4.30阅读周测

Q1:姓名

:Text 1 Every Saturday morning, at 9 am, more than 50,000 runners set off to run 5km around their local park. The Parkrun phenomenon began with a dozen friends andhas inspired 400 events in the UK and more abroad. Events are free, staffed bythousands of volunteers. Runners range from four years old to grandparents; theirtimes range from Andrew Baddeleys world record 13 minutes 48 seconds up to anhour. Parkrun is succeeding where Londons Olympic legacy is failing. Ten years ago on Monday, it was announced that the Games of the 30th Olympiad would be inLondon. Planning s pledged that the great legacy of the Games would beto lever a nation of sport lovers away from their couches. The population would befitter, healthier and produce more winners. It has not happened. The number ofadults doing weekly sport did rise, by nearly 2 million in the run-up to 20 12 - butthe general population was growing faster. Worse, the numbers are now falling at an accelerating rate. The opposition claims primary school pupils doing at least twohours of sport a week have nearly halved. Obesity has risen among adults andchildren. Official retrospections continue as to why London 20 12 failed to inspire a generation. The success of Parkrun offers answers. Parkun is not a race but a time trial: Your only competitor is the clock. The ethos welcomes anybody. There is as much joy over a puffed-out first-timer beingclapped over the line as there is about top talent shining. The Olympic bidders, bycontrast, wanted to get more people doing sport and to produce more elite athletes. The dual aim was mixed up: The stress on success over taking part was intimidatingfor newcomers. Indeed, there is something a little absurd in the state getting involved in the planning of such a fundamentally grassroots concept as community sportsassociations. If there is a role for government, it should really be getting involved inproviding common goods — making sure there is space for playing fields and the money to pave tennis and netball courts, and encouraging the provision of all theseactivities in schools. But successive governments have presided over selling greenspaces, squeezing money from local authorities and declining attention on sport ineducation. Instead of wordy, worthy strategies, future governments need to do more to provide the conditions for sport to thrive. Or at least not make them worse.

Q2:21. According to Paragraph 1, Parkrun has .

Q3:22. The author believes that Londons Olympic legacy has failed to .

Q4:23. Parkrun is different from Olympic games in that it .

Q5:24. With regard to mass sports, the author holds that governments should .

Q6:25. The authors attitude to what UK governments have done for sports is .

:Text2 With so much focus on childrens use of screens, its easy for parents to forget about their own screen use. Tech is designed to really suck you in, says JennyRadesky in her study of digital play, and digital products are there to promotemaximal engagement. It makes it hard to disengage, and leads to a lot of bleed-overinto the family routine. Radesky has studied the use of mobile phones and tablets at mealtimes by giving mother-child pairs a food-testing exercise. She found that mothers who useddevices during the exercise started 20 per cent fewer verbal and 39 per cent fewernonverbal interactions with their children. During a separate observation, she sawthat phones became a source of tension in the family. Parents would be looking attheir emails while the children would be making excited bids for their attention. Infants are wired to look at parents faces to try to understand their world, and if those faces are blank and unresponsive — as they often are when absorbed in adevice — it can be extremely disconcerting for the children. Radesky cites the stillface experiment devised by developmental psychologist Ed Tronick in the 1970s.In it, a mother is asked to interact with her child in a normal way before putting on ablank expression and not giving them any visual social feedback: The childbecomes increasingly distressed as she tries to capture her mothers attention. Parents dont have to be exquisitely present at all times, but there needs to be abalance and parents need to be responsive and sensitive to a childs verbal ornonverbal expressions of an emotional need, says Radesky. On the other hand, Tronick himself is concerned that the worries about kids use of screens are born out of an oppressive ideology that demands that parentsshould always be interacting with their children: Its based on a somewhatfantasised, very white, very upper-middle-class ideology that says if youre failingto expose your child to 30,000 words you are neglecting them. Tronick believesthat just because a child isnt learning from the screen doesnt mean theres no value to it — particularly if it gives parents time to have a shower, do housework or simplyhave a break from their child. Parents, he says, can get a lot out of using theirdevices to speak to a friend or get some work out of the way. This can make themfeel happier, which lets them be more available to their child the rest of the time.

Q7:26. According to Jenny Radesky, digital products are designed to .

Q8:27. Radeskys food-testing exercise shows that mothersuse of devices .

Q9:28. Radesky cites the still face experiment to show that .

Q10:29. The oppressive ideology mentioned by Tronick requires parents to .

Q11:30. According to Tronick, kids use of screens may .