1400 câu trắc nghiệm Đọc hiểu Tiếng Anh có đáp án cực hay

   Learning means acquiring knowledge or developing the ability to perform new behaviors. It is common to think of learning as something that takes place in school, but much of human learning occurs outside the classroom, and people continue to learn throughout their lives.

   Even before they enter school, young children learn to walk, to talk, and to use their hands to manipulate toys, food, and other objects. They use all of their senses to learn about the sights, sounds, tastes, and smells in their environments. They learn how to interact with their parents, siblings, friends, and other people important to their world. When they enter school, children learn basic academic subjects such as reading, writing, and mathematics. They also continue to learn a great deal outside the classroom. They learn which behaviors are likely to be rewarded and which are likely to be punished. They learn social skills for interacting with other children. After they finish school, people must learn to adapt to the many major changes that affect their lives, such as getting married, raising children, and finding and keeping a job. Because learning continues throughout our lives and affects almost everything we do, the study of learning is important in many different fields. Teachers need to understand the best ways to educate children. Psychologists, social workers, criminologists, and other human-service workers need to understand how certain experiences change people’s behaviors. Employers, politicians, and advertisers make use of the principles of learning to influence the behavior of workers, voters, and consumers.

   Learning is closely related to memory, which is the storage of information in the brain. Psychologists who study memory are interested in how the brain stores knowledge, where this storage takes place, and how the brain later retrieves knowledge when we need it. In contrast, psychologists who study learning are more interested in behavior and how behavior changes as a result of a person’s experiences.

   There are many forms of learning, ranging from simple to complex. Simple forms of learning involve a single stimulus. A stimulus is anything perceptible to the senses, such as a sight, sound, smell, touch, or taste. In a form of learning known as classical conditioning, people learn to associate two stimuli that occur in sequence, such as lightning followed by thunder. In operant conditioning, people learn by forming an association between a behavior and its consequences (reward or punishment). People and animals can also learn by observation - that is, by watching others perform behaviors. More complex forms of learning include learning languages, concepts, and motor skills.

A. the need for certain experiences in various areas

B. the exploration of the best teaching methods

C. the influence of various behaviours in the learning process

D. the great influence of the on-going learning process

   Learning means acquiring knowledge or developing the ability to perform new behaviors. It is common to think of learning as something that takes place in school, but much of human learning occurs outside the classroom, and people continue to learn throughout their lives.

   Even before they enter school, young children learn to walk, to talk, and to use their hands to manipulate toys, food, and other objects. They use all of their senses to learn about the sights, sounds, tastes, and smells in their environments. They learn how to interact with their parents, siblings, friends, and other people important to their world. When they enter school, children learn basic academic subjects such as reading, writing, and mathematics. They also continue to learn a great deal outside the classroom. They learn which behaviors are likely to be rewarded and which are likely to be punished. They learn social skills for interacting with other children. After they finish school, people must learn to adapt to the many major changes that affect their lives, such as getting married, raising children, and finding and keeping a job. Because learning continues throughout our lives and affects almost everything we do, the study of learning is important in many different fields. Teachers need to understand the best ways to educate children. Psychologists, social workers, criminologists, and other human-service workers need to understand how certain experiences change people’s behaviors. Employers, politicians, and advertisers make use of the principles of learning to influence the behavior of workers, voters, and consumers.

   Learning is closely related to memory, which is the storage of information in the brain. Psychologists who study memory are interested in how the brain stores knowledge, where this storage takes place, and how the brain later retrieves knowledge when we need it. In contrast, psychologists who study learning are more interested in behavior and how behavior changes as a result of a person’s experiences.

   There are many forms of learning, ranging from simple to complex. Simple forms of learning involve a single stimulus. A stimulus is anything perceptible to the senses, such as a sight, sound, smell, touch, or taste. In a form of learning known as classical conditioning, people learn to associate two stimuli that occur in sequence, such as lightning followed by thunder. In operant conditioning, people learn by forming an association between a behavior and its consequences (reward or punishment). People and animals can also learn by observation - that is, by watching others perform behaviors. More complex forms of learning include learning languages, concepts, and motor skills.

A. recovers

B. creates

C. generates

D. gains

   Animals have an intuitive awareness of quantities. They know without analysis the difference between a number of objects and a smaller number. In his book “ The natural History of Selboure ” (1786 ) , the naturalist Gilbert White tells how he surreptitiously removed one egg a day from a plover’s nest , and how the mother laid another egg each day to make up for the missing one . He noted that other species of birds ignore the absence of a single egg but abandon their nests if more than one egg has been removed. It has also been noted by naturalists that a certain type of wasp always provides five – never four, never six - caterpillars for each of their eggs so that their young have something to eat when the eggs hatch . Research has also shown that both mice and pigeons can be taught to distinguish between odd and even numbers of food pieces.

   These and similar accounts have led some people to infer that creatures other than humans can actually count. They also point to dogs that have been taught to respond to numerical questions with the correct number of barks, or to horses that seem to solve arithmetic problems by stomping their hooves the proper number of times.

   Animals respond to quantities only when they are connected to survival as a species – as in the case of the eggs – or survival as individuals - as in the case of food. There is no transfer to other situations or from concrete reality to the abstract notion of numbers. Animals can “count” only when the objects are present and only when the numbers involved are small – not more than seven or eight. In lab experiments, animals trained to “count” one kind of object were unable to count any other type. The objects, not the numbers, are what interest them. Animals admittedly remarkable achievements simply do not amount to evidence of counting, nor do they reveal more than innate instincts, refined by the genes of successive generations, or the results of clever, careful conditioning by trainers.

A. Although animals may be aware of quantities, they cannot actually count.

B. Of all animals, dogs and horses can count best.

C. Careful training is required to teach animals to perform tricks involving numbers.

D. Animals cannot “count” more than one kind of object.

   Animals have an intuitive awareness of quantities. They know without analysis the difference between a number of objects and a smaller number. In his book “ The natural History of Selboure ” (1786 ) , the naturalist Gilbert White tells how he surreptitiously removed one egg a day from a plover’s nest , and how the mother laid another egg each day to make up for the missing one . He noted that other species of birds ignore the absence of a single egg but abandon their nests if more than one egg has been removed. It has also been noted by naturalists that a certain type of wasp always provides five – never four, never six - caterpillars for each of their eggs so that their young have something to eat when the eggs hatch . Research has also shown that both mice and pigeons can be taught to distinguish between odd and even numbers of food pieces.

   These and similar accounts have led some people to infer that creatures other than humans can actually count. They also point to dogs that have been taught to respond to numerical questions with the correct number of barks, or to horses that seem to solve arithmetic problems by stomping their hooves the proper number of times.

   Animals respond to quantities only when they are connected to survival as a species – as in the case of the eggs – or survival as individuals - as in the case of food. There is no transfer to other situations or from concrete reality to the abstract notion of numbers. Animals can “count” only when the objects are present and only when the numbers involved are small – not more than seven or eight. In lab experiments, animals trained to “count” one kind of object were unable to count any other type. The objects, not the numbers, are what interest them. Animals admittedly remarkable achievements simply do not amount to evidence of counting, nor do they reveal more than innate instincts, refined by the genes of successive generations, or the results of clever, careful conditioning by trainers.

A. To indicate that more research is needed in this field.

B. To show how attitudes have changed since1786.

C. To provide evidence that some birds are aware of quantities.

D. To contradict the idea that animals can count.

   Animals have an intuitive awareness of quantities. They know without analysis the difference between a number of objects and a smaller number. In his book “ The natural History of Selboure ” (1786 ) , the naturalist Gilbert White tells how he surreptitiously removed one egg a day from a plover’s nest , and how the mother laid another egg each day to make up for the missing one . He noted that other species of birds ignore the absence of a single egg but abandon their nests if more than one egg has been removed. It has also been noted by naturalists that a certain type of wasp always provides five – never four, never six - caterpillars for each of their eggs so that their young have something to eat when the eggs hatch . Research has also shown that both mice and pigeons can be taught to distinguish between odd and even numbers of food pieces.

   These and similar accounts have led some people to infer that creatures other than humans can actually count. They also point to dogs that have been taught to respond to numerical questions with the correct number of barks, or to horses that seem to solve arithmetic problems by stomping their hooves the proper number of times.

   Animals respond to quantities only when they are connected to survival as a species – as in the case of the eggs – or survival as individuals - as in the case of food. There is no transfer to other situations or from concrete reality to the abstract notion of numbers. Animals can “count” only when the objects are present and only when the numbers involved are small – not more than seven or eight. In lab experiments, animals trained to “count” one kind of object were unable to count any other type. The objects, not the numbers, are what interest them. Animals admittedly remarkable achievements simply do not amount to evidence of counting, nor do they reveal more than innate instincts, refined by the genes of successive generations, or the results of clever, careful conditioning by trainers.

A. quickly

B. occasionally

C. stubbornly

D. secretly

   Animals have an intuitive awareness of quantities. They know without analysis the difference between a number of objects and a smaller number. In his book “ The natural History of Selboure ” (1786 ) , the naturalist Gilbert White tells how he surreptitiously removed one egg a day from a plover’s nest , and how the mother laid another egg each day to make up for the missing one . He noted that other species of birds ignore the absence of a single egg but abandon their nests if more than one egg has been removed. It has also been noted by naturalists that a certain type of wasp always provides five – never four, never six - caterpillars for each of their eggs so that their young have something to eat when the eggs hatch . Research has also shown that both mice and pigeons can be taught to distinguish between odd and even numbers of food pieces.

   These and similar accounts have led some people to infer that creatures other than humans can actually count. They also point to dogs that have been taught to respond to numerical questions with the correct number of barks, or to horses that seem to solve arithmetic problems by stomping their hooves the proper number of times.

   Animals respond to quantities only when they are connected to survival as a species – as in the case of the eggs – or survival as individuals - as in the case of food. There is no transfer to other situations or from concrete reality to the abstract notion of numbers. Animals can “count” only when the objects are present and only when the numbers involved are small – not more than seven or eight. In lab experiments, animals trained to “count” one kind of object were unable to count any other type. The objects, not the numbers, are what interest them. Animals admittedly remarkable achievements simply do not amount to evidence of counting, nor do they reveal more than innate instincts, refined by the genes of successive generations, or the results of clever, careful conditioning by trainers.

A. numbers such as 1, 3, 5 and so on

B. lucky numbers

C. numbers such as 2, 4, 6 and so on

D. unusual numbers

   Animals have an intuitive awareness of quantities. They know without analysis the difference between a number of objects and a smaller number. In his book “ The natural History of Selboure ” (1786 ) , the naturalist Gilbert White tells how he surreptitiously removed one egg a day from a plover’s nest , and how the mother laid another egg each day to make up for the missing one . He noted that other species of birds ignore the absence of a single egg but abandon their nests if more than one egg has been removed. It has also been noted by naturalists that a certain type of wasp always provides five – never four, never six - caterpillars for each of their eggs so that their young have something to eat when the eggs hatch . Research has also shown that both mice and pigeons can be taught to distinguish between odd and even numbers of food pieces.

   These and similar accounts have led some people to infer that creatures other than humans can actually count. They also point to dogs that have been taught to respond to numerical questions with the correct number of barks, or to horses that seem to solve arithmetic problems by stomping their hooves the proper number of times.

   Animals respond to quantities only when they are connected to survival as a species – as in the case of the eggs – or survival as individuals - as in the case of food. There is no transfer to other situations or from concrete reality to the abstract notion of numbers. Animals can “count” only when the objects are present and only when the numbers involved are small – not more than seven or eight. In lab experiments, animals trained to “count” one kind of object were unable to count any other type. The objects, not the numbers, are what interest them. Animals admittedly remarkable achievements simply do not amount to evidence of counting, nor do they reveal more than innate instincts, refined by the genes of successive generations, or the results of clever, careful conditioning by trainers.

A. wasps

B. Plovers

C. caterpillars

D. mice

   Animals have an intuitive awareness of quantities. They know without analysis the difference between a number of objects and a smaller number. In his book “ The natural History of Selboure ” (1786 ) , the naturalist Gilbert White tells how he surreptitiously removed one egg a day from a plover’s nest , and how the mother laid another egg each day to make up for the missing one . He noted that other species of birds ignore the absence of a single egg but abandon their nests if more than one egg has been removed. It has also been noted by naturalists that a certain type of wasp always provides five – never four, never six - caterpillars for each of their eggs so that their young have something to eat when the eggs hatch . Research has also shown that both mice and pigeons can be taught to distinguish between odd and even numbers of food pieces.

   These and similar accounts have led some people to infer that creatures other than humans can actually count. They also point to dogs that have been taught to respond to numerical questions with the correct number of barks, or to horses that seem to solve arithmetic problems by stomping their hooves the proper number of times.

   Animals respond to quantities only when they are connected to survival as a species – as in the case of the eggs – or survival as individuals - as in the case of food. There is no transfer to other situations or from concrete reality to the abstract notion of numbers. Animals can “count” only when the objects are present and only when the numbers involved are small – not more than seven or eight. In lab experiments, animals trained to “count” one kind of object were unable to count any other type. The objects, not the numbers, are what interest them. Animals admittedly remarkable achievements simply do not amount to evidence of counting, nor do they reveal more than innate instincts, refined by the genes of successive generations, or the results of clever, careful conditioning by trainers.

A. reasons

B. reports

C. deceptions

D. invoices

   Animals have an intuitive awareness of quantities. They know without analysis the difference between a number of objects and a smaller number. In his book “ The natural History of Selboure ” (1786 ) , the naturalist Gilbert White tells how he surreptitiously removed one egg a day from a plover’s nest , and how the mother laid another egg each day to make up for the missing one . He noted that other species of birds ignore the absence of a single egg but abandon their nests if more than one egg has been removed. It has also been noted by naturalists that a certain type of wasp always provides five – never four, never six - caterpillars for each of their eggs so that their young have something to eat when the eggs hatch . Research has also shown that both mice and pigeons can be taught to distinguish between odd and even numbers of food pieces.

   These and similar accounts have led some people to infer that creatures other than humans can actually count. They also point to dogs that have been taught to respond to numerical questions with the correct number of barks, or to horses that seem to solve arithmetic problems by stomping their hooves the proper number of times.

   Animals respond to quantities only when they are connected to survival as a species – as in the case of the eggs – or survival as individuals - as in the case of food. There is no transfer to other situations or from concrete reality to the abstract notion of numbers. Animals can “count” only when the objects are present and only when the numbers involved are small – not more than seven or eight. In lab experiments, animals trained to “count” one kind of object were unable to count any other type. The objects, not the numbers, are what interest them. Animals admittedly remarkable achievements simply do not amount to evidence of counting, nor do they reveal more than innate instincts, refined by the genes of successive generations, or the results of clever, careful conditioning by trainers.

A. As foolish

B. As demanding

C. As clever

D. As mistaken

   Until recently, most American entrepreneurs were men. Discrimination against women in business, the demands of caring for families, and lack of business training had kept the number of women entrepreneurs small. Now, however, businesses owned by women account for more than $40 billion in annual revenues, and this figure is likely to continue rising throughout the 1990s. As Carolyn Doppelt Gray, an official of the Small Business Administration, has noted, "The 1970s was the decade of women entering management, and the 1980s turned out to be the decade of the woman entrepreneur". What are some of the factors behind this trend? For one thing, as more women earn advanced degrees in business and enter the corporate world, they are finding obstacles. Women are still excluded from most executive suites. Charlotte Taylor, a management consultant, had noted, "In the 1970s women believed if they got an MBA and worked hard they could become chairman of the board. Now they've found out that isn't going to happen, so they go out on their own".

   In the past, most women entrepreneurs worked in "women's" fields: cosmetics and clothing, for example. But this is changing. Consider ASK Computer Systems, a $22-million-a-year computer software business. It was founded in 1973 by Sandra Kurtzig, who was then a housewife with degrees in math and engineering. When Kurtzig founded the business, her first product was software that let weekly newspapers keep tabs on their newspaper carriers-and her office was a bedroom at home, with a shoebox under the bed to hold the company's cash. After she succeeded with the newspaper software system, she hired several bright computer-science graduates to develop additional programs. When these were marketed and sold, ASK began to grow. It now has 200 employees, and Sandra Kurtzig owns $66.9 million of stock.

   Of course, many women who start their own businesses fail, just as men often do. They still face hurdles in the business world, especially problems in raising money; the banking and finance world is still dominated by men, and old attitudes die hard. Most businesses owned by women are still quite small. But the situation is changing; there are likely to be many more Sandra Kurtzigs in the years ahead.

A. The computer is especially lucrative for women today.

B. Women today are better educated than in the past, making them more attractive to the business world.

C. Women are better at small business than men are.

D. Women today are opening more business of their own.