barron 听力文本

koala2008xx

Test 3

Students on Campus

Man: I wish I were as sure about my future as you seem to be. I . . . I really don’t know what I want to do after I graduate.

$ Woman: Well, have you talked with a counselor over at the Office of Career Development?

$ Man: No. . . . I talked to my academic advisor, though.

$ Woman: That’s good, but it’s really better to see someone who specializes in helping people make career decisions. You see, an academic advisor is there to help you work out  your academic program. You know, figure out what your major is going to be and which courses to take and all that. But a career counselor has a lot of experience and resources to help you decide what you want to do in the work world.

$ Man: Did you see a career counselor?

$ Woman: I sure did. Last semester. I was . . . well, I didn’t even know what I would be good at, for a career, I mean. So I made an appointment at the Office of Career Development, and I talked with a counselor.

$ Man: Do you remember who it was?

$ Woman: Sure. It was Ruth Jackson.

$ Man: Oh, but since I’m interested in careers for math majors, probably I should see someone else.

$ Woman: Not really. Any of the counselors can help you. Look, first I took some aptitude tests and something called a . . . uh . . . I think it was called a career inventory. Anyway, I took several tests, and then the counselor gave me some ideas about different careers. I even went to some group sessions with some other students for a few weeks. Mrs. Jackson was the group leader, so, um, that’s how I met her, and then I just sort of naturally started making my appointments with her when I needed some advice.

$ Man: It sounds like it took a lot of time. I’m so busy already.

$ Woman: Well, it did take time. Probably three hours for the tests, and I think I went to maybe four group sessions, and then I saw Ruth a couple of times. I guess about nine or ten hours probably. But it was worth it.

$ Man: So, is that why you decided to go into library science? Because of the tests and everything?

$ Woman: In part. But, mostly it was because of the internship. You see, I also got my internship through the Office of Career Development. And when I was working as an intern in the public library, it all sort of came together for me. I really liked what I was doing, and I realized that I didn’t want the internship to end.

$ Man: And you get paid for working there in the library too, don’t you?

$ Woman: I get paid, and I get credit toward my degree. But even better, I have a job offer from the library where I’m doing my internship.

$ Man: Wow! Are you going to take it?

$ Woman: I think so. I have to let them know next week. If I do take the job, I’ll have to go to graduate school to get a degree in library science, but I can do that part-time while I’m working, and I had thought about graduate school anyway. So, I’m leaning toward taking the job.

$ Man: That’s great, Anne. I’m glad for you. So, uh, I guess I’d better make an appointment with Ruth Jackson. Maybe she can find me an internship.

$ Woman: Maybe.

 

 

 

Sociology Class

Professor: Social influence involves the changes in behavior influenced by the actions of other people. Social influence can come about for a variety of reasons, on a continuum from mere suggestion to, in the more severe form, well, to torture. How does social influence work? Well, first we must become aware of a difference between ourselves and the values or behaviors of other people. There are a great many studies of social influence that demonstrate how the presence of others can cause us to change our attitudes or actions. Studies show that people eat more when dining with others than, and I’m talking about dining out here, so they eat more in the company of others than they do when they’re alone. They also run faster when others are running with them. There’s even some interesting research on social influence among animals with similar results to . . . to those of human studies.

Probably one of the most interesting aspects of social influence is the pressure for conformity. Conformity is a process by which an individual’s opinion or behavior moves toward the norms of the group. In a classic study by Solomon Asch, seven people were shown cards with three lines drawn on them. Here’s an example:

So, they were shown the lines, and then they were asked to select the line among the three that matched the, uh . . . the . . . standard line. Here’s the standard. So there’s no question as to the comparison. This has to be easy, right? Wrong. You see, Asch enlisted the cooperation of six of the seven participants in the experiment. On the first card, the six respond correctly—they . . . they identify the lines of the same length—so the seventh person, who is the only real subject in the experiment, well, the seventh person answers correctly, in agreement with the others. But on the next card, four of the cooperating participants choose an incorrect answer, but they’re in agreement, so the problem for the subject is whether to conform to the opinion of the peer group, even though the answer, uh, is in conflict with the answer that the subject knows to be correct.

So what do you think happened? Well, subjects who were tested alone made errors in answers fewer than 1 percent of the time. This was the control group. But of those tested in groups of seven, let’s see, uh, 75 percent yielded at least once to conform to a group answer that was clearly incorrect, and on average, subjects conformed to the group in about 37 percent of the critical trials. This means that they were bringing their behavior into agreement with group norms in . . . in spite of what they were seeing.

Later Asch manipulated the size of the control group . . . I’m sorry, the experimental group . . . to see whether group size would affect pressure, and it did, but probably less than you might expect. Um . . . groups of four demonstrated about the same results as groups of eight. Interestingly enough, a unanimous agreement by the group was more important than the number. In other words, a unanimous opinion by three exerted more pressure to conform than a majority of seven with a dissenting opinion in a group of eight.

Similar experiments have been performed in various countries, among diverse cultural groups, with, um, comparable results. Of course, people in cultures that emphasize group cooperation tended to be more willing to conform, but remember that many of the original studies were done in the United States where there’s a high value placed on individualism. In an interesting variation on the study, Abrams found that conformity is especially strong when the group is selected from among those people that the subject
                clearly identifies with, either because, um . . . they have characteristics in common or . . . or they know each other and interact in a peer group outside of the experimental situation.

So what does all of this mean in the real world? Well, since group members can influence one another to conform to the opinion of the group, the group . . . decisions of a group, uh, may be called into question. What about decisions by political committees or parliaments? What about juries who are charged with convicting or acquitting an accused defendant? Clearly, social influence will play a part in these critical group decisions.

Also interesting is the fact that after a decision is made by a group, there’s a tendency to solidify, and by that I mean that the group becomes even more convinced of the validity of the group opinion. Um . . . this may happen because individual group members who strongly support the group tend to be more popular with the group members.

 

 

 

Art History Class

Professor:

$ We know that the Chinese had been aware of basic photographic principles as early as the fifth century B.C., and Leonardo da Vinci had experimented with a dark room in the 1500s, but it was a number of discoveries in chemistry during the eighteenth century that, uh, accelerated the development of modern photography. The discovery that silver salts were light sensitive led to . . . experimentation with images of light on a . . . a surface that had been coated with silver. Often glass was used in the early images. But the problem was that these images were ephemeral—fading after only a short time. Some of the chemists who worked with them called them fairy pictures, and considered them, uh, that they were only momentary creations, uh, that they would disappear.

Okay. How to fix the image permanently was one of the most important, uh, challenges . . . of the early photographer chemists. In France, in about 1820, Nicephore Niepce discovered a method for fixing the image after a long exposure time, oh, probably eight hours. So, although his work was considered interesting, it was, uh, uh, largely dismissed for . . . as impractical. Nevertheless, one of his associates, Louis Daguerre, managed to find a way to, uh, reduce . . . the exposure time to less than twenty minutes. So the story goes, in 1835, Daguerre was experimenting with some exposed plates, and he put a couple of them into his chemical cupboard, so a few days later, he opened the cupboard, and, uh, to his surprise, the latent images on the plates had developed. At first, he couldn’t figure out why, but eventually, he concluded that this must have occurred as a result of mercury vapor . . . from a broken thermometer that was also in the, uh, enclosed in the cupboard. Supposedly, from this fortunate accident, he was able to invent a process for developing latent images on . . . on exposed plates.

The process itself was somewhat complicated. First, he exposed copper plates to iodine which

released fumes of, uh, of light-sensitive silver iodide. These copper plates were used to capture the image, and by the way, they had to be used almost immediately after their exposure to the iodine. So, the image on the plate was then exposed to light for ten to twenty minutes. The plate was developed over mercury heated to about 75 degrees centigrade, which . . . that caused the mercury to amalgamate with the silver. Now here’s the ingenious part—he then fixed the image in a warm solution of common salt, but later he began using sodium sulphite. Anyway, after he rinsed the plate in hot distilled water, a white image was left permanently on the plate. And the quality was really quite amazing.

But, um . . . the process had its limitations. First, the images couldn’t be reproduced, so each one was a unique piece, and that, uh, greatly increased the cost of photography. Second, the image was reversed, so the subjects would actually see themselves as though they were looking in a mirror, although, uh, in the case of portraits, the fact that people were accustomed to seeing themselves in a mirror made this less . . . this problem less urgent than some of the others. Nevertheless, some photographers did point their cameras at a mirrored reflection of the image that they wanted to capture so that the reflection would be reversed, and a true image could be produced. Okay. Third, the chemicals and the fumes that they released were highly toxic, so photography was a very dangerous occupation. Fourth, the surface of the image was extremely fragile and . . . had to be protected, often under glass, so they didn’t disintegrate from being . . . from handling. The beautiful cases that were made to hold the early images became popular not only for aesthetic purposes but, uh, but also for very practical reasons. And finally, although the exposure time had been radically reduced, it was still . . . inconveniently long . . . at twenty minutes, especially for portraits, since people would have to sit still in the sun for that length of time. Elaborate headrests were constructed to keep the subjects from moving so that the image wouldn’t be ruined, and, uh, many people simply didn’t want to endure the discomfort.

But, by the mid 1800s, improvements in chemistry and optics had resolved most of these issues. Bromide as well as iodine sensitized the plates, and some photographers were even using chlorine in an effort to decrease exposure time. The . . . the portrait lens was also improved by reducing the size of the opening, and limiting the amount of light that could enter, so the exposure time was about twenty seconds instead of twenty minutes. And negative film had been introduced in France, sorry, in England, and negatives permitted the production of multiple copies from a single image. So, photography was on its way to becoming a popular profession and pastime.

koala2008xx

Admissions Office

Student: Excuse me, but the secretary referred me to your office.

$ Assistant: Yes?

$ Student: I’m a new student . . . well, actually, I’m not enrolled yet, but I’m trying to get all my admissions applications turned in today.

$ Assistant: What’s your name?

$ Student: Robert Franklin.

$ Assistant: Middle initial?

$ Student: T.

$ Assistant: Oh, I see. Wait a minute and we’ll find out what you have to do. . . . Well, according to the records here, you have your admissions form, a financial aid application, three letters of recommendation, transcripts from Regional
                    College . . . so that’s everything you need except a transcript from County Community College.

$ Student: That’s what I thought. You see, I took a couple of courses there during the summer because it’s close to my parent’s house. Anyway, almost all of my first two years is from Regional
                    College, and, uh, that’s where I’m transferring from. In fact, the credit for the community college courses appears on the transcript from Regional
                    College as transfer credit, but, uh, it doesn’t show my final grades in the courses.

$ Assistant: Oh, and you haven’t been able to register for your courses here at State
                        University because the computer shows that you are missing some of your application materials. Is that it?

$ Student: Exactly. What I was wondering is whether you have, like a policy for this kind of situation so I could go ahead and register for this first semester while we wait for the transcript to get here. It should be here now. I requested it the same time that I requested a transcript from Regional
                College, but they’re just slow at County
                    Community.

$ Assistant: That happens sometimes. . . . Do you have a copy of your transcript from County
                    Community College?

$ Student: Yes, I do. It’s right here. Of course, it isn’t an official copy. It’s stamped “unofficial copy.”

$ Assistant: But I can use this one until the official copy gets here. Here’s the best way to handle this. We can give you a provisional admission. That means that you’re admitted contingent upon the receipt of your official transcript. That will allow you to register for your courses this semester. When County
                    Community College sends us your official transcript, then I can change your status from provisional admission to regular admission.

$ Student: Oh, that’s great!

$ Assistant: Is this the only copy you have of your transcript?

$ Student: No. I have another one.

$ Assistant: Good. Then I’ll just keep this in your file.

$ Student: Okay.

$ Assistant: Now the only problem is you can’t register for next semester without regular admission status, and you need the official transcript for me to do that, so you still need to keep after them to get everything sent to us as soon as possible.

$ Student: Right. Well, I’ll do that. But at least I have some time to get it done. . . . Um . . . what do I need to do now . . . to get registered, I mean.

$ Assistant: Just wait here while I enter everything into the computer, and then you can take a copy of your provisional admission along with you to the office for transfer students. They’ll assign you an advisor and help you get registered later today.

 

 

Anthropology Class

Professor:

$ The concepts of power and authority are related, but they’re not the same. Power is the ability to exercise influence . . . and control over others. And this can be observed on every level of society, from, well . . . the relationships within a family to the relationships among nations. Power is usually structured by customs and . . . and social institutions or laws and tends to be exerted by persuasive arguments or coercion or . . . or even brute force. In general, groups with the greatest, uh, resources tend to have the advantage in power struggles. So, is power always legitimate? Is it viewed by members of society as justified? Well, no. Power can be realized by individuals or groups . . . even when it involves the resistance of others if . . . as long as . . . as long as they’re in a position to impose their will. But what about power that is accepted by members of society as right and just, that is, legitimate power? Now we’re talking about authority. And that’s what I want to focus on today.

Okay. When individuals or institutions possess authority, they have, um, a recognized and established right . . . to determine policies, with the acceptance of those over . . . over whom they exercise control. Max Weber, the German classical sociologist, proposed three types of authority in society: traditional, charismatic, and rational or legal authority. In all three types, he, uh, he acknowledged the right of those in positions of power to lead . . . with the consent of the governed. So, how did Weber differentiate
                among the three types of authority? Well, he divided them according to how the right to lead and the duty to follow are, uh, interpreted. In traditional authority, power resides in customs and conventions that provide certain people or groups with legitimate power in their societies. Often their origin is found in sacred traditions. The example that most often comes to mind is a monarchy in which kings or queens rule . . . by . . . by birthright, not because of any particular . . . quality of leadership or political election, just because they have a claim to authority, based on traditional acceptance of their position, and in some cases, their, uh, their, uh, unique relationship with and, uh, responsibility in religious practices. The royal families in Europe or the emperors in Asia are . . . come to mind as examples of traditional authority.

Okay. This contrasts sharply with charismatic authority, which is . . . um . . . derived . . . because of personal attributes that inspire admiration, loyalty . . . and even devotion. Leaders who exercise this type of authority may be the founders of religious movements or political parties, but it’s not their traditional right to lead. What’s important here is that their followers are mobilized more by . . . uh, by the force of the leader’s personality than by the tradition or the law. So when we think of “charismatic” leaders in the United States, perhaps John Kennedy would be an example because he was able to project a youthful and energetic image that people were proud to identify with, or, if you prefer Republicans, you may argue that Ronald Reagan was able to exercise authority by virtue of his charismatic appeal. In any case, going back to Weber, to qualify for charismatic authority, a leader must be able to enlist others in the service of a . . . a cause that transforms the social structure in some way.

Which leaves us with legal rational authority, or power that is legitimized by rules, uh, laws, and procedures. In such a system, leaders gain authority not by traditional birthrights or by charismatic appeal but . . . but rather because they’re elected or appointed in accordance with the law, and power is delegated to layers of officials who owe their allegiance to the, uh, principles that are agreed upon rationally, and because they accept the ideal that the law is supreme. In a legal rational society, people accept the legitimacy of authority as a government of laws, not of leaders. So, an example of this type of authority might be a president, like Richard Nixon, who was threatened with, uh, impeachment because he was perceived as not governing within the law.

Some sociologists have postulated that the three types of authority represent stages of evolution in society. That preindustrial societies tend to respect traditional authority, but, uh, as societies move into an industrial age, the importance of tradition . . . wanes . . . in favor of charismatic authority, with a natural rise of charismatic leaders. Then, as . . . as the modern era evolves, the rational legal authority, embodied by rules and regulations, replaces the loyalty to leaders in favor of . . . a respect for law. Of course, other sociologists argue that in practice, authority may be represented by a combination of several of these ideal types at any one time.

 

 

 

Geology Class

Professor:

$ The original source of energy is what? The Sun. Then plants use the Sun’s energy during photosynthesis to convert water and carbon dioxide into sugar and oxygen, and they store the energy in the chemicals that the plant produces. When animals eat plants, the energy is transferred to their bodies. So then, the plants and animals die and decay, and they sink to the bottom of the sea or . . . or disintegrate into the soil and then they’re covered by more and more sediment as rivers deposit mud and sand into the sea or the seas advance and retreat. Of course, it’s a very gradual process . . . one that takes place over, well, millions of years. But finally, the organic material begins to transform into the hydrocarbons, and the hydrocarbons eventually become oil and gas deposits. So how does this happen? Well, at first, the oil and gas are mixed with sand and sediment but . . . as the layers on top increase, then so does the pressure. And under pressure, mixtures of oil and sand and water . . . they seep down through the layers of porous rock . . . that’s usually sandstone or limestone . . . so they sink down until they reach a layer of nonporous rock, and that’s where they pool because they can’t pass through the nonporous rock.

Okay. Sometimes there are breaks in the layers of rocks and the breaks allow oil and gas to bubble up and . . . and eventually they reach the surface of the Earth again. So, when this happens, the gas and some oil evaporate into the air . . . but they leave a sticky black tar that appears in pools or pits on the surface. But most crude oil is found in underground formations, which we call traps. So today, I want to talk about the major types of oil traps. In all the different types of traps, the oil collects in porous rocks, along with gas and water. And, over time, the oil moves up toward the surface of the Earth through cracks and holes in the porous rock . . . until it reaches a nonporous rock deposit . . . and the nonporous rock, remember, it won’t allow the oil to continue moving. So the oil becomes trapped under the nonporous rock deposit.

Now think for a moment. While oil was forming and moving, the Earth was also undergoing changes. In fact, there were enormous movements of the crust as the center began to cool. When folding happened, well, it was like the Earth fell back onto itself. And when faulting happened, it was . . . well, one layer was forced by rocks above down through the layers below. So, you can see that the . . . the . . . repositioning of porous and nonporous rock . . . this repositioning would have affected the movement of oil. When the Earth shifted, cracks would have been opened, and nonporous layers would have been . . . dropped . . . dropped over channels that had previously been used as . . . as pathways for the transfer of oil and gas to the surface.

Okay, as geologists, we’re interested in locating the traps. Now why would that be so? Because that’s where we’ll find the oil and gas reserves. And that’s what I really want to talk about today. So, there are several different types of traps, but today we’re going to talk about the three most common ones—the anticline trap, the salt dome trap, and the fault trap.

Look at this diagram. Here’s an example of an anticline. As you can see, the oil is trapped under a formation of rock that resembles an arch. That’s because the arch was bent from a previously flat formation by uplifting. In this anticline, the petroleum is trapped under a formation of nonporous rock with a gas deposit directly over it. This is fairly typical of an anticline. Because gas isn’t as dense as oil, it rises above it. The dome over the top can be rock as in this example, or it could be a layer of clay. The important thing is that the cap of nonporous material won’t let the oil or gas pass upwards or sideways around it.

Now let’s look at a diagram of a salt dome. This salt dome shows how a cylinder-shaped salt deposit has pushed up through a layer of sedimentary rocks, causing them to arch and fracture. The oil deposits have collected along the sides of the salt dome. Salt is a unique substance. With enough heat and pressure on it, the salt will slowly flow, kind of like a glacier, but unlike glaciers, salt that’s buried below the surface of the Earth can move upward until it reaches the Earth’s surface, where it’s then dissolved by groundwater or . . . rain. Well, to get all the way to the Earth’s surface, salt has to lift and break through many layers of rock. And that’s what ultimately creates the salt dome.

Finally, I want to show you a fault trap. Fault traps are formed by the movement of rock along a fault line. This diagram represents a fracture in the Earth that’s shifted a nonporous rock formation on top of a porous formation. In this case, the reservoir rock, which is porous, has moved opposite a layer of nonporous rock. The nonporous rock prevents the oil from escaping. Remember, as in all traps, the oil is collected in the porous rock and trapped underground by the nonporous rock.

Geologists study the terrain for indications of possible oil traps. For example, a bulge in a flat surface may signal the presence of a salt dome. Your textbook has a good explanation of how technology assists us in this effort. So I want you to read Chapter 3 before class next time.

koala2008xx

Library

Librarian: Hi, how can I help you?

$ Student: Hi, I’m looking for some material on reserve for Business 210.

$ Librarian: Okay. Well, who’s the professor?

$ You see, we keep the files under the professor’s name because there are a couple of sections and the requirements are a little different . . .

$ Student: Oh, okay. It’s, uh, Dr. Parsons.

$ Librarian: Umhum. Parsons? I don’t see any books . . .

$ Student: I think it’s a DVD.

$ Librarian: Oh, yes. Here it is . . . Oh, wait, actually, there are two of them. But that’s all right. Now all I need is your student ID.

$ Student: No problem.

$ Librarian: There you go. Now, these will be due back at the desk in two hours.

$ Student: Two hours? But that won’t even give me time to go home and . . .

$ Librarian: Oh, you can’t leave the library with reserve materials. You have to use them here. But we have some DVD players in the booths behind the reference section. I think there are several free now.

$ Student: But I have to take notes and, uh, uh, I don’t think I can get everything done in two hours.

$ Librarian: Well, you can’t take materials out again until someone else has used them because the professor only left one copy of each. Sorry. Look, maybe two hours will be enough.

$ Student: I don’t think so. These are case studies, and we’re supposed to be able to discuss them.

$ Librarian: Oh, I see. Well, when do you have class?

$ Student: Tomorrow morning. I know I should have come in earlier, but this isn’t my only class. I had an exam earlier today, and I was just waiting to get that out of the way.

$ Librarian: I see. Well, look, why don’t you . . .

$ Student: Isn’t there any way to get an exception to the policy?

$ Librarian: I’m afraid not.

$ Student: Oh. Okay then, let me just check out one of the DVDs. That way, if I finish it, I can check out the other one for two hours, right?

$ Librarian: Sure. That’s perfectly fine. And, here’s a thought. I don’t know if it will work for you since you have a morning class, but if you check out reserve material less than two hours before the library closes, then you can have it overnight . . .

$ Student: Overnight?

$ Librarian: Yes, but you have to have it back when the library opens the next day and . . .

$ Student: But I could do that. Oh, I’m sorry, you were going to say . . .

$ Librarian: Well, if you don’t return the material to the reserve desk when the library opens, then there’s a ten-dollar fine for the first hour and a five-dollar fine for every hour after that . . . that it’s late, I mean. The usual fee is one dollar for every hour but when it’s an overnight . . .

$ Student: Ouch.

$ Librarian: It’s a stiff fine because we need students to take the privilege seriously. Otherwise, other students who need to use the reserve materials wouldn’t have access to them.

$ Student: Oh, I understand.

$ Librarian: And another thing. Sometimes more than one person is trying to use the overnight privilege so . . . so sometimes when you wait until the end of the day . . .

$ Student: Oh. And there isn’t any way to put your name on a list or anything?

$ Librarian: No, not really. It’s first come, first served.

$ Student: Okay. Okay. Then, I think I’ll go ahead and take the one DVD out now because I can still try to get the second one tonight overnight, can’t I?

$ Librarian: Sure. I tell you what. Come back a little before nine.

$ Student: Okay. Will you be here? I mean, I’d rather come back to you.

$ Librarian: I’ll be here until the library closes.

$ Student: Well, then.

$ Librarian: Do you still want to take out one of the DVDs?

$ Student: Yeah. I might as well get one of them out of the way so I’ll only have one left to watch.

$ Librarian: Wait a minute. Your ID.

$ Student: Oh, I’m sorry, I thought I showed it to you.

$ Librarian: You did, but I need to keep it here at the desk until you return the materials.

 

 

Literature Class

Professor:

$ Today we’ll discuss Transcendentalism . .  Transcendentalism . . .which is a philosophical and literary movement that developed in New England in the early nineteenth century. Transcendentalism began with the formation in 1836 of the Transcendental Club in Boston, Massachusetts, by a group of artists and writers. There’s evidence that the group was involved in somewhat of a protest against the intellectual climate of Harvard. Interestingly enough, many of the Transcendentalists were actually Harvard educated, but they never met in Cambridge. Remember, at this time Harvard had only eleven professors, and at least eleven members could be expected to attend a meeting of the Transcendental Club. So their intellectual community was large enough to rival the Harvard faculty.

All right then. Their criticism of Harvard was that the professors were too conservative and old fashioned. Which, come to think of it, isn’t an unusual attitude for students when they talk about their professors. But, in fairness, the classroom method of recitation that was popular at Harvard required the repetition of a lesson without any operational understanding of it. In contrast, the Transcendentalists considered themselves modern and liberal because they preferred a more operational approach to education. Bronson Alcott translated Transcendentalism into pedagogy by encouraging the students to think, using dialogues and journals to develop and record their ideas. Language was viewed as the connection between the individual and society. In 1834, Alcott established the Temple
                    School near Boston Commons and later founded a form of adult education, which he referred to as Conversation. This was really a process whereby the give and take in a conversation became more important than the doctrine that a teacher might have been inclined to pass on to students, an approach that stood in diametric opposition to the tradition at Harvard that encouraged students to memorize their lessons.

The Transcendental group also advanced a reaction against the rigid Puritanism of the period, especially insofar as it emphasized society at the expense of the individual—the Puritans, I mean. According to the Transcendentalists, the justification of all social organizations is the improvement of the individual. So, in the literature of the time, the Transcendentalists insisted that it was basic human nature to engage in self-expression, and many interpreted this as encouragement for them to write essays and other opinion pieces. One of the most distinguished members of the club was Ralph Waldo Emerson, who served as editor of the Transcendentalist’s literary magazine, the Dial. His writing stressed the importance of the individual. In one of his best-known essays, “Self-Reliance,” he appealed to intuition as a source of ethics, asserting that people should be the judge of their own actions, without the rigid restrictions of society. You can imagine the reaction of the church, in particular, the Unitarian
                    Church, in which many of the intellectuals held membership. If individuals were responsible for their own code of ethics, then the clergy, and the entire church organization was threatened.

Perhaps because they were encouraged to think for themselves, the Transcendentalists came up with several options for living out their philosophies. Many were devoted to the idea of a Utopian society or at least to a pastoral retreat without class distinctions, where everyone would be responsible for tending the gardens and maintaining the buildings, preparing the food, and so forth. And quite a few were involved in some sort of communal living. Brook Farm was probably the most successful of these cooperatives, although it lasted only six years. Brook Farm and some of the other experimental communities brought to the surface the problem that the Transcendentalists faced when they tried to reconcile a cooperative society and individual freedom. Both Emerson and Thoreau declined to participate in Brook Farm because they maintained that improvement had to begin with an individual, not a group.

From 1841 to 1843, Emerson and Thoreau lived and worked together in Emerson’s home, exchanging ideas, developing their philosophies, and writing. Upon leaving Emerson’s home, Thoreau built a small cabin along the shores of Walden Pond near Concord, Massachusetts, where he lived alone for two years. Devoting himself to the study of nature and to writing, he published an account of his experiences in Walden, a book that’s generally acknowledged as the most original and sincere contribution to literature by the Transcendentalists.

But I’m getting ahead of myself.

$ Transcendentalism didn’t change the educational system, and it certainly didn’t reform the church in any significant way, but it did, in a sense, change the direction of American social and political culture because Transcendentalism evolved from its initial literary roots into a force that shaped the way a democratic society was interpreted on the North American continent.

 

 

General Science Class

Professor:

$ Okay. This is a general science course, and as such, the first thing I want you to understand is the scientific method. In your book, the definition of the scientific method is “an organized approach to explaining observed facts, with a model of nature that must be tested, and then modified or discarded if it fails to pass the tests.” So let’s take that apart and talk about it. What are observed facts? Anyone?

$ Student 1: I’ll try.

$ Professor: Okay.

$ Student 1: Isn’t a fact supposed to be a statement that everyone agrees on?

$ Professor: So you would say that a fact is objectively true.

$ Student 1: Yeah. That’s what I mean.

$ Professor: Okay. That sounds good, but what about this . . . we consider it a fact that the Sun rises each morning and the Earth rotates. But facts like that are not always agreed upon. Look, when we say that the Sun rises each morning, we assume that it is the same Sun day after day—an idea that might not have been accepted by ancient Egyptians, whose mythology taught them that the Sun died with every sunset and was reborn with every sunrise. Now, let’s consider the case of the Earth’s rotation. Well, for most of human history, the Earth was assumed to be stationary at the center of the universe. So, as you can see, our interpretations of facts often are based on beliefs about the world that others might not share. Still, facts are the raw material that scientific models seek to explain, so it’s important that scientists agree on the facts. How can we do that?

$ Student 2: How about this . . . a fact has to be verified, I mean, that’s where the testing comes in, so we have to be able to test a model, but we have to be able to test a fact, too, right?

$ Professor:

$ Now you’re on the right track. In the context of science, a fact must therefore be something that anyone can verify for himself or herself, at least in principle. So, even though the interpretation may be different, some interpretation of the Sun is there every morning, and that can be verified. Then, a model is proposed to explain the facts. And a model is…

$ Student 3: . . . an explanation of the facts.

$ Professor:

$ Right. Once the facts have been observed, a model can be proposed to explain them and not only explain what is obvious but also make predictions that can be tested through further observations or experiments. Let’s go back to Ptolemy’s model of the universe, which assumed that the Earth was the center of everything. Okay, that was a useful model because it predicted future locations of the Sun, Moon, and planets in the sky. However, although the Ptolemaic model remained in use for nearly 1500 years, eventually it became clear that its predictions didn’t quite match actual observations—a key reason why the Earth-centered model of the universe finally was discarded.

$ Student 2: So models are discarded when they don’t match the observations.

$ Professor:

$ Exactly. And new models are proposed to explain the facts in a better or more inclusive way. Okay, how does a model achieve the status of a theory?

$ Student 1:

$ Well, I guess sometimes the model doesn’t fail, you know, it gets repeated by many experiments and the, uh, the uh . . . pre- um, predictions are verified.

$ Professor:

$ So, when a prediction is verified . . . repeated, then we start to assume that the model is a valid representation of nature, and when that happens with many experiments and a number of different researchers, then the model achieves the status of a scientific theory.

$ Student 2: But . . .

$ Professor: Yes? Jerry?

$ Student 2: Well, the problem is that theories get discarded, too, don’t they?

$ Professor:

$ Absolutely. Because it isn’t really possible to prove that a theory is true beyond all shadow of a doubt. And that’s good because doubt is a cornerstone of science. Even a well-researched and presented theory should undergo continuous challenges from the scientific community, with further observations and experiments.

$ Student 3:

$ I’m sorry. Did we mention the term hypothesis? Does that fit in with a model or a theory?

$ Professor:

$ Glad you brought that up. A proposed model is often called a hypothesis, and that just means that the scientist is making an educated guess that the model’s predictions will bear up under testing.

$ Student 3: So a hypothesis is a proposed model.

$ Professor:

$ Right. But let’s put this all together, shall we? Step 1 is observation, the collection of data, that is, observations.

$ Step 2 is hypothesis or a model to explain the facts and to make predictions. Step 3 is additional observations and experiments. And here’s the important part, when the predictions fail, then we recognize that the model is flawed, and we have to revise or discard it, but when the predictions are verified on a consistent basis, then we consider the possibility that we have a true representation of nature and we elevate the model to the status of a theory.

$ Student: So step 4 is the theory?

$ Professor:

$ Right. But, even then, the theory must undergo step 5 . . . that’s further observations, experiments, and challenges. Okay so far? . . . Okay. Now for a reality check. In the real world of science, discoveries are rarely made by a process as . . . as mechanical as the idealized scientific method outlined in your textbook . . . the one that we just summarized. For example, anyone recognize the name Johannes Kepler?

$ Student 2: Sure. Didn’t he propose the laws of planetary motion?

$ Professor:

$ He did, in about 1600. But instead of verifying new predictions on the basis of his model, he tested themodel against observations that had been made previously. And . . . and . . . like most scientific discoveries, Kepler’s work involved intuition, collaboration with others, moments of insight, and luck. And eventually, other scientists made a lot of observations to, uh . . . verify the planetary positions predicted by his model.

$ Student 1: Student 2:

$ So the . . . . . . Then

$ Student 2: Go ahead.

$ Student 1: So the scientific method in the book . . . that’s not really the way it happens a lot of the time?

$ Professor:

$ Okay, let’s put it this way . . . the scientific method is a process that we need to keep in mind as we do the work of scientists, but we should also understand that it’s an idealized process for making objective judgments about whether a proposed model of nature is close to the truth. And we should also keep in mind that in the work of scientists, other factors are also brought to bear on those ideal steps in the process.

koala2008xx

Test 4

Professor's Office

Professor: So what did you want to see me about Ernie?

$ Student: My grade. I'm not doing very well in this class.

$ Professor: Well, that's not exactly true. You were doing very well until the last test.

$ Student: I got a D. Professor Adams, I've never gotten a D in my life . . . before this, I mean. So that's why I'm here. I hope you can give me some advice.

$ Professor: Well, from my class book, I see that your attendance is excellent. No absences, so that's not the problem.

$ Student: No, I never miss class. I'm a serious student. I just don't know what happened on that test.

$ Professor: Did you bring it? The test?

$ Professor: Okay. I think I remember this, but there were almost a hundred tests to grade, so let's have a look at it.

$ Student: Thanks.

$ Professor: Well, Ernie . . . let's see . . . Here it is. Yes, I do recall this test. You didn't finish it. You stopped after question 15. So you had 5 questions that were counted wrong because they . . . because you didn't complete the test.

$ Student: I know. I didn't watch the time, and I just couldn't believe it when you asked us to hand in the tests.

$ Professor: Yes, I see. But you did a good job on the questions that you did respond to.

$ Student: Professor Adams, maybe you won't believe me, but I know the answers to the questions that I . . . that . . . that . . .

$ Professor: The ones that you left blank at the end.

$ Student: Yeah. So now I need some advice about how to bring up my grade because a D is going to make a big difference.

$ Professor: This test counts 25 percent so, uh, . . . you're right. It will bring it down at least a letter.

$ Student: I know.

$ Professor: Okay then. The first thing is to learn something from this. You have to find a way to pace yourself through tests or you're going to have this problem again.

$ Student: I know, and believe me, I learned that already.

$ Professor: Okay. That's good. Now, uh, what about the grade for this class?

$ Student: I was hoping you might give me a chance to . . . to maybe do an extra credit assignment.

$ Professor: Hummm. I don't know about that.

$ Student: Oh.

$ Professor: But here's what we can do. If you want to finish the test right now, and your answers are satisfactory, then I'll add some points to your grade.

$ Student: You will? I know the answers. Really . . .

$ Professor: . . . I can't give you full credit for your answers. That wouldn't be fair to the other students, but I can add some points, and that should help you somewhat.

$ Student: Wow. This is great.

$ Professor: Okay. Just take your test over there and finish it. You had about an hour to complete 20 questions, so, uh, . . . that would be 15 minutes to finish the 5 questions you left blank. And Ernie . . . pace yourself.

$ Student: I will! Thanks. Thanks a lot.

 

 

Anthropology Class

Professor:

Let’s just pick up where we left off last week. Okay, as you’ll recall, earlier theories about the development of agriculture tended to view it as a progressive event, or even as a catalyst for everything from art to industry, but I’m going to share a rather different view with you. From a revisionist perspective, the development of agriculture about 10,000 years ago didn’t improve the lives of early farmers. On the contrary, when hunter-gatherers abandoned the age-old method of foraging for food and began to cultivate crops, they put their health at risk. Now I know it’s just the opposite of . . . it’s quite a different viewpoint let’s say, so . . . why would this be so . . . why would their health decline when agriculture provided people with an efficient way to get more food for less work?

Clearly, cultivated fields yield more food per acre than uncultivated land with undomesticated patches of berries and nuts. Well, first let’s consider the conditions that are necessary for agriculture to flourish. In order to have enough labor to plant, tend, and harvest crops, a larger number of people must well, . . . they have to cooperate. That means that the density of the population must increase in the area surrounding the cultivated farms. And, as we know, crowding contributes to the transmission of infectious diseases. So when hunter-gatherers were wandering in small bands, the likelihood of an epidemic was slight, but after the agricultural revolution, tuberculosis . . . and diseases of the intestinal tract . . . these began to reach epidemic proportions in the crowded agricultural communities. And in addition, because the population was no longer mobile and . . . and relied on trade to inject variety into the lives and diets of the farmers, that meant that disease was also transmitted through the exchange of goods.

Now, the revisionists also argue that the content of the diet for early farmers was inferior to that of the hunter-gatherers. You’ll recall that hunter-gatherers enjoyed a variety of foods selected from wild plants and game, and in studies of modern tribes that have continued the tradition of hunting and gathering food, it appears that those . . . the hunters and gatherers . . . they have a better balance of nutrients and even more protein than tribes that have adopted agricultural lifestyles. Today, three grain crops . . . wheat, corn, and rice . . . these account for the bulk of calories consumed by farming societies.

$ So, consider the implications. Extrapolating from this and from evidence that early farmers raised only one or two crops, we can conclude that a disproportionate amount of carbohydrates formed the basis of their diets.

Now another interesting series of studies involve the skeletal remains of hunter-gatherers as compared with their agricultural relatives. And one such study from Greece and Turkey . . . it indicates that the average height of hunter-gatherers at the end of the Ice Age was . . . let me check my notes . . . yes, it was 5'9" for men and 5'5" for women. And their bones were strong, healthy, and athletic. But, after the agricultural revolution, skeletal remains revealed that height had diminished to a shocking 5'3" for men and 5′ for women. And evidence from bone samples suggests that they suffered from diseases caused by malnutrition, like anemia. And this is interesting. Further studies from paleontologists at the University of Massachusetts project life expectancies for hunter-gatherers at about twenty-six years, but post agricultural life expectancies were less than twenty years. Let me just read you something from one of the studies by George Armelagos, and I quote, “episodes of nutritional stress and infectious disease were seriously affecting their ability to survive.” And he’s referring to early farmers here.

So, let’s see where we are. Oh, yes. Consider that hunter-gatherers had the advantage of mobility.

So if food wasn’t plentiful, they broke camp and moved on in search of an area with a larger food supply.

$ And, if one type of food were in short supply, for example . . . well, berries, then they wouldn’t eat berries but there would probably be a good supply of another type of food, like nuts. Or hunting might compensate for a bad year for plant foods. But farmers were very vulnerable to crop failures. Remember, most early farmers cultivated only one or two crops. If there was a drought and the grain harvest failed, they didn’t have other resources and that’s why they were subject to malnutrition or even starvation. So, as you see, revisionists have made a rather convincing case. To sum it up, according to the revisionists, the development of agriculture put the health of early farmers at risk.

 

 

Business Class

Professor:

$ In your textbook, the author states that “companies sell products but companies market brands.” And several of you have asked me about that distinction . . . between selling products and marketing brands. . . . I thought we ought to take some time to talk about it in class. So, let me give you an example. Suppose that we have a company, and the product is chicken. Then it’s easy to understand that we’re selling chicken. Maybe we’re even selling a special preparation of chicken-barbecued chicken-and maybe we include lemonade and a hot roll free with our barbecued chicken. We may even have the best service. But, we’re still selling chicken, even though it’s a special preparation and even though we’ve provided an attractive package with free additional products and good service. All of that is still selling.

$ But what’s marketing then? Well, when we market a product, we have to create meaning that attaches itself to the product . . . something that makes the product more unique and more desirable than other similar products. Maybe this chicken was a family recipe that was handed down from Aunt Ruby. So this isn’t just chicken. It’s Aunt Ruby’s recipe. And eating it is special because she doesn’t give the recipe to anyone but family, and being in the restaurant is just like being in Aunt Ruby’s kitchen.

$ How you interpret the experience is just as important as how you view the product. See what I mean?

$ Take a look at commercials on television if you really want to understand marketing because these commercials almost always represent the product as something else—success, sex, youth. All of these are important to the consumer. So, when a car is marketed, for example, it’s shown in the context of a successful crowd of people in an upscale neighborhood, or the man who buys the car gets the woman, or the woman who buys the car is young, beautiful, and desirable while she’s driving it. And marketing is what attaches that meaning to the product. You may not be able to buy youth, but you can buy products, and the message is that these products will get you what you really want.

Okay, so marketing is selling an image or a benefit . . . something that’s really attractive and larger than the product itself, and by attaching it to the product, we can give that larger meaning to what we want to sell. Go back to the car commercial for a minute. We want to sell cars, but we market them by selling something bigger first, and by association, we sell the cars.

$ This brings us to the term branding. Now branding is similar to marketing because the customer perceives the product as being valuable. So then, branding is more about the customer than it is about the product. It’s the personality of the product that people relate to. Think Allstate Insurance, and you’ll probably come up with “You’re in good hands,” and their competitor, State Farm will remind you, “Like a good neighbor, State Farm is there.” This is an emotional relationship that customers have with the personality of the product. Rob Frankel is probably one of the most widely respected business consultants in the area of product branding. In his book, The Revenge of Brand
                X, he says, “business is about relationships, not about transactions.” That’s not an exact quote but it’s close. And he’s so right on. Branding isn’t about the product or even about the customer service. It’s about the customer’s perception of the product and the relationship with the personality of the product. And that’s how branding works.

So it’s not a logo, it’s not a name, although name recognition or the familiarity of a logo is helpful. It’s not a commercial or even a string of commercials in a marketing plan. It’s more about loyalty and confidence and all of the things that make a relationship good.
                

$ Customers have to do more than recognize the brand. They have to be motivated to buy it . . . and . . . and continue to buy it, over time. In a way, it’s a telegraphic marketing message that’s easy to understand and speaks to the customer, and it has to be a consistent message. I mean that to build a brand, and more important, brand loyalty, you have to repeat that message over and over. Say it loud enough and long enough and it starts to sound right, and even more important, it starts to echo in your customers’ heads when they think about making a purchase.

So what’s the result that we’re going for? It’s when the customer will wait until the store gets more of it instead of buying a different brand, or if the price goes up, the customer will pay extra instead of buying a cheaper brand. And this is brand loyalty, which is especially important in an industry where there isn’t very much difference in the competing products. Laundry detergent . . . now that’s really a very similar product across brands . . . but people tend to buy the same one.

Okay then. How do we give our products a personality so we can develop a relationship with customers?

$ Well, Aunt Ruby is someone that we can relate to when we think about chicken. But celebrity spokespersons are an even more obvious option. When kids think about Nike shoes, do they want a relationship with a shoe, with Nike, or with Michael Jordan? It’s pretty obvious that Air Jordan shoes are all about the basketball player. That’s taking branding to its logical conclusion.

 

 

Students on Campus

Woman: This is an interesting assignment.

$ Man: It is. I’m just having a problem figuring out how to write up the report.

$ Woman: Oh? How much have you done?

$ Man: Well, the introduction was easy. I just expanded on the information that the lab assistant provided, you know, about the effects of alcohol on reflexes, and I used the same references that he cited.

$ Woman: Me, too.

$ Man: Then I described the experiment in the second part . . . the methods and materials section.

$ Woman: What did you include there? The lab assistant said that it was important to be specific when we did this part.

$ Man: Yeah, he did. So I mentioned that there were ten subjects, and five were drinking gin and tonic, but the other five . . . that’s the control group . . . they were drinking tonic only, and no one knew which group was which. Then they each had to drive in a computerized . . . what was it called? A . . . a simulator . . . a simulator of a car that was supposed to be moving at 35 miles an hour. And when they saw a bicycle, they were supposed to hit the brakes.

$ Woman: So far so good. The only thing I can think of that you might want to add is maybe a little more about the subjects. I think they were college students, and they were selected at random to be in the experimental or control group.

$ Man: Good idea. Especially the part about the random selection. That would be important information if someone wanted to duplicate the experiment, and didn’t he say that this section had to be specific enough for another researcher to be able to repli . . . repli . . .

$ Woman: replicate . . .

$ Man: Yeah. Replicate the study.

$ Woman: Okay, so what did you do with the results section?

$ Man: That’s the problem. I can’t seem to figure out what to put in the results section and what to use for the discussion section. If I put the chart with the reaction times in the results, should I explain the chart in the discussion, or what?

$ Woman: Oh, now I see the problem. The chart’s fairly self-explanatory, isn’t it? I mean, it’s really a simple chart to read.

$ Man: That’s what I thought.

$ Woman: But you still have to explain the chart in the results section.

$ Man You do?

$ Woman: Yeah. Um, look, here’s what I’d do. I’d look at the chart and try to come up with a few general statements. For example, um, well, all of the subjects who were drinking alcohol had longer reaction times. Then you can look at the range—1 second to 4 seconds for the subjects who were drinking only tonic, and that’s compared with 3 seconds to 20 seconds for the subjects who were drinking gin with the tonic.

$ Man: So, I’m really just repeating what’s on the chart, but I’m explaining it in words.

$ Woman: Right. But, here’s the thing—you shouldn’t draw any conclusions in the results section. Just the facts.

$ Man: You mean, just what happened in the experiment.

$ Woman: Right. You have to save the conclusions for the discussion section.

$ Man: Okay. So in the conclusions, I might say that driving after having four drinks . . . if you have four drinks, you probably won’t be in a position to avoid an accident.

$ Woman: That’s good. And you could also point out problems in the research, if there are any, or suggestions for future research.

$ Man: Like doing the experiment with beer instead of hard liquor or repeating the same experiment with three drinks instead of four.

$ Woman: Sure. That’s the idea.

 

 

Biology Class

Professor:

$ Before we begin our discussion of blood types, let’s review what we know about blood. According to the textbooks, about half of the volume of blood is made up of blood cells that begin as stem cells in bone marrow. And these stem cells can develop into any of the other kinds of cells found in blood, including red cells, white cells, and platelets. So . . . some stem cells become white cells or leukocytes and these are essential to the immune system. And when bacteria or germs invade the body, some of the white cells form antibodies to resist the infection directly while other white cells begin to work on the chemistry of the foreign substance itself . . . to fight the infection. Now, compared with red blood cells, there are relatively few white blood cells . . . only about one for every seven hundred red cells. And the smallest of the blood cells are called platelets, but what they don’t have in size they make up for in numbers. Well, most of us have about two trillion of them and they work to help the blood to clot and . . . , uh, repair holes in the walls of blood vessels. But we need a way to transport the blood, right? Plasma is the liquid substance in blood that transports most of the chemicals . . . vitamins and minerals . . . hormones and enzymes.

But most stem cells become red blood cells, or erythocytes. They’re the most numerous. As I mentioned before, there are about seven hundred to every one white blood cell. So the red cells give blood the color red, and they’re important for what we call blood typing. And blood typing is what I want to get going on today.

Now blood types are a classification of red blood cells according to the presence of specific substances . . . antigenic proteins and carbohydrates . . . and you can see them under the microscope on the surface of the cells. The four blood types are identified by letters . . . A, B, AB, and O. Blood type A contains red blood cells with the antigen A. Blood type B contains red blood cells with the antigen B. The AB blood type contains both antigens, and the O blood type contains no antigens, but the individual with this type can form antibodies containing either A or B antigens.

$ Student 1:

$ Excuse me. Is that why the O blood type is considered a universal blood type? Because it can form antibodies with either A or B antigens?

$ Professor:

$ Right you are. But, in typing the blood, the antigens are really much more complex than this explanation might suggest. There are at least 300 different antigens. In fact, there are so many potential combinations that an individual’s blood type is almost as unique as a fingerprint. But anyway, these basic types are used for determining compatibilities for blood transfusions. Before a transfusion is approved, hospitals always perform a procedure called a cross match which involves taking a sample of the donor’s red blood cells and mixing them with a sample of the patient’s plasma. You see, in almost every individual, the plasma contains antibodies that will react to antigens that are not found on their own red blood cells. So during a transfusion, antibodies in the patient’s plasma can bind to antigens on the donor’s red blood cells when the donor’s blood is not similar to that of the patient. Well, many minor reactions can occur like fever or chills, but some reactions are so severe that they lead to a . . . a spontaneous destruction of the red blood cells from the donor and that can result in shock or even death. So you can understand why blood typing is so important. Cross matching lowers the risk of a serious reaction.

Okay. In cross matching, we take red cells from one person and plasma from the other person, and we watch to see whether there’s a negative response. Take a look at this diagram. It’s on page 112 in your textbook. Here’s what you would be looking at with a reaction caused by incompatible blood. See how the cells clump together?

$ The reason that this is happening is because there’s a chemical reaction between the protein molecules in the red cells of one person and the plasma of the other. Now look at this slide. This diagram is on the next page in your text and this shows a compatible match with no clumping.

$ See how the cells are evenly spaced?
                

Well, of course, doctors prefer to use the same type as that of the patient, but compromises have to be made in emergencies. Type A patients can’t receive type B blood, and type B patients can’t receive type A blood, but back to your question; since an O donor has blood that’s compatible with both A and B antigens, it’s the ideal, or as you said, the universal donor. In an emergency, type O blood can be used for patients of all blood types. And fortunately, worldwide, type O is the most common, followed by type A. Relatively few people have type B blood, and the fewest have type AB.

$ Student 2: Professor Stephens, can you tell us anything about artificial blood?

$ Professor: Well actually, scientists developed artificial blood that’s been used successfully in blood transfusions with human patients. It’s a white fluid, chemically similar to Teflon, the material that coats cookware and prevents material from adhering to it.
                The fluid can be used as a match with all blood types, and so, the cross matching step in transfusions . . . that can be eliminated. So far, artificial blood has done a good job of replacing the red cells by carrying oxygen through the body and liminating carbon dioxide, but there are no white cells present, no antibodies, no platelets. So, it doesn’t clot, and it doesn’t remain in the body very long. Still, continuing research along these lines should probably be encouraged. Um, even with cross matching and other precautions, transfusions with human blood involve risks.

 

 

Orientation Class

Professor:

$ For the most part, college students don’t read fast enough to keep up with the demands of their reading assignments. Let’s just say that the typical college student reads 150 to 300 words per minute. Okay.

$ The professor in the Western Civilization course uses the topics from Chapter 1 of the textbook for three lectures the first week of the semester. Each page has about 500 words on it, and that includes space for pictures and drawings. So, at 150 words per minute . . . let me see . . . each page will take more than three minutes to complete, and . . . if my figures are right . . . that’s almost three hours just to read the textbook assignment once through. That doesn’t even count what you need to do to think and connect the lectures with the book, and you can be sure that there will be additional reading or other assignments besides the lectures and the textbook. . . . Have you heard about the times two rule?

$ Student 1:

$ Isn’t that . . . doesn’t that mean a student should spend two hours of study time for every hour of class time in every subject?

$ Professor:

$ Exactly. Okay. I think you’ll agree that reading faster is important to success in college. So it’s only practical to learn to read faster. And, uh, that’s why I’m going to talk with you about the human capacity for reading . . . and some habits that you may have that could be slowing you down. First, I want you to think about reading like you think about running. The more you run, the faster and farther you can go . . and the more you read, the faster you’re going to read. In fact, researchers hypothesize that our physical capacity to read surpasses our ability to turn the pages. In other words, our brains can take in the information faster than our hands can move. So reading 700 to 1000 words a minute should be a reasonable goal for almost everyone. That would be quite a time saver, wouldn’t it?

$ Student 1: Yeah. It sure would.

$ Professor:

$ Now, let’s talk about why most of us probably aren’t reading at that speed . . . at 1000 words a minute . . .

$ why we’re not doing that now. We know that we have the capacity—that our brains can take it in. But there are a few habits that prevent readers from reaching that target speed of 700 to 1000 words. In the first place, some people are auditory readers. That means that they hear every word in their minds.

$ Some people even move their lips so they seem to be speaking while they’re reading. This is a serious problem because we can only speak about 300 words per minute, but, uh, our capacity to read . . . it’s many times faster. So if you’re hearing the words in your head or moving your lips, you know that you’re preventing your mind from processing as fast as it can. Can any of you relate to that?

$ Student 2: I can. I hear every word.

$ Professor:

$ A lot of people do. Now, another problem is something called fixations. Fixations are the actual pauses that the eye makes. We can’t see while the eye is moving so we have to stop to take in the text. Everyone has to fixate to see the print, but, uh, some people . . . they stop their eyes on every single word and that will really slow you down. So if you’re looking at every word or even at every few words, that habit is something to work on. When you’re not reading word by word, your mind has to connect and, uh, build associations and . . . and patterns. You can do this because so much of a written text is redundant— that means that there’s a lot of repetition, so quite a few words can be skipped without losing the meaning.

$ Student 3: So you’re saying we should try to guess the meaning?

$ Professor:

$ I think I would use the term predict rather than guess, but basically the answer to your question is “yes.” Now this may surprise you. Using a dictionary is a good habit. Right? Well, yes, in moderation. But stopping to look up every new word is a bad habit because you don’t need to know every word in order to understand what you’re reading. Remember what I just said about redundancy. So, uh, stopping to use the dictionary too often . . . that interrupts your train of thought and, uh, prevents you from reaching your potential reading speed.

$ Student 3: I’ve heard that before and it makes sense but . . .

$ Professor: But you’re afraid to try it?

$ Student 3: That’s probably true.

$ Professor:

$ Well, I’ll come back to that in a minute. First I want to point out one more problem. A lot of readers go back over the words they’ve already read to clarify the meaning. But this is probably the worst habit because, uh, when we’re repeating twice or even more times, that causes our reading speed to drop and it goes to 50 or even 30 percent of our capacity. Did I mention that this is called regression?

$ Okay, well this regression not only slows us down, it also makes it more difficult to understand the meaning because, uh, the way that we comprehend . . . we understand by connecting with the next phrase, so going back all the time makes us lose the connections. And this is what’s really important in all of this—research demonstrates a correlation between speed and comprehension. In an overwhelming number of cases, when students increase their reading speed, they also increase their comprehension of the material. So how can you do this? First break the habits that are causing you to read slowly. Don’t think the words in your head or move your lips to sound out each word. Don’t let your eyes pause on every word. Don’t look up every new word in the dictionary. And try not to go back over paragraphs and, uh, sentences that you’ve already read. But, that’s hard to do if you have these habits, isn’t it?

$ Especially if you’re also trying to read in order to learn a new subject. That’s why you’re afraid to try it . . . because, uh, you have to learn the content in order to pass the course and . . . you don’t want to try something new . . . to take a risk.

$ Student 3: Yeah. That’s about the size of it.

$ Professor:

$ Well, I understand that. But you can take a risk and try to change some of those habits, but it helps if you do it in a structured environment like the Learning
                        Center. It’s free and you’ll more than make up for the time you spend in one of the reading courses they offer when you begin to read all of your assignments at twice the speed you’re reading them now.

koala2008xx

终于忍着悲痛弄完了，希望对大家有所帮助

愿都能考出好成绩，不要像我，悲壮的Cancel了成绩，5555555

helloivory

Thanks you so so so so so so so so so much

helloivory

汗　打错了　ＴＨＡＮＫ　ＹＯＵ～

dduckii

楼主太伟大了!!!!!

感激啊感激

yiyun2004

大好人啊，终于找到听力文本了。

Amelia1983

谢谢