vid Feldman and Lynn Goldsmith was taught far more about writing by his journalist father than his English teacher. High-IQ children, in Australia studied by Miraca Gross had much more positive feelings about their families than their schools. About half of the mathematicians studied by Benjamin Bloom had little good to say about school. They all did well in school and took honors classes when available, and some skipped grades.
26. The main point the author is making about schools is that
A) they should satisfy the needs of students from different family backgrounds
B) they are often incapable of catering to the needs of talented students
C) they should organize their classes according to the students' ability
D) they should enroll as many gifted students as possible
27. The author quotes the remarks of one of Oliver Goldsmith's teachers
A) to provide support for his argument
B) to illustrate the strong will of some gifted children
C) to explain how dull students can also be successful
D) to show how poor Oliver's performance was at school
28. Pablo Picasso is listed among the many gifted children who
A) paid no attention to their teachers in class
B) contradicted their teachers much too often
C) could not cope with their studies at school successfully
D) behaved arrogantly and stubbornly in the presence of their teachers
29. Many gifted people attributed their success.
A) mainly to parental help and their education at home
B) both to school instruction and to their parents' coaching
C) more to their parents' encouragement than to school training
D) less to their systematic education than to their talent
30. The root cause of many gifted students having bad memories of their school years is that
A) their nonconformity brought them a lot of trouble
B) they were seldom praised by their teachers
C) school courses failed to inspire or motivate them
D) teachers were usually far stricter than their parents
Passage Three Questions 31 to 35 are based on the following passage.
When we worry about who might be spying on our private lives, we usually think about the Federal agents. But the private sector outdoes the government every time. It's Linda Tripp, not the FBI, who is facing charges under Maryland's laws against secret telephone taping. It's our banks, not the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), that pass our private financial data to telemarketing fin'ms.Consumer activists are pressing Congress for better privacy laws without much result so far.
The legislators lean toward letting business people track our financial habits virtually at will.As an example of what's going on, consider U.S. Bancorp, which was recently sued for deceptive practices by the state of Minnesota. According to the lawsuit, the bank supplied a telemarketer called MemberWorks with sensitive customer data such as names,, ph'one numbers, bank-account and credit-card numbers, Social Security numbers, account balances and credit limits.With these customer lists in hand, MemberWorks started dialing for dollars - selling dental plans, videogames, computer software and other products and services.
Customers who accepted a "free trial offer" had, 30 days to cancel. If the deadline passed, they were charged automatically through their bank or credit-card accounts. U.S. Bancorp collected a share of the revenu——es_ ……Customers were doubly deceived, the lawsuit claims. They. didn't know that the bank was giving account numbers to MemberWorks. And if customers asked, they were led to think the answer was no.
The state sued MemberWorks separately for deceptive selling. Thecompany de'hies that it did anything wrong. For its part, U.S. Bancorp settled without admitting any mistakes. But it agreed to stop exposing its customers to nonfinancial products sold by outside firms. A few top banks decided to do the same. Many other banks will still do business with MemberWorks and similar firms.And banks will still be mining data from your account in order to sell you financial products, including things of little value, such as credit insurance and credit-card protection plans.
You have almost no protection from businesses that use your personal accounts for profit. For example, no federal law shields "transaction and experience" information - mainly the details of your bank and credit-card accounts. Social Security numbers are for sale by private fa'ms. They've generally agreed not to sell to the public. But to businesses, the numbers are an open book. Selfregulation doesn't work. A firm might publish a privacy-protection policy, but who enforces it?
Take U.S. Bancorp again. Customers were told, in writing, that "all personal information you supply
上一页 [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] 下一页
