EAP英语总结及机经（完整版）

《EAP英语总结及机经（完整版）》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《EAP英语总结及机经（完整版）（4页珍藏版）》请在装配图网上搜索。

1、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

2、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

3、 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 betwe

4、en 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

5、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

6、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

7、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

8、 write between 250-300 words.TEXT 1Alex Fischer,Critical Thinking. An Introduction(CUP: Cambridge, 2001)What is critical thinking and how to improve itIn recent year critical thinking has become something of a buzz word in educational circles. For many reasons, educators have become very interested

9、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 peoples teaching has been on teaching content history, physics, geography or whatever and, though many teachers would claim to teach their

10、students how to think, most would say that they do thisindirectly or implicitlyin 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

11、up the thinking skills in question. The result is that many teachers have become interested in teaching these skillsdirectly. This is what this text aims to do. It teaches a range oftransferablethinking skills, but it does soexplicitlyanddirectly. The skills in question are critical thinking skills

12、(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

13、 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 o

14、f 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 Scrivens definition a little. He defines critical thin

15、king as a skilled activity. He points out that thinking does not count as critical merely because it isintendedto be, any more than thinking counts asscientificsimply because it aims to be. To be critical, thinking has to meet certain standards of clarity, relevance, reasonableness, etc. and one may

16、 bemoreorlessskilled at this. He defines critical thinking as an active process, partly because it involvesquestioningand partly because of the role played bymetacognition thinking about your own thinking. He includes interpretation (of texts, speech, film, graphics, actions and even body language)

17、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 o

18、f 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

19、 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 present

20、ing 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 thinkerIt is clear that someone can have a skill which they choose not to use or not to us

21、e 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 ha

22、d 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 attitu

23、de 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 pro

24、duces 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

25、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

26、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

27、and use them; in short become acritical thinker. (p.12)TEXT 2Writing CriticallyEdward de Bonos Six Thinking HatsHandout: Graduate Development Programme, University of CambridgeInSix Thinking Hats(Penguin, 2000), Edward de Bono argues that there are six ways in which we can think about problems. He a

28、rgues 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

29、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 HatIs neutral, objective, concerned with objective facts and figuresNeutral

30、ObjectiveInformation GapsFactsNo interpretations or opinionsRed hatGives the emotional viewEmotionsFeelings as an important part of thinkingValue systemsNo justifications necessaryBlack HatPoints out weaknesses in an ideaCautiousCarefulAssessmentConsiders risks, dangers, obstacles, weaknessesNot abo

31、ut argument for argument sakeYellow HatIs optimistic, it covers hope and positive thinkingPositiveConstrictiveOptimismAssessmentValueBenefitGenerativeMaking things happenOpportunity seekingVisions / DreamsGreen HatIndicates creativity and new ideasEnergyGrowthNew ideasCreativityModifications / ImprovementsPossibilitiesBlue HatIs concerned with overview, the organization of the thinking process and the use of other hatsOverviewSummariesConclusionsManagement / Organisation of ThinkingProcess controlSets focus, what is to be achievedTable 1: Edward de Bonos Six Thinking Hats