I'm taking a test and have to guess the right answer to the question after the article. Article: "Your honor !Let me say a few words for myself. What they have told you is just not true. I was not trying to kill anyone, and it was hardly possible to try to kill three strong young men at the same time. I didn't have anything to tell people that night and was quite alone. I didn't know them and needn't hate them. I was attacked by them, and I knocked one of them down. It's true, but I was made to do it, or I might be killed by them. I did this not because I hated the white men as they said. I just had to do so. While I was beaten in the dark street by the three men, a policeman came, caught me and took me here. I know why I was beaten. I have just moved into a house next to these three white men. I have felt that I am not welcome and I have tried to be quiet. I think, as an American, I have the right to choose where to live. I am guilty. What makes me guilty is my color opposite to theirs and I can't enjoy justice . Yes, I'm not guilty. This is all I want to say. Thank you, your honor." Question: Why did he speak for himself? Options: A: He wanted to live in the house next to the whites. B: He wanted to have the right to choose where to live. C: He wanted to show he was not guilty. D: He wanted to show he didn't hate the whites.
C

I'm taking a test and have to guess the right answer to the question after the article. Article: Why doesn't the unemployment rate ever reach zero? Economists, who generally believe that supply tends to meet demand, have long thought about this question. Even in good times, i.e. not now, there are people who can't find work. And even in bad times, i.e. now, there are job openings. With over 14 million people out of work and looking for a job, you would think every available job would be filled. But that's not the case. Not now and not ever. On Monday, the Nobel Prize committee awarded the prize for economics to the three scholars who have done the most to explain this phenomenon. Two of the winners are Americans, Peter Diamond of MIT and Dale Mortensen of Northwestern. The third winner is Christopher Pissarides, who teaches at the London School of Economics and was born on Cyprus. Like most of economics, what they have found about why the jobless and ready-employers don't find each other seems obvious. You have to find out there is job opening you are interested in. Employers need to get resumes . It takes a while for both employers and employees to make the decision that this is what they want. And these guys came up with a frame-work to study the problem of why people stay unemployed longer than they should and what can be done about it. So what would today's Nobel Prize winners do to solve the current problem of the unemployed? And does the awarding of the prize contribute to the politicians' lowering joblessness? Speaking from his north London home, Pissarides told The Associated Press the announcement came as "a complete surprise" though his work had already helped shape thinking on both sides of the Atlantic. For example, the New Deal for Young People, a British government policy aimed at getting 18-24-year-olds back on the job market after long periods of unemployment, "is very much based on our work," he said. "One of the key things we found is that it is important to make sure that people do not stay unemployed too long so they don't lose their feel for the labor force," Pissarides told... Question: What is it that leads to their winning the prize? Options: A: They have found the reason for unemployment. B: They have put forward a set of ideas to deal with unemployment. C: They have found out why people don't want to be employed. D: They have long studied the problem of unemployment.
B

I'm taking a test and have to guess the right answer to the question after the article. Article: Eat less and exercise more--it has long been a magic word for reducing those extra weight. But now it seems that all the hard work may have been in vain. Scientists say there are ten other reasons why people just keep getting bigger. They say that sleeping habits, central heating, medicines and even some pollutants can play a role in weight gain. Traditionally, people have focused on diet and exercise to solve the problem. However the scientists from top US and Canadian universities say that other things must be considered. Lack of sleep could be partly the reason. In recent years, the average night's sleep has dropped from nine hours to just seven. Sleep shortage changes levels of the hormones that control food intake and body fat and increase hunger and appetite. If it is too hot or too cold, we burn calories to cool down or heat up. But if the temperature is just right, the calories may be turned into body fat instead. Those who take medicine to control their blood pressure can often put on weight. Similarly, studies have shown that going on the Pill can add to a woman's weight. Mother nature may also be the reason, with our body shape being partly inherited . The overweight are also more likely to settle with partners of a similar size. And their children are more likely to be obese . And the use of pollutants is on the rise, say the researchers. The man-made chemicals in pesticides and plastics can lead to weight gain. Your mother's age and your weight at birth are also important, with older woman more likely to have obese children and underweight babies having a bigger chance of being obese in later life. We also tend to put on weight as we get older. Finally, giving up smoking can also help pile on the pounds. The scientists from Yale, Cornell and Johns Hopkins said there was some evidence supporting poor diet and lack of exercise as the main causes of obesity. Question: Which of the following statements would the author agree to? Options: A: Lack of sleep leads you to take in more food. B: Unpleasant weather helps you to put on weight. C: Obese parents are not likely to have fat children. D: Medicine for blood pressure helps you lose weight.
A

I'm taking a test and have to guess the right answer to the question after the article. Article: As the summer time approaches, more and more commercials and advertisements can be seen on the mass media encouraging students to join English study tours abroad. The purpose of these tours is to provide students with an opportunity to learn English in a native speaking environment and use English in real situations. Parents always believe that their children will automatically speak good English after attending these study tours. However, for me, as an English major and former participant of many English study tours, I find these summer tours ineffective. Parents who send their children abroad for a summer to study English usually believe that the native speaking environment, including the courses, teachers, and host families, can help their children to learn English better. This might be true if the students really study hard and they really get an all-English environment. But the fact is that, most of the time, the tour part is more important than the study part. Although these tours take place in foreign countries, students are rarely exposed in an all-English environment. You will find that, in the morning classes, Taiwanese students would like to stick together and speak Chinese with each other, even though there are some students from other countries. In the afternoon, the students go on a sightseeing excursion with their companions from Taiwan; they speak Chinese of course. In the evening, when students return to the host families, they would stay in their room and share the day with their roommate, another Taiwanese student. People who speak the same language with you is like a log in the ocean when living in a foreign country where you can not express yourself well, so that you would naturally stick with them. This is especially true with children. Another unrealistic expectation parents have for these tours is that the experience of living abroad can make their children more independent and mature. However, maturity does not come overnight. It takes time and practice. The most important of all is... Question: What makes the parents send their children to join English study tours abroad according to the text? Options: A: Parents' misunderstanding to the ads. B: Parents' lack of information. C: Parents' unrealistic expectation. D: Parents' social experience.
C