这资料从哪儿搞的？上面印刷错误不少（没给你改）

你先按我的提示再读一遍，快速一点读。

Para1

The longitudinal(纵向的)study demonstrates that students who receive ESL (English as a second language) instruction are far better than those taught primarily in their native language.

主题句。简单说，是ESL学生要“厉害”点

A comparison of the three-year exit rates for students in ESL and bilingual programs shows that those who receive ESL instruction test out faster and in higher percentages than those who receive instruction in their native language, regardless of the grade in which they entered school.

具体事例，主题句的支撑句，不会与“ESL厉害”这主题相左

exit rates（参与者比率，原指驻留过网页的民众比率）

For example, 79.3 percent of the children who entered ESL programs in kindergarten tested out, while only 51.5 percent of those who received their education in their native languages did. Likewise, 72.9 percent of the LEP (limited English proficiency)students who entered programs in the first grad tested out, while only 38.5 of those in bilingual programs did. For students who instruction classes still hadri't tested out after three years, as compared with 78 percent of those in ESL classes.

例子说明前文，这节可以不用细看，大致瞄一眼就行

Para 2.

Furthermore, (段落规划词，它表明本段意思与上文语流一致, 意思就说接下来的部分只要粗略看就行)  children who had been in ESL classes tested 4 higher in English and math once they exited LEP programs than those who had received native-language instruction. Of the LEP students who entered in kindergarten or the first grade, 49 percent of those who had been in ESL classes eventually read at grade level（可理解为对应年级的“基准分水平或平均水平”）, while only 32 percent of those who had been in bilingual classes performed that well. In math, the statistics are even more impressive. Of the children who entered in kindergarten or the first grade, more than 69 percent of those who had been in ESL classes eventually performed at grade level or above, as opposed to 54 percent of those who had been in bilingual classes.

Para3

Naturally, (评价用词，看作者要说什么，涉及观点，应该细读）, the study provoked a barrage of criticism from the highly political and vocal bilingual lobby, which prompted the New York City Board of Education to issue a paper in November 1994 mitigating the findings of the study and ignoring the distinction between students in ESL and bilingual education programs. (提出了反对的观点，这是这种议论性文章的基本套路)

Rather than exit rates, this paper focuses on the achievement of LEP students during the period in which they are in bilingual or ESL classes. （以下是反观点的支撑句，用的结构是“不是…而是”， 一般反对人家，总会有办法。比如你说A方面不行，但我可以从B方面说人家行）The authors show that although the scores of LEP students were below average on the English-language test, their scores in al areas showed improvement; they point out that in math, there were insufficient data on the progress of LEP students to draw valid conclusions. //

Para 4

However, （又是段落规划词，要看清楚它是要however掉哪个观点，还是对自己说的话做出一点让步） a report on citywide mathematics test results in New York in the spring of 1995 deals more fully with the math scores of the 26, 248 stud examined the previous school year in Chinese, Spanish, or Haitian Creole. According to this document （结论性用词）only 16.6 percent of these children were performing at or above grade level in mathematics. Although this figure represents an improvement of 1.1 percent over the scores of the previous year, it discredits the argument that native-language instruction keeps performing at grade level in subject areas. Although LEP students are improving faster than the national norm, they continue to perform far below the norm. 即LEP学生归根到底还是不行

题1，From Paragraph 1 we learn that

[A] ESL instruction could test students faster than LEP instruction

[B] LEP students performed worse than did ESL students

[C] native-language instruction classes seemed to fail utterly

[D] the data of the longitudinal study were likely tentative

>>> 

[A] A错在它根本没有语义。ESL教育测试学生更快？

[B] 接近原文

原文是说接受ESL教育的学生，会相对比较牛逼，仅此而已。

原文是学生far better…, A项成了不知什么东拉西扯的东西。

注意这种出题的小手段

感觉第一段主要说的是ESC（应该就是双语教学）和本土语言教学的对比，但选项都不是这方面相关的感觉。而且第一段中For example, 79.3 percent of the children who entered ESL programs in kindergarten tested out, while only 51.5 percent of those who received their education in their native languages did. Likewise, 72.9 percent of the LEP(limited English proficiency)students who entered programs in the first grad tested out, while only 38.5 of those in bilingual programs did.这句话有两个对比，感觉逻辑上有矛盾。likewise前面说的是ESL比本土语言教学好，但likewise后又说LEP（仅限于英语掌握，应该就是单语言教学）比双语言好，是我理解错了吗。还有文中的exit rates和test out怎么理解？

题2，The author believes(Paragraph 2)that

A] ESL children tested higher in English than LEP children

[B] bilingual programs failed the students performing well in math

[C] the math data are still more credible than those on English

[D] bilingual classes had 54% of students exiting from grade level

A严格来讲，本身有点小问题，但没没大问题。原文说英语、数学都好点，这里只说了英语一项，但逻辑上没有问题，并不矛盾。可是题干说The author believes是什么意思？原文是事实，到这里的题目里，则是想象。

B项双语教育把数学好的学生给毁了，没讲这回事。

C项对应的原文有impressive，它可对应believe, 都是感觉的东西，此项OK

D项在说什么？原文是69% 与54% 对比，到这里54%成了将其它不相关是事情

### 看看这里人家是怎么出题的，尽是些耍小套路的雕虫小技。所以考试时，不学到这种技法，难考。

 感觉四个选项都在原文有对应，该选哪个？

题3，According to the NY 1995 report, it is unbelievable that

[A] a great number of multilingual students were examined accuratel

[B] native-language instruction keeps performing well in subjects

[C] any document on subject instructions can draw valid conclusions

[D] LEP students are improving faster than the national norm

>>> 

这段是对上一段从不同的角度讲LEP学生也有点长处的however, 换句话说，这些长处仍然不行，但注意题干的unbelievable， 不要读反了意思，

A 的multilingual 直接毙掉

B 有干扰性，但原文的discredits已经把这项毙掉了。也就是B讲反了。

即要让B成为答案，应该是native-language instruction doesn't keep performing well in subjects

 <B>也是传说中的“照抄原文的不是选项”, 当然我不是要叫你相信这种类似的话

C 不知所云，原文也没说到这么绝对的any document;  any ≠  insufficient

D 接近原文。LEP学生不是太好，但也毕竟有1.1%的增长。矮子里面高一点点。这可以构成unbelievable的事件。 

我选的B，因为文中明确说了discredit the argument，但C怎么排除呢，感觉也是不可信的，是不是文中没提这方面的信息就不能选它啊。

总体是感觉这个题，

文章讲究布局，选项讲究小套路

不知道这是否为川大出题老师喜欢的技法

如果想考川大，多留心一点这方面的东西，娴熟了做题就会很快。

最后，是不要相信百度. 如果有川大自己的答案，可以分享一下。

 （仅供参考）