2019年5月亞太SAT考題回顧，重點是沒有重復舊題（下)

2019年5月亞太SAT考題回顧，重點是沒有重復舊題（上)2019年5月亞太SAT考題回顧，重點是沒有重復舊題（中)

文法題型考點和回憶版答案

本次整體文法部分與3月份難度相當，curve應該差不多。從本次的具體的考點分布來看，基礎語法整體是簡單的，詞匯也是簡單常見詞；語篇難度稍大，主要是主旨的概括，證據的找尋，邏輯詞等會是大家的痛點。以下是這次考試同學們的回憶答案和對應的題型考點，供大家參考。答案已經不重要，重要的是我們后期如何更好的科學規劃自己的時間?？嫉煤玫?，先恭喜大家，終于跟SAT說再見了，文書可以慢慢準備起來了?？嫉牟粔蚝玫囊膊挥脷怵H，多總結一下這次自己的小失誤，下次再接再厲。

題號	考點	答案與內容
1	TOD主旨題	C，bookmakers have long imagined ways to challenge the concept of books as static obkects
2	SST runon	B, illustrations, while others incorporated
3	TOD support	B, elaborate foldout displays
4	USG SV一致	B, was
5	TOD focus	C, no, because it diverges from the paragraph's focus on Meggendorfer's books
6	USG 名詞單復數	D, naturalist's arm swings
7	SST modifier	A, flower, causing
8	ORG 邏輯詞	C，accompanied by
9	SST fragment	B, fangs, the
10	USG tense	C, provided
11	ORG conclusion	C, through modern technology, the ingenuity of an inventor who used almost nothing but paper and imagination has been preserved
12	PUN comma	B, money to buy and develop properties
13	ELU precision	D, enriching
14	ORG邏輯詞	D, eventually
15	TOD support	A, taking money from the other players and using that money to make even more
17	SST fragment	D, DELETE the underlined portion
18	PUN's	B, game's properties
19	TOD focus	A, kept, because it provides an additional example of the variety associated with the game
20	ELU 合并句	B, Darrow, sensing a moneymaking opportunity, designed a game board of his own, penned
21	SST modifier	C, Maggie, effectively
22	ELU style and tone	C, great wealth
23	PUN comma	C, walls, under floors, and around pipes Municipalities
24	USG 代詞	D, Municipalities
25	TOD support	C, job growth
26	TOD data	A, NO CHANGE（rise from 23,300 to 29,400)
27	TOD data	A, flower, causing
28	ORG邏輯詞	C, however
29	USG易混詞	A, NO CHANGE (unsuitable)
30	USG SV一致	A, NO CHANGE (is)
31	PUN comma	B, scraps,or
32	TOD support	D, They are also more labor-intensive to install, company
33	PUN comma	B, company
34	ELU合并句	C, temperatures
35	USG代詞	D,they
36	TOD主旨題	B, but conditions worsened later in the day as the two weather systems collides and encountered a formidable barrier in the Presidential range
37	SST modifier	S, distance, driving
38	ORG transition	B, such conditions had interfered with weather observations in the past
39	ELU precision	A, NO CHANGE(malfunctioned)
40	ELU concision	C, opened
41	TOD support	D, he learned that his efforts had been successful
42	ORG 排序	C, after sentence 4
43	ELU concision	A, day
44	ORG邏輯詞	D, DELETE the underlined portion

 

寫作部分Essay

這次寫作考題選自Joanne Lipman的Let’s Expose the Gender Pay Gap，2015年8月13日發表于《紐約時報》，核心論點是公司應該公開男女之間的薪酬差異，以下為原文全文：1 HOW serious are we, really, about tackling income equality? . . .2 More than a half-century after President John F. Kennedy signed the Equal Pay Act of 1963, the gap between what men and women earn has defied every effort to close it. And it can’t be explained away as a statistical glitch, a function of women preferring lower-paying industries or choosing to take time off for kids.3 Claudia Goldin, a labor economist at Harvard, has crunched the numbers and found that the gap persists for identical jobs, even after controlling for hours, education, race and age. Female doctors and surgeons, for example, earn 71 percent of what their male colleagues make, while female financial specialists are paid just 66 percent as much as comparable men. Other researchers have calculated that women one year out of college earn 6.6 percent less than men after controlling for occupation and hours, and that female M.B.A. graduates earn on average $4,600 less than their male classmates for their first jobs.4 It’s not that men are intentionally discriminating against women—far from it. I’ve spent the past year interviewing male executives for a book about men and women in the workplace. A vast majority of them are fair-minded guys who want women to succeed. They’re absolutely certain that they don’t have a gender problem themselves; it must be some other guys who do. Yet they’re leaders of companies that pay men more than women for the same jobs.5 Women are trying mightily to close that chasm on their own. Linda Babcock, an economist at Carnegie Mellon and co-author of the book “Women Don’t Ask,” has found that one reason for the disparity is that men are four times more likely to ask for a raise than women are, and that when women do ask, we ask for 30 percent less. And so women are told we need to lean in, to demand to be paid what we’re worth. It’s excellent advice—except it isn’t enough.6 There is an antidote to the problem. Britain recently introduced a plan requiring companies with 250 employees or more to publicly report their own gender pay gap. It joins a handful of other countries, including Austria and Belgium, that have introduced similar rules. (In the United States, President Obama last year signed a presidential memorandum instructing federal contractors to report wage information by gender and race to the Department of Labor.) The disclosures “will cast sunlight on the discrepancies and create the pressure we need for change, driving women’s wages up,” Prime Minister David Cameron said last month.7 Critics of the British plan protest that it’s too expensive and complex. Some contend that it doesn’t address the root of the problem: systemic issues that block women from higher-paying industries, and social issues like unconscious bias.8 But real-world results suggest otherwise. Last year, the consulting firm PricewaterhouseCoopers voluntarily released its gender pay gap in Britain, one of five firms in the country, including AstraZeneca, to do so. Simply saying the number out loud “created much more momentum internally” to close it, Sarah Churchman, who runs the firm’s British diversity and inclusion efforts, told me.9 PricewaterhouseCoopers’s analysis showed that most of its 15.1 percent pay disparity (compared with a Britain-wide gap of more than 19 percent) reflected a lack of women in senior jobs. So the firm focused on whether it was promoting fairly. In 2013, the grade just below partner was 30 percent female, yet only 16 percent of those promoted to partner were women. A year later, the percentage of women promoted to partner had more than doubled. . . .

10 The potential cost savings of publishing the gender wage gap are enormous. About 20 percent of large companies now train employees to recognize unconscious bias, spending billions of dollars to try to stamp out unintentional discrimination. Paying for a salary analysis is cheaper and potentially more effective. Evidence also suggests that less secrecy about pay results in greater employee loyalty and lower turnover. . . .

11 Political realities being what they are, the chances of achieving [full] transparency are slim; even the tepid C.E.O. pay gap rule took the S.E.C. five years to push through, in the face of fierce industry opposition.

12 But why would we not want a measure that will settle the controversy over the pay gap with quantifiable facts? Shining some much-needed sunlight on the gender wage gap will make a difference for every one of us, men and women, right now.

來自留學匯科創營