EAP英语总结及机经(完整版)

返回 相似 举报
EAP英语总结及机经(完整版)_第1页
第1页 / 共4页
EAP英语总结及机经(完整版)_第2页
第2页 / 共4页
EAP英语总结及机经(完整版)_第3页
第3页 / 共4页
EAP英语总结及机经(完整版)_第4页
第4页 / 共4页
亲,该文档总共4页,全部预览完了,如果喜欢就下载吧!
资源描述:
总体: EAP 英语测试从发过去申请邮件之后我觉得就要经常刷邮件看有无回复了,因为一旦对方回复同意,就会要求你最好 24 小时之内搞定并回复空白邮件给他们(我不知道拖延是否影响,但个人觉得既然他们要求这样,最好还是按要求吧)。新版的 EAP 是个 online 测试,由于广大前辈的努力,我们现在可以完全轻轻松松的在测试之前就把这个测试题的一大半完成并修改。。然后 copy 过去。。(这个就看个人的想法了)。 阅读: 在群里的文件里面已经有人把阅读贴了出来(我也把这个文章附在了这个总结的最后面),完全一样,写一个 summary,此题可以提前搞定。。 听力: 9 分钟左右的听力,是一个关于剑桥以及大学发展教育的历史 ,一个老头讲的,课堂录音,发音清晰, 语速极慢。 总体来说不难,但是有些东西我个人觉得需要注意一下。 首先是 9 分钟的听力, 内容极多,但是 summary 只让写 200-250 词 (或者是 150-200,记不清了)。就是说,听力的内容远远多于 summary 的内容,所以要大大精简,不必每个细节都纠结。 然后就是听力里面会有一些词,可能不是每个人都熟悉,例如他会讲之前 的大学教育是被宗教管辖的,有些东西在修道院( monastery)进行,相关词汇比较生僻,可以稍微提前注意一下。 总体来说,听力应该是实际考试中最应该下功夫的地方,因为这个提前没法搞定。 写作: 三道题,没什么说的 1. Explain as if writing for an educated but non-expert audience the nature of your postgraduate course and describe what your intentions are on the completion of it. You should aim to write between 250-300 words. 2. Give an honest self-assessment of your academic English abilities in all skill areas. You should aim to write between 150-200 words. 第三题 是个 改写句子的 ,比较简单,也很短,几乎不费时间。 口语: 每人时间不等,但是一般不会超过 10 分钟(她前后还会说明一些东西,所以实际时间也就六七分钟,我的 前后 一共才 5:32 秒)。语速较快(其实说实话,老外说话就是这速度。。)。但是发音清晰,可以选择电话或者 skype。人很和善,所以大家不用紧张。面试我的是 Dr Karen Ottewell,好像很多人都是她 如果 用 skype 的话会提前加你 (我的提前了一个半小时),打电话之前会发信息问你是否准备好了。 个人推荐提前准备,要不然真的会紧张。。。可以读,但是一定 不能太假。准备内容的话我认为以下几个问题足够(我总结了一下前辈的机经,以及自己的): 1. 介绍一下你的课程 (如果是 phd 的话,第一个问题肯定是 I have heard you ….专业,让你说说 nature of your research)。以及 你对这个课程(或专业,或领域)的看法 (这个问题貌似前辈们没遇到过,她让我谈谈对我这个 field 的看法) ,顺便准备一下 自己的学习目标 啊,学习计划啊,或者 研究的应用 等等,不用太长,一个问题估计也就 一分钟 2. Why Cambridge? why your course? ( 感觉 master 问的可能性大些,我是 phd,没问我这个) your career plan? 3. 如果你在国外读的 master 或者本科,会问你在国外的生活情况,如果是国内的本科或者 master,会问你是否有过去 english-speaking 的国家(貌似也有可能问是否去过剑桥,英国,美国),就是问你说英语的经历。 4. 这几个的可能性不大,但还是准备下吧,你 现在学的什么 (或者 your current research, why are you interested in, when did you first contact your current research)。还有就是如果你已提交你的英语成绩(托福雅思等),但是有一门很弱(一般是口语),她可能会让你 解释一下为什么这一门弱 。 总体就是这些吧,都不用准备多。 最后祝大家都能通过 EAP! 附阅读材料 阅读 Incorporating the views and ideas expressed in the two short article extracts as well as your own ideas, write a short response in appropriate academic style on the following statement: Critical thinking is the cornerstone transferable skill for all aspects of postgraduate study. You should aim to write between 250-300 words. TEXT 1 Alex Fischer, Critical Thinking. An Introduction (CUP: Cambridge, 2001) What is critical thinking and how to improve it In recent year ‘critical thinking’ has become something of a ‘buzz word’ in educational circles. For many reasons, educators have become very interested in teaching ‘thinking skills’ of various kinds in contrast with teaching information and content. Of course, you can do both, but in the past the emphasis in most people’s teaching has been on teaching content – history, physics, geography or whatever – and, though many teachers would claim to teach their students ‘how to think’, most would say that they do this indirectly or implicitly in the course of teaching the content which belongs to their special subject. Increasingly, educators have come to doubt the effectiveness of teaching ‘thinking skills’ in this way, because most students simply do not pick up the thinking skills in question. The result is that many teachers have become interested in teaching these skills directly. This is what this text aims to do. It teaches a range of transferable thinking skills, but it does so explicitly anddirectly. The skills in question are critical thinking skills (sometimes called critic-creative thinking skills), and they will be taught in a way that expressly aims to facilitate their transfer to other subjects and other contexts. If you learn, for example, how to structure an argument, judge the credibility of a source or make a decision, by the methods we shall explain in a few contexts, it will not be difficult to see how to do these things in many other contexts too; this is the sense in which the skills are ‘transferable’. (p.1) [...] Michael Scriven has recently argued that critical thinking is an ‘academic competency akin to reading and writing’ and is of similarly fundamental importance. He defines it thus: Critical thinking is skilled and active interpretation and evaluation of observations and communications, information and argumentation. (Fisher and Scriven, 1997, p.21) It is worth unpacking Scriven’s definition a little. He defines critical thinking as a skilled ‘activity’. He points out that thinking does not count as critical merely because it is intended to be, any more than thinking counts as scientific simply because it aims to be. To be critical, thinking has to meet certain standards – of clarity, relevance, reasonableness, etc. – and one may bemore or less skilled at this. He defines critical thinking as an ‘active’ process, partly because it involves questioning and partly because of the role played by metacognition – thinking about your own thinking. He includes ‘interpretation’ (of texts, speech, film, graphics, actions and even body language) because ‘like explanations, interpretation typically involved constructing and selecting the best of several alternatives [and it] is a crucial preliminary to drawing conclusions about complex claims’. He includes ‘evaluation’ because ‘this is the process of determining the merit, quality, worth or value of something’ and much critical thinking is concerned with evaluating the truth, probability or reliability of claims. It is unusual to include explicit reference to ‘observations’ in a definition of critical thinking, but what one sees or hears, for example, often requires interpretation and evaluation and this may require the sue of critical thinking skills. Scriven takes the term ‘information’ to refer to factual claims, and the term ‘communications’ to go beyond information to include questions, commands, other linguistic utterances, signals etc. Finally, ‘argumentation’ consists of language presenting reasons for conclusions. Perhaps the most striking feature of this definition is the way it recognizes that ‘observations’ can be matters for critical thinking. (p.11) [...] Dispositions and values of the critical thinker It is clear that someone can have a skill which they choose not to use or not to use too much: the example we gave earlier was of someone who can turn somersaults but who chooses not to. In the case of critical thinking, it is clear that someone could have the relevant skills but might not bother or choose to use them in appropriate situations; for example, they might show they had the skill by raising the right credibility questions in an examination, but they might not apply this skill in their other work or in everyday situations. Indeed, many people who have worked in the critical thinking tradition have thought there was something intrinsically wrong with such an attitude to good thinking. Glaser and others have argued that it makes no sense to have these skills, or to develop them and at the same time to fail to act on them whenever it is appropriate. They argue that if, for example, you are skills at judging the credibility of evidence, you will see that this produces more reasonable beliefs than if you are rather more gullible – and that you cannot fail to see that this is better – that you will be led astray less often and that this is to your advantage. Thus, they argue, you cannot fail to see that this skill is worth using whenever significant questions of credibility arise; it is valuable and it will pay you to adopt the habit of using it, to be disposed to use it. It is hard to understand someone who develops these thinking skills and then does not bother to use them quite generally. They are undoubtedly valuable skills and, if you can get yourself into the habit of using them, they can greatly increase your understanding in many contexts. There is no doubt that these are valuable skills and that they will help you in many ways if you get into the habit of using them whenever it is appropriate, so do not just acquire the skills, but value them – and use them; in short become a critical thinker. (p.12) TEXT 2 Writing Critically Edward de Bono’s Six Thinking Hats Handout: Graduate Development Programme, University of Cambridge In Six Thinking Hats (Penguin, 2000), Edward de Bono argues that there are six ways in which we can think about problems. He argues that although we might think we habitually apply all six methods, in fact we frequently fail to do so. He therefore suggests that when problem-solving, we should work systematically through all six ways of thinking. De Bono also suggests that it is best, when working in groups, for all members of the group to work through all six types together, with each member contributing at each stage. This detaches thinking from ego – it prevents one person adopting the role of the person who makes criticisms, for example. White Hat Is neutral, objective, concerned with objective facts and figures Neutral Objective Information Gaps Facts No interpretations or opinions Red hat Gives the emotional view Emotions Feelings as an important part of thinking Value systems No justifications necessary Black Hat Points out weaknesses in an idea Cautious Careful Assessment Considers risks, dangers, obstacles, weaknesses Not about argument for argument sake Yellow Hat Is optimistic, it covers hope and positive thinking Positive Constrictive Optimism Assessment Value Benefit Generative Making things happen Opportunity seeking Visions / Dreams Green Hat Indicates creativity and new ideas Energy Growth New ideas Creativity Modifications / Improvements Possibilities Blue Hat Is concerned with overview, the organization of the thinking process and the use of other hats Overview Summaries Conclusions Management / Organisation of Thinking Process control Sets focus, what is to be achieved Table 1: Edward de Bono’s Six Thinking Hats
展开阅读全文

最新标签

版权声明:以上文章中所选用的图片及文字来源于网络以及用户投稿,由于未联系到知识产权人或未发现有关知识产权的登记,如有知识产权人并不愿意我们使用,如有侵权请立即联系:2622162128@qq.com ,我们立即下架或删除。

Copyright© 2017-2019 www.wodocx.com ,All Rights Reserved |陕ICP备19002583号-1 

陕公网安备 61072602000132号     违法和不良信息举报:0916-4228922