As the days went by, the chimp (猩猩) by the name of Maggie grew more and more 1 . Tom and Peg didn't sit with her very much now because it was too hard to look after her.

　　One afternoon Mother asked Tom and Peg to keep Maggie out of 2 . At first everything went 3 well. Maggie played quietly, so Tom and Peg went 4 to do their lessons.

　　Very quietly Maggie slipped out of the bedroom. She went straight into the kitchen (厨房), where she saw an open jar of jam. Down she sat and 5 it all.

　　When the jam was 6 , she slipped quietly down the hall into Mother's room. She opened the closet (衣柜) door and there hung all Mother's 7 . This was going to be fun! Out came the clothes, and Maggie began to 8 herself up.

　　By the time Mother came back, Maggie had had 9 Mother's new spring hat and the skirt of her new suit. Jam stains (斑点) were all over the skirt, all over the walls, and all over the closet door, too.

　　Maggie heard 10 coming into the bedroom. Quickly she reached up to turn off the closet 11 .

　　“Maggie!” shouted Mrs Davis.

　　Both Tom and Peg jumped up and ran to see 12 had happened.

　　Maggie had never looked so 13 in all her life. But the children didn't 14 . They heard their mother say 15 ,“Tom and Peg, this is all your fault (过失) You promised to 16 Maggie!”

　　Mother started 17 to pull off her hat. But Maggie showed her teeth and acted as if she were ready to fight.

　　At that moment Father walked in. Maggie 18 down at once and ran up to him as if he were her only 19 .

　　Father took one 20 at the jam-covered hands and marched Maggie straight to the bathroom to wash herself.

1．

[　　]

2．

[　　]

3．

[　　]

4．

[　　]

5．

[　　]

6．

[　　]

7．

[　　]

8．

[　　]

9．

[　　]

10．

[　　]

11．

[　　]

12．

[　　]

13．

[　　]

14．

[　　]

15．

[　　]

16．

[　　]

17．

[　　]

18．

[　　]

19．

[　　]

20．

[　　]

With fears of a possible nuclear meltdown(核反应堆堆芯的熔毁) in Japan building up, evidence has come to light that the nation received warnings over the stability of its power plants from an international watchdog more than two years ago.
　　As the Telegraph is reporting, an official from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said in December 2008 that safety rules were out of date, and strong earthquakes would cause a “serious problem” for the power stations.
　　A U.S. embassy document, by quoting（引用）an unnamed expert, states: “He (the IAEA official) explained that safety guides for earthquakes have only been updated three times in the last 35 years and that the IAEA is now re-examining them. Also, the presenter noted recent earthquakes in some cases have gone beyond the design basis for some nuclear plants, and that this is a serious problem that is now driving earthquake safety work.”
　　The Telegraph also reports that the government responded to the warnings by building an emergency response center at the Fukushima Daiichi plant designed to resist magnitude-7.0 earthquakes. Friday's earthquake, originally named a magnitude-8.9 shock, has since been upgraded to magnitude-9.0.
　　Other nuclear experts state IAEA officials had willingly ignored lessons from the Chernobyl disaster to protect the nuclear industry's expansion, reports Bloomberg. “After Chernobyl, all the force of the nuclear industry was directed to hide this event, for not creating damage to their reputation,”Russian nuclear accident specialist Iouli Andreyev tells Reuters, before noting that radiation from spent fuel rods（棒）stored close to reactors at Fukushima looked like an example of putting profit before safety. “The Japanese were very greedy, and they used every square inch of the space. But when you have a dense(密集的) placing of spent fuel in the basin, you have a high possibility of fire if the water is removed from the basin.”
【小题1】 From the passage, we know that ____________.

A．people fear that the nuclear meltdown will possibly become more and more serious in Japan

B．people are becoming more and more afraid of a possible nuclear meltdown in Japan

C．Japan made no response to the warnings over the safety of its power plants

D．Iouli Andreyev warned Japan not to store spent fuel rods close to reactors

Laws that would have ensured pupils from five to 16 received a full financial education got lost in the ‘wash up’. An application is calling on the next government to bring it back.

　At school the children are taught to add up and subtract(减法) but, extraordinarily, are not routinely shown how to open a bank account — let alone how to manage their finances in an increasingly complex and demanding world.

　Today the parenting website Mumsnet and the consumer campaigner Martin Lewis have joined forces to launch an online application to make financial education a compulsory element of the school curriculum in England. Children from five to 16 should be taught about everything from pocket money to pensions, they say. And that was exactly the plan preserved in the Children, Schools and Families bill that was shelved by the government in the so-called “wash-up” earlier this month — the rush to legislation before parliament was dismissed. Consumer and parent groups believe financial education has always been one of the most frustrating omissions of the curriculum.

　As the Personal Finance Education Group (Pfeg) points out, the good habits of young children do not last long. Over 75% of seven- to 11-year-olds are savers but by the time they get to 17, over half of them are in debt to family and friends. By this age, 26% see a credit card or overdraft(透支) as a way of extending their spending power. Pfeg predicts that these young people will “find it much harder to avoid the serious unexpected dangers that have befallen many of their parents' generation unless they receive good quality financial education while at school.”

　The UK has been in the worst financial recession(衰退)for generations. It does seem odd that — unless parents step in — young people are left in the dark until they are cruelly introduced to the world of debt when they turn up at university. In a recent poll of over 8,000 people, 97% supported financial education in schools, while 3% said it was a job for parents.

1.The passage is mainly about _____________.

A．how to manage school lessons             B． teaching young people about money　

C．how to deal with the financial crisis          D．teaching students how to study effectively

2.It can be inferred from the first two paragraphs that __________.

A．laws on financial education have been effectively carried out

B．pupils should not be taught to add up and subtract

C．students have been taught to manage their finances

D．the author complains about the school education

3.The website and the consumer campaigner joined to _________.

A．instruct the pupils to donate their pocket money

B．promote the connection of schools and families

C．ask the government to dismiss the parliament

D．appeal for the curriculum of financial education

4.A poll is mentioned to ___________.

A．show the seriousness of the financial recession

B．stress the necessity of the curriculum reform

C．make the readers aware of burden of the parents

D．illustrate some people are strongly against the proposal

With fears of a possible nuclear meltdown(核反应堆堆芯的熔毁) in Japan building up, evidence has come to light that the nation received warnings over the stability of its power plants from an international watchdog more than two years ago.

　　As the Telegraph is reporting, an official from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said in December 2008 that safety rules were out of date, and strong earthquakes would cause a “serious problem” for the power stations.

　　A U.S. embassy document, by quoting（引用）an unnamed expert, states: “He (the IAEA official) explained that safety guides for earthquakes have only been updated three times in the last 35 years and that the IAEA is now re-examining them. Also, the presenter noted recent earthquakes in some cases have gone beyond the design basis for some nuclear plants, and that this is a serious problem that is now driving earthquake safety work.”

　　The Telegraph also reports that the government responded to the warnings by building an emergency response center at the Fukushima Daiichi plant designed to resist magnitude-7.0 earthquakes. Friday's earthquake, originally named a magnitude-8.9 shock, has since been upgraded to magnitude-9.0.

　　Other nuclear experts state IAEA officials had willingly ignored lessons from the Chernobyl disaster to protect the nuclear industry's expansion, reports Bloomberg. “After Chernobyl, all the force of the nuclear industry was directed to hide this event, for not creating damage to their reputation,”Russian nuclear accident specialist Iouli Andreyev tells Reuters, before noting that radiation from spent fuel rods（棒）stored close to reactors at Fukushima looked like an example of putting profit before safety. “The Japanese were very greedy, and they used every square inch of the space. But when you have a dense(密集的) placing of spent fuel in the basin, you have a high possibility of fire if the water is removed from the basin.”

1. From the passage, we know that ____________.

A. people fear that the nuclear meltdown will possibly become more and more serious in Japan

B. people are becoming more and more afraid of a possible nuclear meltdown in Japan

C. Japan made no response to the warnings over the safety of its power plants

D. Iouli Andreyev warned Japan not to store spent fuel rods close to reactors

2. Which of the following is true according to the passage?

A. Japan was warned of the stability of its power plants when they were built over 2 years ago.

B. Safety guides for earthquakes should be updated three times in 35 years.

C. The emergency response centre at the Fukushima Daiichi plant can not resist Friday’s  

     earthquake.

D. IAEA officials advised Japan to ignore lessons from the Chernobyl disaster.

3. IAEA officials were willing to ignore lessons from the Chernobyl disaster because they want ________.

A. to put profit before safety.         B. the nuclear industry to develop

   C. to protect the reputation of Japan        D. every inch of land to be made good use of

4.The writer develops this passage mainly by__________.

A. making comments              B. providing facts

C. quoting what experts say             D. analysing what happened

Laws that would have ensured pupils from five to 16 received a full financial education got lost in the ‘wash up’. An application is calling on the next government to bring it back.
　At school the children are taught to add up and subtract(减法) but, extraordinarily, are not routinely shown how to open a bank account — let alone how to manage their finances in an increasingly complex and demanding world.
　Today the parenting website Mumsnet and the consumer campaigner Martin Lewis have joined forces to launch an online application to make financial education a compulsory element of the school curriculum in England. Children from five to 16 should be taught about everything from pocket money to pensions, they say. And that was exactly the plan preserved in the Children, Schools and Families bill that was shelved by the government in the so-called “wash-up” earlier this month — the rush to legislation before parliament was dismissed. Consumer and parent groups believe financial education has always been one of the most frustrating omissions of the curriculum.
　As the Personal Finance Education Group (Pfeg) points out, the good habits of young children do not last long. Over 75% of seven- to 11-year-olds are savers but by the time they get to 17, over half of them are in debt to family and friends. By this age, 26% see a credit card or overdraft(透支) as a way of extending their spending power. Pfeg predicts that these young people will “find it much harder to avoid the serious unexpected dangers that have befallen many of their parents' generation unless they receive good quality financial education while at school.”
　The UK has been in the worst financial recession(衰退)for generations. It does seem odd that — unless parents step in — young people are left in the dark until they are cruelly introduced to the world of debt when they turn up at university. In a recent poll of over 8,000 people, 97% supported financial education in schools, while 3% said it was a job for parents.
【小题1】The passage is mainly about _____________.