user: (Question)
Personally I enjoy doing things outside. You know, the good ol’ nature. One time, me and my buddy Alex and some friends decided we were going to go camping. (I know, basic camping story. Well not exactly.) We planned on going for the weekend. Got to the spot and put up our tents like normal campers. But knowing myself and my friends we wanted to drink a couple beers and do some fishing. We did just that. Later that night we had started out camp fire and cooked up some links before bed time. My drunk self wanted to keep the fire going all night to prevent wild animals from coming t our sight. Well at least I thought that’d help. So I needed a bunch of wood to do so. Everyone was asleep by this point but me. So I took myself out into the woods a little deeper to grab a full broken down tree. I thought to myself, “Well if I want to utilize all of this wood I’m going to need to break it into smaller prices right?” Wrong. Well at least it was wrongful of how I planned on doing it. I attempted to break the tree in half by throwing it against another tree, as if I were as strong as the hulk or something. Once I chunked the tree at this tree I messed the entire vacation up. The tree came down on my knee and crushed it. I was in so much pain. I realized that I messed it up pretty bad so I laid there for a second trying to get back to my feet. The next day I couldn’t apply any pressure and couldn’t walk at all. I was dirty and smelly and needed some serious help on my leg but I was too far from any civilization. Worst nature experience ever! Why did the narrator look for more wood? Pick the correct answer from the following options: - not enough information - For fun, because he was drunk. - He thought if he kept the fire going all night, wild animals wouldn't come to their camping spot. - He wanted to keep the fire going all night because he was very cold.
(Answer)
He thought if he kept the fire going all night, wild animals wouldn't come to their camping spot.


(Question)
I end this small run of blog posts with the question posed by Professor Brian Boyd at the beginning of our evening: Do we want to close the achievement gap? We know we can close the gap. It’s been done or almost been done before in Scottish education, but the answers have been ignored as they pass us by. The simple clue is this: poverty is single biggest predictor of achievement, and according to research (Hammonds sic, reference required), aged 10, a child living in poverty is 60% less likely to get to university. Boyd borrowed from his own mother’s report card to ask us what kind of education we desire. Is it the academic success at all costs route, or is there another option we need to value as much, if not more? His mother’s report card, one that prevented her from becoming a secondary school pupil in Glasgow, is filled with G and FG, until the last point: Character and conduct - excellent. What kind of pupils do we want to develop in Scotland? What do we value in our assessment system? Opening up opportunity for all is a tough game to play when the examination system rewards only certain types of behaviour, few of them related to what the Curriculum for Excellence says we stand for. In his own small community in East Kilbride, three secondary schools enter a period of meltdown as the local rag sets about creating its own local league table of performance, with those three ‘teams’ in competition for the top spot (or at least not the bottom one). Therefore, we must stop basing “the gap” largely on attainment. First of all, Boyd would like us to remove the traditional, and non-sensical academic/vocational divide. Is the law or medicine degree we value not vocational? (Are all General Practitioners not Plumbers, as Dr Murray on the panel suggests?) After the end of the story the writer: Pick the correct answer from the following options: - would disagree with Boyd's future opinions and findings - not enough information - would agree with Boyd's future opinions and findings - would attack any of Boyd's opinions and findings
(Answer)
would agree with Boyd's future opinions and findings


(Question)
SEOUL, SOUTH KOREA — During his first year in office, South Korean President Moon Jae-in’s persistent pursuit of diplomacy, often working in parallel with U.S. President Donald Trump’s “maximum pressure” campaign, played a significant role in persuading North Korea to engage in talks to end its nuclear program. “Before the extreme measures might have been chosen by the United States, he gave diplomacy another chance to succeed,” said Bong Young-shik, a political analyst with the Yonsei University’s Institute for North Korean Studies in Seoul. A year ago this week, Moon, a former human rights lawyer and candidate for the progressive Democratic Party, won a special presidential election held after former conservative President Park Geun-hye was impeached for her involvement in a bribery and corruption scandal. This year, Park was sentenced to 24 years in prison during criminal trial related to the scandal in which she was charged with abuse of power, coercion and bribery. Moon assumed power at a time of increasing tensions, not just concerning North Korea’s accelerated nuclear and ballistic missile tests, but also China’s imposing of informal economic sanctions against South Korea for deploying the U.S. THAAD missile defense system, and the Trump administration’s talk of possible military action to end the North’s efforts to develop a nuclear armed intercontinental missile that could strike the U.S. mainland. In his inaugural address in May 2017, Moon promised to engage in shuttle diplomacy with Washington, Beijing and Pyongyang to work out a peaceful solution to the growing crisis. In a July speech in Berlin, President Moon laid out his vision for inter-Korean reconciliation that called for peaceful co-existence of the two Korean governments, but also said that denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula is “the absolute condition for peace.” But unlike past progressive South Korean governments that provided unconditional economic assistance, the Moon administration complied with economic sanctions in place and... What reason led to former President Park abusing their power and using bribery? Pick the correct answer from the following options: - Strong support with the U.S. as an ally - not enough information - Denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula - The tensions in South Korea were heightened with nuclear tests and economic sanctions against them.
(Answer)


assistant: The tensions in South Korea were heightened with nuclear tests and economic sanctions against them.