Article: On the whole, it's not something we parents shout about, but one in four of us does it.Hiring private tutors for our children is now widespread.And this year, as always,the Easter holidays will be peak time for tutor demand. "My husband and I tried to tutor her at home,but we found all our knowledge was out of date and we were only confusing Zarreen.We also tried a group revision course but all the children were sitting exams for different boards . On the whole we think one-two-one tuition works best and it is worth the money.In our case,Preeta is a bit like an elder sister to Zarreen and that's the most important,"says Ashan Sabri from London, whose daughter Zarreen,18,is having tuition in biology and chemistry in preparation for A-levels this summer. In fact,Preeta Datta is only six years older than her pupil and she is happy to provide extra tuition through mobile phone."Maybe Zarreen will call me two or three times a week with a question about biology or chemistry, and that's fine to me,"says Datta. The real question is:does tutoring do any good? "It's not the magic bullet,"says Professor Judith Ireson.'It's still up to the child to do the learning.If he or she isn't interested,then sending them to a private tutor won't do any good." In which case,surely it's time to break open the Champagne ?Not necessarily, says Elaine Tyrrell,head of the Rowans School. "While we recommend private tutoring for a few children whose first language isn't English,we don't encourage it for the others,"says Tyrrell."With the level of education they get here,children really ought to be able to pass the entrance exams without any extra teaching. Besides, our biggest worry is that they might just get in with the help of last-minute tutoring,but,once they actually get to that school,they won't be able to manage." It's a point worth considering.After all,who would want their child to stay at the bottom of the class? Question: From the passage we know that_. Yes or no, is the answer "Preeta Datta is only twenty four years old."?
No

Article: Let's face it: Teenagers spend hours texting, socializing on Facebook and playing video games.And it's driving their parents nuts. Sure, there are real dangers connected with all this screen time--everything from cyberbullying to couch-potato obesity.Not to mention driving while texting, and shortened attention spans . Douglas Gentile, who studies the effects of media on children, says texting, Facebook and video games are not naturally bad.Nor are they naturally better or worse than watching TV, although they do lead to different risks, such as cyberbullying. But research has shown that the more time kids spend in front of screens--whether it's TV or instant-messaging--the worse their school performances are."That doesn't mean it's true for every kid, but it makes sense, that for every hour a kid is playing video games, it's an hour that they're not doing homework or reading or exploring or creating," he said.If screen time is taking the place of doing their homework, that's bad.But if their homework is done, well, so what? The study also found that the more time kids spend with media, the lower their grades and levels of personal satisfaction are.Gentile said the influence of screen time on school work can be reduced by what he calls "protective factors".Those might include good teachers and a high-performing school, love of reading, coming from a family where education is valued."If you had all these protective factors, then that one little risk factor, who cares?" One thing parents should worry about is the way electronic devices encourage multitasking . "As adults, your response speeds up, you're quicker to look over your shoulder and notice little noises or lights.However this is not what the kids need when they get to the classroom.Scanning to see when the next message comes may not be good for kids.The more distractions you have, the worse your performance is." Getting kids to turn off their phones, iPods in order to let them concentrate on homework is a fight worth having. Question: What might be the most suitable title for the passage? Yes or no, is the answer "Are texting and Facebook worse for teens than TV?"?
No

*Question*
Article: In 1859, prefix = st1 /ItalyandFrancewere at war withAustria, and Henry Dunant, a young Swiss gentleman, came upon one of their battlefields. For the first time in his life, Dunant saw how heartless war would be. Around him were suffering men untended and left to die where they fell. Henry Dunant went to work at once. Helped by several peasant women, he formed an ambulance service and set up headquarters in a little church. He treated the wounds of Frenchmen, Italians and Austrians alike. When he was asked why he did so, his answer showed a spirit of humanity that was not common in those days. "We are all brothers. A wounded enemy is an enemy no longer." With his band of assistants, Dunant helped to save many lives. The "gentleman in white" (as Dunant was called because he wore a white suit) was looked upon by hundreds of wounded men as an angel. When Dunant returned toSwitzerland, he could not forget the needless suffering on the battlefield. He thought of a great organization that should be planned to include many nations. It would do its work with the approval of all countries. And it must operate under a sign that all would know: its symbol would be a red cross against a white background. He wrote a book to make the public see the need for this great organization. In the book he included a truthful account of what he had seen on the battlefield. The consequence was that readers were shocked by what he described. After Dunant's hard work, in Geneva on October 26, 1863, all the nations of Europe were invited to a meeting at which it was decided a relief society should be formed in each country. Then the Geneva Convention was made the following year. The nations that signed the Geneva Convention chose the red cross as the symbol for the international organization. Until his death in 1910, Dunant was always ready to look for a noble cause. And when the Nobel Peace Prize was awarded for the first time in 1901, the honor went to Dunant. No man has deserved it more than the founder of the Red Cross. Question: Dunant planned the organization with an intention to _ . Yes or no, is the answer "get the approval for relief work from every country"?
**Answer**
No