In this task, you're given an article and an answer. Your task is to generate the question for the answer based on the given article.
--------
Question: Article: Forty years ago, Finland was a small, country with mediocre public schools. Today, Finland is still small but no one calls Finland's public schools mediocre any more. In 2000, the Finns surprised the world when their 15-year-olds scored at the top of a closely watched international exam called the PISA. Finland has stayed near the top ever since, while the U.S. scores around the middle. Pasi Sahlberg, an official with Finland's Ministry of Education and Culture, is in Seattle this week to share the story of Finland's success, and what states like Washington can learn from it. Sahlberg's message, although he is too polite to put it so bluntly: Stop testing so much, trust teachers more; give less homework; shorten the school day. On Tuesday, in a room filled with teachers, principals, professors, school-board members and policy makers, Sahlberg joked about the Finns' reputation for being a quiet, humble people. "When Finland hit the top of the PISA," he said, "the biggest disbelievers were Finns." More seriously, Finland never set out to create the world's top school system. Instead, he said, the country decided in the 1970s that it wanted to ensure that a student's success didn't depend on family background. "Finland relied on cooperation among teachers and schools, rather than on competition. Rather than judging teachers and schools based on test scores," he said, "Finland puts trust in its teachers and principals. Teachers develop the curriculum in Finland, and design their own tests. There are no national tests, except one at the end of high school." That's just the start. Along with a shorter school day, Finnish students don't even start school until they are 7 years old. Many primary schools have a policy against giving homework. "But Finland," he said, " succeeded in part by adopting ideas from the U.S. and other countries. And those countries, he said, can learn from Finland, too."
Answer: To ask the US to improve its education.

Answer: What might be the author's purpose of writing the passage?

Question: Article: Educating Girls Is a Real Lifesaver Clare Short knows it. Every developing economist knows it. The World Bank knows it. The education of girls is the surest way to reduce poverty. The reason is simple. All the evidence shows that taking girls out of the fields and homes, and putting them behind desks, raises economic productivity, lowers infant and maternal death rates, reduces birth rates, and improves environmental management. Why, then, are 90 million primary school-age girls around the world not in school? For the same reason that when Charles Dickens was writing David Copperfield 150 years ago girls were absent from the British education system: Men in power mostly prefer _ that way, or are not interested enough in changing the situation to commit energy and money to doing so. The countries with the poorest record for having women in positions of power or influence have the worst figures for girls' education. High-profile intervention by organizations such as the World Bank has begun successfully with several countries, and more of the same will probably be needed to bring change in conservative, male-run states. Even if there were no development payoff from gender equality in schools, the education of girls would still be a cause worth fighting for. Education is a human right, and the denial of it to girls is a scar on the community in the twenty-first century. To be born a girl in a rural area in Nepal, Pakistan, Indonesia, Morocco, Togo, or Sudan -- half a dozen of the most shameful performers -- means being condemned to a life without school, education, or clean water, marriage and babies coming too early, too many births, children who die of preventable diseases, backbreaking work in the fields, subordination to husband and his family, and an early death. Every year, almost 12 million children under the age of five needlessly die of infectious diseases associated with poverty. But each additional year spent by their mothers in primary school lowers the risk of premature child deaths by about 8 percent. In Pakistan, an extra year of school for 1,000 girls could prevent sixty infant deaths. With women and girls being the main farmers in Africa and southern Asia, their education offers a chance to develop more efficient farming practices, improve output, and raise awareness of the ecological needs of the land with tree planting and farming. Therefore, the world community cannot afford to ignore this avenue of change.
Answer: It lowers maternal death rates.

Answer: Which is Not the reason why educating girls reduces poverty?

Question: Article: When Caleb Forbes got his first job at an advertising company at the age of 20, he thought he would be at the company for years. But after seven months he was bored. Soon after that, Forbes moved to London. He took four different jobs at three companies over the next five years. Forbes wanted a better job and higher pay---he was never quite satisfied. Welcome to the world of a job hopper. Forbes's story isn't unusual these days and such frequent movement from one job to the next will become more common. The main reason: the nature of employment is changing. There are a lot more contracts and part-time jobs or flexible employment. That leads to people having a greater number of jobs. What's more, layoffs and pay freezes , among other things, have pushed people from one job to another. In some cases, a bad worldwide job market has limited opportunities for star employees, promoting them to seek new challenges at other companies. However, employers often think that if a person jumped from his last employer after a short period, he will likely do the same again --- there is a significant financial risk in hiring someone who leaves in short order. What's more, moving from company to company frequently doesn't mean workers are climbing the corporate ladder faster. In 2005, Monika Hamori, a professor at Spain's IE Business School, looked at CEOs at about 55 to see if those who moved around more frequently climbed the ladder faster. She found that executives who stayed with one company became CEOs after 23 years, while executives who changed companies many times became CEOs after 26 years. One reason: workers within the same organization tend to be promoted more frequently and be offered better jobs.
Answer: It was dangerous.

Answer:
How did Forbes feel about his first job at first?