单选题Teachers could encourage students to use __________ to gather and organize their ideas for writing.A elicitingB mind mappingC explainingD brainstorming

考查对交际策略的理解。交际策略是学生为了争取更多的交际机会、维持交际以及提高交际效果而采取的行动。此题中，A项“当说英语时，学生能够意识到自己的错误并予以改正”，这属于认知策略。B项“学生经常与老师和同学交流学习体会”，这属于调控策略。C项“学生借助手势和表情进行交流”，这能够使交流更加顺畅．有利于表达自己的想法．同时也更有利于听话人的理解，属于交际策略。D项“学生利用参考书来获得更多的信息”，这属于资源策略。所以此题的正确选项为C。

考查写作教学。学生在写作中犯错常常是难以避免的情况．但是教师要不怕学生犯错并鼓励他们运用较难的词汇和句子，这样学生的写作能力才会提高，故A错误。教师如果经常对错误持消极的态度，就会阻碍学生的写作热情，不利于写作技能的提高，故B错。教师在批阅作文时，不应该自己把所有的错误都改正，而应该指出错误并让学生自己去改，以培养学生独立写作的能力，C项错误，故选D。

考查词汇教学模式。任务型教学模式“Task—based language teaching”是新课标所倡导的一种教学模式。在展示环节，教师通过展示让学生理解词语的意义和用法。任务环节，教师要通过将词汇最大限度置于听读写练习中。汇报环节，学生推举各组代表来展示听读写的任务完成情况。评价和联系环节：教师对学生的任务汇报进行评价，评价他们对新词的使用。PPP模式是指教学过程中的Presentation，Practice，production。PWP模式是教学过程中的Pre-，While-，Post-；PPT模式是Presentation，Practice and Testing。

考查词汇教学模式。任务型教学模式(Task-based Language Teaching)是新课标所倡导的一种教学模式。在展示环节，教师通过展示让学生理解词语的意义和用法。任务环节，教师要通过将词汇最大限度置于听读写练习中。汇报环节，学生推举各组代表来展示听读写的任务完成情况。评价和联系环节：教师对学生的任务汇报进行评价.评价他们对新词的使用.

暂无解析

考查语音教学。当教师在教学生发音的时候，不可以依赖于解释。

考查写作教学。教师让学生收集的自己的想法，并将它们连贯、有逻辑性地组织起来，这属于绘制思维导图(mindmapping)的过程。而头脑风暴(brainstorming)是指在给定主题之后，学生思考并收集与主题相关的想法这一过程，但不包括将它们进行组织这一步骤。故选B。

考查课堂教学中的教师指令语。教师的课堂指令语应简洁明了，这样学生才会明白；切忌长而复杂．这样不便于学生理解，也会影响教学的效率。教师在课堂上应尽量少用母语，必要时可以使用身体语言辅助学生理解。课堂指令语不应过多，教师应最大限度地发挥学生的主观能动性。故选B。

考查写作教学。教师让学生收集的自己的想法，并将它们连贯、有逻辑性地组织起来，这属于绘制思维导图(mindmapping)的过程。而头脑风暴(brainstorming)是指在给定主题之后，学生思考并收集与主题相关的想法这一过程。但不包括将它们进行组织这一步骤。故选B。

细节题。文中作者在第一段第三句中已经指出“...or how much priority it must be given over general language development and reading ability.”的内容与选项B的意思相关。所以本题应选B。


推论题。在这个短语前面说如果教师在评阅学生作文时仅仅把重点放在单词拼写正确与否上，聪明的学生就很可能play safe，所以选D。


细节题。第二段的最后一句点出了教师鼓励学生尽早使用字典的目的，即：使他们能够pay attention to content，所以选A。


细节题。要求推断作者对某位教师批阅学生作文时所持的态度。第三段第一句的谓语动词shocked一词就集中体现了作者的态度，所以选B。


本题考查本文的中心思想，单词的正确拼写与写作内容的关系是本文的中心话题。

Teachers' Salaries Linked With Students' Evaluation Nowadays, people tend to break thetraditional absolute authority of teachers and grant students more freedom, whichmakes the classroom more liberal and democratic. In some pilot programs,teachers' salaries are linked with students' evaluation.
While this is without doubt a good attempt,it seems to have gone too far. As I see it, students' evaluation is not a reliablecriterion to judge teaching quality and overemphasis on the evaluation maycause difficulties on the teachers' side. To start with, students' evaluationis far less than accurate. Hence linking the evaluation directly with teachers'salaries is not appropriate. Generally speaking, it is very difficult forstudents to evaluate their teachers fairly and objectively. Not beingeducational experts, students' evaluation is solely based on how they feelabout the teachers: Is this teacher friendly to the students? Is he too strictand most importantly, is he likely to give a high score to a particularstudent? Such evaluation is highly subjective, unprofessional and unreasonable.A teacher may receive less salary because he is so responsible for his coursethat he has failed a couple of students in the exam. Apparently, such evaluationsystem is not fair when seen from the aspect of the students' immaturejudgment. Additionally, such system actually does no good to students. Everyteacher has his own teaching plan and teaching style. We cannot expect teachersto make every student pleased and satisfied, because one man's meat can beanother man's poison.
However, under such evaluation mechanism,students are given too much power which they do not know how to exercisewisely. Students tend to blame the teacher--not themselves or the courses--oncethey feel unhappy about their study. And it is likely that some students willabuse their power to vent off such unhappiness by giving unreasonably lowscores to their teachers in the evaluation. In this case, teachers may losetheir initiatives in teaching, and be forced to please their students, whichwill lead to the deterioration of teaching quality. Therefore, such evaluationsystem is not good for students.
Giving students more freedom is advisable.But before rushing into implementing new rules, we should always consider thepossible outcomes. Linking teachers' salaries with students' evaluation mayseem a good idea at the first glance, but actually it will affect the teachingquality by giving too, much power to educational amateurs.