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 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 are 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：本文论述了作者通过自己在一线教育工作的经验看出中国的教育制度存在的一些问题，学生不能独立思考问题做作业去网上或者其他的地方找答案，学生缺乏创造性，作者指出有了丰富的学习环境，及新的学习方法，才能有创造性的研究氛围。
【小题1】细节理解题。根据they had been shaped by an educational system that rarely stressed or rewarded critical thinking or inventiveness. 学生的观点缺乏创造力，对于这一点作者感到失望，故选D。
【小题2】推理判断题。根据It’s hardly known for producing independent thinking and openness, and even big salary offers may not be attractive enough to overcome
this.可以推出高工资可能不会解决这个中国的研究问题，故选B。
【小题3】标题归纳题。从整体和最后一段判断，整篇文章是讲关于教育出现的问题——有了丰富的学习环境，及新的学习方法，才能有创造性的研究氛围。故选A。
考点：教育类短文阅读。
点评：标题归纳题一般来说，标题的写作格式是：以话题为中心，将控制性概念的词按一定的语法浓缩为概括主题句句意或中心思想的词组。做此类题时，要避免如下三种错误：一是概括不够。多表现为部分替代整体。二是过度概括。多表现为人为扩大范围。三是以事实、细节替代抽象的大意。