《2021年12月英语六级真题(第3套).pptx》由会员分享,可在线阅读,更多相关《2021年12月英语六级真题(第3套).pptx(8页珍藏版)》请在文库网上搜索。
1、2021 年 12 月大学英六考真(第 3 套)Part IWriting(30 minutes)(于正式开考后半小内完成部分,之后将行听力考)Directions: For this part, you are allowed 30 minutes to write an essay based on theshort passage given below. In your essay, you are to comment on the phenomenondescribed in the passage and suggest measures to address the issue
2、. You should writeat least 150 words but no more than 200 words.Young people spend a lot of time on the internet. However, they are sometimes unableto recognize false information on the internet, judge the reliability of onlineinformation sources, or tell real news stories from fake ones.Part II(略)L
3、istening ComprehensionReading Comprehension(30 minutes)(40 minutes)Part IIISection A(略)Section BDirections: In this section, you are going to read a passage with ten statementsattached to it. Each statement contains information given in one of the paragraphs.Identify the paragraph from which the inf
4、ormation is derived. You may choose aparagraph more than once. Each paragraph is marked with a letter. Answer thequestions by marking the corresponding letter on Answer Sheet 2.Do music lessons really make children smarter?AA recent analysis found that most research mischaracterizes the relationship
5、between music and skills enhancement.BIn 2004, a paper appeared in the journal Psychological Science, titled “ MusicLessons Enhance IQ.” The author; composer and psychologist Glenn Schellenberghad conducted an experiment with 144 children randomly assigned to four groups:one learned the keyboard for
6、 a year, one took singing lessons, one joined an actingclass, and a control group had no extracurricular training. The IQ of the children inthe two musical groups rose by an average of seven points in the course of a year;those in the other .two groups gained an average of 4.3 points.C Schellenberg
7、had 1ong been skeptical of the science supporting claims hat musiceducation enhances childrens abstract reasoning, math, or language sills. If childrenwho play the piano are smarter, he says, it doesnt necessarily mean they are smarterbecause they play the piano. It could be that the youngsters who
8、play the piano also1happen to be more ambitious or better at focusing on a task. Correlation, after all,does not prove causation.D The 2004 paper was specifically designed to address those concerns. And as apassionate musician, Schellenberg was delighted when he turned up credible evidencethat music
9、 has transfer effects on general intelligence. But nearly a decade later, in2013, the Education Endowment Foundation funded a bigger study with more than900 students. That study failed to confirm Schellenbergs findings, producing noevidence that music lessons improved math and literacy skills.E Sche
10、llenberg took that news in stride while continuing to cast a skeptical eye onthe research in his field, Recently, he decided to formally investigate just how oftenhis fellow researchers in psychology and neuroscience make what he believes areerroneousor at least prematurecausal connections between m
11、usic and intelligence.His results, published in May, suggest hat many of his peers do just that.FFor his recent study, Schellenberg asked two research assistants to look forcorrelational studies on the effects of music education. They found a total of 114papers published since 2000. To assess whethe
12、r the authors claimed any causation,researchers then looked for telltale verbs in each papers title and abstract, verbs like“enhance” ,“promote” ,“facilitate” , and “strengthen” . The papers were categorized asneuroscience if the study employed a brain imaging method like magnetic resonance,or if th
13、e study appeared in a journal that had “brain”, “neuroscience”, or a related termin its title. Otherwise the papers were categorized as psychology. Schellenberg didnttell his assistants what exactly he was trying to prove.G After computing their assessments, Schellenberg concluded that the majority
14、ofthe articles erroneously claimed that music training had a causal effect. Theoverselling, he also found, was more prevalent among neuroscience studies, threequarters of which mischaracterized a mere association between music training andskills enhancement as a cause-and-effect relationship. This m
15、ay come as a surprise tosome. Psychologists have been battling charges that they dont do “real” science forsome time in large part because many findings from classic experiments haveproved unreproducible. Neuroscientists, on the other hand, armed with brain scansand EEGs( ), have not been subject to
16、 the same degree of critique.HTo argue for a cause-and-effect relationship, scientists must attempt to explain whyand how a connection could occur. When it comes to transfer effects of music,scientists frequently point to brain plasticity the fact that the brain changesaccording to how we use it. Wh
17、en a child learns to play the violin, for example,several studies have shown that the brain region responsible for the fine motor skillsof the left hands fingers is likely to grow. And many experiments have shown thatmusical training improves certain hearing capabilities, like filtering voices fromb
18、ackground noise or distinguishing the difference between the consonants (音) band g.IBut Schellenberg remains highly critical of how the concept of plasticity has beenapplied in his field. “Plasticity has become an industry of its own,” he wrote in hisMay paper. Practice does change the brain, he all
19、ows, but what is questionable is theassertion that these changes affect other brain regions, such as those responsible for2spatial reasoning or math problems.JNeuropsychologist Lutz Jncke agrees. “Most of these studies dont allow forcausal inferences,” he said. For over two decades, Jncke has resear
20、ched the effects ofmusic lessons, and like Schellenberg, he believes that the only way to trulyunderstand their effects is to run longitudinal studies. In such studies, researcherswould need to follow groups of children with and without music lessons over a longperiod of timeeven if the assignments
21、are not completely random. Then they couldcompare outcomes for each group.K Some researchers are staring to do just that. The neuroscientist Peter Schneiderfrom Heidelberg University in Germany, for example, has been following a group ofchildren for ten years now. Some of them were handed musical in
22、struments and givenlessons through a school-based program in the Ruhr region of Germany called JedemKind ein Instrument, or“an instrument for every child,” which was carried out withgovernment funding. Among these children, Schneider has found that those who wereenthusiastic about music and who prac
23、ticed voluntarily showed improvements inhearing ability, as well as in more general competencies, such as the ability toconcentrate.L To establish whether effects such as improved concentration are caused by musicparticipation itself, and not by investing time in an extracurricular activity of any k
24、ind,Assal Habibi, a psychology professor at the s University of Southern California, isconducing a five-year longitudinal study with children from low-income communitiesin Los Angeles. The youngsters fall into three groups: those who take after schoolmusic, those who do after-school sports, and thos
25、e with no structured after-schoolprogram at all. After two years, Habibi and her colleagues reported seeing structuralchanges in the brains of the musically trained children, both locally and in thepathways connecting different parts of the brain.M That may seem compelling, but Habibis children were
- 配套讲稿:
如PPT文件的首页显示word图标,表示该PPT已包含配套word讲稿。双击word图标可打开word文档。
- 特殊限制:
部分文档作品中含有的国旗、国徽等图片,仅作为作品整体效果示例展示,禁止商用。设计者仅对作品中独创性部分享有著作权。
- 关 键 词:
- 2021 12 英语六级