1. 阅读难有很多原因。对中国学生来说客观原因就是阅读量小，单词量不够，速度不够等等。其次，阅读是考试第一个部分，大家可能还没进入英文的阅读状态。这次阅读大家感觉小说难，其实文本还好，只不过出题偏难，有点意识流的感觉。大家需要在平时的阅读中关注情节不多而整篇感觉都是个人沉思的文章（比如OG 4的小说-坐气球到北极）。而其他的三篇科学文章可以说是中规中矩了，历史的难度也没有2019年5月亚洲大。
2. 北美有加试（出现section 5）是正常现象，去年就有美高学生说了。大家不必惊慌，加试理论上是不算分的；只是CB在测试题目的信度和区分度，以及一些其他的目的（这里不做赘述）。但是给大家的建议是遇到加试还是正常做完，不要空着或者瞎填。
4. 北美的考场不一定都监考很松。比如我所在的Irvine Valley College的这个教室，全程在监视大家的一举一动，甚至桌上准考证都不允许放。其他国家和地区也应该类似（肯定不是某些地方考场一定松，具体还是要看监考官和这个特定的考场）
最后一题问谁最不重视音乐，就是文章最后出现的两个家长名字：Mary L（选项没有这个）和Joan C（正确选项）。
How Science Can Help Get Out the Vote
Only about half of the people who couldvote in the 2012 U.S. presidential election actually did so (53.6 percent ofthe voting-age population). Solutions that aim to address these problemstypically inform people about the importance of their vote in electing agovernment that works for them. Yet this tactic does not appear to sway many.Despite such efforts, turnout has consistently hovered around 50 percent forthe past nine U.S. presidential elections—the highest being 56.9 percent in2008.
Behavioral science might explain why theseinformational interventions fall short. A substantive body of evidenceindicates that the environment in which we make decisions can fundamentallyalter them. For example, what we think others are doing, how voting makes usfeel about ourselves, and what we need to do to vote all affect whether or notwe participate on Election Day. So instead of simply telling Americans to vote,the science suggests we need to think about the context in which citizensdecide to cast their ballots.
A number of traditional mobilizationefforts are directed at getting citizens to agree they will vote come electiontime. But just as many of us intend to exercise, eat healthy and save forretirement, people often fail to act on their intentions. As a 2015 review byresearchers at Harvard University and the University of Pennsylvania concluded,making concrete plans canhelp people translate goals into actions across a number of domains.
In a field experiment conducted among287,000 would-be voters in Pennsylvania during the 2008 Democratic primaryelection, researchers tried to see if voter turnout could be increased byhelping people make a concrete plan to implement their intentions. One to threedays before the November 2008 election, behavioral scientists David Nickerson,now at Temple University, and Todd Rogers of Harvard asked one group ofwould-be voters about their intentions to vote and a second group about theirintentions and also about when, where and how they would accomplish the goal ofvoting.
Voter records showed that making a plan wasmore than twice as effective as simply asking people about their intentions. Overallthere was a 4.1 percentage point increase in the likelihood of voting by makinga plan relative to people who did not receive a phone call. (The averageeffectiveness of commercial phone banks, assessed from dozens of studies, isabout one percentage point.)
Conventional wisdom (and practice) suggeststhat we could convince people to vote by stressing that their particular ballotis very important because not many other people are voting. Yet findings in behavioralscience indicate that most of us are motivated by the desire to conform to thesocial norm—meaning we are more likely to do what most people are doing.
Two get-out-the-vote field experimentsduring the 2005 general election in New Jersey and the 2006 primary election inCalifornia tested these hypotheses. They found that individuals were much moremotivated to vote when they believed lots of other people were voting comparedwith when they thought relatively few others were voting.
In another field experiment run byresearchers at Yale University and the University of Northern Iowa during the2006 primary election in Michigan, potential voters received direct mail notingthat both they and their neighbors would be informed of who had voted after theelection. Amazingly, this led to an 8.1 percent increase in turnout—one of themost successful get-out-the-vote tactics studied to date. Conventionaldirect-mail reminders, in contrast, yield just a 0.162 percent increase inturnout on average, according to a 2013 estimate based on 110 studies.
If most of us vote, then being part of thetruant few who do not feels like we are shirking a social contract. Publicizingvoting records may therefore increase the salience of this social obligationand possibly bring shame on nonvoters. Following through, however, allows them to maintain theirself-identity as contributing members of society.
Human Activity Boosts Brain Size in Animals
It is not easy to develop new habits for anew environment. Many animals have been compelled to adjust their behavior,gradually learning to avoid, outsmart, or even befriend their new urban neighbors. Now, a recentstudy conducted by University of Minnesota biologist Emilie C. Snell-Rood andundergraduate Naomi Wick suggests that some animals have adapted to thepresence of humans by developing bigger brains.
In their study, Snell-Rood and Wick focusedon local animal specimens collected at the University of Minnesota Bell Museum.By measuring the breadth, width, and height of various mammal skulls, they wereable to estimate the size of the species’ brains. Remarkably, in thewhite-footed mouse and the meadow vole, they found that specimens from the citydisplayed a 6 percent increase in brain capacity over their rural counterparts.
Snell-Rood provides two possibleexplanations for these findings. An increase in nutritional quantity andquality, which urbanization provides to some extent, may give animals theenergy required to maintain larger brains. However, the increase in skull size was not accompaniedby an increase in body size, making this theory less likely. A more probableand interesting hypothesis is that adapting to human activity places a largerdemand on cognitive skills, such as foraging for food and interacting withhumans.
The growing impact of city environments onanimal behavior, a trend dubbed “synurbanization,” is well-documented. Bydestroying or radically transforming natural habitats, cities create new,unfilled niches and force local species to adapt. Studies of resulting animalbehavior report changes such as increased friendliness toward humans, newnesting preferences, and longer waking hours. For some city-dwelling animals,humans have also become a primary supplier of food. As human metropolisescontinue to grow, the effects of synurbanization have been conspicuous andprofound. Snell-Rood’s study, however, is the first that points to a possiblelink between behavioral change and brain size.
An additional finding in the new studysuggests that the influence of human activity extends beyond cities as well.According to Snell-Rood’s measurements, four rural species exhibited a boost inbrain size, revealing that they, too, may have been affected by changingenvironments. For instance, an impact like deforestation may force bats in thecountryside to change their feeding and roosting habits.
Snell-Rood’s discovery is not the first time scientists have foundevidence of human activity driving animal evolution. InLondon, industrial pollution gave dark peppered moths an advantage over thelighter ones, enabling them to blend in with layers of soot. By contrast, the white pepperedmoths, which once blended in with tree bark and lichens, lost theirevolutionary advantage and became less numerous. A second example ofhuman-driven evolution is a type of anole lizard, which developed shorter legsto adapt to urban areas in the Bahamas. While long legs are suitable forperching on wide surfaces, with shorter legs the lizard is better equipped toclimb the narrow stalks that are typical of urban plants.
While Snell-Rood’s findings aresignificant, on other specimens to determine whether the trend continues in otherregions. The age of the museum collections is also an important factor, as theMinnesota researchers could only study specimens from the past century — thebrain sizes of animals that lived before major industrialization remainunknown.
Passage 4 历史对比文章
Ancient volcanic explosions shed light onMercury’s origins
The surface of Mercury crackled withvolcanic explosions for extended periods of the planet’s history, according toa new analysis led by researchers at Brown University. The findings aresurprising considering Mercury wasn’t supposed to have explosive volcanism inthe first place, and they could have implications for understanding how Mercuryformed.
On Earth, volcanic explosions like the onethat tore the lid off Mount St. Helens happen because our planet’s interior isrich in volatiles — water, carbon dioxide and other compounds with relativelylow boiling points. As lava rises from the depths toward the surface, volatilesdissolved within it change phase from liquid to gas, expanding in the process.The pressure of that expansion can cause the crust above to burst like anoverinflated balloon.
Mercury, however, was long thought to bebone dry when it comes to volatiles, and without volatiles there can’t beexplosive volcanism. But that view started to change in 2008, after NASA’sMESSENGER spacecraft made its first flybys of Mercury. Those glimpses of the surface revealed deposits ofpyroclastic ash — the telltale signs of volcanic explosions — pepperingthe planet’s surface. It was a clue that at some point in its history Mercury’sinterior wasn’t as bereft of volatiles as had been assumed.
What wasn’t clear from those initial flybyswas the timeframe over which those explosions occurred. Did Mercury’s volatilesescape in a flurry of explosions early in the planet’s history or has Mercuryheld on to its volatiles over a much longer period?
A team of researchers led by Tim Goudge, agraduate student in the Department of Geological Sciences at Brown, looked at51 pyroclastic sites distributed across Mercury’s surface. They used data fromMESSENGER’s cameras and spectrometers collected after the spacecraft enteredorbit around Mercury in 2011. Compared with the data from the initial flybys,the orbital data provideda much more detailed view of the deposits and the source vents that spatthem out.
The new MESSENGER data revealed that some of the vents have eroded toa much greater degree than others — an indicator that the explosionsdidn’t happen all at the same time.
“If [the explosions] happened over a briefperiod and then stopped, you’d expect all the vents to be degraded byapproximately the same amount,” Goudge said. “We don’t see that; we seedifferent degradation states. So the eruptions appear to have been taking placeover an appreciable period of Mercury’s history.”
But just where that period of explosivenessfits into Mercury’s geological history was another matter. To help figure thatout, Goudge and his colleagues took advantage of the fact that most of thesites are located within impact craters. The age of each crater offers animportant constraint in the age of the pyroclastic deposit inside it: Thedeposit has to be younger than its host crater. If the deposit had come first,it would have been obliterated by the impact that formed the crater. So the ageof the crater provides an upper limit on how old the pyroclastic deposit canbe.
As it happens, there’s an establishedmethod for dating craters on Mercury. The rims and walls of craters becomeeroded and degraded over time, and the extent of that degradation can be usedto get an approximate age of the crater.
Using that method, Goudge and hiscolleagues showed that some pyroclastic deposits are found in relatively young(geologically speaking) craters dated to between 3.5 and 1 billion years old.The finding helps rule out the possibility that all the pyroclastic activityhappened shortly after Mercury’s formation around 4.5 billion years ago.
“These ages tell us that Mercury didn’tdegas all of its volatiles very early,” Goudge said. “It kept some of its volatilesaround to more recent geological times.”
The extent to which Mercury’s volatilesstuck around could shedlight on how the planet formed. Despite being the smallest planet in the solarsystem (since Pluto was demoted from the ranks of the planets), Mercury has anabnormally large iron core. That finding led to speculation the perhaps Mercurywas once much larger, but had its outer layers removed — either fried away bythe nearby Sun or perhaps blasted away be a huge impact early in the planet’shistory. Either of those events, however, would likely have heated the outerparts of Mercury enough to remove volatiles very early in its history.
In light of this study and other datacollected by MESSENGER showing traces of the volatiles sulfur, potassium, andsodium on Mercury’s surface, both those scenarios seem increasingly unlikely.
“Together with other results that suggestthe Moon may have had more volatiles than previously thought, this research isrevolutionizing our thinking about the early history of the planets andsatellites,” said Jim Head, professor of geological sciences and a MESSENGERmission co-investigator. “These results define specific targets for future exploration of Mercury by orbiting and landed spacecraft.”
第一篇：Rock and Roll en Espanol
第三篇：A plant's response to temprature
语气题考了environmental cues，其他选项非常扯，比如mother nature, signs from the universe等；所以区分度很大。
第四篇：Gwen Ifill's Legacy
Because of British currency restrictionsenacted just before World War II, my father had to come up with an innovativeway of getting his cash out of England when, fearing a German invasion, weimmigrated to the United States. He settled on silver. Before leaving, hepurchased all the Georgian silver objects he could find, with the idea ofselling them once the family reached America.
A few months after we arrived, he openedthe Harris English Silver Co. in Manhattan. While wartime rationing made manyeveryday items difficult to obtain, the demands of holidays, birthdays andanniversaries still required special gifts. Antique silver answered that needfor many New Yorkers.
By 1944 my father had made more than enoughto move the family to California, where he sold most of the remainder of hisoriginal inventory. Things were going so well that he decided to take a buyingtrip to England in 1948, and he took me along as his 11-year-old assistant. Ateach antique shop we visited, he would slowly survey the goods on display,identify the pieces of particular interest, and then have all the items broughttogether in one spot where he could inspect them. I was told to pick outanything that caught my eye and bring those pieces, too, to the centralcollection point.
I soon found that the pieces I gravitatedto — boxes, doll house furnishings, knife rests, small carvings, writingimplements, hand tools and the like — tended to have one thing in common: Theywere nearly all made of ivory.
When the shipment from that buying tripreached Los Angeles, my father gave me most of the items I had selected, andthat was the start of my ivory collection. After becoming a U.S. diplomat, Iadded to these original items during trips abroad. And I soon became fascinatedby the different uses to which ivory has been put — some practical, because ofthe material’s special properties, and some decorative, because of its unusualbeauty.
Ivory pieces, like other artisticexpressions, reflect the time and cultures that produced them. That’s one ofthe main reasons people collect artifacts of any sort: to preserve the bestexamples of cultural expression.
Today, however, ivory collections like mine— and ivory collectors themselves — are being vilified. The current debate inWashington over ivory policy has far less to do with protecting elephants thanit does with satisfying the assumptions of animal rights groups, making thingssimple for government officials and accommodating the special wants of huntersand the special needs of musicians and museum curators. Collectors have littlevoice in the debate, and their collections have been likened to blood diamondsor denigrated as vanity indulgences. Any harm that American collectors sufferfrom the new regulations has been dismissed by Dan Ashe, director of the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service, as collateral damage for the greater good of savingelephants.
Ashe has issued an order that virtuallyeliminates all trade and movement in the United States of objects made from orwith ivory — no matter their origin, age or provenance — by requiringunimpeachable, detailed documentation on the ivory contained in a piece. Tobuy, trade or sell such pieces, collectors must have original bills of sale orrepair invoices or proof of the year of importation into the United States. Nocollector and very few antique dealers can produce that kind of documentation,especially since none of it was required at the time most of the pieces wereimported or purchased. How many treasures inherited from a relative or given asgifts come with written proof of where they came from or how they got here?
These draconian new rules have not beenpromulgated casually. Ashe believes that virtually ending all trade in Africanivory in the United States — thus sending a message that ivory is valueless —is the best way to protect African elephants from the ravishes of poachers.
But that’s unrealistic and unproven.Today’s poaching problem has its roots in East Asia, where there is still astrong demand for and an active trade in new ivory objects. Demonizing olderivory objects to discourage possession of newer versions of similar items willnot bring back the mammoths or save modern elephants from the economic forcesthat drive poachers.
Indeed, the International Ivory Society, onwhose advisory board I sit, believes that taking valuable ivory objects out ofcirculation will only increase the market price for raw ivory abroad and putelephants in even more danger than at the present.
Everyone is rightly concerned with theplight of African elephants and the horrors that poachers are inflicting onherds across the continent. All of us want to find the right solution tostabilize elephant populations in Africa through sound economic andconservation policies. But the answer must not come at the expense ofcollectors who play such an important role in preserving important, interestingand revelatory objects in our cultural history.