UNCOVERING FRAUD IN SCIENCE

Английский язык (контрольные задания): методическое пособие для студентов второй ступени высшего образования БГУИР

The English Language. Proficiency Evaluation Tests

For Post-graduate Students

Минск БГУИР 2012

УДК 811.111(076)

ББК 81.2Англя73

    А64

Авторы-составители:

Т. Г. Шелягова, С. И. Лягушевич, И. И. Илюкевич,

И. Г. Маликова, А. М. Лазаренко, Т. В. Левкович,

Н. П. Сержан, Н. Ф. Смольская, Ю. М. Амелина

Рецензенты:

профессор кафедры английского языка учреждения образования «Минский государственный лингвистический университет», доктор филологических наук, профессор А.П. Клименко; доцент кафедры иностранных языков факультета технологий управления и гуманитаризации учреждения образования «Белорусский национальный технический университет», кандидат филологических наук Т. И. Васильева

ISBN 978-985-488-847-7.

Пособие содержит восемь оригинальных тестов, каждый из которых состоит из двух частей – А и В. Часть А включает тесты закрытого типа (Close Tests) с заданиями множественного выбора с одним возможным правильным ответом.

Часть В состоит из тестовых заданий открытого типа, направленных на проверку уровня сформированности умений словообразования и правильного употребления английской лексики.

Тесты предназначены для студентов второй ступени высшего образования и направлены на комплексную проверку уровня владения материалом, который предусмотрен программой «Типовая программа-минимум кандидатского экзамена по иностранному языку (английский, испанский, итальянский, немецкий, французский)» (приказ высшей аттестационной комиссии Республики Беларусь от 16 декабря 2004 года №164).

УДК 811.111(076)

ББК 81.2Англя73

ISBN 978-985-488-847-7

ПРЕДИСЛОВИЕ

Важнейшим показателем качества обучения является объективная оценка учебных достижений учащихся, успешно осуществляемая посредством самой популярной в настоящее время техники тестирования – множественного выбора. Настоящее пособие состоит из 8 контролирующих тестов, в основу разработки которых положен учебный материал программы «Типовая программа-минимум кандидатского экзамена по иностранному языку (английский, испанский, итальянский, немецкий, французский)» (приказ высшей аттестационной комиссии Республики Беларусь от 16 декабря 2004 года №164).

Пособие предназначено для студентов второго уровня высшего образования для комплексной проверки уровня сформированности умений (лексических, грамматических, чтения) по английскому языку согласно действующей программе.

Тестовый материал пособия представлен тематическими блоками и включает следующие темы-проблемы: Science and Society, My Research Work, Higher Education in Foreign Countries, Scientific Cooperation, Attending a Conference, Job Search, Mass Media. Задания каждого теста касаются различных аспектов заявленной темы-проблемы (лексический аспект). Тесты являются методически аутентичными и идентичными по уровню трудности.

Каждый тест состоит из двух частей – А и В. Часть А состоит из 63 тестовых заданий закрытого типа, направленных на контроль уровня сформированности лексико-грамматических умений, в том числе умений работы с текстами определенной проблематики. В заданиях этой части основные разделы английской грамматики (предлоги, артикли, местоимения, наречия, видо-временные формы глагола, неличные формы глагола и т.д.) проверяются не в изолированных предложениях, а на основе цельных текстов. Часть А содержит также задания на проверку коммуникативной компетенции, состоящей в умении владеть фразами этикетного общения в различных ситуациях. Для проверки чтения предлагается аутентичный текст по контролируемой проблематике, соответствующий по языковой сложности уровню владения английским языком студентами второго уровня высшего образования.

В процессе выполнения теста по чтению учащиеся должны продемонстрировать понимание информации, содержащейся в тексте, а именно:

– понять основное содержание текста;

– установить смысловые связи между отдельными фактами и явлениями в тексте;

– найти требуемую информацию в тексте;

– соотнести некоторые элементы текста.

В части В содержится 25 заданий закрытого типа. Тестируемым предлагается образовать производные слова от исходных, перевести фрагменты предложения с русского на английский язык, восполнить пробелы в связном тексте и т. д. Задания в этой части, как и в предыдущей, тематически ориентированы, что позволяет реализовать принцип преемственности и последовательности контроля знаний определённой тематической области.

Test 1

Part A

FRAUD IN SCIENCE

Science is the search for truth. Its tools are rationality, objectivity, experimentation, and the free exchange of reliable information. But what happens when a scientist reports unreliable or fraudulent information?

According to a traditional view, the process of science is governed by rationality, logic, and truth. The scientist carefully and objectively observes, collects, and classifies information, then formulates a hypothesis in order to explain the data and to predict what might happen under various conditions. The scientist also performs experiments to test the hypothesis. Depending on the outcome, the hypothesis may be expanded, revised, or completely rejected. If the hypothesis proves sturdy enough to withstand a series of experiments, a scientist might develop a broader set of explanations and predictions known as a theory. In turn, even theories are subject to modification or replacement as new knowledge accumulates.

In science, an essential form of communication is the scientific paper – a detailed summary of an experiment, published in a specialized journal for fellow scientists around the world to read. Several steps ensure the integrity of the scientific paper. Before publication, the journal’s editors typically send the paper to referees – experts in the field who evaluate the quality of the data and the soundness of the paper’s conclusions. And each scientific paper includes specific information on how the work was done, in sections discussing materials, methods, and so forth. This enables any other scientist to perform an identical experiment – a process known as replication – in order to verify the results. Refereeing and replication are two elements that allow science to correct itself – to ensure that not only are honest errors corrected, but also that instances of deliberate cheating are promptly exposed. That, at any rate, is how the process is supposed to work.

Scientists, of course, are human beings. An important scientific achievement – a discovery, a cure, or some other breakthrough – can bring prestigious awards, worldwide recognition, and lasting fame (not to mention financial gain). The prospects of these kinds of rewards can be powerful motivators. Just as every teenager with a guitar dreams about writing a hit song, and every aspiring actor imagines accepting an Academy Award, it is likely that many scientists daydream about traveling to Stockholm, Sweden, to accept a Nobel Prize for a scientific breakthrough.

Daydreams aside, there is intense competitive pressure in science to be first to achieve some significant result – a distinction referred to as priority. “Credit in science goes only for originality, for being the first to discover something,” write science journalists William Broad and Nicholas Wade in their book Betrayers of the Truth. “With rare exceptions, there are no rewards for being second.”

A scientist must also be concerned with a career – with job placement, promotion, and obtaining funds for research. “Publish or perish,” goes the old saying, and for many a scientist trying to build a career in a competitive world, it is barely an exaggeration. In recent years, competition in science has created pressure to stand out from the crowd by having a long list of published papers to one’s credit – preferably, papers in prestigious journals reporting significant findings.

Science itself has changed in recent decades. Before World War II (1939-1945), the federal government provided minimal support for science. Now, through such agencies as the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the National Science Foundation (NSF), and the Department of Defense (DOD), the United States government funnels upwards of $70 billion annually into scientific research at universities and other institutions. Competition for federal dollars provides yet another source of pressure on scientists to produce noteworthy results. And still another financial lure lies in patents for drugs, chemical compounds, new materials, and other fruits of basic research. It is not uncommon for scientists to be employees (or even founders) of companies in such areas as biotechnology and pharmaceuticals. This raises the possibility of a conflict of interest in which an objective report, for example on the results of a drug trial, might jeopardize the financial success of the company.

UNCOVERING FRAUD IN SCIENCE

Suspicion of misconduct touches some of the greatest names in science. For example, the 2nd-century astronomer Claudius Ptolemy’s theories about astronomy were influential for more than a thousand years. Yet many historians now (19)__ that Ptolemy (20)__ the celestial observations he claimed.

Other immortal names (21)__. The 17th-century scientist Galileo, for instance, (22)__ as an outstanding example of the rational, thorough experimenter. After attempting to recreate some of his investigations, however, some historians doubt whether Galileo actually (23)__ all the experiments for which he is famous.

The thread of scientifically questionable work extends into the modern era as well. British psychologist Cyril Burt supposedly (24)__ “nature vs. nurture” experiments on twins who (25)__ apart—in support of the theory that intelligence (26)__ at birth rather than a trait that can be affected by upbringing or other factors. His findings were very influential in British educational policy; an intelligence quotients (IQ) test administered to 11-year olds, for example, determined whether a child (27)__ in an academic or vocational school. During his life, Burt (28)__ as one of the greatest psychologists. It was not until after Burt’s death in 1971 that scholars reviewed his data and found that in many instances Burt appeared to have simply fabricated data, describing subjects who never existed.

INFORMATION SCIENCE

Information Science is an interdisciplinary academic field that deals (29)__ the generation, collection, organization, storage, retrieval, and dissemination of recorded knowledge. Although it is related (30)__ library science, information science is a separate discipline.

Library science is (31)__ professional area of study designed to prepare individuals (32)__ careers as librarians. (33)__ librarians are primarily concerned with such tasks as evaluating, processing, storing, and retrieving information.

Information science combines elements of librarianship (34)__ ideas and technologies from many other fields, including social sciences, computer science, mathematics, electrical engineering, linguistics, management, neuroscience, and information systems theory. Within the field of information science, information may be defined as the knowledge contained (35)__ the human brain and in all electronic and written records. Information science is the scientific study of that information: how it is created, transmitted, encoded, transformed, retrieved, measured, used, and valued.

Information scientists are interested (36)__ studying such questions as the following: What is the effect of information (37)__ individuals and groups when it is presented in various formats? How do humans and computers interact? What is the reliability of retrieving information (38)__ online databases and the Internet?

MODERN SCIENCE

It seems entirely (45)__ to us that there are teams of scientists in universities and other institutions around the world, attempting to (46)__ the way the world works. However, it hasn’t always been that (47)__. Although the scientific method is now four or five hundred years old, the ancient Greeks, for example believed that they could work out the (48)__ of natural events just by the power of thought.

During the 17^th century, more and more people began to realise that they could (49)__ their scientific ideas by designing a relevant (50)__ and seeing what happened. A lot of (51)__ was made in this way by individual scientists. These men and women often worked alone, carrying out (52)__ into many different areas of science, and they often received very little (53)__ for their hard work. At the start of the 20^th century, though, it became (54)__ that science was becoming more complicated and more expensive. The individual scientist disappeared, to be replaced by highly qualified teams of experts. Modern science was born.

Choose the name A 58-A 60 from the given below (1-4). One name is odd.

Choose the name A61-63 from the given bellow (1-4). One name is odd.

Part B

Human-computer interfaces provide the means for p… (B13) to use computers. An example of a human-computer i… (B14) is the keyboard, which lets humans enter c… (B15) into a computer and e… (B16) text into a specific application. The diversity of research into human-computer interfacing corresponds to the diversity of computer u… (B17) and applications. However, a unifying theme is the d… (B18) of better interfaces and experimental evaluation of their effectiveness. Examples include improving computer a… (B19) for people with disabilities, simplifying program use, developing three-dimensional i… (B20) and output devices for virtual r… (B21), improving handwriting and s… (B22) recognition.

Test 2

Part A

UNDERSTANDING RESEARCH

Research is at the heart of academic life, one of the defining characteristics of Higher Education which differentiates it from other forms of adult training. Academic staff undertake research in order to create new knowledge and understanding in their subject area, hopefully involving and engaging students in the process and using outcomes to inform curriculum developments.

As a student you will almost certainly have to engage in research at some stage. Typically this will be in the form of an individual project or dissertation during the final year of undergraduate study, although universities are increasingly introducing elements of research-based or enquiry-based learning into all levels of study.

Part of the research process involves exposing your findings to peer review and ultimately to public scrutiny. Unfortunately there are large numbers of small-scale research projects whose findings are rejected because their methodology is not appropriate, their methods are flawed or lack rigour, or their conclusions are invalid.

Whether consciously or not any research question will be investigated from a particular standpoint. The way in which we view the world is called a paradigm. When it comes to doing research, our paradigms are determined in particular by our views on ontology and epistemology.

A positivist standpoint adopts a scientific approach to research. In terms of ontology and epistemology it assumes that the world has an objective reality, that knowledge exists and that it can be observed and measured. A positivist approach generally translates into quantitative research methodology.

One of the cornerstones of the positivist approach is the process of deduction, whereby empirical evidence is collected in order to prove or disprove a hypothesis. Strictly speaking, the research aims to falsify the hypothesis, testing what is known as the null hypothesis. If the null hypothesis is rejected, then the theoretical hypothesis is supported. Critics of the positivist approach would claim that it is too mechanistic and inflexible, limited in scope and pseudo-scientific.

Interpretivism supports the view that people and their institutions are fundamentally different from the natural sciences. The study of the social world therefore requires a different approach and seeks an understanding of human behaviour, an empathic understanding of human action.

There is a view that all research is interpretive, that research is guided by the researcher’s set of beliefs and feelings about the world and how it should be understood and studied. Interpretive research methods are prone to criticism because they embrace multiple, individually constructed realities.

An interpretivist approach will always adopt an inductive process, meaning that theory is developed from the evidence base. Because of its underpinning belief that reality is personally constructed, it inevitably uses qualitative methods to gain insight into each individual’s experience of a phenomenon. Critics of the interpretivist approach would argue that it is unscientific and value-laden, open to conjecture and subjective interpretation.

Quantitative research involves the collection and analysis of data in numerical format. A prime aim of quantitative research is to analyze evidence from a sample in order to produce results which can be extended to the whole population. This also allows direct comparisons to be made. Consequently, a quantitative study needs to pay particular attention to issues of reliability and validity, to ensure that these claims stand up to scrutiny. These issues of generalizability and comparability make quantitative research methods particularly attractive to managers.

The main aim of qualitative research is to discover how research subjects, or participants, feel about their lived experiences. The research usually begins with gut instinct rather than with a hypothesis to be tested. Emphasis is given to how participants express themselves in their discourse, with particular attention being paid to the use of metaphor and imagery.