Which of the following statements is NOT a way of consolidating vocabulary?

Which of the following does not make a good English teacher

In which of the following activities does the teacher mainly play the role of a Controller?

Which of the following words has the proper word stress

Passage 1

Lonely people, it seems, are at greater risk than the gregarious of developing illnessesassociated with chronic inflammation, such as heart disease and certain cancers. A paper publishedlast year in the Public Library of Science, Medicine, shows the effect on mortality of loneliness iscomparable with that of smoking and drinking after examining the results of 148 previous studiesand controlled for factors such as age and pre-existing illness.

Steven Cole of the University of California, Los Angeles, thinks he may know why this is so.

He told the American Association for the Advancement of Science meeting in Washington, D.C.,about his work studying the expression of genes in lonely people. Dr. Cole harvested samples ofwhite blood cells from both lonely and gregarious people. He then analysed the activity of theirgenes, as measured by the production of a substance called messenger RNA. This molecule carriesinstructions from the genes telling a cell which proteins to make. The level of messenger RNA frommost genes was the same in both types of people. There were several dozen genes, however, thatwere less active in the lonely, and several dozen others that were more active. Moreover, both theless active and the more active gene types came from a small number of functional groups.

Broadly speaking, the genes less active in the lonely were those involved in staving off viralinfections. Those that were more active were involved in protecting against bacteria. Dr. Colesuspects this could help explain not only why the lonely are iller, but how, in evolutionary terms, thisodd state of affairs has come about.

The crucial bit of the puzzle is that viruses have to be caught from another infected individualand they are usually species-specific. Bacteria, in contrast, often just lurk in the environment, andmay thrive on many hosts. The gregarious are therefore at greater risk than the lonely of catchingviruses, and Dr. Cole thus suggests

Passage 1

Lonely people, it seems, are at greater risk than the gregarious of developing illnessesassociated with chronic inflammation, such as heart disease and certain cancers. A paper publishedlast year in the Public Library of Science, Medicine, shows the effect on mortality of loneliness iscomparable with that of smoking and drinking after examining the results of 148 previous studiesand controlled for factors such as age and pre-existing illness.

Steven Cole of the University of California, Los Angeles, thinks he may know why this is so.

He told the American Association for the Advancement of Science meeting in Washington, D.C.,about his work studying the expression of genes in lonely people. Dr. Cole harvested samples ofwhite blood cells from both lonely and gregarious people. He then analysed the activity of theirgenes, as measured by the production of a substance called messenger RNA. This molecule carriesinstructions from the genes telling a cell which proteins to make. The level of messenger RNA frommost genes was the same in both types of people. There were several dozen genes, however, thatwere less active in the lonely, and several dozen others that were more active. Moreover, both theless active and the more active gene types came from a small number of functional groups.

Broadly speaking, the genes less active in the lonely were those involved in staving off viralinfections. Those that were more active were involved in protecting against bacteria. Dr. Colesuspects this could help explain not only why the lonely are iller, but how, in evolutionary terms, thisodd state of affairs has come about.

The crucial bit of the puzzle is that viruses have to be caught from another infected individualand they are usually species-specific. Bacteria, in contrast, often just lurk in the environment, andmay thrive on many hosts. The gregarious are therefore at greater risk than the lonely of catchingviruses, and Dr. Cole thus suggests

Passage 1

Lonely people, it seems, are at greater risk than the gregarious of developing illnessesassociated with chronic inflammation, such as heart disease and certain cancers. A paper publishedlast year in the Public Library of Science, Medicine, shows the effect on mortality of loneliness iscomparable with that of smoking and drinking after examining the results of 148 previous studiesand controlled for factors such as age and pre-existing illness.

Steven Cole of the University of California, Los Angeles, thinks he may know why this is so.

He told the American Association for the Advancement of Science meeting in Washington, D.C.,about his work studying the expression of genes in lonely people. Dr. Cole harvested samples ofwhite blood cells from both lonely and gregarious people. He then analysed the activity of theirgenes, as measured by the production of a substance called messenger RNA. This molecule carriesinstructions from the genes telling a cell which proteins to make. The level of messenger RNA frommost genes was the same in both types of people. There were several dozen genes, however, thatwere less active in the lonely, and several dozen others that were more active. Moreover, both theless active and the more active gene types came from a small number of functional groups.

Broadly speaking, the genes less active in the lonely were those involved in staving off viralinfections. Those that were more active were involved in protecting against bacteria. Dr. Colesuspects this could help explain not only why the lonely are iller, but how, in evolutionary terms, thisodd state of affairs has come about.

The crucial bit of the puzzle is that viruses have to be caught from another infected individualand they are usually species-specific. Bacteria, in contrast, often just lurk in the environment, andmay thrive on many hosts. The gregarious are therefore at greater risk than the lonely of catchingviruses, and Dr. Cole thus suggests

Passage 1

Lonely people, it seems, are at greater risk than the gregarious of developing illnessesassociated with chronic inflammation, such as heart disease and certain cancers. A paper publishedlast year in the Public Library of Science, Medicine, shows the effect on mortality of loneliness iscomparable with that of smoking and drinking after examining the results of 148 previous studiesand controlled for factors such as age and pre-existing illness.

Steven Cole of the University of California, Los Angeles, thinks he may know why this is so.

He told the American Association for the Advancement of Science meeting in Washington, D.C.,about his work studying the expression of genes in lonely people. Dr. Cole harvested samples ofwhite blood cells from both lonely and gregarious people. He then analysed the activity of theirgenes, as measured by the production of a substance called messenger RNA. This molecule carriesinstructions from the genes telling a cell which proteins to make. The level of messenger RNA frommost genes was the same in both types of people. There were several dozen genes, however, thatwere less active in the lonely, and several dozen others that were more active. Moreover, both theless active and the more active gene types came from a small number of functional groups.

Broadly speaking, the genes less active in the lonely were those involved in staving off viralinfections. Those that were more active were involved in protecting against bacteria. Dr. Colesuspects this could help explain not only why the lonely are iller, but how, in evolutionary terms, thisodd state of affairs has come about.

The crucial bit of the puzzle is that viruses have to be caught from another infected individualand they are usually species-specific. Bacteria, in contrast, often just lurk in the environment, andmay thrive on many hosts. The gregarious are therefore at greater risk than the lonely of catchingviruses, and Dr. Cole thus suggests

Passage 1

Lonely people, it seems, are at greater risk than the gregarious of developing illnessesassociated with chronic inflammation, such as heart disease and certain cancers. A paper publishedlast year in the Public Library of Science, Medicine, shows the effect on mortality of loneliness iscomparable with that of smoking and drinking after examining the results of 148 previous studiesand controlled for factors such as age and pre-existing illness.

Steven Cole of the University of California, Los Angeles, thinks he may know why this is so.

He told the American Association for the Advancement of Science meeting in Washington, D.C.,about his work studying the expression of genes in lonely people. Dr. Cole harvested samples ofwhite blood cells from both lonely and gregarious people. He then analysed the activity of theirgenes, as measured by the production of a substance called messenger RNA. This molecule carriesinstructions from the genes telling a cell which proteins to make. The level of messenger RNA frommost genes was the same in both types of people. There were several dozen genes, however, thatwere less active in the lonely, and several dozen others that were more active. Moreover, both theless active and the more active gene types came from a small number of functional groups.

Broadly speaking, the genes less active in the lonely were those involved in staving off viralinfections. Those that were more active were involved in protecting against bacteria. Dr. Colesuspects this could help explain not only why the lonely are iller, but how, in evolutionary terms, thisodd state of affairs has come about.

The crucial bit of the puzzle is that viruses have to be caught from another infected individualand they are usually species-specific. Bacteria, in contrast, often just lurk in the environment, andmay thrive on many hosts. The gregarious are therefore at greater risk than the lonely of catchingviruses, and Dr. Cole thus suggests

Ibought a new bicycle, __________was very high.

It is in the Future Mall where you bought a coat___________her sister works.

Passage 1

Two years ago, Rupert Murdoch′s daughter, Elisabeth, spoke of the"unsettling dearth ofintegrity across so many of our institutions". Integrity had collapsed, she argued, because of acollective acceptance that the only "sorting mechanism" in society should be profit and the market.

But "it′ s us, human beings, we the people who create the society we want, not profit".

Driving her point home, she continued: "It′s increasingly apparent that the absence of purpose,of a moral language within government, media or business could become one of the most dangerousgoals for capitalism and freedom." This same absence of moral purpose was wounding companiessuch as News International, she thought, making it more likely that it would lose its way as it hadwith widespread illegal telephone hacking.

As the hacking trial concludes--finding guilty one ex-editor of the News of the World, AndyCoulson, for conspiring to hack phones, and finding his predecessor, Rebekah Brooks, innocent ofthe same charge--the wider issue of dearth of integrity still stands. Journalists are known to havehacked the phones of up to 5,500 people. This is hacking on an industrial scale, as wasacknowledged by Glenn Mulcaire, the man hired by the News of the World in 2001 to be the pointperson for phone hacking. Others await trial. This long story still unfolds.

In many respects, the dearth of moral purpose frames not only the fact of such widespreadphone hacking but the terms on which the trial took place. One of the astonishing revelations washow little Rebekah Brooks knew of what went on in her newsroom, how little she thought to ask andthe fact that she never inquired how the stories arrived. The core of her successful defence was thatshe knew nothing.

In today′s world, it has become normal that well-paid executives should not be accountable forwhat happens in the organisations that they run. Perhaps we should not be so surprised. For ageneration, the collecti

Passage 1

Two years ago, Rupert Murdoch′s daughter, Elisabeth, spoke of the"unsettling dearth ofintegrity across so many of our institutions". Integrity had collapsed, she argued, because of acollective acceptance that the only "sorting mechanism" in society should be profit and the market.

But "it′ s us, human beings, we the people who create the society we want, not profit".

Driving her point home, she continued: "It′s increasingly apparent that the absence of purpose,of a moral language within government, media or business could become one of the most dangerousgoals for capitalism and freedom." This same absence of moral purpose was wounding companiessuch as News International, she thought, making it more likely that it would lose its way as it hadwith widespread illegal telephone hacking.

As the hacking trial concludes--finding guilty one ex-editor of the News of the World, AndyCoulson, for conspiring to hack phones, and finding his predecessor, Rebekah Brooks, innocent ofthe same charge--the wider issue of dearth of integrity still stands. Journalists are known to havehacked the phones of up to 5,500 people. This is hacking on an industrial scale, as wasacknowledged by Glenn Mulcaire, the man hired by the News of the World in 2001 to be the pointperson for phone hacking. Others await trial. This long story still unfolds.

In many respects, the dearth of moral purpose frames not only the fact of such widespreadphone hacking but the terms on which the trial took place. One of the astonishing revelations washow little Rebekah Brooks knew of what went on in her newsroom, how little she thought to ask andthe fact that she never inquired how the stories arrived. The core of her successful defence was thatshe knew nothing.

In today′s world, it has become normal that well-paid executives should not be accountable forwhat happens in the organisations that they run. Perhaps we should not be so surprised. For ageneration, the collecti

Passage 1

Two years ago, Rupert Murdoch′s daughter, Elisabeth, spoke of the"unsettling dearth ofintegrity across so many of our institutions". Integrity had collapsed, she argued, because of acollective acceptance that the only "sorting mechanism" in society should be profit and the market.

But "it′ s us, human beings, we the people who create the society we want, not profit".

Driving her point home, she continued: "It′s increasingly apparent that the absence of purpose,of a moral language within government, media or business could become one of the most dangerousgoals for capitalism and freedom." This same absence of moral purpose was wounding companiessuch as News International, she thought, making it more likely that it would lose its way as it hadwith widespread illegal telephone hacking.

As the hacking trial concludes--finding guilty one ex-editor of the News of the World, AndyCoulson, for conspiring to hack phones, and finding his predecessor, Rebekah Brooks, innocent ofthe same charge--the wider issue of dearth of integrity still stands. Journalists are known to havehacked the phones of up to 5,500 people. This is hacking on an industrial scale, as wasacknowledged by Glenn Mulcaire, the man hired by the News of the World in 2001 to be the pointperson for phone hacking. Others await trial. This long story still unfolds.

In many respects, the dearth of moral purpose frames not only the fact of such widespreadphone hacking but the terms on which the trial took place. One of the astonishing revelations washow little Rebekah Brooks knew of what went on in her newsroom, how little she thought to ask andthe fact that she never inquired how the stories arrived. The core of her successful defence was thatshe knew nothing.

In today′s world, it has become normal that well-paid executives should not be accountable forwhat happens in the organisations that they run. Perhaps we should not be so surprised. For ageneration, the collecti

Passage 1

Two years ago, Rupert Murdoch′s daughter, Elisabeth, spoke of the"unsettling dearth ofintegrity across so many of our institutions". Integrity had collapsed, she argued, because of acollective acceptance that the only "sorting mechanism" in society should be profit and the market.

But "it′ s us, human beings, we the people who create the society we want, not profit".

Driving her point home, she continued: "It′s increasingly apparent that the absence of purpose,of a moral language within government, media or business could become one of the most dangerousgoals for capitalism and freedom." This same absence of moral purpose was wounding companiessuch as News International, she thought, making it more likely that it would lose its way as it hadwith widespread illegal telephone hacking.

As the hacking trial concludes--finding guilty one ex-editor of the News of the World, AndyCoulson, for conspiring to hack phones, and finding his predecessor, Rebekah Brooks, innocent ofthe same charge--the wider issue of dearth of integrity still stands. Journalists are known to havehacked the phones of up to 5,500 people. This is hacking on an industrial scale, as wasacknowledged by Glenn Mulcaire, the man hired by the News of the World in 2001 to be the pointperson for phone hacking. Others await trial. This long story still unfolds.

In many respects, the dearth of moral purpose frames not only the fact of such widespreadphone hacking but the terms on which the trial took place. One of the astonishing revelations washow little Rebekah Brooks knew of what went on in her newsroom, how little she thought to ask andthe fact that she never inquired how the stories arrived. The core of her successful defence was thatshe knew nothing.

In today′s world, it has become normal that well-paid executives should not be accountable forwhat happens in the organisations that they run. Perhaps we should not be so surprised. For ageneration, the collecti

Passage 1

Two years ago, Rupert Murdoch′s daughter, Elisabeth, spoke of the"unsettling dearth ofintegrity across so many of our institutions". Integrity had collapsed, she argued, because of acollective acceptance that the only "sorting mechanism" in society should be profit and the market.

But "it′ s us, human beings, we the people who create the society we want, not profit".

Driving her point home, she continued: "It′s increasingly apparent that the absence of purpose,of a moral language within government, media or business could become one of the most dangerousgoals for capitalism and freedom." This same absence of moral purpose was wounding companiessuch as News International, she thought, making it more likely that it would lose its way as it hadwith widespread illegal telephone hacking.

As the hacking trial concludes--finding guilty one ex-editor of the News of the World, AndyCoulson, for conspiring to hack phones, and finding his predecessor, Rebekah Brooks, innocent ofthe same charge--the wider issue of dearth of integrity still stands. Journalists are known to havehacked the phones of up to 5,500 people. This is hacking on an industrial scale, as wasacknowledged by Glenn Mulcaire, the man hired by the News of the World in 2001 to be the pointperson for phone hacking. Others await trial. This long story still unfolds.

In many respects, the dearth of moral purpose frames not only the fact of such widespreadphone hacking but the terms on which the trial took place. One of the astonishing revelations washow little Rebekah Brooks knew of what went on in her newsroom, how little she thought to ask andthe fact that she never inquired how the stories arrived. The core of her successful defence was thatshe knew nothing.

In today′s world, it has become normal that well-paid executives should not be accountable forwhat happens in the organisations that they run. Perhaps we should not be so surprised. For ageneration, the collecti

Although some countries have taken action to solve the shortage of water, it may be sometime __________ the situation improves.

In the following activities, which one needs most control

Passage 1

Come on--Everybody′s doing it. That whispered message, half invitation and half forcing, iswhat most of us think of when we hear the words peer pressure. It usually leads to no good--drinking, drugs and casual sex. But in her new book Join the Club, Tina Rosenbe~ contends thatpeer pressure can also be a positive force through what she calls the social cure, in whichorganizations and officials use the power of group dynamics to help individuals improve their livesand possibly the word.

Rosenberg, the recipient of a Pulitzer Prize, offers a host of examples of the social cure inaction: In South Carolina, a state-sponsored antismoking program called Rage Against the Haze setsout to make cigarettes uncool. In South Africa, an HIV-prevention initiative known as loveLiferecruits young people to promote safe sex among their peers.

The idea seems promising, and Rosenberg is a perceptive observer. Her critique of the lamenessof many pubic-health campaigns is spot-on: they fail to mobilize peer pressure for healthy habits,and they demonstrate a seriously flawed understanding of psychology. "Dare to be different, pleasedon′t smoke!" pleads one billboard campaign aimed at reducing smoking among teenagers--teenagers, who desire nothing more than fitting in. Rosenberg argues convincingly that public-healthadvocates ought to take a page from advertisers, so skilled at applying peer pressure.

But on the general effectiveness of the social cure, Rosenberg is less persuasive. Join the Clubis filled with too much irrelevant detail and not enough exploration of the social and biologicalfactors that make peer pressure so powerful. The most glaring flaw of the social cure as it′spresented here is that it doesn′t work very well for very long. Rage Against the Haze failed oncestate funding was cut. Evidence that the loveLife program produces lasting changes is limited andmixed.

There′ s no doubt that our peer groups exert enormous influence on our

Passage 1

Come on--Everybody′s doing it. That whispered message, half invitation and half forcing, iswhat most of us think of when we hear the words peer pressure. It usually leads to no good--drinking, drugs and casual sex. But in her new book Join the Club, Tina Rosenbe~ contends thatpeer pressure can also be a positive force through what she calls the social cure, in whichorganizations and officials use the power of group dynamics to help individuals improve their livesand possibly the word.

Rosenberg, the recipient of a Pulitzer Prize, offers a host of examples of the social cure inaction: In South Carolina, a state-sponsored antismoking program called Rage Against the Haze setsout to make cigarettes uncool. In South Africa, an HIV-prevention initiative known as loveLiferecruits young people to promote safe sex among their peers.

The idea seems promising, and Rosenberg is a perceptive observer. Her critique of the lamenessof many pubic-health campaigns is spot-on: they fail to mobilize peer pressure for healthy habits,and they demonstrate a seriously flawed understanding of psychology. "Dare to be different, pleasedon′t smoke!" pleads one billboard campaign aimed at reducing smoking among teenagers--teenagers, who desire nothing more than fitting in. Rosenberg argues convincingly that public-healthadvocates ought to take a page from advertisers, so skilled at applying peer pressure.

But on the general effectiveness of the social cure, Rosenberg is less persuasive. Join the Clubis filled with too much irrelevant detail and not enough exploration of the social and biologicalfactors that make peer pressure so powerful. The most glaring flaw of the social cure as it′spresented here is that it doesn′t work very well for very long. Rage Against the Haze failed oncestate funding was cut. Evidence that the loveLife program produces lasting changes is limited andmixed.

There′ s no doubt that our peer groups exert enormous influence on our

Passage 1

Come on--Everybody′s doing it. That whispered message, half invitation and half forcing, iswhat most of us think of when we hear the words peer pressure. It usually leads to no good--drinking, drugs and casual sex. But in her new book Join the Club, Tina Rosenbe~ contends thatpeer pressure can also be a positive force through what she calls the social cure, in whichorganizations and officials use the power of group dynamics to help individuals improve their livesand possibly the word.

Rosenberg, the recipient of a Pulitzer Prize, offers a host of examples of the social cure inaction: In South Carolina, a state-sponsored antismoking program called Rage Against the Haze setsout to make cigarettes uncool. In South Africa, an HIV-prevention initiative known as loveLiferecruits young people to promote safe sex among their peers.

The idea seems promising, and Rosenberg is a perceptive observer. Her critique of the lamenessof many pubic-health campaigns is spot-on: they fail to mobilize peer pressure for healthy habits,and they demonstrate a seriously flawed understanding of psychology. "Dare to be different, pleasedon′t smoke!" pleads one billboard campaign aimed at reducing smoking among teenagers--teenagers, who desire nothing more than fitting in. Rosenberg argues convincingly that public-healthadvocates ought to take a page from advertisers, so skilled at applying peer pressure.

But on the general effectiveness of the social cure, Rosenberg is less persuasive. Join the Clubis filled with too much irrelevant detail and not enough exploration of the social and biologicalfactors that make peer pressure so powerful. The most glaring flaw of the social cure as it′spresented here is that it doesn′t work very well for very long. Rage Against the Haze failed oncestate funding was cut. Evidence that the loveLife program produces lasting changes is limited andmixed.

There′ s no doubt that our peer groups exert enormous influence on our

Passage 1

Come on--Everybody′s doing it. That whispered message, half invitation and half forcing, iswhat most of us think of when we hear the words peer pressure. It usually leads to no good--drinking, drugs and casual sex. But in her new book Join the Club, Tina Rosenbe~ contends thatpeer pressure can also be a positive force through what she calls the social cure, in whichorganizations and officials use the power of group dynamics to help individuals improve their livesand possibly the word.

Rosenberg, the recipient of a Pulitzer Prize, offers a host of examples of the social cure inaction: In South Carolina, a state-sponsored antismoking program called Rage Against the Haze setsout to make cigarettes uncool. In South Africa, an HIV-prevention initiative known as loveLiferecruits young people to promote safe sex among their peers.

The idea seems promising, and Rosenberg is a perceptive observer. Her critique of the lamenessof many pubic-health campaigns is spot-on: they fail to mobilize peer pressure for healthy habits,and they demonstrate a seriously flawed understanding of psychology. "Dare to be different, pleasedon′t smoke!" pleads one billboard campaign aimed at reducing smoking among teenagers--teenagers, who desire nothing more than fitting in. Rosenberg argues convincingly that public-healthadvocates ought to take a page from advertisers, so skilled at applying peer pressure.

But on the general effectiveness of the social cure, Rosenberg is less persuasive. Join the Clubis filled with too much irrelevant detail and not enough exploration of the social and biologicalfactors that make peer pressure so powerful. The most glaring flaw of the social cure as it′spresented here is that it doesn′t work very well for very long. Rage Against the Haze failed oncestate funding was cut. Evidence that the loveLife program produces lasting changes is limited andmixed.

There′ s no doubt that our peer groups exert enormous influence on our

Passage 1

Come on--Everybody′s doing it. That whispered message, half invitation and half forcing, iswhat most of us think of when we hear the words peer pressure. It usually leads to no good--drinking, drugs and casual sex. But in her new book Join the Club, Tina Rosenbe~ contends thatpeer pressure can also be a positive force through what she calls the social cure, in whichorganizations and officials use the power of group dynamics to help individuals improve their livesand possibly the word.

Rosenberg, the recipient of a Pulitzer Prize, offers a host of examples of the social cure inaction: In South Carolina, a state-sponsored antismoking program called Rage Against the Haze setsout to make cigarettes uncool. In South Africa, an HIV-prevention initiative known as loveLiferecruits young people to promote safe sex among their peers.

The idea seems promising, and Rosenberg is a perceptive observer. Her critique of the lamenessof many pubic-health campaigns is spot-on: they fail to mobilize peer pressure for healthy habits,and they demonstrate a seriously flawed understanding of psychology. "Dare to be different, pleasedon′t smoke!" pleads one billboard campaign aimed at reducing smoking among teenagers--teenagers, who desire nothing more than fitting in. Rosenberg argues convincingly that public-healthadvocates ought to take a page from advertisers, so skilled at applying peer pressure.

But on the general effectiveness of the social cure, Rosenberg is less persuasive. Join the Clubis filled with too much irrelevant detail and not enough exploration of the social and biologicalfactors that make peer pressure so powerful. The most glaring flaw of the social cure as it′spresented here is that it doesn′t work very well for very long. Rage Against the Haze failed oncestate funding was cut. Evidence that the loveLife program produces lasting changes is limited andmixed.

There′ s no doubt that our peer groups exert enormous influence on our

The one that does not belong to the approach to teaching reflection is__________.

Careful surveys have indicated that as many as 50 percent of patients do not takedrugs__________directed.

His___________in alcohol mined his whole life.

How many consonant clusters exist in the sentence "The story was splashed across the frontpage of the newspaper"

Which of the letter "u"in the following words has a different pronunciation from others

It would be unwise to __________too much importance to these opinion polls.

Nowadays, there are many teenagers addicted to the Interact, __________waste a lot of timeon it.

听力技能是语言技能的重要内容之一。请简述听力基本技能包括哪些内容，并选择其中的三项技能．列举出合理的训练方式。

以下片段选自某节英语课堂教学实录，阅读并回答问题。

T: ... You all have finished the writing about how to protect our environment, right Ok,now, it′s time to check in terms of the grammar, punctuation point and spelling.

S: (checking time)

T: Ok, now, who would like to share your papers

Anna: ... We shouldn′ t throw rubbish everywhere ...

T: Your ideas are a little shallow, and the organization is a little disordered.

根据上面的教学片段回答下面三个问题：

(1)该片段呈现的是英语教学的什么课型它属于该课型的哪个阶段

(2)这节课的教学重难点是什么

(3)分析该教师在这一阶段存在的主要问题，并提出相应的改进建议。

设计任务：请阅读下面学生信息和语言素材，设计20分钟的英语阅读教学方案。

教案没有固定格式．但须包含下列要点：

·teaching objectives

·teaching contents

·key and difficult points

·major steps and time allocation

·activities and justifications

教学时间：20分钟

学生概况：某城镇普通高中一年级(第二学期)，班级人数40人，多数学生已经达到《普通高中英语课程标准(实验)》六级水平。学生课堂参与积极性一般。

语言素材：

Good teacher

To be a good teacher, you need some of the gifts of a good actor; you must be able to hold theattention and interest of your audience; you must be a clear speaker, with a good, strong, pleasingvoice which is fully under your control; and you must be able to act what you are teaching, in orderto make its meaning clear.

Watch a good teacher, and you will see that he does not sit still before his class: he stands thewhole time he is teaching; he walks about, using his arms, hands and fingers to help him in hisexplanations, and his face to express feelings. Listen to him, and you will hear the loudness, thequality (音色) and the musical note of his voice always changing according to what he is talkingabout.

The fact that a good teacher has some of the gifts of a good actor doesn′t mean that he willindeed be able to act well on the stage, for there are very important differences between the teacher′ swork and the actor′s. The actor has to speak words which he has learnt by heart; he has to repeatexactly the same words each time he plays a certain part, even his movements and the ways in whichhe uses his voice are usually fixed beforehand (预先). What he has to do is to make all thesecarefully learnt words and actions seem natural on the stage.

A good teacher works in quite a different way. His audience takes an active part in his play:they ask and answer questions, they obey orders, and if they don′t understand something, they sayso. The teacher therefore has to meet the needs of his audience, which is his class. He cannot learnhis part by heart, but must invent it as he goes along.

I have known many t