1999年全国硕士研究生入学考试英语试题

]这是一道细节题。本题考词汇。原文LINE 29“……BASIC COMPUTER SKILLS ARE ONLY COMPLEMENTARY TO……”。选项[A]中AUXILIARY和COMPLEMENTARY同为“辅助，补充”之意。译文解读关于计算机课堂教学，在认识上存在着一条无形的界限，那就是有人提倡以此来增加学生的就业前景，有人则希望以此达到从根本上改革教育的目的。很少有人撰写文章来描述这一区别，或者更确切地说是矛盾，但是这一问题正是主张用计算机课堂教学这一运动的症结之所在。这是一篇议论文。第一段提出计算机教学是为了职业教育还是基本教育改革目的这个问题的分界线不明，并且没有引起足够的重视。为了使学生获得一种工作的教育是职业教育，设立这种教育的目的与法律所要求的人都需要教育的目的截然不同。法律要求所有孩子在十几岁前接受教育的目的并不是单纯的为了增加他们的就业希望。然而，我们对一个美国公民的素质有一种既定的认识，（他们）认为：如果他不能充分地评价外界因素对其生活和幸福的影响，他的个性是不完整的。但是，情况并不总是如此，在法律规定所有孩子必须在校学习到某个年龄之前，人们普遍认为有些孩子的本性并不适合接受这种教育的。随着乐观思想在所有工业化国家的不断深入，人们开始接受每个人都适合受教育这一观念。主张计算机教育的人放弃了这种乐观主义认识，取而代之的是一种悲观的态度，这种悲观态度背离了他们本来应该有的乐观的观念。一方面是主张为普通教育而设立计算机课堂教学，另一方面是主张职业是目的，基于对以上两种目的的混淆，计算机教育的倡导者常常只强调计算机对就业前景的影响而忽视了其教育成就。对适当的学生进行职业教育也有某些充足的论据。为了使孩子们具备将要从事的职业所需要的技能，很多欧洲学校很早就引进了职业教育这一概念。然而如果因此就坚持地认为只有这么多的工作在等着同样多的科学家、商人及会计师来做，就未免太自以为是了。况且，在像我们这样一个经济发展遍及很多地区，同时又有许多跨国公司的大国中，职业教育不可能培养出每一种职业所需要的足够的专业型人才。第二、三段指出职业教育不同于义务普及教育。普及教育认为每个人都适于受教育，职业教育更强调毕业生的就业前景，而忽视教育成效，因而欧洲的职业教育模式不适用于美国。但是，相对于为数不多的学生来说，职业培训有可能是必要的，因为假设其他条件相同，熟练的技能有可能是他们最后能否找到工作的决定性因素。目前所有使用的任何计算机的基本技能都是很简单的，学会使用各种软件不必花费毕生的时间。当然如果想成为计算机工程师，那完全是另一回事。掌握计算机基本技能最多只需要一两个月。不管怎样，计算机基本技能只能是一种想要成为专业型人员所需要的各种职业技能的补充。当然，应该看到，不管是普通学校还是职业学校，如混淆其目的，都不会从中受到益处。第四段指出职业教育中，计算机基础技能只起到一种补充作用。

　　[A]included as an auxiliary course in school

　　[B]highlighted in acquisition of professional qualifications

　　[C]mastered through a life-long course

　　[D]equally emphasized by any school, vocational or otherwise

　　Passage4

　　When a Scottish research team startled the world by revealing 3 months ago that it had cloned an adult sheep, President Clinton moved swiftly. Declaring that he was opposed to using this unusual animal husbandry technique to clone humans, he ordered that federal funds not be used for such an experiment—although no one had proposed to do so—and asked an independent panel of experts chaired by Princeton President Harold Shapiro to report back to the White House in 90 days with recommendations for a national policy on human cloning. That group—the National Bioethics Advisory Commission （NBAC）—has been working feverishly to put its wisdom on paper, and at a meeting on 17 May, members agreed on a nearfinal draft of their recommendations.

　　NBAC will ask that Clinton's 90-day ban on federal funds for human cloning be extended indefinitely, and possibly that it be made law. But NBAC members are planning to word the recommendation narrowly to avoid new restrictions on research that involves the cloning of human DNA or cells—routine in molecular biology. The panel has not yet reached agreement on a crucial question, however, whether to recommend legislation that would make it a crime for private funding to be used for human cloning.

　　In a draft preface to the recommendations, discussed at the 17 May meeting, Shapiro suggested that the panel had found a broad consensus that it would be "morally unacceptable to attempt to create a human child by adult nuclear cloning." Shapiro explained during the meeting that the moral doubt stems mainly from fears about the risk to the health of the child. The panel then informally accepted several general conclusions, although some details have not been settled.

　　NBAC plans to call for a continued ban on federal government funding for any attempt to clone body cell nuclei to create a child. Because current federal law already forbids the use of federal funds to create embryos (the earliest stage of human offspring before birth) for research or to knowingly endanger an embryo's life, NBAC will remain silent on embryo research. NBAC members also indicated that they will appeal to privately funded researchers and clinics not to try to clone humans by body cell nuclear transfer. But they were divided on whether to go further by calling for a federal law that would impose a complete ban on human cloning. Shapiro and most members favored an appea