|
|
旋元佑英文自習 - ETS托福Official Guide答案錯誤，題解亂掰瀏覽數:1002次
去年(2007)夏天我回到登峰美語補習班授課，除了我自己的單元班(文法，字彙)之外，還接了GMAT修辭與托福閱讀這兩個留學考的班。 Communications with the ETS寄件者：Hsuan Yuanyu [yy.hsuan@msa.hinet.net] 寄件日期：2007/5/10 (星期四) 上午 03:33 收件者：customer.service@mcgraw-hill.com; os_internet@ets.org Dear Sirs: I'm about to start teaching TOEFL Reading using the McGraw Hill "Official Guide to the New TOEFL iBT," International Edition 2006, printed in Singapore. I've spotted a possible mistake in the book, which is potentially very serious. I've attached my explanations in a Word document. I'll start teaching around May 25. I'll appreciate it very much if you can reply to me before that. Thank you very much. Best regards, Hsuan Yuanyu, Taipei, Taiwan AttachmentDear Sirs: I have been studying McGraw Hill’s The Official Guide to the New TOEFL iBT, International Edition 2006, printed in Singapore. I believe there may be a serious mistake in the book. In the Explanation on pages 34-35, Choice 6 is among the Correct Choices, and Choice 1 among the Incorrect. I chose differently when I did the question. When I looked at the corresponding Explanations, they failed to convince me. Choice 6 reads: In the twentieth century, artists working in the fine arts often treat materials in new ways whereas applied arts specialists continue to think of crafts in terms of function. There are two problems with this choice. First, The first sentence of the last paragraph says: “Even though the fine arts in the twentieth century often treat materials in new ways, the basic difference in attitude of artists in relation to their materials in the fine arts and the applied arts remains relatively constant.” The weight of the sentence is clearly on the second and main clause, since the first clause (starting “Even though”) is merely a concession. Thus, the whole sentence merely reaffirms that “the basic difference … remains relatively constant.” Choice 6 says “In the twentieth century, artists working in the fine arts often treat materials in new ways….” This repeats the content of the “Even though…” clause, which stands in logical contrast to the main clause, the clause that contains the main idea. Therefore, Choice 6 is far from being an accurate summary of any main idea in the passage. Second, after the author makes a passing reference of a new trend in the fine arts in the twentieth century as a concession, he immediately returns to his main thesis and goes on to conclude: “It would therefore not be too great an exaggeration to say….” The structure of the last paragraph indicates that the concluding sentence is a summary of the main idea, whereas the sentence preceding it (on which Choice 6 is erroneously based) is merely a supporting detail. Therefore, Choice 6 is clearly incorrect. Choice 1 reads: The fine arts are only affected by the laws of physics because of the limitations of the materials that are used. The Explanation for Choice 1 goes: “This answer is incorrect because it is a minor point mentioned in sentence 4 of paragraph 2. The statement is true, but it is made only to support the broader theme (of the second correct answer choice above) about the differences between the two forms of art. Thus, it is used as an example in support of a major idea and is not itself one of the major themes in the passage.” This Explanation necessitates a look at “the second correct answer choice,” which is this: Applied-art objects are bound by the laws of physics in two ways: by the materials used to make them, and the function they are to serve. This answer choice deals with “applied-art objects” only. Therefore, the theme of Choice 2 is neither broader nor narrower than that of Choice 1. Since the passage as a whole is a contrast between fine arts and applied arts, Choice 2 covers only half the theme (the half that has to do with applied arts); Choice 1 covers the other half (the half that deals with fine arts). The first two sentences of paragraph 2 serve as transition that leads to the third: “This assumption misses a significant difference between the two disciplines,” and thus to the fourth and fifth sentences: “Fine-art objects are not constrained by the laws of physics in the same way that applied-art objects are. Because their primary purpose is not functional, they are only limited in terms of the materials used to make them,” which is basically what Choice 1 says. Sentence 5 (not sentence 4 as the Explanation says) truly points out a “significant difference” between the two kinds of arts. All the remaining sentences of this paragraph (seven in all) are devoted to supporting and developing this difference. Explanation for Choice 2 says that “five or six” sentences are used to develop the major theme of the first paragraph, which is that applied-art objects are bound by physical laws both in function and in material. Now “seven” sentences are used to develop the major theme of the second paragraph, which is that fine-art objects are bound by physical laws only in material—exactly what Choice 1 says. If Choice 2 is correct, then Choice 1 must be correct. I’m supposed to start teaching a TOEFL Reading class in Taipei around May 25, using McGraw Hill’s Official Guide. I cannot in good faith tell my students what they see in the Official Guide is correct. If there really is a mistake in the Official Guide, please acknowledge it. If I am mistaken in my interpretations, please enlighten me. Thank you very much for your help. Best regards, Hsuan Yuanyu, Taipei, Taiwan -----Original Message----- Dear Sir: I have received your letter regarding a possible error in the ETS TOEFL guide. I have forwarded it to ETS for a response. I will contact you as soon as I hear from ETS. Thank you for contacting us. Chuck Wall Senior Editor McGraw-Hill From: Hsuan Yuanyu [mailto:yy.hsuan@msa.hinet.net] Dear Mr. Wall: Thank you for your response. I have to inform you, however, that I have spotted another mistake--this time a rather obvious one--in the same book (The Official Guide to the NEW TOEFL iBT, International Edition 2006). Question 1 on page 70 is a simple, straightforward Factual Information Question. The answer should be Choice 2. Your book gives Choice 3 as the answer, and offers some very lame explanations on page 75. Please take me seriously. It won't take you more than two minutes to do the question and check the Answers and Explanations. You'll see what I mean. I'm in the publishing business myself. It's easy to imagine the kind of pressure your company and the ETS people must have been under to bring out this new guide in time for the new test format. Mistakes are understandable, if not inevitable. I have no intention of challenging the authority of your company or of the ETS. All I ask is an acknowledgement, so that I can face my students with some degree of assurance. Otherwise, I really don't know how I'm supposed to use the book in class. Thank you very much for your help. Hsuan Yuanyu, Taipei, Taiwan -----Original Message----- Dear Hsuan Yanyu: Thank you once again for taking the time to write to us. I will need to submit your note to ETS and get a response from them. All content questions regarding this book are for them to decide. I will get back to you as soon as I have a response. Cordially, Chuck Wall Senior Editor McGraw-Hill From: Hsuan Yuanyu [mailto:yy.hsuan@msa.hinet.net] Dear Mr. Wall: I have written two letters to the ETS informing them of the mistakes in the Official Guide, and you have also forwarded my letters to the ETS. I regret to say that I haven't received any reply from the ETS yet. Obviously the ETS has chosen to ignore me, hoping the whole thing will just blow away. If I don't get a replay very soon, here's what I'll do. First, I will announce to all my students that there are unforgivable mistakes in the Official Guide, and that the ETS has opted for a coverup. Then, as Chief Editorial Writer of TIME for Students, a bilingual magazine authorized for publication in Taiwan and Hong Kong by Time Inc., I will make the same announcement in the editorial of next month's issue. After that, I will call a press conference to expose the scandal--I have elicited the help of several TOEFL teachers who will back up my claims, and by then the ETS's lack of response will have escalated into a full-blown scandal. These emails will be presented as evidence that the ETS is attempting a coverup. Meanwhile, I will leave my comments on every English-learning website I can find. Sorry, but this will not just blow away. Please tell the ETS people that I am offering them a last chance to do the right thing. Let me reiterate my point: all I ask for is an acknowledgement of the mistakes, in the form of an email to me, so that I can face my students with a clear conscience. If I can't have that, I have no choice but to fight for what is right. As the publishing company, McGraw-Hill is not without responsibility in this matter. I am sure you are capable of telling right from wrong, without having to wait for the ETS. Thank you for your help. Best regards, Hsuan Yuanyu -----Original Message----- Dear Hsuan Yuanyu, The staff at ETS has composed a response to you and I’m sure it will be on its way to you shortly. I will contact them and emphasize the urgency of your request. Thank you again for contacting us. Charles A. Wall Senior Editor McGraw-Hill Professional 2 Penn Plaza, 11th Floor New York, NY 10121 phone 212 904 5387 charles_wall@mcgraw-hill.com -----Original Message----- Dear Hsuan Yuanyu, Attached is a letter responding to your email of May 9 regarding a possible mistake in the Official Guide to the New TOEFL iBT. Feel free to contact our Order Services mailbox @ OS_Internet@ets.org with any further questions or concerns. Sincerely, ETS Order Services Dolores-2988 < > --------------------------------------------------This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain privileged or confidential information.It is solely for use by the individual for whom it is intended, even if addressed incorrectly.If you received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender; do not disclose, copy, distribute,or take any action in reliance on the contents of this information; and delete it fromyour system. Any other use of this e-mail is prohibited.Thank you for your compliance.--------------------------------------------------AttachmentDear Mr. Hsuan Yuanyu: Thank you very much for your communication of May 2, 2007 concerning a possible error in the ETS/McGraw-Hill “Official Guide to New TOEFL iBT,” International Edition 2006. I work in Test Development area of ETS on the TOEFL test, and am one of the staff who is responsible for writing TOEFL iBT Reading Comprehension questions. You wrote that you believe that identified correct answers for the sample Prose Summary on pages 34 and 35 of the Guide are incorrect, specifically, that Choice 1 has many characteristics that make it as important a point in the summary, if not a better point in the summary than Choice 6. I believe that your analysis is substantially correct. We will revise this example of the Prose Summary item in the next reprint of the TOEFL Guide. You also wrote on May 15 about a Reading Comprehension question on page 70 of the Guide. Again, we agree that the distinctions between Choices 2 and 3 should be clearer for this to be an effective practice question. We will make changes in this question in the next printing of the Guide. Thank you again for taking the time to write to us. We are very concerned that our products be as helpful as possible to students, and we appreciate your efforts to make the Official Guide to the New TOEFL iBT better. Good luck with your upcoming class. Sincerely yours, Philip Everson 寄件者：Hsuan Yuanyu [yy.hsuan@msa.hinet.net] 寄件日期：2007/5/23 (星期三) 上午 02:08 收件者：Thompson, Dolores 副本：WallCharles 主旨(J)：RE: O S X FW: Possible Mistake in Official Guide to the New TOEFL BT Dear Ms. Thompson: Thank you for your response. Now I can go to class with a light heart, and I see no need to take any further action on this matter. I don't have Mr. Everson's email address. Please tell Mr. Everson that I appreciate his candid admission of mistakes. Best regards, Hsuan Yuanyu From: Hsuan Yuanyu [mailto:yy.hsuan@msa.hinet.net] Dear Mr. Wall: Thanks to your help, the ETS has written me and admitted mistakes on both counts. As I said, that's all I need to face my students, and I see no need to take further action on this matter. Thank you again for your help. Best regards, Hsuan Yuanyu 寄件者：Wall, Charles [Charles_Wall@mcgraw-hill.com] 寄件日期：2007/5/23 (星期三) 上午 02:18 收件者：Hsuan Yuanyu 主旨(J)：RE: ETS TOEFL Guide I’m very glad that ETS was able to answer your concerns. Thank you again for writing to us. We always appreciate hearing from readers! Best wishes, Charles A. Wall Senior Editor McGraw-Hill Professional 2 Penn Plaza, 11th Floor New York, NY 10121 phone 212 904 5387 charles_wall@mcgraw-hill.com
|
