政策解讀
快速擇校
About the time that schools and others quite reasonably became interested in seeing to it that all children, whatever their background, were fairly treated, intelligence testing became unpopular.
Some thought it was unfair to minority children. Through the past few decades such testing has gone out of fashion and many communities have indeed forbidden it.
However, paradoxically, just recently a group of black parents filed a lawsuit (訴訟) in California claiming that the state’s ban on IQ testing discriminates against their children by denying them the opportunity to take the test. (They believed, correctly, that IQ tests are a valid method of evaluating children for special education classes.) The judge, therefore, reversed, at least partially, his original decision.
And so the argument goes on and on. Does it benefit or harm children from minority groups to have their intelligence tested? We have always been on the side of permitting, even facilitating such testing. If a child of any color or group is doing poorly in school it seems to us very important to know whether it is because he or she is of low intelligence, or whether some other factor is the cause.
What school and family can do to improve poor performance is influenced by its cause. It is not discriminative to evaluate either a child’s physical condition or his intellectual level.
Unfortunately, intellectual level seems to be a sensitive subject, and what the law allows us to do varies from time to time. The same fluctuation back and forth occurs in areas other than intelligence. Thirty years or so ago, for instance, white families were encouraged to adopt black children. It was considered discriminative not to do so.
And then the style changed and this cross-racial adopting became generally unpopular, and social agencies felt that black children should go to black families only. It is hard to say what the best procedures are. But surely good will on the part of all of us is needed.
As to intelligence, in our opinion, the more we know about any child’s intellectual level, the better for the child in question.
1. Why did the intelligence test become unpopular in the past few decades?
A. Its validity was challenged by many communities.
B. It was considered discriminative against minority children.
C. It met with strong opposition from the majority of black parents.
D. It deprived the black children of their rights to a good education.
2. The recent legal action taken by some black parents in
A. draw public attention to IQ testing
B. put an end to special education
C. remove the state’s ban on intelligence tests
D. have their children enter white schools
3. The author believes that intelligence testing ______.
A. may ease racial confrontation in the
B. can encourage black children to keep up with white children
C. may seriously aggravate racial discrimination in the
D. can help black parents make decisions about their children’s education
4. The author’s opinion of child adoption seems to be that ______.
A. no rules whatsoever can be prescribed
B. white families should adopt black children
C. adoption should be based on IQ test results
D. cross-racial adoption is to be advocated
5. Child adoption is mentioned in the passage to show that ______.
A. good will may sometimes complicate racial problems
B. social surroundings are vital to the healthy growth of children
C. intelligence testing also applies to non-academic areas
D. American opinion can shift when it comes to sensitive issues
答案:B C A D D
特別聲明:①凡本網注明稿件來源為"原創"的,轉載必須注明"稿件來源:育路網",違者將依法追究責任;
②部分稿件來源于網絡,如有侵權,請聯系我們溝通解決。
成都在職研究生考公務員優勢顯著,報考階段有超30%碩士崗可癬筆試面試因專業學習更具競爭力;上岸后薪資定級更高(碩士定四級主任科員)、晉升更快(縮短職級晉升年限)...
四川在職研究生落戶政策以成都為例,45歲以下本科及以上學歷的在職研究生,提供畢業證及學歷認證材料,即便無房也可選擇本人或直系親屬合法穩定住所、單位集體戶或人才流...
會計非全日制研究生(MPAcc)報考無需學位證,大專及以上學歷等滿足條件即可報名,涵蓋考試流程、多院校招生信息,助力考生選擇。
武漢非全日制招生簡章涵蓋報考條件、考試流程、招生院校等信息,申請便捷,多采用遠程授課,為在職人士提供高效深造途徑。
浙江同等學力申碩通過率較高,得益于免試入學的政策。大專及以上學歷可先參加課程學習,本科畢業有學位滿三年可申碩,申碩考試科目少、難度低,多種因素共同提升了通過率。
40歲讀在職研究生不晚。學習沒有年齡限制,40歲時通過在職研究生提升學歷、拓展能力,既能適配職場發展需求,又能實現自我成長,且在職學習可平衡工作與生活,年齡不是...
評論0
“無需登錄,可直接評論...”