나무 숲

2019년 9월 고2 모의고사 영어 본문


2019년 9월 고2 모의고사 영어

wood.forest 2019. 9. 14. 12:07

2019 9월 고2 모의고사 영어.hwp

2019 9 2


To whom it may concern,

We are students from St. Andrew’s College who are currently taking a Media Studies class that requires us to film a short video. We would like to film at Sunbury Park on November 14th, 2019, from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. After looking for several days to find good locations, we decided on filming at Sunbury because it is not overly populated during this time of day. Our team will not cause any issues to public services or other park visitors. We would therefore like to request permission to film at Sunbury Park at the time above. If you need to contact our Media Studies teacher, Damien Matthews, for further information, he can be reached at damien@st_andrews.ac.uk.

Yours faithfully, Taylor Johnson & Chloe Moore



The rain was more than a quick spring shower because in the last ten minutes, it had only gotten louder and heavier. The thunder was getting even closer. Sadie and Lauren were out there with no rain gear. No shelter. And standing in the midst of too many tall treesor lightning rods. Sadie looked up, trying to see if the black cloud was moving. But it was no longer just one cloud. It appeared as though the entire sky had turned dark. Their innocent spring shower had turned into a raging thunderstorm. “Maybe we should go back the direction we came from,” Sadie said, panicked. “Do you know which way we came?” Lauren asked, her eyes darting around. Sadie’s heart fell. Sadie realized with anxiety that she didn’t even know where she’d taken her last ten steps from. Every angle looked exactly the same. Every tree a twin to the one beside it. Every fallen limb mimicking ten others.



These days, electric scooters have quickly become a campus staple. Their rapid rise to popularity is thanks to the convenience they bring, but it isn’t without problems. Scooter companies provide safety regulations, but the regulations aren’t always followed by the riders. Students can be reckless while they ride, some even having two people on one scooter at a time. Universities already have certain regulations, such as walk-­only zones, to restrict motorized modes of transportation. However, they need to do more to target motorized scooters specifically. To ensure the safety of students who use electric scooters, as well as those around them, officials should look into reinforcing stricter regulations, such as having traffic guards flagging down students and giving them warning when they violate the regulations.



Humans are omnivorous, meaning that they can consume and digest a wide selection of plants and animals found in their surroundings. The primary advantage to this is that they can adapt to nearly all earthly environments. The disadvantage is that no single food provides the nutrition necessary for survival. Humans must be flexible enough to eat a variety of items sufficient for physical growth and maintenance, yet cautious enough not to randomly ingest foods that are physiologically harmful and, possibly, fatal. This dilemma, the need to experiment combined with the need for conservatism, is known as the omnivore’s paradox. It results in two contradictory psychological impulses regarding diet. The first is an attraction to new foods; the second is a preference for familiar foods.



Recording an interview is easier and more thorough, and can be less unnerving to an interviewee than seeing someone scribbling in a notebook. But using a recorder has some disadvantages and is not always the best solution. If the interview lasts a while, listening to it again to select the quotes you wish to use can be time-­consuming, especially if you are working to a tight deadline. It is often more efficient to develop the technique (using a recorder as backup if you wish) of selective note­taking. This involves writing down the key answers from an interview so that they can be transcribed easily afterwards. It is sensible to take down more than you think you’ll need, but try to get into the habit of editing out the material you are not going to need as the interview proceeds. It makes the material much easier and quicker to handle afterwards.



The original idea of a patent, remember, was not to reward inventors with monopoly profits, but to encourage them to share their inventions. A certain amount of intellectual property law is plainly necessary to achieve this. But it has gone too far. Most patents are now as much about defending monopoly and discouraging rivals as about sharing ideas. And that disrupts innovation. Many firms use patents as barriers to entry, suing upstart innovators who trespass on their intellectual property even on the way to some other goal. In the years before World War I, aircraft makers tied each other up in patent lawsuits and slowed down innovation until the US government stepped in. Much the same has happened with smartphones and biotechnology today. New entrants have to fight their way through “patent thickets” if they are to build on existing technologies to make new ones.



The earliest challenges and contests to solve important problems in mathematics date back to the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Some of these problems have continued to challenge mathematicians until modern times. For example, Pierre de Fermat issued a set of mathematical challenges in 1657, many on prime numbers and divisibility. The solution to what is now known as Fermat’s Last Theorem was not established until the late 1990s by Andrew Wiles. David Hilbert, a German mathematician, identified 23 unsolved problems in 1900 with the hope that these problems would be solved in the twenty­first century. Although some of the problems were solved, others remain unsolved to this day. More recently, in 2000, the Clay Mathematics Institute named seven mathematical problems that had not been solved with the hope that they could be solved in the twenty­first century. A $1 million prize will be awarded for solving each of these seven problems.



Born in 1917, Cleveland Amory was an author, an animal advocate, and an animal rescuer. During his childhood, he had a great affection for his aunt Lucy, who was instrumental in helping Amory get his first puppy as a child, an event that Amory remembered seventy years later as the most memorable moment of his childhood. He graduated from Harvard College in 1939 and later became the youngest editor ever hired by The Saturday Evening Post. Amory wrote three instant best­selling books, including The Best Cat Ever, based on his love of animals. He founded The Fund for Animals in 1967, and he served as its president, without pay, until his death in 1998. He always dreamed of a place where animals could roam free and live in caring conditions. Inspired by Anna Sewell’s novel Black Beauty, Amory established Black Beauty Ranch, a 1,460­acre area that shelters various abused animals including chimpanzees and elephants. Today, a stone monument to Amory stands at Black Beauty Ranch.



Not only are humans unique in the sense that they began to use an ever­-widening tool set, we are also the only species on this planet that has constructed forms of complexity that use external energy sources. This was a fundamental new development, for which there were no precedents in big history. This capacity may first have emerged between 1.5 and 0.5 million years ago, when humans began to control fire. From at least 50,000 years ago, some of the energy stored in air and water flows was used for navigation and, much later, also for powering the first machines. Around 10,000 years ago, humans learned to cultivate plants and tame animals and thus control these important matter and energy flows. Very soon, they also learned to use animal muscle power. About 250 years ago, fossil fuels began to be used on a large scale for powering machines of many different kinds, thereby creating the virtually unlimited amounts of artificial complexity that we are familiar with today.



A champion of free speech and religious toleration, Voltaire was a controversial figure. He is, for instance, supposed to have declared, “I hate what you say, but will defend to the death your right to say it,” a powerful defense of the idea that even views that you despise deserve to be heard. In eighteenth­-century Europe, however, the Catholic Church strictly controlled what could be published. Many of Voltaire’s plays and books were censored and burned in public, and he was even imprisoned in the Bastille in Paris because he had insulted a powerful aristocrat. But none of this stopped him challenging the prejudices and pretensions of those around him. In his short philosophical novel, Candide, he completely undermined the kind of religious optimism about humanity and the universe that other contemporary thinkers had expressed, and he did it in such an entertaining way that the book became an instant bestseller. Wisely, Voltaire left his name off the title page, otherwise its publication would have landed him in prison again for making fun of religious beliefs.



Children develop the capacity for solitude in the presence of an attentive other. Consider the silences that fall when you take a young boy on a quiet walk in nature. The child comes to feel increasingly aware of what it is to be alone in nature, supported by being “with” someone who is introducing him to this experience. Gradually, the child takes walks alone. Or imagine a mother giving her two­-year­-old daughter a bath, allowing the girl’s reverie with her bath toys as she makes up stories and learns to be alone with her thoughts, all the while knowing her mother is present and available to her. Gradually, the bath, taken alone, is a time when the child is comfortable with her imagination. Attachment enables solitude.



Much of the spread of fake news occurs through irresponsible sharing. A 2016 study from Columbia University in New York City and Inria, a French technology institute, found that 59 percent of the news from links shared on social media wasn’t read first. People see an intriguing headline or photo in their news feed or on another website and then click the Share button to repost the item to their social media friendswithout ever clicking through to the full article. Then they may be sharing fake news. To stop the spread of fake news, read stories before you share them. Respect your social media friends enough to know what information you are sending their way. You may discover, on close inspection, that an article you were about to share is obviously fraudulent, that it doesn’t really say what the headline promises, or that you actually disagree with it.



New technology tends to come from new venturesstartups. From the Founding Fathers in politics to the Royal Society in science to Fairchild Semiconductor’s “traitorous eight” in business, small groups of people bound together by a sense of mission have changed the world for the better. The easiest explanation for this is negative: it’s hard to develop new things in big organizations, and it’s even harder to do it by yourself. Bureaucratic hierarchies move slowly, and entrenched interests shy away from risk. In the most dysfunctional organizations, signaling that work is being done becomes a better strategy for career advancement than actually doing work. At the other extreme, a lone genius might create a classic work of art or literature, but he could never create an entire industry. Startups operate on the principle that you need to work with other people to get stuff done, but you also need to stay small enough so that you actually can.



If you want to use the inclined plane to help you move an object (and who wouldn’t?), then you have to move the object over a longer distance to get to the desired height than if you had started from directly below and moved upward. This is probably already clear to you from a lifetime of stair climbing. Consider all the stairs you climb compared to the actual height you reach from where you started. This height is always less than the distance you climbed in stairs. In other words, more distance in stairs is traded for less force to reach the intended height. Now, if we were to pass on the stairs altogether and simply climb straight up to your destination (from directly below it), it would be a shorter climb for sure, but the needed force to do so would be greater. Therefore, we have stairs in our homes rather than ladders.



The first commercial train service began operating between Liverpool and Manchester in 1830. Ten years later, the first train timetable was issued. The trains were much faster than the old carriages, so the peculiar differences in local hours became a severe nuisance. In 1847, British train companies put their heads together and agreed that henceforth all train timetables would be adjusted to Greenwich Observatory time, rather than the local times of Liverpool, Manchester, or Glasgow. More and more institutions followed the lead of the train companies. Finally, in 1880, the British government took the unprecedented step of legislating that all timetables in Britain must follow Greenwich. For the first time in history, a country adopted a national time and obliged its population to live according to an artificial clock rather than local ones or sunrise­to­sunset cycles.



You know that forks don’t fly off to the Moon and that neither apples nor anything else on Earth cause the Sun to crash down on us. The reason these things don’t happen is that the strength of gravity’s pull depends on two things. The first is the mass of the object. The apple is very small, and doesn’t have much mass, so its pull on the Sun is absolutely tiny, certainly much smaller than the pull of all the planets. The Earth has more mass than tables, trees, or apples, so almost everything in the world is pulled towards the Earth. That’s why apples fall from trees. Now, you might know that the Sun is much bigger than Earth and has much more mass. So why don’t apples fly off towards the Sun? The reason is that the pull of gravity also depends on the distance to the object doing the pulling. Although the Sun has much more mass than the Earth, we are much closer to the Earth, so we feel its gravity more.



Testing strategies relating to direct assessment of content knowledge still have their value in an inquiry­-driven classroom. Let’s pretend for a moment that we wanted to ignore content and only assess a student’s skill with investigations. The problem is that the skills and the content are interconnected. When a student fails at pattern analysis, it could be because they do not understand how to do the pattern analysis properly. However, it also could be that they did not understand the content that they were trying to build patterns with. Sometimes students will understand the processes of inquiry well, and be capable of skillfully applying social studies disciplinary strategies, yet fail to do so because they misinterpret the content. For these reasons, we need a measure of a student’s content understanding. To do this right, we need to make sure our assessment is getting us accurate measures of whether our students understand the content they use in an inquiry.



Open international online access is understood using the metaphor “flat earth.” It represents a world where information moves across the globe as easily as a hockey puck seems to slide across an ice rink’s flat surface. This framework, however, can be misleadingespecially if we extend the metaphor. As anyone who has crossed an ice rink can confirm, just because the surface of the rink appears flat and open does not necessarily mean that surface is smooth or even. Rather, such surfaces tend to be covered by a wide array of dips and cracks and bumps that create a certain degree of pull or drag or friction on any object moving across it. In much the same way, an array of technological, political, economic, cultural, and linguistic factors can exist and create a similar kind of pull or drag or friction. They affect how smoothly or directly information can move from point to point in global cyberspace. Thus, while the earth might appear to be increasingly flat from the perspective of international online communication, it is far from frictionless.



In physics, the principle of relativity requires that all equations describing the laws of physics have the same form regardless of inertial frames of reference. The formulas should appear identical to any two observers and to the same observer in a different time and space. Attitudes and values, however, are subjective to begin with, and therefore they are easily altered to fit our ever­changing circumstances and goals. Thus, the same task can be viewed as boring one moment and engaging the next. Divorce, unemployment, and cancer can seem devastating to one person but be perceived as an opportunity for growth by another person, depending on whether or not the person is married, employed, and healthy. It is not only beliefs, attitudes, and values that are subjective. Our brains comfortably change our perceptions of the physical world to suit our needs. We will never see the same event and stimuli in exactly the same way at different times.



When we see an adorable creature, we must fight an overwhelming urge to squeeze that cuteness. And pinch it, and cuddle it, and maybe even bite it. This is a perfectly normal psychological tickan oxymoron called “cute aggression”and even though it sounds cruel, it’s not about causing harm at all. In fact, strangely enough, this compulsion may actually make us more caring. The first study to look at cute aggression in the human brain has now revealed that this is a complex neurological response, involving several parts of the brain. The researchers propose that cute aggression may stop us from becoming so emotionally overloaded that we are unable to look after things that are super cute. “Cute aggression may serve as a tempering mechanism that allows us to function and actually take care of something we might first perceive as overwhelmingly cute,” explains the lead author, Stavropoulos.



It is not uncommon to hear talk about how lucky we are to live in this age of scientific and medical advancement where antibiotics and vaccinations keep us living longer, while our poor ancient ancestors were lucky to live past the age of 35. Well, this is not quite true. At best, it oversimplifies a complex issue, and at worst, it is an obvious misrepresentation of statistics. Did ancient humans really just drop dead as they were entering their prime, or did some live long enough to see a wrinkle on their face? It would appear that as time went on, conditions improved and so did the length of people’s lives. But it is not so simple.

What is commonly known as “average life expectancy” is technically “life expectancy at birth.” But life expectancy at birth is an unhelpful statistic if the goal is to compare the health and longevity of adults. That is because a major determinant of life expectancy at birth is the child mortality rate which, in our ancient past, was extremely high, and this skews the life expectancy rate dramatically downward. If we look again at the estimated maximum life expectancy for prehistoric humans, which is 35 years, we can see that this does not mean that the average person living at this time died at the age of 35. Rather, it means that for every child that died in infancy, another person might have lived to be 70. The life expectancy statistic is, therefore, a deeply flawed way to think about the quality of life of our ancient ancestors.

댓글쓰기 폼