2018年6月23日雅思考试题目预测

发布日期:2018-07-11 15:41 本文摘要:2018年6月23日雅思考试题目预测 【阅读】 READING PASSAGE 1 You should spend about 20 minutes on Questions 1-13, which are based on Reading Passage 1 below. Geoff Brash Geoff Brash, who died in 2010, was a gregarious Australian businessman an

  2018年6月23日雅思考试题目预测

【阅读】

  

READING PASSAGE 1

  

You should spend about 20 minutes on Questions 1-13, which are based on Reading Passage 1 below.

  

Geoff Brash

  

Geoff Brash, who died in 2010, was a gregarious Australian businessman and philanthropist who encouraged the young to reach their potential.

  

Born in Melbourne to Elsa and Alfred Brash, he was educated at Scotch College. His sister, Barbara, became a renowned artist and printmaker. His father, Alfred, ran the Brash retail music business that had been founded in 1862 by his grandfather, the German immigrant Marcus Brasch, specialising in pianos. It carried the slogan A home is not a home without a piano.,

  

In his young days, Brash enjoyed the good life, playing golf and sailing, and spending some months travelling through Europe, having a leisurely holiday. He worked for a time at Myer department stores before joining the family business in 1949, where he quickly began to put his stamp on things. In one of his first management decisions, he diverged from his fathers sense of frugal aesthetics by re-carpeting the old mans office while he was away. After initially complaining of his extravagance, his father grew to accept the change and gave his son increasing responsibility in the business.

  

After World War II (1939 – 1945), Brashs had begun to focus on white goods, such as washing machines and refrigerators, as the consumer boom took hold. However, while his father was content with the business he had built, the younger Brash viewed expansion as vital. When Geoff Brash took over as managing director in 1957, the company had two stores, but after floating it on the stock exchange the following year, he expanded rapidly and opened suburban stores, as well as buying into familiar music industry names such as Allans, Palings and Suttons. Eventually, 170 stores traded across the continent under the Brashs banner.

  

Geoff Brash learned from his fathers focus on customer service. Alfred Brash had also been a pioneer in introducing a share scheme for his staff, and his son retained and expanded the plan following the float.

  

Geoff Brash was optimistic and outward looking. As a result, he was a pioneer in both accessing and selling new technology, and developing overseas relationships. He sourced and sold electric guitars, organs, and a range of other modern instruments, as well as state-of-the-art audio and video equipment. He developed a relationship with Taro Kakehashi, the founder of Japans Roland group, which led to a joint venture that brought electronic musical devices to Australia.

  

In 1965, Brash and his wife attended a trade fair in Guangzhou, the first of its kind in China; they were one of the first Western business people allowed into the country following Mao Zedongs Cultural Revolution. He returned there many times, helping advise the Chinese in establishing a high quality piano factory in Beijing; he became the factorys agent in Australia. Brash also took leading jazz musicians Don Burrows and James Morrison to China, on a trip that reintroduced jazz to many Chinese musicians.

  

 

  

He stood down as Executive Chairman of Brashs in 1988, but under the new management debt became a problem, and in 1994 the banks called in administrators. The company was sold to Singaporean interests and continued to trade until 1998, when it again went into administration. The Brash name then disappeared from the retail world. Brash was greatly disappointed by the collapse and the eventual disappearance of the company he had run for so long. But it was not long before he invested in a restructured Allans music business.

  

Brash was a committed philanthropist who, in the mid-1980s, established the Brash Foundation, which eventually morphed, with other partners, into the Soundhouse Music Alliance. This was a not-for-profit organisation overseeing and promoting multimedia music making and education for teachers and students. The Soundhouse offers teachers and young people the opportunity to get exposure to the latest music technology, and to use this to compose and record their own music, either alone or in collaboration. The organisation has now also established branches in New Zealand, South Africa and Ireland, as well as numerous sites around Australia.

  

 

  

Questions 1-5

  

Do the following statements agree with the information given in Reading Passage 1?

  

Write

  

TRUE        if the statement agrees with the information

  

FALSE        if the statement contradicts the information

  

NOT GIVEN     if there is no information on this

  

 

  

1       The Brash business originally sold pianos.

  

2       Geoff Brashs first job was with his grandfather’s company.

  

3       Alfred Brash thought that his son wasted money.

  

4       By the time Geoff Brash took control, the Brash business was selling some electrical products.

  

5       Geoff Brash had ambitions to open Brash stores in other countries.

  

 

  

Questions 6-10

  

Answer the questions below.

  

Choose NO MORE THAN THREE WORDS OR/A NUMBER from the passage for each answer.

  

6   Which arrangement did Alfred Brash set up for his employees?

  

7   Which Japanese company did Geoff Brash collaborate with?

  

8   What type of event in China marked the beginning of Geoff Brashs relationship with that country?

  

9   What style of music did Geoff Brash help to promote in China?

  

10  When did the Brash company finally stop doing business?

  

Questions 11-13

  

Complete the notes below.

  

  

Soundhouse Music Alliance

   Grew out of the Brash Foundation. A non-commercial organization providing support for music and music

11 __________

   Allows opportunities for using up-to-date 12 __________ Has 13 __________ in several countries.

   

  Choose ONE WORD ONLY from the passage for each answer.

   

  

READING PASSAGE 2

  

You should spend about 20 minutes on Questions 14-26, which are based on Reading Passage 2 below.

  

Questions 14-19

  

Reading Passage 2 has SEVEN sections, A-G.

  

Choose the correct heading for sections A-F from the list of headings below. Write the correct number, i-viii.

  

List of Headings

   Outbreaks of plague as a result of military campaigns. Systematic intelligence-gathering about external cases of plague. Early forms of treatment for plague victims. The general limitations of early Russian anti-plague measures. Partly successful bans against foreign states affected by plague. Hostile reactions from foreign states to Russian anti-plague measures. Various measures to limit outbreaks of plague associated with war. The formulation and publication of preventive strategies.

14   Section A ____________

  

15   Section B ____________

  

16   Section C ____________

  

17   Section D ____________

  

18   Section E ____________

  

19   Section F ____________

   

   

  

Measures to combat infections disease in tsarist Russia

  

 

  

A In the second half of the seventeenth century, Russian authorities began implementing controls at the borders of their empire to prevent the importation of plague, a highly infectious and dangerous disease. Information on disease outbreak occurring abroad was regularly reported to the tsars court through various means, including commercial channels (travelling merchants), military personnel deployed abroad, undercover agents, the network of Imperial Foreign Office embassies and representations abroad, and the customs offices. For instance, the heads of customs offices were instructed to question foreigners entering Russia about possible epidemics of dangerous diseases in their respective countries.

  

B If news of an outbreak came from abroad, relations with the affected country were suspended. For instance, foreign vessels were not allowed to dock in Russian ports if there was credible information about the existence of epidemics in countries from whence they had departed. In addition, all foreigners entering Russia from those countries had to undergo quarantine. In 1665, after receiving news about a plague epidemic in England, Tsar Alexei wrote a letter to King Charles II in which he announced the cessation of Russian trade relations with England and other foreign states. These protective measures appeared to have been effective, as the country did not record any cases of plague during that year and in the next three decades. It was not until 1692 that another plague outbreak was recorded in the Russian province of Astrakhan. This epidemic continued for five months and killed 10,383 people, or about 65 percent of the citys population. By the end of the seventeenth century, preventative measures had been widely introduced in Russia, including the isolation of persons ill with plague, the imposition of quarantines, and the distribution of explanatory public health notices about plague outbreaks.

  

C During the eighteenth century, although none of the occurrences was of the same scale as in the past, plague appeared in Russia several times. For instance, from 1703 to 1705, a plague outbreak that had ravaged Istanbul spread to the Podolsk and Kiev provinces in Russia, and then to Poland and Hungary. After defeating the Swedes in the battle of Poltava in 1709, Tsar Peter I (Peter the Great) dispatched part of his army to Poland, where plague had been raging for two years. Despite preventive measures, the disease spread among the Russian troops. In 1710, the plague reached Riga (then part of Sweden, now the capital of Latvia), where it was active until 1711 and claimed 60,000 lives. During this period, the Russians besieged Riga and, after the Swedes had surrendered the city in 1710, the Russian army lost 9,800 soldiers to the plague. Russian military chronicles of the time note that more soldiers died of the disease after the capture of Riga than from enemy fire during the siege of that city.

  

D Tsar Peter I imposed strict measures to prevent the spread of plague during these conflicts. Soldiers suspected of being infected were isolated and taken to areas far from military camps. In addition, camps were designed to separate divisions, detachments, and smaller units of soldiers. When plague reached Narva (located in present-day Estonia) and threatened to spread to St. Petersburg, the newly built capital of Russia, Tsar Peter I ordered the army to cordon off the entire boundary along the Luga River, including temporarily halting all activity on the river. In order to prevent the movement of people and goods from Narva to St Petersburg and Novgorod, roadblocks and checkpoints were set up on all roads. The tsars orders were rigorously enforced, and those who disobeyed were hung.

  

E However, although the Russian authorities applied such methods to contain the spread of the disease and limit the number of victims, all of the measures had a provisional character: they were intended to respond to a specific outbreak, and were not designed as a coherent set of measures to be implemented systematically at the first sign of plague. The advent of such a standard response system came a few years later.

  

F The first attempts to organise procedures and carry out proactive steps to control plague date to the aftermath of the 1727-1728 epidemic in Astrakhan. In response to this, the Russian imperial authorities issued several decrees aimed at controlling the future spread of plague. Among these decrees, the Instructions for Governors and Heads of Townships required that all governors immediately inform the Senate – a government body created by Tsar Peter I in 1711 to advise the monarch – if plague cases were detected in their respective provinces.

  

Furthermore, the decree required that governors ensure the physical examination of all persons suspected of carrying the disease and their subsequent isolation. In addition, it was ordered that sites where plague victims were found had to be encircled by checkpoints and isolated for the duration of the outbreak. These checkpoints were to remain operational for at least six weeks.

  

The houses of infected persons were to be burned along with all of the personal property they contained, including farm animals and cattle. The governors were instructed to inform the neighbouring provinces and cities about every plague case occurring on their territories. Finally, letters brought by couriers were heated above a fire before being copied.

  

G The implementation by the authorities of these combined measures demonstrates their intuitive understanding of the importance of the timely isolation of infected people to limit the spread of plague.

  

 

  

Questions 20-21

  

Choose TWO letters, A-E.

  

Write the correct letters.

  

Which TWO measures did Russia take in the seventeenth century to avoid plague outbreaks?

  

A       Cooperation with foreign leaders.

  

B       Spying.

  

C       Military campaigns.

  

D      Restrictions on access to its ports.

  

E       Expulsion of foreigners.

  

 

  

Questions 22-23

  

Choose TWO letters, A-E.

  

Write the correct letters.

  

Which TWO statements are made about Russia in the early eighteenth century?

  

A   Plague outbreaks were consistently smaller than before.

  

B   Military casualties at Riga exceeded the number of plague victims.

  

C   The design of military camps allowed plague to spread quickly.

  

D   The tsars plan to protect St Petersburg from plague was not strictly implemented.

  

E   Anti-plague measures were generally reactive rather than strategic.

  

 

  

 

  

Questions 24-26

  

Complete the sentences below.

  

Choose ONE WORD ONLY from the passage for each answer.

  

24  An outbreak of plague in _________ prompted the publication of a coherent preventative strategy.

  

25 Provincial governors were ordered to burn the _________ and possessions of plague victims.

  

26 Correspondence was held over a _________ prior to copying it.

   

  

 

  

READING PASSAGE 3

  

You should spend about 20 minutes on Questions 27-40, which are based on Reading Passage

  

Recovering a damaged reputation

  

In 2009, it was revealed that some of the information published by the University of East Anglias Climatic Research Unit (CRU) in the UK, concerning climate change, had been inaccurate. Furthermore, it was alleged that some of the relevant statistics had been withheld from publication. The ensuing controversy affected the reputation not only of that institution, but also of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), with which the CRU is closely involved, and of climate scientists in general. Even if the claims of misconduct and incompetence were eventually proven to be largely untrue, or confined to a few individuals, the damage was done. The perceived wrongdoings of a few people had raised doubts about the many.

  

The response of most climate scientists was to cross their fingers and hope for the best, and they kept a low profile. Many no doubt hoped that subsequent independent inquiries into the IPCC and CRU would draw a line under their problems. However, although these were likely to help, they were unlikely to undo the harm caused by months of hostile news reports and attacks by critics.

  

The damage that has been done should not be underestimated. As Ralph Cicerone, the President of the US National Academy of Sciences, wrote in an editorial in the journal Science: Public opinion has moved toward the view that scientists often try to suppress alternative hypotheses and ideas and that scientists will withhold data and try to manipulate some aspects of peer review to prevent dissent. He concluded that the perceived misbehavior of even a few scientists can diminish the credibility of science as a whole.,

  

An opinion poll taken at the beginning of 2010 found that the proportion of people in the US who trust scientists as a source of information about global warming had dropped from 83 percent, in 2008, to 74 percent. Another survey carried out by the British Broadcasting Corporation in February 2010 found that just 26 percent of British people now believe that climate change is confirmed as being largely human-made, down from 41 percent in November 2009.

  

Regaining the confidence and trust of the public is never easy. Hunkering down and hoping for the best – climate sciences current strategy – makes it almost impossible. It is much better to learn from the successes and failures of organisations that have dealt with similar blows to their public standing.

  

In fact, climate science needs professional help to rebuild its reputation. It could do worse than follow the advice given by Leslie Gaines-Ross, a reputation strategist at Public Relations (PR) company Weber Shandwick, in her recent book Corporate Reputation: 12 Steps to Safeguarding and Recovering Reputation. Gaines-RossJs strategy is based on her analysis of how various organisations responded to crises, such as desktop-printer firm Xerox, whose business plummeted during the 1990s, and the USAs National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) after the Columbia shuttle disaster in 2003.

  

The first step she suggests is to take the heat – leader first. In many cases, chief executives who publicly accept responsibility for corporate failings can begin to reverse the freefall of their companys reputations, but not always. If the leader is held at least partly responsible for the fall from grace, it can be almost impossible to convince critics that a new direction can be charted with that same person at the helm.

  

This is the dilemma facing the heads of the IPCC and CRU. Both have been blamed for their organisations, problems, not least for the way in which they have dealt with critics, and both have been subjected to public calls for their removal. Yet both organisations appear to believe they can repair their reputations without a change of leadership.

  

The second step outlined by Gaines-Ross is to communicate tirelessly. Yet many climate researchers have avoided the media and the public, at least until the official enquiries have concluded their reports. This reaction may be understandable, but it has backfired. Journalists following the story have often been unable to find spokespeople willing to defend climate science. In this case, no comment, is commonly interpreted as an admission of silent, collective guilt.

  

Remaining visible is only a start, though; climate scientists also need to be careful what they say. They must realise that they face doubts not just about their published results, but also about their conduct and honesty. It simply wont work for scientists to continue to appeal to the weight of the evidence, while refusing to discuss the integrity of their profession. The harm has been increased by a perceived reluctance to admit even the possibility of mistakes or wrongdoing.

  

The third step put forward by Gaines-Ross is dont underestimate your critics and competitors. This means not only recognising the skill with which the opponents of climate research have executed their campaigns through Internet blogs and other media, but also acknowledging the validity of some of their criticisms. It is clear, for instance, that climate scientists need better standards of transparency, to allow for scrutiny not just by their peers, but also by critics from outside the world of research.

  

It is also important to engage with those critics. That doesnt mean conceding to unfounded arguments which are based on prejudice rather than evidence, but there is an obligation to help the public understand the causes of climate change, as well as the options for avoiding and dealing with the consequences.

  

To begin the process of rebuilding trust in their profession, climate scientists need to follow these three steps. But that is just the start. Gaines-Ross estimates that it typically takes four years for a company to rescue and restore a broken reputation.

  

Winning back public confidence is a marathon, not a sprint, but you cant win at all if you dont step up to the starting line.

  

 

  

Questions 27-40

  

Questions 27-32

  

Do the following statements agree with the views of the writer in Reading Passage 3?

  

Write

  

YES                     if the statement agrees with the claims of the writer

  

NO                     if the statement contradicts the claims of the writer

  

NOT GIVEN     if it is impossible to say what the writer thinks about this

  

 

  

27     If a majority of scientists at the CRU were cleared of misconduct, the public would be satisfied.