In this task, you're given an article, a question which often contains a blank, four options (associated with "A", "B", "C", "D") and the answer to that question. Your task is to classify whether the given answer is correct or not by providing "Yes" or "No", based on the article.
--------
Question: Article: There is an agreement that we are depriving this current generation of young kids a chance to do what they are not only equipped to do,but need to dotake some risks.And we're not talking about unimportant ones,either.Kids need to learn how to handle "dangerous" things like power tools,make fires,and have the benefits that occur from "playing with knives". Hanna Rosin focuses on some of the misguided reasons we are raising "The Overprotected Kid" in the Atlantic.She says our concerns with kids' safety go beyond the actual risks. I agree with this new opinion. For many kids growing up today,there are fewer and fewer opportunities to practice risk taking.Risk taking is an important skill every kid needs to learn,how to do something that they are a little seared of doing because they haven't done it before.Part of the reason for "Overprotection" is certainly the parental fear. This is certainly evident in terms of the physical environment. I claim that much of the parental concern isn't driven by.fear of injury--it's more about concern with success. "Play" may be in fact less dangerous than our structured sports--yet we focus more on the risk because we don't see the benefit.And this broader concern with success is not limited to the playground or sports field."Overprotection" certainly happens in the social and academic fields as well,as phrases like "helicopter parent" have become mainstream.There is plenty of social and academic risk taking that can also be prevented because of the perception of risk.
Question: Which of the following would Hanna Rosin agree with?
Options: (A) Not all kids can play on the playground alone. (B) The review of the statistics details the danger of injury. (C) Parents should take care of the kids in case they are lost. (D) Parents' concerns with kids' safety aren't actually necessary mostly.
Asnwer: A

Answer: No

Question: Article: Charlie Bell became chief executive of McDonald's in April. Within a month doctors told him that he had color1ectal cancer. After stock market hours on November 22nd, the fast-food firm said he had resigned; it would need a third boss in under a year. Yet when the market opened, its share price barely dipped then edged higher. After all, McDonald's had, again, shown how to act swiftly and decisively in appointing a new boss. Mr. Bell himself got the top job when Jim Cantalupo died of a heart attack hours before he was due to address a convention of McDonald's franchisees . Mr. Cantalupo was a McDonald's veteran brought out of retirement in January 2003 to help remodel the firm after sales began falling because of dirty restaurants, indifferent service and growing concern about junk food. He devised a recovery plan, backed by massive marketing, and promoted Mr. Bell to chief operating officer. When Mr. Cantalupo died, a rapidly convened board confirmed Mr. Bell, a 44-year-old Australian already widely seen as his heir apparent, in the top job. The convention got its promised chief executive's address, from the firm's first non-American leader. Yet within weeks executives had to think about what to do if Mr. Bell became too ill to continue. Perhaps Mr. Bell had the same thing on his mind: he usually introduced Jim Skinner, the 60-year-old vice-chairman, to visitors as the "steady hand at the wheel". Now Mr. Skinner, an expert on the firm's overseas operations, becomes chief executive, and Mike Roberts, head of its American operations, joins the board as chief operating officer. Is Mr. Roberts now the new heir apparent? Maybe. McDonald's has brought in supposedly healthier choices such as salads and toasted sandwiches worldwide and, instead of relying for most of its growth on opening new restaurants, has turned to upgrading its 31,000 existing ones. America has done best at this; under Mr. Roberts, like-for-like sales there were up by 7. 5% in October on a year earlier. The new team's task is to keep the revitalization plan on course, especially overseas, where some American brands are said to face political hostility from consumers. This is a big challenge. Is an in-house succession(, ) the best way to tackle it? Mr. Skinner and Mr. Roberts are both company veterans, having joined in the 1970s. Some recent academic studies find that the planned succession of a new boss from within, such as Mr. Bell and now (arguably) Mr. Roberts, produces better results than looking hastily, or outside, for one. McDonald's smooth handling of its serial misfortunes at the top certainly seems to prove the point. Even so, everyone at McDonald's must be hoping that it will be a long time before the firm faces yet another such emergency.
Question: The main reason for the constant change at the top of McDonald is _ .
Options: (A) the constant change of its share price (B) the board's failure to reach an agreement (C) the falling sales (D) the physical problems of the chief executives
Asnwer: B

Answer: No

Question: Article: On April twenty-second, some American children stayed out of school but they were not punished. They were with their parents. As Faith Lapidus tells us, it was Take Our Daughters and Sons to Work Day. The Ms. Foundation for Women started the program seventeen years ago, in 1993. At first it was just called Take Our Daughters to Work. Gloria Steinem and other foundation leaders pointed to studies showing that self-image suffers as girls become teenagers. They can lose trust in their abilities and intelligence, especially in areas like science, math and technology. So the Ms. Foundation planned a day for parents in New York City to show girls all the possibilities for them in the professional world. But there was so much interest, the organizers decided to make it national. At first, girls mostly followed their mom or dad around at work to learn about their jobs. Later, employers and schools began to offer organized activities. But from the beginning there were protests from parents and others about the exception of boys. So in 2003 the day was renamed Take Our Daughters and Sons to Work. 2007 was the last year that the Ms. Foundation for Women headed the program. Now, the event is run by a twelve-person group called the Take Our Daughters and Sons to Work Foundation. The event is connected with Mattel, the company that makes Barbie dolls. Carolyn McKecuen is president of the foundation. She says a total of about thirty-three million children and adults are involved in the program. About one-third of the adults work at large companies or nonprofit organizations. Another third are in small businesses. The rest work in education. Carolyn McKecuen says the numbers from this year's event are not final yet. But early reports suggest that participation was up at least ten percent from last year. And she says the foundation is hoping to find support to expand the program internationally. She says there are lots of requests from other countries for information about how to set up similar programs.
Question: It was called Take Our Daughters to Work at first because _ .
Options: (A) girls are considered to be clever than boys (B) girls are considered to be more foolish than boys (C) girls aren't confident in some areas as they becomes older (D) girls don't want to learn some science subjects
Asnwer: C

Answer:
Yes