Question

I once had my Chinese MBA students brainstorming on “two-hour business plans”. I separated them into six groups and gave them an example: a restaurant chain. The more original their idea, the better, I said. Finally, five of the six groups presented plans for restaurant chains. The sixth proposed a catering（饮食）service. Though I admitted the time limit had been difficult, I expressed my disappointment.
My students were middle managers, financial analysts and financiers from state owned enterprises and global companies. They were not without talent or opinions, but they had been shaped by an educational system that rarely stressed or rewarded critical thinking or inventiveness. The scene I just described came in different forms during my two years’ teaching at the school. Papers were often copied from the Web and the Harvard Business Review. Case study debates were written up and just memorized. Students frequently said that copying is a superior business strategy, better than inventing and creating.
In China, every product you can imagine has been made and sold. But so few well developed marketing and management minds have been raised that it will be a long time before most people in the world can name a Chinese brand.
With this problem in mind, partnerships with institutions like Yale and MIT have been established. And then there’s the “thousand talent scheme”: this new government program is intended to improve technological modernization by attracting top foreign trained scientists to the mainland with big money. But there are worries about China’s research environment. It’s hardly known for producing independent thinking and openness, and even big salary offers may not be attractive enough to overcome this.
At last, for China, becoming a major world creator is not just about setting up partnerships with top Western universities. Nor is it about gathering a group of well-educated people and telling them to think creatively. It’s about establishing a rich learning environment for young minds. It’s not that simple.
【小题1】Why does the author feel disappointed at his students?

A．Because there is one group presenting a catering service.

B．Because the six groups made projects for restaurant chains.

C．Because all the students copied a case for the difficult topic.

D．Because the students’ ideas were lacking in creativeness.

【小题2】We can infer from the passage that ________.

A．China can make and sell any product all over the world

B．high pay may not solve the problem of China’s research environment

C．cooperation with institutions has been set up to make a Chinese brand

D．the new government program is aimed at encouraging imagination

【小题3】Which is the best title of the passage?

A．Look for a New Way of Learning.

B．Reward Creative Thinking.

C．How to Become a Creator.

D．Establish a technical Environment.

Answer 1

【小题1】D
【小题2】B
【小题3】A

解析试题分析：本文主要讲述的是中国人缺少创造性思维导致中国的创新能力不够，中国政府等正在努力改变这种情况。
【小题1】D 细节题。根据文章1,2段Finally, five of the six groups presented plans for restaurant chains. The sixth proposed a catering（饮食）service.和Papers were often copied from the Web and the Harvard Business Review.以及In China, every product you can imagine has been made and sold. But so few well developed marketing and management minds have been raised 可知中国人的教育中缺少了创新教育，导致我们的思想没有了创造力。故D项正确。
【小题2】B 细节题。根据文章第三段最后3行It’s hardly known for producing independent thinking and openness, and even big salary offers may not be attractive enough to overcome this.说明只靠高收入还不足以扭转目前的情况，故B正确。
【小题3】A 主旨度语态。本文主要讲述的是中国人缺少创造性思维导致中国的创新能力不够，中国政府等正在努力改变这种情况。故A项符合文章内容。
考点：考查文化类短文阅读
点评：本文主要讲述的是中国人缺少创造性思维导致中国的创新能力不够，中国政府等正在努力改变这种情况。文章基本上是考查细节题，对此类题型考生可以首先从问题中找到关键词，然后以此为线索，运用略读及查阅的技巧在文中迅速寻找这一细节，找到后再把这一部分内容仔细阅读一遍，仔细比较所给选项与文中细节的细微区别，在准确理解细节的前提下，最后确定最佳答案