Вопросы по дисциплине:
Академическое чтение, письмо, выступление
Сбросить фильтр
| № | Вопрос | Действия |
|---|---|---|
| 1491 | Read the text Unfair Education In a country where government and families alike are tightening their belts and trying to make do with less, you could be pardoned for thinking that private education would be in a bit of a jam right now. And yet, although fees at independent schools in Britain have approximately doubled over the last two and a half decades, pupil numbers are the highest since records started in 1974. Although there are numerous reasons why parents might choose to fork out an average of £12,500 per year on their child’s education, there is one which stands out more than any other: their reputation for getting their students into elite universities, such as the American Ivy League colleges and Britain’s most prestigious universities: Oxford and Cambridge. Private schools with experience in these admissions processes run like well-oiled machines. Their informed careers advisers have in-depth tactical knowledge of which colleges would best suit each candidate, and help them to edit their personal statements to reflect the qualities that elite universities are looking for. Interview training sessions guide young applicants through an interview system which has been described as being ‘more reminiscent of an old-boy network than justice for society’. Those with family members and teachers who have successfully gone through the admissions process are at a considerable advantage to those who are the first to apply among their social group. Consequently, the social mix of students at the top universities remains sadly biased towards the rich and privately educated – although thanks to increasing numbers of bursaries providing free private school education to academically gifted youngsters, it is possible to be one without the other. Even so, the fact is that 7% of British children go to private schools, while more than 40% of the intake at Oxford and Cambridge is privately educated, and this statistic depicts a worryingly skewed trend. The proportion matters because, although there are obviously plenty of other universities offering excellent study programmes, an Oxbridge or Ivy-League degree undoubtedly enhances employability in the ruling professions. According to recent studies by the UK educational charity The Sutton Trust, over 30% of leading professionals in the United Kingdom, including almost 80% of lawyers, 47% of highflyers in financial services and 41% of top journalists attended Oxford or Cambridge. Every university-educated Prime Minister since 1937 except one, Gordon Brown, is an alumnus of one or the other, as are approximately two-thirds of the current government cabinet. This bias is bad news not only for the clever but underprivileged students who have to settle for a less renowned university; it is bad news for Britain, as decisions that affect the whole nation are made by a select group with a narrow pool of experience, rather than one that is representative of society as a whole. This disproportion was brought to public attention in 2000, when politician Gordon Brown launched an attack on the selection processes at Oxford University. He publicised the story of Laura Spence, a gifted students who had the “best A-level qualifications you can have”, but nevertheless was turned down by Magdalen College, Oxford. Later, Member of Parliament David Lammy used the freedom of information act to examine admissions data at Oxford and Cambridge Universities, and found that almost 90% of the student body at both universities was drawn from the upper and middle classes, that in 2009 Oxford accepted only one British black Caribbean undergraduate, and it focused its attentions on admissions events at private schools such as Kate Middleton’s school, Marlborough College, and Prince William’s alma mater, Eton. Since then, universities have been forced to up their game welcoming the less privileged among their students. Quotas have been put into place to ensure that the colleges admit a larger proportion of less privileged students. These targets are not often met, however, and they have brought about a new practice in which parents privately educate their children up to the age of 16, giving them a sound academic background, then put them in state education for their two final years, to better improve their chances of being accepted at a top university as part of their ‘less privileged’ quota. Even so, Oxford now spends $4 million a year on student outreach, a $1.6 million increase since 2006–07. Much of this is spent on school visits and teacher-training programmes aimed at supporting poor and minority students who wish to apply to the university. The university has also launched a summer school, which allows around 500 academically talented, state-school students a chance to experience studying at Oxford for a week. And yet these strategies depend on state schools being able to educate students to the same level as private schools; where stringent selection processes, partnered with high budgets, parental support and top-class facilities allow schools to spew out students of an impressively high academic calibre. State schools have much less opportunity to do this. Or have they? One commentator argues that the success of private schools is not in their money, but in their organisation. State schools fail their pupils because, under government control, they lack options. But if head teachers at state schools were given the same freedom as those at private schools, namely to sack poor teachers and pay more to good ones, parents would not need to send their children to private schools any more. Identify the statement as True/False/Not given All students at private schools in Britain come from rich families. | Открыть |
| 1492 | Read the text Unfair Education In a country where government and families alike are tightening their belts and trying to make do with less, you could be pardoned for thinking that private education would be in a bit of a jam right now. And yet, although fees at independent schools in Britain have approximately doubled over the last two and a half decades, pupil numbers are the highest since records started in 1974. Although there are numerous reasons why parents might choose to fork out an average of £12,500 per year on their child’s education, there is one which stands out more than any other: their reputation for getting their students into elite universities, such as the American Ivy League colleges and Britain’s most prestigious universities: Oxford and Cambridge. Private schools with experience in these admissions processes run like well-oiled machines. Their informed careers advisers have in-depth tactical knowledge of which colleges would best suit each candidate, and help them to edit their personal statements to reflect the qualities that elite universities are looking for. Interview training sessions guide young applicants through an interview system which has been described as being ‘more reminiscent of an old-boy network than justice for society’. Those with family members and teachers who have successfully gone through the admissions process are at a considerable advantage to those who are the first to apply among their social group. Consequently, the social mix of students at the top universities remains sadly biased towards the rich and privately educated – although thanks to increasing numbers of bursaries providing free private school education to academically gifted youngsters, it is possible to be one without the other. Even so, the fact is that 7% of British children go to private schools, while more than 40% of the intake at Oxford and Cambridge is privately educated, and this statistic depicts a worryingly skewed trend. The proportion matters because, although there are obviously plenty of other universities offering excellent study programmes, an Oxbridge or Ivy-League degree undoubtedly enhances employability in the ruling professions. According to recent studies by the UK educational charity The Sutton Trust, over 30% of leading professionals in the United Kingdom, including almost 80% of lawyers, 47% of highflyers in financial services and 41% of top journalists attended Oxford or Cambridge. Every university-educated Prime Minister since 1937 except one, Gordon Brown, is an alumnus of one or the other, as are approximately two-thirds of the current government cabinet. This bias is bad news not only for the clever but underprivileged students who have to settle for a less renowned university; it is bad news for Britain, as decisions that affect the whole nation are made by a select group with a narrow pool of experience, rather than one that is representative of society as a whole. This disproportion was brought to public attention in 2000, when politician Gordon Brown launched an attack on the selection processes at Oxford University. He publicised the story of Laura Spence, a gifted students who had the “best A-level qualifications you can have”, but nevertheless was turned down by Magdalen College, Oxford. Later, Member of Parliament David Lammy used the freedom of information act to examine admissions data at Oxford and Cambridge Universities, and found that almost 90% of the student body at both universities was drawn from the upper and middle classes, that in 2009 Oxford accepted only one British black Caribbean undergraduate, and it focused its attentions on admissions events at private schools such as Kate Middleton’s school, Marlborough College, and Prince William’s alma mater, Eton. Since then, universities have been forced to up their game welcoming the less privileged among their students. Quotas have been put into place to ensure that the colleges admit a larger proportion of less privileged students. These targets are not often met, however, and they have brought about a new practice in which parents privately educate their children up to the age of 16, giving them a sound academic background, then put them in state education for their two final years, to better improve their chances of being accepted at a top university as part of their ‘less privileged’ quota. Even so, Oxford now spends $4 million a year on student outreach, a $1.6 million increase since 2006–07. Much of this is spent on school visits and teacher-training programmes aimed at supporting poor and minority students who wish to apply to the university. The university has also launched a summer school, which allows around 500 academically talented, state-school students a chance to experience studying at Oxford for a week. And yet these strategies depend on state schools being able to educate students to the same level as private schools; where stringent selection processes, partnered with high budgets, parental support and top-class facilities allow schools to spew out students of an impressively high academic calibre. State schools have much less opportunity to do this. Or have they? One commentator argues that the success of private schools is not in their money, but in their organisation. State schools fail their pupils because, under government control, they lack options. But if head teachers at state schools were given the same freedom as those at private schools, namely to sack poor teachers and pay more to good ones, parents would not need to send their children to private schools any more. Identify the statement as True/False/Not given Most leading politicians and judges in the UK were educated at Oxford or Cambridge University. | Открыть |
| 1493 | Read the text Unfair Education In a country where government and families alike are tightening their belts and trying to make do with less, you could be pardoned for thinking that private education would be in a bit of a jam right now. And yet, although fees at independent schools in Britain have approximately doubled over the last two and a half decades, pupil numbers are the highest since records started in 1974. Although there are numerous reasons why parents might choose to fork out an average of £12,500 per year on their child’s education, there is one which stands out more than any other: their reputation for getting their students into elite universities, such as the American Ivy League colleges and Britain’s most prestigious universities: Oxford and Cambridge. Private schools with experience in these admissions processes run like well-oiled machines. Their informed careers advisers have in-depth tactical knowledge of which colleges would best suit each candidate, and help them to edit their personal statements to reflect the qualities that elite universities are looking for. Interview training sessions guide young applicants through an interview system which has been described as being ‘more reminiscent of an old-boy network than justice for society’. Those with family members and teachers who have successfully gone through the admissions process are at a considerable advantage to those who are the first to apply among their social group. Consequently, the social mix of students at the top universities remains sadly biased towards the rich and privately educated – although thanks to increasing numbers of bursaries providing free private school education to academically gifted youngsters, it is possible to be one without the other. Even so, the fact is that 7% of British children go to private schools, while more than 40% of the intake at Oxford and Cambridge is privately educated, and this statistic depicts a worryingly skewed trend. The proportion matters because, although there are obviously plenty of other universities offering excellent study programmes, an Oxbridge or Ivy-League degree undoubtedly enhances employability in the ruling professions. According to recent studies by the UK educational charity The Sutton Trust, over 30% of leading professionals in the United Kingdom, including almost 80% of lawyers, 47% of highflyers in financial services and 41% of top journalists attended Oxford or Cambridge. Every university-educated Prime Minister since 1937 except one, Gordon Brown, is an alumnus of one or the other, as are approximately two-thirds of the current government cabinet. This bias is bad news not only for the clever but underprivileged students who have to settle for a less renowned university; it is bad news for Britain, as decisions that affect the whole nation are made by a select group with a narrow pool of experience, rather than one that is representative of society as a whole. This disproportion was brought to public attention in 2000, when politician Gordon Brown launched an attack on the selection processes at Oxford University. He publicised the story of Laura Spence, a gifted students who had the “best A-level qualifications you can have”, but nevertheless was turned down by Magdalen College, Oxford. Later, Member of Parliament David Lammy used the freedom of information act to examine admissions data at Oxford and Cambridge Universities, and found that almost 90% of the student body at both universities was drawn from the upper and middle classes, that in 2009 Oxford accepted only one British black Caribbean undergraduate, and it focused its attentions on admissions events at private schools such as Kate Middleton’s school, Marlborough College, and Prince William’s alma mater, Eton. Since then, universities have been forced to up their game welcoming the less privileged among their students. Quotas have been put into place to ensure that the colleges admit a larger proportion of less privileged students. These targets are not often met, however, and they have brought about a new practice in which parents privately educate their children up to the age of 16, giving them a sound academic background, then put them in state education for their two final years, to better improve their chances of being accepted at a top university as part of their ‘less privileged’ quota. Even so, Oxford now spends $4 million a year on student outreach, a $1.6 million increase since 2006–07. Much of this is spent on school visits and teacher-training programmes aimed at supporting poor and minority students who wish to apply to the university. The university has also launched a summer school, which allows around 500 academically talented, state-school students a chance to experience studying at Oxford for a week. And yet these strategies depend on state schools being able to educate students to the same level as private schools; where stringent selection processes, partnered with high budgets, parental support and top-class facilities allow schools to spew out students of an impressively high academic calibre. State schools have much less opportunity to do this. Or have they? One commentator argues that the success of private schools is not in their money, but in their organisation. State schools fail their pupils because, under government control, they lack options. But if head teachers at state schools were given the same freedom as those at private schools, namely to sack poor teachers and pay more to good ones, parents would not need to send their children to private schools any more. Identify the statement as True/False/Not given Former Prime Minister Gordon Brown was educated at to Oxford University. | Открыть |
| 1494 | Read the text Unfair Education In a country where government and families alike are tightening their belts and trying to make do with less, you could be pardoned for thinking that private education would be in a bit of a jam right now. And yet, although fees at independent schools in Britain have approximately doubled over the last two and a half decades, pupil numbers are the highest since records started in 1974. Although there are numerous reasons why parents might choose to fork out an average of £12,500 per year on their child’s education, there is one which stands out more than any other: their reputation for getting their students into elite universities, such as the American Ivy League colleges and Britain’s most prestigious universities: Oxford and Cambridge. Private schools with experience in these admissions processes run like well-oiled machines. Their informed careers advisers have in-depth tactical knowledge of which colleges would best suit each candidate, and help them to edit their personal statements to reflect the qualities that elite universities are looking for. Interview training sessions guide young applicants through an interview system which has been described as being ‘more reminiscent of an old-boy network than justice for society’. Those with family members and teachers who have successfully gone through the admissions process are at a considerable advantage to those who are the first to apply among their social group. Consequently, the social mix of students at the top universities remains sadly biased towards the rich and privately educated – although thanks to increasing numbers of bursaries providing free private school education to academically gifted youngsters, it is possible to be one without the other. Even so, the fact is that 7% of British children go to private schools, while more than 40% of the intake at Oxford and Cambridge is privately educated, and this statistic depicts a worryingly skewed trend. The proportion matters because, although there are obviously plenty of other universities offering excellent study programmes, an Oxbridge or Ivy-League degree undoubtedly enhances employability in the ruling professions. According to recent studies by the UK educational charity The Sutton Trust, over 30% of leading professionals in the United Kingdom, including almost 80% of lawyers, 47% of highflyers in financial services and 41% of top journalists attended Oxford or Cambridge. Every university-educated Prime Minister since 1937 except one, Gordon Brown, is an alumnus of one or the other, as are approximately two-thirds of the current government cabinet. This bias is bad news not only for the clever but underprivileged students who have to settle for a less renowned university; it is bad news for Britain, as decisions that affect the whole nation are made by a select group with a narrow pool of experience, rather than one that is representative of society as a whole. This disproportion was brought to public attention in 2000, when politician Gordon Brown launched an attack on the selection processes at Oxford University. He publicised the story of Laura Spence, a gifted students who had the “best A-level qualifications you can have”, but nevertheless was turned down by Magdalen College, Oxford. Later, Member of Parliament David Lammy used the freedom of information act to examine admissions data at Oxford and Cambridge Universities, and found that almost 90% of the student body at both universities was drawn from the upper and middle classes, that in 2009 Oxford accepted only one British black Caribbean undergraduate, and it focused its attentions on admissions events at private schools such as Kate Middleton’s school, Marlborough College, and Prince William’s alma mater, Eton. Since then, universities have been forced to up their game welcoming the less privileged among their students. Quotas have been put into place to ensure that the colleges admit a larger proportion of less privileged students. These targets are not often met, however, and they have brought about a new practice in which parents privately educate their children up to the age of 16, giving them a sound academic background, then put them in state education for their two final years, to better improve their chances of being accepted at a top university as part of their ‘less privileged’ quota. Even so, Oxford now spends $4 million a year on student outreach, a $1.6 million increase since 2006–07. Much of this is spent on school visits and teacher-training programmes aimed at supporting poor and minority students who wish to apply to the university. The university has also launched a summer school, which allows around 500 academically talented, state-school students a chance to experience studying at Oxford for a week. And yet these strategies depend on state schools being able to educate students to the same level as private schools; where stringent selection processes, partnered with high budgets, parental support and top-class facilities allow schools to spew out students of an impressively high academic calibre. State schools have much less opportunity to do this. Or have they? One commentator argues that the success of private schools is not in their money, but in their organisation. State schools fail their pupils because, under government control, they lack options. But if head teachers at state schools were given the same freedom as those at private schools, namely to sack poor teachers and pay more to good ones, parents would not need to send their children to private schools any more. Identify the statement as True/False/Not given Both Kate Middleton and Prince William applied to Oxford University. | Открыть |
| 1495 | If there's any cake left I _____ another piece. | Открыть |
| 1496 | Read the text. Educating Psyche by Bernie Neville is a book which looks at radical new approaches to learning, describing the effects of emotion, imagination and the unconscious on learning. One theory discussed in the book is that proposed by George Lozanov, which focuses on the power of suggestion. Lozanov's instructional technique is based on the evidence that the connections made in the brain through unconscious processing (which he calls non-specific mental reactivity) are more durable than those made through conscious processing. Besides the laboratory evidence for this, we know from our experience that we often remember what we have perceived peripherally, long after we have forgotten what we set out to learn. If we think of a book we studied months or years ago, we will find it easier to recall peripheral details - the colour, the binding, the typeface, the table at the library where we sat while studying it - than the content on which we were concentrating. If we think of a lecture we listened to with great concentration, we will recall the lecturer's appearance and mannerisms, our place in the auditorium, the failure of the air-conditioning, much more easily than the ideas we went to learn. Even if these peripheral details are a bit elusive, they come back readily in hypnosis or when we relive the event imaginatively, as in psychodrama. The details of the content of the lecture, on the other hand, seem to have gone forever. This phenomenon can be partly attributed to the common counterproductive approach to study (making extreme efforts to memorise, tensing muscles, inducing fatigue), but it also simply reflects the way the brain functions. Lozanov therefore made indirect instruction (suggestion) central to his teaching system. In suggestopedia, as he called his method, consciousness is shifted away from the curriculum to focus on something peripheral. The curriculum then becomes peripheral and is dealt with by the reserve capacity of the brain. The suggestopedic approach to foreign language learning provides a good illustration. In its most recent variant (1980), it consists of the reading of vocabulary and text while the class is listening to music. The first session is in two parts. In the first part, the music is classical (Mozart, Beethoven, Brahms) and the teacher reads the text slowly and solemnly, with attention to the dynamics of the music. The students follow the text in their books. This is followed by several minutes of silence. In the second part, they listen to baroque music (Bach, Corelli, Handel) while the teacher reads the text in a normal speaking voice. During this time they have their books closed. During the whole of this session, their attention is passive; they listen to the music but make no attempt to learn the material. Beforehand, the students have been carefully prepared for the language learning experience. Through meeting with the staff and satisfied students they develop the expectation that learning will be easy and pleasant and that they will successfully learn several hundred words of the foreign language during the class. In a preliminary talk, the teacher introduces them to the material to be covered, but does not 'teach' it. Likewise, the students are instructed not to try to learn it during this introduction. Some hours after the two-part session, there is a follow-up class at which the students are stimulated to recall the material presented. Once again the approach is indirect. The students do not focus their attention on trying to remember the vocabulary, but focus on using the language to communicate (e.g. through games or improvised dramatisations). Such methods are not unusual in language teaching. What is distinctive in the suggestopedic method is that they are devoted entirely to assisting recall. The 'learning' of the material is assumed to be automatic and effortless, accomplished while listening to music. The teacher's task is to assist the students to apply what they have learned paraconsciously, and in doing so to make it easily accessible to consciousness. Another difference from conventional teaching is the evidence that students can regularly learn 1000 new words of a foreign language during a suggestopedic session, as well as grammar and idiom. Lozanov experimented with teaching by direct suggestion during sleep, hypnosis and trance states, but found such procedures unnecessary. Hypnosis, yoga, Silva mind-control, religious ceremonies and faith healing are all associated with successful suggestion, but none of their techniques seem to be essential to it. Such rituals may be seen as placebos. Lozanov acknowledges that the ritual surrounding suggestion in his own system is also a placebo, but maintains that without such a placebo people are unable or afraid to tap the reserve capacity of their brains. Like any placebo, it must be dispensed with authority to be effective. Just as a doctor calls on the full power of autocratic suggestion by insisting that the patient take precisely this white capsule precisely three times a day before meals, Lozanov is categoric in insisting that the suggestopedic session be conducted exactly in the manner designated, by trained and accredited suggestopedic teachers. While suggestopedia has gained some notoriety through success in the teaching of modern languages, few teachers are able to emulate the spectacular results of Lozanov and his associates. We can, perhaps, attribute mediocre results to an inadequate placebo effect. The students have not developed the appropriate mind set. They are often not motivated to learn through this method. They do not have enough 'faith'. They do not see it as 'real teaching', especially as it does not seem to involve the 'work' they have learned to believe is essential to learning. Choose the only correct answer The book Educating Psyche is mainly concerned with | Открыть |
| 1497 | Read the text. Educating Psyche by Bernie Neville is a book which looks at radical new approaches to learning, describing the effects of emotion, imagination and the unconscious on learning. One theory discussed in the book is that proposed by George Lozanov, which focuses on the power of suggestion. Lozanov's instructional technique is based on the evidence that the connections made in the brain through unconscious processing (which he calls non-specific mental reactivity) are more durable than those made through conscious processing. Besides the laboratory evidence for this, we know from our experience that we often remember what we have perceived peripherally, long after we have forgotten what we set out to learn. If we think of a book we studied months or years ago, we will find it easier to recall peripheral details - the colour, the binding, the typeface, the table at the library where we sat while studying it - than the content on which we were concentrating. If we think of a lecture we listened to with great concentration, we will recall the lecturer's appearance and mannerisms, our place in the auditorium, the failure of the air-conditioning, much more easily than the ideas we went to learn. Even if these peripheral details are a bit elusive, they come back readily in hypnosis or when we relive the event imaginatively, as in psychodrama. The details of the content of the lecture, on the other hand, seem to have gone forever. This phenomenon can be partly attributed to the common counterproductive approach to study (making extreme efforts to memorise, tensing muscles, inducing fatigue), but it also simply reflects the way the brain functions. Lozanov therefore made indirect instruction (suggestion) central to his teaching system. In suggestopedia, as he called his method, consciousness is shifted away from the curriculum to focus on something peripheral. The curriculum then becomes peripheral and is dealt with by the reserve capacity of the brain. The suggestopedic approach to foreign language learning provides a good illustration. In its most recent variant (1980), it consists of the reading of vocabulary and text while the class is listening to music. The first session is in two parts. In the first part, the music is classical (Mozart, Beethoven, Brahms) and the teacher reads the text slowly and solemnly, with attention to the dynamics of the music. The students follow the text in their books. This is followed by several minutes of silence. In the second part, they listen to baroque music (Bach, Corelli, Handel) while the teacher reads the text in a normal speaking voice. During this time they have their books closed. During the whole of this session, their attention is passive; they listen to the music but make no attempt to learn the material. Beforehand, the students have been carefully prepared for the language learning experience. Through meeting with the staff and satisfied students they develop the expectation that learning will be easy and pleasant and that they will successfully learn several hundred words of the foreign language during the class. In a preliminary talk, the teacher introduces them to the material to be covered, but does not 'teach' it. Likewise, the students are instructed not to try to learn it during this introduction. Some hours after the two-part session, there is a follow-up class at which the students are stimulated to recall the material presented. Once again the approach is indirect. The students do not focus their attention on trying to remember the vocabulary, but focus on using the language to communicate (e.g. through games or improvised dramatisations). Such methods are not unusual in language teaching. What is distinctive in the suggestopedic method is that they are devoted entirely to assisting recall. The 'learning' of the material is assumed to be automatic and effortless, accomplished while listening to music. The teacher's task is to assist the students to apply what they have learned paraconsciously, and in doing so to make it easily accessible to consciousness. Another difference from conventional teaching is the evidence that students can regularly learn 1000 new words of a foreign language during a suggestopedic session, as well as grammar and idiom. Lozanov experimented with teaching by direct suggestion during sleep, hypnosis and trance states, but found such procedures unnecessary. Hypnosis, yoga, Silva mind-control, religious ceremonies and faith healing are all associated with successful suggestion, but none of their techniques seem to be essential to it. Such rituals may be seen as placebos. Lozanov acknowledges that the ritual surrounding suggestion in his own system is also a placebo, but maintains that without such a placebo people are unable or afraid to tap the reserve capacity of their brains. Like any placebo, it must be dispensed with authority to be effective. Just as a doctor calls on the full power of autocratic suggestion by insisting that the patient take precisely this white capsule precisely three times a day before meals, Lozanov is categoric in insisting that the suggestopedic session be conducted exactly in the manner designated, by trained and accredited suggestopedic teachers. While suggestopedia has gained some notoriety through success in the teaching of modern languages, few teachers are able to emulate the spectacular results of Lozanov and his associates. We can, perhaps, attribute mediocre results to an inadequate placebo effect. The students have not developed the appropriate mind set. They are often not motivated to learn through this method. They do not have enough 'faith'. They do not see it as 'real teaching', especially as it does not seem to involve the 'work' they have learned to believe is essential to learning. Choose the only correct answer Lozanov’s theory claims that when we try to remember things, | Открыть |
| 1498 | Read the text. Educating Psyche by Bernie Neville is a book which looks at radical new approaches to learning, describing the effects of emotion, imagination and the unconscious on learning. One theory discussed in the book is that proposed by George Lozanov, which focuses on the power of suggestion. Lozanov's instructional technique is based on the evidence that the connections made in the brain through unconscious processing (which he calls non-specific mental reactivity) are more durable than those made through conscious processing. Besides the laboratory evidence for this, we know from our experience that we often remember what we have perceived peripherally, long after we have forgotten what we set out to learn. If we think of a book we studied months or years ago, we will find it easier to recall peripheral details - the colour, the binding, the typeface, the table at the library where we sat while studying it - than the content on which we were concentrating. If we think of a lecture we listened to with great concentration, we will recall the lecturer's appearance and mannerisms, our place in the auditorium, the failure of the air-conditioning, much more easily than the ideas we went to learn. Even if these peripheral details are a bit elusive, they come back readily in hypnosis or when we relive the event imaginatively, as in psychodrama. The details of the content of the lecture, on the other hand, seem to have gone forever. This phenomenon can be partly attributed to the common counterproductive approach to study (making extreme efforts to memorise, tensing muscles, inducing fatigue), but it also simply reflects the way the brain functions. Lozanov therefore made indirect instruction (suggestion) central to his teaching system. In suggestopedia, as he called his method, consciousness is shifted away from the curriculum to focus on something peripheral. The curriculum then becomes peripheral and is dealt with by the reserve capacity of the brain. The suggestopedic approach to foreign language learning provides a good illustration. In its most recent variant (1980), it consists of the reading of vocabulary and text while the class is listening to music. The first session is in two parts. In the first part, the music is classical (Mozart, Beethoven, Brahms) and the teacher reads the text slowly and solemnly, with attention to the dynamics of the music. The students follow the text in their books. This is followed by several minutes of silence. In the second part, they listen to baroque music (Bach, Corelli, Handel) while the teacher reads the text in a normal speaking voice. During this time they have their books closed. During the whole of this session, their attention is passive; they listen to the music but make no attempt to learn the material. Beforehand, the students have been carefully prepared for the language learning experience. Through meeting with the staff and satisfied students they develop the expectation that learning will be easy and pleasant and that they will successfully learn several hundred words of the foreign language during the class. In a preliminary talk, the teacher introduces them to the material to be covered, but does not 'teach' it. Likewise, the students are instructed not to try to learn it during this introduction. Some hours after the two-part session, there is a follow-up class at which the students are stimulated to recall the material presented. Once again the approach is indirect. The students do not focus their attention on trying to remember the vocabulary, but focus on using the language to communicate (e.g. through games or improvised dramatisations). Such methods are not unusual in language teaching. What is distinctive in the suggestopedic method is that they are devoted entirely to assisting recall. The 'learning' of the material is assumed to be automatic and effortless, accomplished while listening to music. The teacher's task is to assist the students to apply what they have learned paraconsciously, and in doing so to make it easily accessible to consciousness. Another difference from conventional teaching is the evidence that students can regularly learn 1000 new words of a foreign language during a suggestopedic session, as well as grammar and idiom. Lozanov experimented with teaching by direct suggestion during sleep, hypnosis and trance states, but found such procedures unnecessary. Hypnosis, yoga, Silva mind-control, religious ceremonies and faith healing are all associated with successful suggestion, but none of their techniques seem to be essential to it. Such rituals may be seen as placebos. Lozanov acknowledges that the ritual surrounding suggestion in his own system is also a placebo, but maintains that without such a placebo people are unable or afraid to tap the reserve capacity of their brains. Like any placebo, it must be dispensed with authority to be effective. Just as a doctor calls on the full power of autocratic suggestion by insisting that the patient take precisely this white capsule precisely three times a day before meals, Lozanov is categoric in insisting that the suggestopedic session be conducted exactly in the manner designated, by trained and accredited suggestopedic teachers. While suggestopedia has gained some notoriety through success in the teaching of modern languages, few teachers are able to emulate the spectacular results of Lozanov and his associates. We can, perhaps, attribute mediocre results to an inadequate placebo effect. The students have not developed the appropriate mind set. They are often not motivated to learn through this method. They do not have enough 'faith'. They do not see it as 'real teaching', especially as it does not seem to involve the 'work' they have learned to believe is essential to learning. Choose the only correct answer In this passage, the author uses the examples of a book and a lecture to illustrate that | Открыть |
| 1499 | Read the text. Educating Psyche by Bernie Neville is a book which looks at radical new approaches to learning, describing the effects of emotion, imagination and the unconscious on learning. One theory discussed in the book is that proposed by George Lozanov, which focuses on the power of suggestion. Lozanov's instructional technique is based on the evidence that the connections made in the brain through unconscious processing (which he calls non-specific mental reactivity) are more durable than those made through conscious processing. Besides the laboratory evidence for this, we know from our experience that we often remember what we have perceived peripherally, long after we have forgotten what we set out to learn. If we think of a book we studied months or years ago, we will find it easier to recall peripheral details - the colour, the binding, the typeface, the table at the library where we sat while studying it - than the content on which we were concentrating. If we think of a lecture we listened to with great concentration, we will recall the lecturer's appearance and mannerisms, our place in the auditorium, the failure of the air-conditioning, much more easily than the ideas we went to learn. Even if these peripheral details are a bit elusive, they come back readily in hypnosis or when we relive the event imaginatively, as in psychodrama. The details of the content of the lecture, on the other hand, seem to have gone forever. This phenomenon can be partly attributed to the common counterproductive approach to study (making extreme efforts to memorise, tensing muscles, inducing fatigue), but it also simply reflects the way the brain functions. Lozanov therefore made indirect instruction (suggestion) central to his teaching system. In suggestopedia, as he called his method, consciousness is shifted away from the curriculum to focus on something peripheral. The curriculum then becomes peripheral and is dealt with by the reserve capacity of the brain. The suggestopedic approach to foreign language learning provides a good illustration. In its most recent variant (1980), it consists of the reading of vocabulary and text while the class is listening to music. The first session is in two parts. In the first part, the music is classical (Mozart, Beethoven, Brahms) and the teacher reads the text slowly and solemnly, with attention to the dynamics of the music. The students follow the text in their books. This is followed by several minutes of silence. In the second part, they listen to baroque music (Bach, Corelli, Handel) while the teacher reads the text in a normal speaking voice. During this time they have their books closed. During the whole of this session, their attention is passive; they listen to the music but make no attempt to learn the material. Beforehand, the students have been carefully prepared for the language learning experience. Through meeting with the staff and satisfied students they develop the expectation that learning will be easy and pleasant and that they will successfully learn several hundred words of the foreign language during the class. In a preliminary talk, the teacher introduces them to the material to be covered, but does not 'teach' it. Likewise, the students are instructed not to try to learn it during this introduction. Some hours after the two-part session, there is a follow-up class at which the students are stimulated to recall the material presented. Once again the approach is indirect. The students do not focus their attention on trying to remember the vocabulary, but focus on using the language to communicate (e.g. through games or improvised dramatisations). Such methods are not unusual in language teaching. What is distinctive in the suggestopedic method is that they are devoted entirely to assisting recall. The 'learning' of the material is assumed to be automatic and effortless, accomplished while listening to music. The teacher's task is to assist the students to apply what they have learned paraconsciously, and in doing so to make it easily accessible to consciousness. Another difference from conventional teaching is the evidence that students can regularly learn 1000 new words of a foreign language during a suggestopedic session, as well as grammar and idiom. Lozanov experimented with teaching by direct suggestion during sleep, hypnosis and trance states, but found such procedures unnecessary. Hypnosis, yoga, Silva mind-control, religious ceremonies and faith healing are all associated with successful suggestion, but none of their techniques seem to be essential to it. Such rituals may be seen as placebos. Lozanov acknowledges that the ritual surrounding suggestion in his own system is also a placebo, but maintains that without such a placebo people are unable or afraid to tap the reserve capacity of their brains. Like any placebo, it must be dispensed with authority to be effective. Just as a doctor calls on the full power of autocratic suggestion by insisting that the patient take precisely this white capsule precisely three times a day before meals, Lozanov is categoric in insisting that the suggestopedic session be conducted exactly in the manner designated, by trained and accredited suggestopedic teachers. While suggestopedia has gained some notoriety through success in the teaching of modern languages, few teachers are able to emulate the spectacular results of Lozanov and his associates. We can, perhaps, attribute mediocre results to an inadequate placebo effect. The students have not developed the appropriate mind set. They are often not motivated to learn through this method. They do not have enough 'faith'. They do not see it as 'real teaching', especially as it does not seem to involve the 'work' they have learned to believe is essential to learning. Choose the only correct answer Lozanov claims that teachers should train students to | Открыть |
| 1500 | Read the text. Educating Psyche by Bernie Neville is a book which looks at radical new approaches to learning, describing the effects of emotion, imagination and the unconscious on learning. One theory discussed in the book is that proposed by George Lozanov, which focuses on the power of suggestion. Lozanov's instructional technique is based on the evidence that the connections made in the brain through unconscious processing (which he calls non-specific mental reactivity) are more durable than those made through conscious processing. Besides the laboratory evidence for this, we know from our experience that we often remember what we have perceived peripherally, long after we have forgotten what we set out to learn. If we think of a book we studied months or years ago, we will find it easier to recall peripheral details - the colour, the binding, the typeface, the table at the library where we sat while studying it - than the content on which we were concentrating. If we think of a lecture we listened to with great concentration, we will recall the lecturer's appearance and mannerisms, our place in the auditorium, the failure of the air-conditioning, much more easily than the ideas we went to learn. Even if these peripheral details are a bit elusive, they come back readily in hypnosis or when we relive the event imaginatively, as in psychodrama. The details of the content of the lecture, on the other hand, seem to have gone forever. This phenomenon can be partly attributed to the common counterproductive approach to study (making extreme efforts to memorise, tensing muscles, inducing fatigue), but it also simply reflects the way the brain functions. Lozanov therefore made indirect instruction (suggestion) central to his teaching system. In suggestopedia, as he called his method, consciousness is shifted away from the curriculum to focus on something peripheral. The curriculum then becomes peripheral and is dealt with by the reserve capacity of the brain. The suggestopedic approach to foreign language learning provides a good illustration. In its most recent variant (1980), it consists of the reading of vocabulary and text while the class is listening to music. The first session is in two parts. In the first part, the music is classical (Mozart, Beethoven, Brahms) and the teacher reads the text slowly and solemnly, with attention to the dynamics of the music. The students follow the text in their books. This is followed by several minutes of silence. In the second part, they listen to baroque music (Bach, Corelli, Handel) while the teacher reads the text in a normal speaking voice. During this time they have their books closed. During the whole of this session, their attention is passive; they listen to the music but make no attempt to learn the material. Beforehand, the students have been carefully prepared for the language learning experience. Through meeting with the staff and satisfied students they develop the expectation that learning will be easy and pleasant and that they will successfully learn several hundred words of the foreign language during the class. In a preliminary talk, the teacher introduces them to the material to be covered, but does not 'teach' it. Likewise, the students are instructed not to try to learn it during this introduction. Some hours after the two-part session, there is a follow-up class at which the students are stimulated to recall the material presented. Once again the approach is indirect. The students do not focus their attention on trying to remember the vocabulary, but focus on using the language to communicate (e.g. through games or improvised dramatisations). Such methods are not unusual in language teaching. What is distinctive in the suggestopedic method is that they are devoted entirely to assisting recall. The 'learning' of the material is assumed to be automatic and effortless, accomplished while listening to music. The teacher's task is to assist the students to apply what they have learned paraconsciously, and in doing so to make it easily accessible to consciousness. Another difference from conventional teaching is the evidence that students can regularly learn 1000 new words of a foreign language during a suggestopedic session, as well as grammar and idiom. Lozanov experimented with teaching by direct suggestion during sleep, hypnosis and trance states, but found such procedures unnecessary. Hypnosis, yoga, Silva mind-control, religious ceremonies and faith healing are all associated with successful suggestion, but none of their techniques seem to be essential to it. Such rituals may be seen as placebos. Lozanov acknowledges that the ritual surrounding suggestion in his own system is also a placebo, but maintains that without such a placebo people are unable or afraid to tap the reserve capacity of their brains. Like any placebo, it must be dispensed with authority to be effective. Just as a doctor calls on the full power of autocratic suggestion by insisting that the patient take precisely this white capsule precisely three times a day before meals, Lozanov is categoric in insisting that the suggestopedic session be conducted exactly in the manner designated, by trained and accredited suggestopedic teachers. While suggestopedia has gained some notoriety through success in the teaching of modern languages, few teachers are able to emulate the spectacular results of Lozanov and his associates. We can, perhaps, attribute mediocre results to an inadequate placebo effect. The students have not developed the appropriate mind set. They are often not motivated to learn through this method. They do not have enough 'faith'. They do not see it as 'real teaching', especially as it does not seem to involve the 'work' they have learned to believe is essential to learning. Identify the statement as True/False/Not given In the example of suggestopedic teaching in the fourth paragraph, the only variable that changes is the music. | Открыть |