Article: Moral science is taught as a subject in most schools but with little effect. Perhaps part of the problem lies in the fact that morality is not a science, strictly speaking. It is too much of a social phenomenon, and also has too much of the personal and subjective things mixed within. Besides, morality itself changes with generations. So it is impossible to be defined in a textbook. I remember sitting through forty minutes of moral lessons, which told stories about little children who never told lies and were rewarded for their goodness. It had little effect and left no impression on me, though. If moral science has to be taught as a subject in schools, it needs a participatory approach. When you tell a child about morals, you also have to deal with social norms and cultural differences. You have to explain that morality can be subjective, and be able to co-exist in society. You will probably have to refer to the morals of the present time. The best way to tell a child how to live is to show him what is valued. If a child likes his friend, you have to make the child think about why. Once the child notices and recognizes goodness in others, he or she is likely to develop it as well. In fact, children learn most of their morals by watching people around them. They absorb behavior patterns from teachers and older students. They watch to see what is rewarded and who is punished. They learn on the sports field and through social work. Moral science lessons should simply consist of letting them live and interact, and watch you support correct values and reward good behavior. Question: The author describes his own experience of having moral lessons in order to _ . Yes or no, is the answer "prove moral lessons in schools have little effect."?
No

Article: The summer I was ten, my mother decided to bring us to the world of art. My brother and I were not very excited when we realized what my mother meant. What she meant was not that we could take drawing classes or painting classes but that we would have to spend one afternoon a week with her at the Fine Arts Museum. Before each visit to the museum, she made us read about artists and painting styles. It was almost as bad as being in school. Who wants to spend the summer thinking about artists when you could be with your friends at the swimming pool? First we had to read about ancient Egyptians and their strange way of painting faces and then go to look at them at the museum. My 12-year-old brother thought this was so funny, but I was not interested. Later we had to learn about artists in the Middle Ages who painted people wearing strange long clothing. We had to look at pictures of fat babies with wings and curly hair and with no clothes on flying around the edges of paintings. I certainly couldn't see what was so great about art. On our last visit to the museum, something happened when I saw a painting by a woman called Mary. In it, a woman was reading to a child. The colors were soft and gentle, and you could tell by the mother's expression how happy she was just to be with the child. I couldn't stop looking at this painting! I wanted to see every painting Mary had ever made! It was really worth looking at so many paintings to find a painter who could interest me so much. Question: What was the writer's experience in the museum before the last visit? Yes or no, is the answer "She hardly enjoyed herself."?
No

Article: Everybody may have seen the film "Death on the Nile (n. )", but nobody can imagine that the writer of the story, Agatha Christie, saved a baby in a most unusual way. In June 1977, a baby girl became seriously ill in Deleville. Doctors there were unable to find out the cause of her illness, so she was sent to a famous hospital in London, where there were many excellent doctors. The baby was so seriously ill that a team of doctors hurried to examine the baby without delay. The doctors, too, were puzzled by the baby's illness and they also became discouraged. Just then a nurse asked to speak to them. "I think the baby is suffering from thallium (n. ) poisoning. " said the nurse. "A few days ago, I read a story 'A Pale Horse' written by Agatha Christie. Someone uses thallium poison, and all the symptoms are written in the book. They are exactly the same as the baby's." "You're very good at observing things," said a doctor, "and you may be right. We'll carry out some tests and find out whether the cause is thallium poisoning or not." The tests proved that the baby had indeed been poisoned by thallium. Once they knew the cause, the doctors were able to give her correct treatment. The baby soon got well and was sent back to Deleville A week later, it was reported that the poison might have come from an insecticide (n. ) used in Deleville. Question: From this passage it seems that the baby's illness had something to do with _ . Yes or no, is the answer "a harmful substance (n. ) used to kill pests"?
Yes

Article: The King received news one day that a group outlaws were committing some wrong and cruel acts on a distant border of the kingdom. The news angered the King. He quickly gathered his army and started off for the distant border, leaving his kingdom unguarded and without a ruler. On their long march, the King and his army made camp for the night wherever they could. One rainy day they stopped in a forest, seeking shelter under the trees. They unsaddled their horses and steamed some peas, which they fed to their steeds in long narrow containers. A monkey in a tree nearby saw the horses being fed, and he came racing down, filled both paws with peas, then climbed quickly up to a branch and settled down to eat. But as he opened one paw, a single pea fell to the ground. Without hesitation, the monkey jumped from his branch to hunt for the lost pea, and in doing so,he dropped all the other peas in his paws. The King observed this foolish monkey and was greatly amused. He timed to his minister and asked: "Friend, what do you think of this monkey who would give up so much to _ so little?" "That is the way of the foolish," replied the minister, "they will give up much that is certain for a little that is uncertain." Then he added, "And we, Great King, are we not like the monkey in the trees. To gain so little we neglect so much exactly like the monkey with its pea." The King understood the blame and realized how very foolish he had been himself to leave his kingdom unguarded. He gave out orders to his men, and he and his army returned at once to their country. Question: Which of the following can be the best title for the text? Yes or no, is the answer "A Simple-minded Monkey"?
No