英語(yǔ)作文真題記單詞
核心詞匯:
psychological adj. 心理(上)的
[例] Is there any possible psychological explanation for his bad health?
他健康狀況不好,有沒(méi)有可能具有什么心理上的原因呢?
[派生] psychologically adv. 心理上地, 心理學(xué)地psychology n. 心理學(xué), 心理狀態(tài)classify vt. 分類(lèi), 分等
[例] classify books by subjects 按學(xué)科將圖書(shū)分類(lèi)
[同義] group, sort, categorize, organize
[派生] classified v. 分類(lèi) adj. 機(jī)密的military adj. 軍事的, 軍用的
[例] According to the Constitution of the country all the young men do a year's military service.
"根據(jù)該國(guó)的憲法規(guī)定,所有的男青年都要服一年兵役。"
[同義] armed forces, army , service, civil , naval
[反義] civil adj. 全民的, 市民的, 公民的, 國(guó)民的, 民間的.民事的, 根據(jù)民法的, 文職的, 有禮貌的
[派生] militarize v. 軍事化divert v. 1 轉(zhuǎn)移, 轉(zhuǎn)向2 使高興
[例] A ditch diverted water from the stream into the fields. 一條溝渠把水從河里引向田間。
[同義] amuse, delight , entertain ,tickle;detract, distract
[派生] diversion n. 轉(zhuǎn)移, 轉(zhuǎn)換, 牽制, 解悶, 娛樂(lè)precision n. 精確, 精密度, 精度
[例] precision in calculation 計(jì)算的精確度
[同義] accuracy, correctness ,exactness
[反義] inaccuracy n. 錯(cuò)誤
[派生] precise adj. 精確的, 準(zhǔn)確的 n. 精確validate vt. 1[律]使有效, 使生效2 確認(rèn), 證實(shí), 驗(yàn)證
[例] Time validated our suspicion. 時(shí)間證實(shí)了我們的懷疑。
[反義] invalidate vt. 使無(wú)效
[派生] validity n. 有效性, 合法性, 正確性error n. 錯(cuò)誤, 過(guò)失, 誤差
[例] The accident was caused by human error. 這事故是由人為的錯(cuò)誤引起的。
[同義] fault , wrong , mistake
[派生] erroneous adj. 錯(cuò)誤的, 不正確的qualitative adj. 性質(zhì)上的, 定性的
[例] a qualitative analysis 定性分析
[派生] qualitatively adv. 質(zhì)量上comparable adj. 可比較的, 比得上的
[例] A comparable car would cost far more in Europe. 一輛象這樣好的汽車(chē)在歐洲可要貴得多。
[同義] similar, equivalent
[反義] incomparable adj. 無(wú)與倫比的, 不能比較的
[派生] compare v. 比較, 相比, 比喻 n. 比較circumstance n. 環(huán)境, 詳情, 境況
[例] The circumstances forced me to accept. 環(huán)境迫使我不得不同意。
[同義] condition, situation ,state
[派生] circumstantial adj. 依照情況的
【真題原文】
學(xué)習(xí)完單詞后自己認(rèn)真翻譯原文,并將原文中紅色字體部分句子的譯文回帖,認(rèn)真答題者獎(jiǎng)勵(lì)50HY,灌水者殺無(wú)赦。
The standardized educational or psychological test that are widely used to aid in selecting, classifying, assigning, or promoting students, employees, and military personnel have been the target of recent attacks in books, magazines, the daily press, and even in congress. The target is wrong, for in attacking the tests, critics divert attention form the fault that lies with ill-informed or incompetent users.The tests themselves are merely tools, with characteristics that can be measured with reasonable precision under specified conditions. Whether the results will be valuable, meaningless, or even misleading depends partly upon the tool itself but largely upon the user .
All informed predictions of future performance are based upon some knowledge of relevant past performance: school grades, research productivity, sales records, or whatever is appropriate. How well the predictions will be validated by later performance depends upon the amount, reliability, and appropriateness of the information used and on the skill and wisdom with which it is interpreted. Anyone who keeps careful score knows that the information available is always incomplete and that the predictions are always subject to error.
Standardized tests should be considered in this context. They provide a quick, objective method of getting some kinds of information about what a person learned , the skills he has developed, or the kind of person he is. The information so obtained has, qualitatively, the same advantages and shortcomings as other kinds of information. Whether to use tests, other kinds of information, or both in a particular situation depends, therefore, upon the evidence from experience concerning comparative validity and upon such factors as cost and availability.
In general, the tests work most effectively when the qualities to be measured can be most precisely defined and least effectively when what is to be measured or predicted cannot be well defined. Properly used, they provide a rapid means of getting comparable information about many people. Sometimes they identify students whose high potential has not been previously recognized, but there are many things they do not do. For example, they do not compensate for gross social inequality, and thus do not tell how able an underprivileged youngster might have been had he grown up under more favorable circumstances.
【原文翻譯】
標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化教育測(cè)試或心理測(cè)試現(xiàn)在廣泛應(yīng)用于協(xié)助選拔、分類(lèi)、委派或提升學(xué)生、雇員和軍事人員,這些測(cè)試一直是某些人近年來(lái)在圖書(shū)、雜志、日?qǐng)?bào)、甚至國(guó)會(huì)中抨擊的目標(biāo)。把這種標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化測(cè)試作為抨擊的目標(biāo)是不對(duì)的,因?yàn),在抨擊這類(lèi)測(cè)試時(shí),批評(píng)者沒(méi)有考慮其弊病來(lái)自人們對(duì)測(cè)試不甚了解或使用不當(dāng)。這些測(cè)試本身只是一種工具,其各種特性是可以在規(guī)定的條件下用相當(dāng)?shù)木葋?lái)測(cè)定的。測(cè)試的結(jié)果是有價(jià)值的,還是無(wú)意義的,甚至是誤導(dǎo)的,部分取決于這種工具本身,但主要取決于測(cè)試的使用者。
所有對(duì)未來(lái)表現(xiàn)有見(jiàn)地的預(yù)測(cè)都是以在某種程度上了解有關(guān)過(guò)去的表現(xiàn)為基礎(chǔ)的:學(xué)校學(xué)習(xí)成績(jī)、研究效益、銷(xiāo)售記錄或一切符合需要的信息。這些預(yù)測(cè)在多大程度上被后來(lái)的表現(xiàn)所證實(shí),取決于所采用的信息的數(shù)量、可靠性和適應(yīng)性,以及解釋這些信息的技能和才智。任何仔細(xì)記分的人都知道,所得到的信息總是不完全的.,而且這些預(yù)測(cè)也總會(huì)是會(huì)有錯(cuò)誤的。
應(yīng)該根據(jù)這種觀點(diǎn)去考察標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化考試。標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化測(cè)試提供了快速、客觀地得到某種信息的方法。這些信息是有關(guān)一個(gè)人所學(xué)到的知識(shí)、他所獲得的技能,或者他是屬于哪一類(lèi)型的人。這樣得到的信息,從性質(zhì)上講,和其他種類(lèi)的信息一樣都具有優(yōu)缺點(diǎn)。因此,在某一特定環(huán)境下,究竟是采取測(cè)試還是其他種類(lèi)的信息,或者兩者同時(shí)使用,須憑有關(guān)相對(duì)效力的經(jīng)驗(yàn)依據(jù)而定,也取決于諸如費(fèi)用和有無(wú)來(lái)源等因素。
一般說(shuō)來(lái),當(dāng)需要測(cè)定的特征能十分精確的界定,測(cè)試的效果就是最佳的,反之,如果所需測(cè)定和預(yù)測(cè)的東西得不到明確的界定,那麼測(cè)試的效果就最差。這些測(cè)試如能恰當(dāng)使用,就能提供一種快速的方法來(lái)獲得有關(guān)許多人的可比性信息。有時(shí)這些測(cè)試能鑒別出一些學(xué)生,他們很高的潛在能力過(guò)去一直沒(méi)有被認(rèn)識(shí)。但是也有許多事情,這些測(cè)試是不能勝任的;例如,測(cè)試并不彌補(bǔ)很明顯的社會(huì)不公;因此,它們說(shuō)明不了一個(gè)物質(zhì)條件差的年輕人,如果在較好的環(huán)境下成長(zhǎng)的話(huà),會(huì)有多大的才干。
【英語(yǔ)作文真題記單詞】相關(guān)文章:
考研英語(yǔ)真題有哪些單詞詞匯11-18
英語(yǔ)真題閱讀完型核心單詞04-06
作文的題記10-18
帶有題記的作文07-12
英語(yǔ)單詞作文07-15
感動(dòng)的作文題記09-29
作文題記格式10-10
關(guān)于題記作文10-14
題記初中優(yōu)秀作文10-09