Read the article and select the best answer. Article: In a recent class I was asked "What is a short story?" My first answer was that it was something that could be read in one sitting and brought an illumination to the reader, sudden and golden like sunlight cracking(, ) through a heavy cloud. I went on to say that in my opinion a "real" short story was closer to poetry than to a novel. Here are some definitions of the short story. My favorite is Benet's: "something that can be read in an hour and remembered for a lifetime". One writer said, "The theme of a novel won't fit into the framework of a short story; It's like trying to squeeze a large painting done on a wall into the frame of a miniature . And as in a miniature painting, the details need to be sharp. " The short story is an example of one aspect of human nature. Often a character _ some event, something that offers him or her change. This is why it's said that short stories usually "say something ", often a small something, but sometimes delivered with such accuracy that the effect is strongly felt, even a life-moment for some readers, something similar to a religious experience or to witnessing a never-to-be-repeated scene in nature. Ok, let's form a definition here: A short story is an account, rarely over 10, 000 words or below 500 words-more commonly 1, 500 to 5, 000 words-a single-sitting read, but with enough time and weight to move the reader. It is narrow and focused to produce an effect through the story, most commonly through events affecting some change in an individual. Writer Isabelle Allende once wrote: "Novels are, for me, adding up details, just work, work, work, then you're done. Short stories are more difficult-they have to be perfect, complete in themselves. " Question: What should the ideal short story be in length? Options: A: at most 10, 000 words B: below 500 words C: over 5, 000words D: around 2, 000 words
D

(Question)
Read the article and select the best answer. Article: My students often tell me that they don't have "enough time" to do all their schoolwork. My reply is often a brief "You have as much time as the president."I usually carry on a bit about there being twenty-four hours in the day for everyone, and suggest that "not enough time" is not an acceptable explanation of not getting something done. Once in graduate school,I tried to prove to one of my professors by saying that I was working hard.His answer to me was. "That's irrelevant .What's important is the quality of your work. " Since then I have had time to think carefully about the "hard worker" dodge ,and I have come to some conclusions--all relevant to the problem of how much time we have. If you analyze the matter, you can identify two parts of the prob1em:There is, of course,the matter of "time", which we call think of as fixed. Then there is the problem of "work" during that time. But, as my professor suggested, it's not how hard one works but the quality of the product that's important. That led me to a new idea: the quality of the work.That concept is perhaps best explained by a sign I once saw on the wall in someone s office: "Don't work harder. Work smarter." There is a lot of sense in that idea. If you can't get more time,and few of US can,the only solution is to improve the quality of the work.That means thinking of ways to get more out of the same time than we might otherwise get.That should lead us to an analysis of our work habits.Since "work" for students usually means "homework", the expression "work habits' should be read as "study habits". Then, as a smart student,you will seek to improve those skills that you use in study, chiefly reading and writing. If you learn to read better and write better,there are big advantages that pay off in all your studies. Question: Which of the following is TRUE according to the passage? Options: A: The author's students make good use of their time to do all their homework. B: The author tried to tell the professor that he/she(the author) had done a good job. C: You can't improve the quality of the work if you can't get more time. D: You'11 try to improve your skills in reading and writing if you're a clever student.
(Answer)
D

Ques: Read the article and select the best answer. Article: The man who learned to fly It is publicly accepted that it was the Wright brothers that invented the plane, but actually George Cayley knew how to make a plane a century before the Wright brothers took off. If only he'd got the internal combustion engine to work. During the 18thand 19thcenturies, scientists and the public all believed that it was only impossible to fly using an artificial wing, but an act of silly deed to suggest that you could. This did not discourage the English gentleman scientist George Cayley, even though his contemporaries --- including his own son--- were embarrassed by his efforts. In 1799, Cayley carved a silver disc with one side bearing a design for the world's first aeroplane and the other illustrating the earliest published description of the aerodynamic forces on the wing that enable a plane to fly. His three--part essay Aerial Navigation, published in 1809 and 1810, was greeted with skepticism by his contemporaries. But Cayley "didn't give a rat's ass" about what they all thought, according to Richard Dyde of York University in Ontario, Canada, author of The Man Who Discovered Flight--- and with good reason. He had completed a series of experiments to back up his theories and "was convinced that everyone else was wrong". Cayley constructed increasingly excellent model flying machines, and finally invented a full-scale glider, which was flown in 1853 by his grandson, George. This pioneering work would prove inspirational to Orville and Wilbur Wright, who made the first controlled and sustained heavier-than-air human flight 50 years later. Their success was dependent on the recent invention of the internal combustion engine--- a device which Cayley, having realized its great importance, had spent many fruitless years trying to develop. Question: Why didn't George Cayley make his plane fly? Options: A: Because he was short of money. B: Because he didn' t get support from the government. C: Because he didn't have the internal combustion engine. D: Because he didn't have a pilot.
Ans:
C