职位是英语教师，对于学历专业没有要求。
看了一下她的
武汉某大学下属一个三本学院，国际商务英语专业，英语过了六级和专四。工作经历没有，拿过一次丙等奖学金，去湖北省博物馆当过志愿者，还拿过一次湖北省翻译大赛B组口译三等奖。
让她自我介绍一下。半天用磕磕绊绊的英语，带着浓重的湖北口音，说：
我热爱英语，但是没有教学经验。同时我今年考了华科的研究生，没考上，所以没有找工作的经验。大二的时候作为志愿者，我曾经在湖北省博物馆参加了义务讲解。我喜欢上网，听英语歌和看英语电影，还喜欢在网上搜索资源，还会听BBC，会上网看新闻。BLAHBLAH……
CIVIC不得已打断了她不得要领长篇大论的自我介绍，说，无意冒犯你，也要谢谢你对我们工作的支持，但是，我觉得你不太适合我们这个岗位，我们这里的老师首先必须要口语过关，你的英语语音有很大问题，而且讲话过程中语法错误太多，学生对于你的口语会有意见，更很难去信任你。
姑娘赶紧抢过话头，说，我知道自己口语不好，这是因为我读书的时候喜欢参加
我说：作为一个想靠英语吃饭的人，不管你是想做老师，抑或想做口译员，口语就是你的门面。你的口语不好就是你的软肋，不好，就是不好，说明你不够努力。说没有锻炼机会什么的，都是借口。
这个姑娘后来悻悻的走了。
CIVIC说，已经不是第一次遇到这样的面试者了。对自己信心满满，说自己过了专八如何如何，多么多么会考试，一开口，所有的元音都要卷舌，he和she代指谁都分不清楚，单数第三人称在口语中不存在，所有的句子都用现在时……
CIVIC是非英专(非英语专业)，于是他对中国的英语专业学生培养很困惑。
很多学生都会为自己的口语不好找借口。说自己出身偏远地区基础不好，说自己在语言方面没有天分，说自己中学光顾着考试没留心口语，说大学期间学校不提供机会，说都是教育制度给害的，让“哑巴英语”盛行，大学老师的口语都很难听，都怪体制……
语言学习本身需要天分，可是“有些人的努力程度之低，根本就轮不到拼天分”。
你说你喜欢听英语歌，你能完整唱下来的有几首?你说你喜欢看英语电影，你能将台词全部背下来的有几部?你说你喜欢听BBC，你一个词都不落能听懂，能坚持几分钟?你说你喜欢看英语新闻，你知道萨科奇的名字怎么读么?新当选的奥朗德呢?你参加过湖北省翻译大赛拿了三等奖，你知道这个比赛测试手段在信度和效度上达标么?你学了四年英语专业，甚至想做一个口译员，还分不清英式和美式口音么?
语言学习不需要那么多理性。有人可以把CNN放到1.8倍甚至2倍做听写，每周背一遍GRE红宝书;也有人背下《生活大爆炸》的所有台词;背新概念二三四已经不是什么新闻了。当然，还有某人背过四六级题，背过各种演讲，给美国副总统当过翻译，还当了十几年中国学生的偶像(当然后来还打了他老婆)。以上提到的当事人，甚至没有一个是英语专业的。
语言学习最怕的就是某种得过且过的心态。
我过了四级(六级)就好，过了专四(专八)就好……
你将来的职业也许不是天天考试。你可能面对客户的刁难，面对学生的挑刺，面对对方译员的鄙视眼光。
你肯定不想你一开口错误百出贻笑大方。
青春还长，既然已经上了学习英语的贼船，何不将它讲的漂亮?
Equality of Opportunity
These days we hear a lot of nonsense about the ‘great classless society’. The idea that the twentieth century is the age of the common man has become one of the great clichés of our time. The same old arguments are put forward in evidence. Here are some of them: monarchy as a system of government has been completely discredited. The monarchies that survive have been deprived of all political power. Inherited wealth has been savagely reduced by taxation and, in time, the great fortunes will disappear altogether. In a number of countries the victory has been complete. The people rule; the great millennium has become a political reality. But has it? Close examination doesn’t bear out the claim.
It is a fallacy to suppose that all men are equal and that society will be leveled out if you provide everybody with the same educational opportunities. (It is debatable whether you can ever provide everyone with the same educational opportunities, but that is another question.) The fact is that nature dispenses brains and ability with a total disregard for the principle of equality. The old rules of the jungle, ‘survival of the fittest’, and ‘might is right’ are still with us. The spread of education has destroyed the old class system and created a new one. Rewards are based on merit. For ‘aristocracy’ read ‘meritocracy’; in other respects, society remains unaltered: the class system is rigidly maintained.
Genuine ability, animal cunning, skill, the knack of seizing opportunities, all bring material rewards. And what is the first thing people do when they become rich? They use their wealth to secure the best possible opportunities for their children, to give them ‘a good start in life’. For all the lip service we pay to the idea of equality, we do not consider this wrong in the western world. Private schools which offer unfair advantages over state schools are not banned because one of the principles in a democracy is that people should be free to choose how they will educate their children. In this way, the new meritocracy can perpetuate itself to a certain extent: an able child from a wealthy home can succeed far more rapidly than his poorer counterpart. Wealth is also used indiscriminately to further political ends. It would be almost impossible to become the leader of a democracy without massive financial backing. Money is as powerful a weapon as ever it was.
In societies wholly dedicated to the principle of social equality, privileged private education is forbidden. But even here people are rewarded according to their abilities. In fact, so great is the need for skilled workers that the least able may be neglected. Bright children are carefully and expensively trained to become future rulers. In the end, all political ideologies boil down to the same thing: class divisions persist whether you are ruled by a feudal king or an educated peasant.
1. What is the main idea of this passage?
[A] Equality of opportunity in the twentieth century has not destroyed the class system.
[B] Equality means money.
[C] There is no such society as classless society.
[D] Nature can’t give you a classless society.
2. According to the author, the same educational opportunities can’t get rid of inequality because
[A] the principle ‘survival of the fittest’ exists.
[B] Nature ignores equality in dispensing brains and ability.
[C] Material rewards are for genuine ability.
[D] People have the freedom how to educate their children.
3. Who can obtain more rapid success
[A] those with wealth.
[B] Those with the best brains.
[C] Those with the best opportunities.
[D] Those who have the ability to catch at opportunities.
4. Why does the author say the new meritocracy can perpetuate itself to a certain extent? Because
[A] money decides everything.
[B] Private schools offer advantages over state schools.
[C] People are free to choose the way of educating their children.
[D] Wealth is used for political ends.
5. According to the author, ‘class divisions’ refers to
[A] the rich and the poor.
[B] Different opportunities for people.
[C] Oppressor and the oppressed.
[D] Genius and stupidity.
答案详解：
1. A 二十世纪平等的机遇并没有摧毁阶级。文章一开始就对无阶级社会的论点进行了反驳：有人认为君主整体已完全摧毁，幸存下来的王公贵族已经被剥夺了一切政治权力，继承的财产为税收大幅度的削减，到时候，巨大的财富将消失殆尽，在许多国家中，已全面胜利，人民进行统治，伟大的太平盛世已成为政治显示。作者认为：深入检查证实这一断言不实。第二段提出了即使人人都获同样的受教育的机会，可人的天然智慧和能力与平等原则无关，适者生存，强权即公理依然存在。教育的普及摧毁了老的阶级体制，却创造新的，报酬是机遇才干成就。贵族统治就是英才统治，可在其他方面，社会依然，阶级确实存在。后面两段集中论述了金钱的作用。
B.金钱意味着平等是错误的。C.不存在无阶级社会。内容是对的，但不是本文的主题思想。D.自然界不会赋予你一个无阶级社会。
2. B 自然界在分赋人智慧和能力是不会顾及平等。
A.适者生存的原则存在。根据这一原则无智慧和能力者难以生存于社会。C.物质报偿是根据人的真正能力。D.人们有自由选择如何教育自己的孩子。这三项都基于一点――人的智慧和能力。有智慧能力才能生存，才能获报偿，这已经是不平等，即使获同样的受教育的机会，也不可能铲除不平等。
3. A 有钱的人。第三段一开始就点明：真正的能力、动物般机敏狡猾、技能、善抓机会的`诀窍，这一切都带来物质报偿。有了钱的人首要作的事情就是给孩子最佳教育机会，而私人学校教育优于公立学校，人们又有自由选择如何教育自己的孩子。在这个意义上，英才教育在某种程度上是永存的。一个来自富有家庭的有能力的孩子要比其对立面获得成功要快得多得多。
B.具有很高智慧的人，若没有钱是难以成功的。第三段的最后一句话也点明这一点，金钱同从前一样是强有力的武器。文章最后一段即使在完全遵循社会平等原则的社会里，禁止特权的私人教育，人们也是按能力获报酬。小心翼翼而又耗费巨大地把聪明的孩子培养成未来的统治者。C.具有最佳机遇的人。D.是B和C的结合。
4. A金钱决定一切。新的英才教育在一定程度上永存。没有钱，上不起私立学校，谈不上机会，更不用说英才教育。有了钱才能为孩子创造机会。
B.私立学校提供的优越性高于公立学校。C.人们有自由选择教育孩子的方式方法。D.财富用于政治目的。第三段最后三句话：“财富也可以不加区别地用于更远的政治目的。没有强大的财政作后盾，成为民主国家的元首几乎是不可能。金钱和过去一样是强有力的武器，这也说明了金钱的力量，决定一切。”
5. A 富人和穷人。纵然作者提及，同样的教育机会也不可能铲除不平等，因为上天赋予人之智慧是不可能考虑平等原则，可是作者也提到适者生存、强权即公理。贵族政治可读成英才教育。这已说明英才指的是贵族的英才。第四段进一步指出有钱的人首先要做的就是给子女一个良好的教育机会。而私立学校的教育质量优于公立学校。有钱人家的有能力的孩子成功机遇就高。财产还可用于政治目的，要成为民主国家的领袖就得有雄厚的财力支持。钱财和过去一样强有力。即使在以社会平等为原则的社会中，私立学校被禁，酬劳还是以人的能力为准，大量需要有技能的工作人员，而差劲的人没有人关注。天才的孩子予以仔细而又及其昂贵的培养以成为未来的统治者。
总之，政治意识归结为同一个东西――阶级划分存在，不论你是为封建帝王统治，还是为受过教育的农民统治，从这里看，作者的class division指的是A项。
B.人们不同的机遇。C.压迫者和被压迫者。D.天才和笨蛋。
Nowadays, food has become easier to prepare. Has this change improved the way people live? Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer.
The twentieth century has brought with it many advances. With those advances, human lives have changed dramatically. In some ways life is worse, but mostly it is better. Changes in food preparation methods, for example, have improved our lives greatly.
The convenience of preparing food today is amazing. Even stoves have gotten too slow for us. Microwave cooking is much easier. We can press a few buttons and a meal is completely cooked in just a short time. People used to spend hours preparing an oven-cooked meal, and now they can use that time for other, better things. Plus, there are all kinds of portable, prepackaged foods we can buy. Heat them in the office microwave, and lunch at work is quick and easy.
Food preparation today allows for more variety. With refrigerators and freezers, we can preserve a lot of different foods in our homes. Since technology makes cooking so much faster, people are willing to make several dishes for even a small meal. Parents are more likely to let children be picky, now that they can easily heat them up some prepackaged macaroni and cheese on the side. Needless to say, adults living in the same house may have very different eating habits as well. If they don’t want to cook a lot of different dishes, it’s common now to eat out at restaurants several times a week.
Healthful eating is also easier than ever now. When people cook, they use new fat substitutes and cooking sprays to cut fat and calories. This reduces the risk of heart disease and high cholesterol. Additionally, we can buy fruits and vegetable fresh, frozen or canned. They are easy to prepare, so many of us eat more of those nutritious items daily. A hundred years ago, you couldn’t imagine the process of taking some frozen fruit and ice from the freezer, adding some low-fat yogurt from a plastic cup and some juice from a can in the refrigerator, and whipping up a low-fat smoothie in the blender!
Our lifestyle is fast, but people still like good food. What new food preparation technology has given us is more choices. Today, we can prepare food that is more convenient, healthier, and of greater variety than ever before in history.
