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?) According to the above context, answer the following question. Boyd believes that we want
OPTIONS:
- Excellence
- not enough information
- Opportunity in our education system
- Poverty is a cause of achievement
Answer: Opportunity in our education system

input with options: You may have read some of the scary research recently that links parabens (a preservative ingredient found in loads of health and beauty products) with breast cancer, and whilst there is no evidence yet to prove that using parabens causes breast cancer more and more people are choosing to ditch parabens in favour of something more natural. I'm gradually trying to replace all of my old skincare and bodycare products with natural alternatives so that my body comes into contact with less parabens and other nasty chemicals. One of the types of products which seems to be very late to the natural table is deodorant, there isn't a wide variety of paraben-free products available yet but I was really pleased to see that Soft & Gentle, a well-known household brand, had brought out this new 0% Aluminium Dry Deodorant. It's free from parabens, allergens and aluminium and uses astringent plant extracts that shrink the sweat pores to reduce perspiration whilst natural herb sage acts as a deodoriser. Available in three fragrances Active, Floral and Care I've been using the Floral Soft & Gentle 0% Aluminium Dry Deodorant for over 2 weeks and I've really put it through its paces as the temperature has been fairly hot and humid for the last fortnight. With a deodorant there are 2 main factors that we can look at to evaluate its success dryness and odour control. So how did this paraben free Soft & Gentle deodorant fare? With regard to dryness I found that it kept me dry all day. I've been walking 2 miles or more most days and the weather has been warm, over 25 degrees some days, and I've been feeling generally a bit hot and sticky. But not on my underarms, they've been dry and I feel confident that this deodorant controls my sweat. In the first couple of days I did notice a little bit of unpleasant odour, but then I increased the amount that I was spraying under each arm and after this I've experienced no problems whatsoever, even after doing exercise or going on a long walk. According to the above context, answer the following question. Why are many people trying to steer away from parabens?
OPTIONS:
- not enough information
- Some research has linked them to breast cancer
- They don't work as well
- There isn't a wide variety of products without them yet
output: Some research has linked them to breast cancer

Q: The Texas church where a gunman opened fire during Sunday services, killing 26 and injuring 20, may not reopen. Pastor Frank Pomeroy of the First Baptist Church of Sutherland Springs told leaders of the Southern Baptist Convention earlier this week that it would be too painful to continue using the church as a place of worship. Pomeroy, who lost his own 14-year-old daughter in the massacre, proposed turning the site into a memorial and building another church on a different site. The final decision on the fate of the building will be made by the denomination's top leaders, who traveled to the rural community in a show of support. But a national Southern Baptist spokesman said the pastor's wishes will be taken into consideration. Other sites of mass shootings have been torn down, including Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Connecticut, where a gunman killed 20 children and six adults in December 2012. A new school was built elsewhere. A one-room Amish schoolhouse near Lancaster, Pennsylvania, was torn down in 2006, 10 days after an assailant took children hostage and shot and killed five girls ages 6 to 13. The original site of the school is now a pasture. A nearly identical schoolhouse with a security fence was erected nearby. Also Thursday, the father of the Texas gunman broke his silence to say his family is in mourning. Michael Kelley spoke to ABC News on Wednesday from his home in New Braunfels, about 55 kilometers north of Sutherland Springs. He refused to comment further, saying he does not want the "media circus'' surrounding the attack by Devin Patrick Kelley to destroy "our lives, our grandchildren's lives.'' A motive for the carnage remains unclear, but the younger Kelley appears to have targeted the church because it was attended by his wife's family. He died from a self-inflicted gunshot wound after being shot and chased by two residents as he was leaving the church. According to the above context, answer the following question. The pastor's speech probably lasted:

OPTIONS:
- 6 years
- not enough information
- 5 weeks
- 30 minutes

A:
30 minutes