英语模考三

Section I Use of English

Directions:

Read the following text. Choose the best word(s) for each numbered blank and mark A, B, C or D on the ANSWER SHEET. (10 points)

     In the first paper of its kind, published in Science on March 8th, Soroush Vosoughi and his colleagues at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology __1____ evidence that, on Twitter at least, false stories travel faster and farther than true ones.

     The study, ___2___ at MIT’s Laboratory for Social Machines, showed this by examining every tweet sent between 2006 and 2017. The researchers used statistical models to __3____ tweets as false or true. That ___4___ them to categorize over 4.5m tweets about 126,000 different stories. Those stories were then ___5___ according to how they spread among Twitter’s users.

     The results were ___6____. False information was retweeted by more people than the true stuff, and faster to boot. True stories took, __7____, six times longer than falsehoods to reach at least 1,500 people. Only about 0.1% of true stories were ___8___ by more than 1,000 people, __9___ 1% of false stories managed between 1,000 and 100,000 shares.

     The reason false information does better than the true stuff is simple, say the researchers. Things spread through social networks because they are ___10___, not because they are true. One way to make news appealing is to make it __11___. Sure enough, when the researchers checked how novel a tweet was, they found false tweets were significantly more novel than the true ones. Untrue stories were also more likely to inspire ___12___ such as fear, disgust and surprise, whereas genuine ones ___13___ anticipation, sadness, joy and trust, leading to the rather depressing conclusion that people prefer to share stories that generate strong ____14___ reactions.

     The paper also sheds some of the first peer-reviewed light on the __15__ of “bots”---automated accounts posing as real people. The idea that Russian bots in particular helped sway America’s presidential election has lodged itself firmly in the public consciousness. __16___ the paper finds that, on Twitter at least, the presence of bots does not seem to boost the spread of falsehoods relative to truth.

     The researchers were able to conduct a study of this breadth ___17____ the business relationship between one of their number, Deb Roy, and Twitter, which __18___ its entire historical dataset at a steep discount. But more are likely to come. Technology companies, and particularly social-media firms, are facing a backlash from regulators and consumers worried about the __19___ from their products. Twitter, ___20___, has said it is ready to offer the same dataset to other outside experts.

Section II Reading Comprehension

Part A

Directions:

Read the following four texts. Answer the questions after each text by choosing A, B, C or D. Mark your answers on the ANSWER SHEET. (40 points)

Text 1

     For the first time in history, the Earth has more people over the age of 65 than under the age of five. In another two decades the ratio will be two-to-one, according to a recent analysis by Deutsche Bank.

     Ageing slows growth in several ways. One is that there are fewer new workers to boost output. Workforces in some 40 countries are already shrinking because of demographic change. As the number of elderly people increases, governments may neglect growth-boosting public investment in education and infrastructure in favour of spending on pensions and health care. People in work, required to support ever more pensioners, must pay higher taxes. But the biggest hit to growth comes from weakening productivity.

     Why are older economies less productive? The answer is not, as one might suppose, that older workers are. Though some capabilities, notably physical ones, deteriorate with age, the overall effect is not dramatic. Companies can tweak employees’ roles as they get older in order to make best use of the advantages of age, such as extensive experience and professional connections. Furthermore, if weak productivity growth was caused by older workers producing less, pay patterns should reflect that. Wages would tend to rise at the beginning of a career and fall towards its end. But that is not what usually happens. Rather, according to a recent paper by Moody’s Analytics, wages are lower for everyone in companies with lots of older workers. It is not older workers’ falling productivity that seems to hold back the economy, but their influence on those around them.

     How this influence makes itself felt is unclear. But the authors suggest that companies with more older workers might be less eager to embrace new technologies. That might be because they are reluctant to make investments that would require employees to be retrained, given the shorter period over which they could hope to make a return on that training for those near the end of their careers.

If the evidence suggested that ageing economies struggled primarily because of slow-growing labour forces and fast-growing pension costs, it would make sense to focus policy efforts on keeping people in work longer. But if, as seems to be the case, reluctance to embrace new technologies is a bigger issue, other goals should take priority—in particular, boosting competition. The benefits of breaking up powerful firms and increasing competition might be even bigger than thought, if conservative old firms are thereby spurred to make better use of newer technologies.

Text 2

     Like many an office novelty, agile working is becoming a corporate mantra. It has been on trend for at least 20 years and rather more commonplace since the arrival of the mobile phone and broadband.

It seems like a win-win: employers measure employees’ output without sweating the time taken for a long lunch; employees gain a newfound autonomy that is unprecedented in postwar business practice. In some ways, it mirrors student work styles: do it in your time, at your chosen place or indeed in your pajamas.

     Agile working is increasingly popular. According to a recent UK Labor Force Survey, nearly 10m people work remotely some or all of the time, and a study in February 2016 by Lancaster University found that about half of all employers planned to adopt agile or flexible working by 2017. But it may also be the case that agile working has hit a tipping point.

Today’s agile working is a far cry from the simple flexitime of the 1980s. Now it involves working wherever you like, including from home, while you are connected to the office via chat systems, intranets and emails; flexitime simply meant coming in later every so often.

     Agile working has attained more popularity based on the proposition that if you get your work done, you can take as much time off as you want. Compared to the old cumbersome mode of work, which involved commuting to an office, punching in, sitting at a desk, taking a break at an anointed hour and then the same in reverse, today work can be more flexible: arrive when you like, where you like, and leave when you want.

     But herein lies a contradiction: the ability to produce work that is inclusive, fit for purpose and aligned to group goals is not always easy when you are working by yourself. Yes, withdrawing into the home office without interruptions has advantages, not least that you can think deeply through a problem without being interrupted. But the structure, rigor and discipline of systematized collaboration in a team are a prerequisite to much work.

     So, agile working by itself might not lead to agile thinking. Water-cooler disruptions can be annoying but they can also be creative. Workspaces can be oppressive, but a style designed as agile work may lead to thinking blocks. Regular encounters between colleagues in a safe space that is professional and nurturing can be the most productive. We call these offices.

Text 3

     Within many workers’ lifetimes, jobs will be radically altered by automation. And, according to one of the world’s biggest international coalitions, it’s time to develop a plan B.

A recent employment outlook from the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), a coalition consisting of 36 countries across the world, said that within the next two decades half of all jobs will be substantially transformed by technology.

     In some cases, that will mean workers losing their jobs outright -- the OECD estimates 14 percent of jobs will be completely automated in the next two decades -- while others, 32 percent of jobs, will be vastly different from what they look like now.

     Whether jobs are transformed or lost completely to the advance of technology, the OECD says one question rises above all others: are we ready?

     “The OECD Employment Outlook does not envisage a jobless future. But it does foresee major challenges for the future of work,” said OECD Secretary-General Angel Gurría, in a statement.

While many jobs will be changed or eliminated, the OECD says that the shift won’t necessarily equate to less overall jobs for workers. With new and improved technology, also comes new and skilled jobs.

Automation may even create jobs in the short term, say some analysts. The problem, says the organization, is ensuring that current workers are equipped to transition into those jobs now and in the future.

     To ensure that workers eclipsed by robots and other technology can pivot into a new career, the OECD says that a robust adult training program is critical. That may involve not only training older workers but also removing the financial burdens of their endeavors through subsidies.

     This money, say proponents, would allow workers to undergo additional training for new jobs and ease unrest in the case of substantial job loss. Opponents say the stipend would just disincentivize work all together. The OECD is clear that nothing is set in stone. Even with a rapidly changing economy and the forward march of technology, all we need is a plan.

     “With the right policies, we can manage these challenges. We face significant transformation, but we have the opportunity and the determination to use this moment and build a future of work that benefits everyone,”said Gurria.

Text 4

     App-based marketplaces like Uber and Lyft have revolutionized the way people find work and earn income. Workers today can choose many kinds of short-term and flexible jobs, whenever they want or need.

     Yet, this flexibility comes at a cost. Most of these “gig workers”, while they earn income, do not receive benefits, including healthcare, life insurance, disability insurance and pensions. For this new way of working to be a net positive for workers, the ensuing and emerging gap for traditional employment benefits will need to be filled.

     There are three potential options for filling this gap. A public solution would see governments step in to provide these benefits. That seems unlikely in the current climate, particularly in countries such as the US. A private solution would have companies start to treat their gig workers like employees and provide full benefits. But given the costs involved, analysts expect Uber, Lyft and most other companies to refuse unless they are forced to by new laws or regulations.

     That means that in the short term, gig workers will have to carry the cost of their own benefits. That creates an opening for the third possibility: a new set of for-profit businesses could emerge to provide benefits tailored to gig workers.

     These private companies could find it very attractive to offer lower cost options for healthcare, workers’ compensation and retirement savings that individual gig workers would never be able to negotiate on their own. Further, these companies could come up with innovative products aimed at these workers, including loans designed for individuals with intermittent but predictable income, or tools for running freelancer businesses.

     Given how work has evolved, labor regulations must change as well. The existing work contract needs to be reimagined to extend beyond the typical categories of self-employed, full-time or part-time. This new “gig status” would be designed to protect flexible work while providing some economic protection, enabling them to weather financial shocks and provide a path to longer term economic stability.

     Under this scenario, workers would receive select benefits like health or disability insurance without compromising their employment status. Right now, the receipt of any type of “benefits” often triggers an official employment relationship requiring individuals to work more hours, losing their flexibility.

It will take time to develop and implement a new framework that strikes the right balance between flexibility and economic security. We know that work brings more than just income: it also provides dignity, purpose and social connections. A reimagined work contract would allow every worker to achieve their full potential, on their own terms. 

Part B

Directions:

Read the following text and match each of the numbered items in the left column to its corresponding information in the right column. There are two extra choices in the right column. Mark your answers on the ANSWER SHEET. (10 points)

     Students, parents and educators increasingly obsessed with college rankings have a new tool: the Obama administration’s College Scorecard. The new database focuses on a college’s graduation rate, graduates’ median earnings 10 years after graduation and the percentage of students paying back their college loans.

     “It’s a classic example of confusing causation and correlation,” said Frank Bruni, the author of “Where You Go Is Not Who You’ll Be,” a book about the college admissions process, and an op-ed columnist for The New York Times. “Anyone who has taken statistics should know better, but when it comes to colleges, that’s what people do. They throw common sense out the window.”

     “It’s absurd,” said Jerry Z. Muller, a professor of history at Catholic University of America and the author of “The Costs of Accountability,” a study of misplaced and misunderstood metrics. “Their graduates have high earnings because they’re incredibly selective about who they let in. And many of them come from privileged backgrounds, which also correlates with high earnings.”

     Andrew Delbanco, a professor at Columbia University and author of the book “College: What It Was, Is, and Should Be,” agreed. “Holding colleges accountable for how well they prepare students for post college life is a good thing in principle,” he said. “But measuring that preparation in purely monetary terms raises many dangers. Should colleges be encouraged first and foremost to maximize the net worth of their graduates? I don’t think so.”

U.S. News does not even include earnings data in its ranking formula, although it said it might do so.        “The federal data is a large and new data set, and we’re studying it,” said Brian Kelly, editor and chief content officer for U.S. News. “It represents a subset of students, and we’re looking closely to determine if it in fact tells us what it claims to.”

Jonathan Rothwell, a fellow at Brookings and an author of the study, said that many educators applauded this approach but it had drawn criticism from the liberal arts community, which says it unduly weights a narrow focus on high-paying STEM fields. Mr. Rothwell defended that approach, noting that a college’s curriculum and what field a student studies were “hugely relevant to graduate success.”

     But he acknowledged that liberal arts programs and programs that train students for lower-paying fields were valuable to both individuals and society. “If your only goal is to make as much money as possible, you should study engineering, computer science, biology or business,” he said. “But most people are interested in more than just making money.”

Section III Translation