。
4. According to the author, what is the ROOT reason of the fall of open education?
A.Nathaniel Gage’s confirmation.
B.The results of Neville Bennett’s study.
C.The New York Times’ active publicity.
D.The authorities’ conservative viewpoint.
正确答案：D
从该文的讨论不能得出这样的一个结论：open education之所以举步维艰，主要是源于当权者的保守思想。
5. Gage’s relatively-complete studies proves all the following EXCEPT that ______
A.open education students could solve problems better.
B.open education students demonstrated more creativity.
C.compared with tradition students, in open education students suffered.
D.open education students held more positive attitudes towards schools.
正确答案：C
显然，给学生以过多的自由和放任，只能有损(害)于其学习，而第四段提出的“showed that students learned less…”是选择C的重要参照。
6. Which of the following can be chozen as the best title of the passage?
A.In the End Is Open Education
B.The Fall and Rebirth of Open Education
C.The Integrity of Educational Psychologist
D.Open Education Is the Best Mold up till Now
正确答案：B
该文通篇讨论的有两大主题：一是traditional education，二是open education，所以B是唯一的选择。
Prayer in Schools
The Reverend Jerry Falwell contends that up until about thirty years ago the precepts of the Bible were at the basis of the curriculum of public schools throughout the country. Prayer was offered and passages from the Bible were read virtually every day, and, because of that, the country and its citizens were better off. Falwell also claims that this was precisely what the founders of this country wanted. Quoting from President John Adams, who said that one means of preserving our Constitution was to “patronize every rational effort to encourage schools, colleges, universities and every institution for propagating knowledge, virtue and religion among all classes of the people,” Falwell sees the recent elimination of school prayer as a contributing cause of the moral disintegration of society. Since in a democracy education is supposed to create better citizens, then schools must provide the moral foundation for that citizenry.
Senator John East pointed out that the phrase “separation of church and state” appears nowhere in the Constitution. If the government were required to eliminate all traces of religious practice, then “we could have no chaplains in the Armed Forces. We could have no religious facilities on military bases. We could not open the Senate or the House with prayer. We could not have ‘In God We Trust’ on our coins. We could not say ‘God Save This Honorable Court’ when the Supreme Court opens. We could not allow the President, at the conclusion of his Presidential oath, to say ‘…So Help Me God.’” In short, prayer in the schools was favored by the founders, and to eliminate it, as the Supreme Court has ruled, neglects a crucial component of every child’s education.
Opponents of school prayer find major distortions in the current attacks against the “secularization” of schools and argue that the “materials [the opponents] advocate are consistent with historical traditions of character development while also being in tune with the present realities of the times.”
