Article: As the semester ended, students had a chance to _ . They got to grade me anonymously , assessing the ability of my thinking, my organizational skills and the depth of my knowledge. Such evaluations keep me alert to what works and what doesn't. Students reflect my performance back to me, and I'm glad to learn what they think of my teaching so that I might try to improve. This system reflects many aspects of my work. There is, of course, nothing wrong with it. But this system assumes that what students need is the same as what they want. Reading my evaluations every semester has taught me otherwise. Actually many students' expectations for their courses have already changed, reflecting, in part, the business model many universities are following: classes are considered services, and parents are eager to get their money's worth from their children's education. Students feel pressure from their parents to get practical use from their courses. This could make sense for an engineering course, but in my field, creative writing, which rarely trains up excellent 21-year-old writers, it is more difficult to provide the results that the career-minded students desire. Then I tried some teaching techniques to change the criticism of those unhappy students to the opposite and improve my student evaluations. My record would accurately reflect a smart, attentive, encouraging teacher. However, I would admit that they loved me simply because I agreed writing should be easy. I know other teachers have done the same thing: teach your heart out to the teachable but be sure to please the unteachable; keep your ratings high, like a politician trying to improve his poll results. I believe in the struggle. But I still can't help wincing when I read, "The instructor is mean." "Marcus is not committed to my work." "This class sucks." The business model has taught me that customers are always right. And maybe a few more dissatisfied customers would mean a better learning experience. Question: What is the author's attitude towards being graded by his students? Yes or no, is the answer "Positive."?
No

(Question)
Article: Reseachers at the University of Kansas say that people can accurately juage 90 percent of a stranger's personality simply by looking at the person's shoes."Shoes convey useful information about their wearers,''the authors wrote in the new study published in the Journal of Research in Personality. Lead researcher Omri Gillath said the judgments were based on the style,cost,color and condition of someone's shoes.In the study,63 University of Kansas researchers looked at pictures showing 208 different pairs of shoes worn by the study's participants.Volunteers in the study were photographed in their most commonly worn shoes,and then filled out a personality questionnaire. Some of the results were expected:People with higher incomes most commonly wore expensive shoes,and flashier shoes were typically worn by outgoing people.However,some of the more specific results are strange enough.For example,"practical and functional'' shoes were generally worn by more "pleasant" people,while ankle boots were more linked with ''aggressive'' personalities.The strangest of all may be that those who wore' 'uncomfortable looking" shoes tend to have "calm" personalities.And if you have several pairs of new shoes or take extreme care of them,you may suffer from "attachment anxiety",spending lots of time worrying about what other people think of your appearance.There was even a political calculation in the mix with more liberal types wearing "shabbier and less expensive" shoes. The researchers noted that some people will choose shoe styles to mask their actual personalities,but researchers noted that volunteers were also likely to be unaware that their footwear choices were showing the deep side of their personalities. Question: Which of the results is beyond people's expectation? Yes or no, is the answer "Aggressive people are likely to wear"ankle boots."?
(Answer)
No

Ques: Article: As a young man, Paul Beier hiked in the mountains of California. Since then, he has decided to choose his career as a wildlife protector. He went to school to learn more first of all. After he earned his doctor's degree, he eagerly signed up for a job studying cougars , which once lived throughout the United States, but now live mainly in the Rocky Mountains and westward. They need not only a lot of land to survive but also plenty of food and places to raise their young. But many wild areas have been divided by freeways and taken over by towns. The small wilderness areas of the Santa Ana Mountains in Southern California didn't have much room for them. And yet a few still lived there. How did they do it? Many big animals are disappearing. Those that survive are being trapped in shrinking patches of habitat. A patch may not have enough space or food for a cougar to survive. Scientists wondered if cougars could move from one patch to another. If so, maybe humans could preserve wildlife corridors to connect the patches, providing enough room for the animals. But no one had shown that animals use wildlife corridors in real life. To see if cougars had found corridors through local suburbs and freeways, Paul and his research team studied 32 cougars for five years. They used a drug to make each cat sleep, buckled a radio collar around its neck, and let it go. Every day, Paul used an electrical device that sends and receives radio signals to find cougars, listening for radio beeps from their collars. Once or twice a week, he trailed one of the cougars all night. He traced their travels on a map. Sure enough, some of them had discovered paths from one small park land to the next. One cougar became famous for his travels. He was named M6:"M"for Male, and"6"because he was the sixth one collared in the study. M6's corner of the Santa Ana Mountains wasn't large enough for him. Chino Hills State Park was not far away, but the trip was not safe. After dark, M6 used a paved vehicle underground passage to cross undera busy... Question: The purpose of the study done by Paul and his team was to . Yes or no, is the answer "see how cougars found and used corridors"?
Ans: No

Ques: Article: A study of a million UK women, published today in The Lancet, has shown that happiness itself has no direct effect on mortality, and that the widespread but mistaken belief that unhappiness and stress directly cause ill health came from studies that had simply confused cause and effect. Life-threatening poor health can cause unhappiness, and for this reason unhappiness is associated with increased mortality. In addition, smokers tend to be unhappier than non-smokers. However, after taking account of previous ill health, smoking, and other lifestyle and socio-economic factors, the investigators found that unhappiness itself was no longer associated with increased mortality. The lead author, Dr Bette Liu, now at the University of New South Wales, Australia said: "Illness makes you unhappy, but unhappiness itself doesn't make you ill. We found no direct effect of unhappiness or stress on mortality, even in a ten-year study of a million women." As in other studies, unhappiness was associated with deprivation, smoking, lack of exercise, and not living with a partner. The strongest associations, however, were that the women who were already in poor health tended to say that they were unhappy, stressed, not in control, and not relaxed. The main analyses included 700 000 women, average age 59 years, and over the next 10 years these women were followed by electronic record linkage for mortality, during which time 30 000 of the women died. After allowing for any differences already present in health and lifestyle, the overall death rate among those who were unhappy was the same as the death rate among those who were generally happy. The study is so large that it rules out unhappiness being a direct cause of any material increase in overall mortality in women. This was true for overall mortality, for cancer mortality, and for heart disease mortality, and it was true for stress as well as for unhappiness. Question: The word "mortality" in the passage means . Yes or no, is the answer "relaxation"?
Ans:
No