11 澳大利亚的法律制订

　　V1 by dandanhoo

　　一个是关于英国的哥们们去澳大利亚殖民时期设立法律的事情，有一个A打头的生词，不知道是不是原住民???贯穿了全文。。。

　　V2 by mobura

　　澳洲原住民法律与1992年出台，而事实上很久以前的相关法律更为复杂。。。说以前不管是英国人还是原住民都服从英国法律，只是原住民之间的纠纷英国不管(有题 简单直接定位)。。。后来说这样的法律在后来的美洲殖民地再次出现(有题问澳洲法律的作用 选作为先行者对后来殖民地有影响)

　　V3 by sissimikey(720 V39)

　　有英国殖民者到澳大利亚时，于法案有关的那篇文章。A打头的那个词应该是Aborigines。说的好像是关于aborigines应该适用的法律的问题。印象比较深的是说到澳大利亚的那些英国人适用于英国的法律，aborigines与英国人发生争执的时候也要用英国的法律，但是在 aborigines相互之间发生争执的时候不用用英国的法律(这里有考题，所以印象深点)

　　V4 by bigbigtongue(700+ V40+)

　　第一段大概是提到英国在澳大利亚制定的法律，该法律已经很complex(考点)了。

　　第二段举例说明，比如有个A类人，他们和欧洲人如果发生冲突的话，英国的法律适用，而他们自己内部冲突的话，就不用英国的法律。

　　第三段最后提到在澳大利亚的法律和在美国的差不多

　　考点：

　　1：以下哪个正确(我选择了A和欧洲人冲突时才用英国法律，A自己内部冲突时不用)

　　2：这篇article的目的(我选择了说明那时的法律已经很复杂了)

　　3：最后提到美国的法律的目的是什么

　　12 美国工业和服务业[附GWD原文原题]

　　V1 by Gothicly

　　我貌似碰上了某次prep模考时的原题。希望不是我又记错了。大家帮忙找找看。是关于19世纪美国工业和服务业的。

　　第一段说17 18世纪，美国的工业企业增长是3%每年，后来变成了1%每年。然后又说19世纪美国的工业企业从一个低谷走到了**(貌似是世界前列)。然后说blablabla。

　　第二段，开始说，19世纪美国工业可以快速增长是因为他们怎么怎么，但是除去了产品质量的因素。(有题，好像问美国工业企业的增长可以知道什么。)中间到最后说美国工业有受到国外别的竞争者的压力。所以很多人失业。但是事实上这个竞争压力被夸大了(有题问从文中工业企业与国外竞争者可以得出什么)，部分失业 可能是这个竞争压力导致的，但是更多的是需求不足导致的。

　　第三段，又说服务业得考虑的质量因素。还说到了服务业和国外竞争者的关系、貌似说国外竞争者对服务业的影响更大。blablabla。因为没有题，不太记得了。

　　另外两道题，一道主旨题，选项有两个比较迷惑。一个说介绍一种观点工业企业的增长方法还是什么方法不适合于服务业企业。一个说怎么怎么工业企业和服务业企业，并提出一个解决服务业企业的增长缓慢的方法。

　　一道是高亮题在第三段开头。

　　V2 by chihhsin7337

　　还有一篇不知是哪里的，不过很眼熟

　　是讲美国制造业和服务业的成长

　　第一段开始讲1945年-60年 GDP成长是3%(OR 1%)

　　70年 是1%还3%

　　第二段 有讲制造业受外国竞争，但其实不是这么回事，外国竞争是政客语言

　　第三段讲 政府赤字造成利息高 让服务业不能借钱进行投资

　　附GWD原文原题[已确认]

　　(This passage is excerpted from material published in 1997)

　　Whereas United States economic productivity grew at an annual rate of 3 percent from 1945 to 1965, it has grown at an annual rate of only about 1 percent since the early 1970’s. What might be preventing higher productivity growth? Clearly, the manufacturing sector of the economy cannot be blamed. Since 1980, productivity improvements in manufacturing have moved the United States from a position of acute decline in manufacturing to one of world prominence. Manufacturing, however, constitutes a relatively small proportion of the economy. In 1992, goods-producing businesses employed only 19.1 percent of American workers, whereas service-producing businesses employed 70 percent. Although the service sector has grown since the late 1970’s, its productivity growth has declined. Several explanations have been offered for this declined and for the discrepancy in productivity growth between the manufacturing and service sectors. One is that traditional measures fail to rlect service-sector productivity growth because it has been concentrated in improved quality of services. Yet traditional measures of manufacturing productivity have shown significant increases despite the under measurement of quality, whereas service productivity has continued to stagnate. Others argue that since the 1970’s, manufacturing workers, faced with strong foreign competition, have learned to work more ficiently in order to keep their jobs in the United States, but service workers, who are typically under less global competitive pressure, have not. However, the pressure on manufacturing workers in the United States to work more ficiently has generally been overstated, often for political reasons. In fact, while some manufacturing jobs have been lost due to foreign competition, many more have been lost simply because of slow growth in demand for manufactured goods.

　　Yet another explanation blames the federal budget dicit: if it were lower, interest rate would be lower too, thereby increasing investment in the development of new technologies, which would spur productivity growth in the service sector. There is, however, no dearth of technological resources, rather, managers in the service sector fail to take advantage of widely available skills and machines. High productivity growth levels attained by leading edge service companies indicate that service sector managers who wisely implement available technology and choose skillful workers can significantly improve their companies’ productivity. The culprits for service-sector productivity stagnation are the forces-such as corporate takeovers and unnecessary governmental regulation-that distract managers from the task of making optimal use of available resources.

　　T-3-Q33

　　Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the budget dicit explanation for the discrepancy mentioned in line 27?

　　A. Research shows that the federal budget dicit has traditionally caused service companies to invest less money in research and development of new technologies.

　　B. New technologies have been shown to play a significant role in companies that have been able to increase their service productivity.

　　C. In both service sector and manufacturing, productivity improvements are concentrated in gains in quality.

　　D. The service sector typically requires larger investments in new technology in order to maintain productivity growth than dose manufacturing

　　E. High interest rates tend to slow the growth of manufacturing productivity as much as they slow the growth of service-sector productivity in the United States.

　　T-3-Q34

　　The passage states which of the following about the fectof foreign competition on the American manufacturing sector since the 1970’s?

　　A. It has often been exaggerated.

　　B. It has not been a direct cause of job loss.

　　C. It has in large part been responsible for the subsequent slowing of productivity growth.

　　D. It has slowed growth in the demand for manufactured goods in the United States.

　　E. It has been responsible for the majority of American jobs lost in manufacturing.

　　T-3-Q35

　　It can be inferred from the passage that which of the following was true of the United States manufacturing sector in the years immediately prior to 1980?

　　A. It was performing relatively poorly.

　　B. It was in a position of world prominence.

　　C. It was increasing its productivity at an annual rate of 3 percent.

　　D. It was increasing its productivity at an annual rate of 1 percent.

　　E. Its level of productivity was higher than afterward.

　　T-3-Q36

　　The author of the passage would be most likely to agree with which of the following statements about productivity improvements in United States service companies?

　　A. Such improvements would be largely attributable to ficiencies resulting from corporate takeovers.

　　B.Such improvements would depend more on wise implementation of technology than on managers’ choice of skilled workers.

　　C.Such improvements would be more easily accomplished if there were fewer governmental regulations of the service sector.

　　D.Such improvements would require companies to invest heavily in the development of new technologies.

　　E. Such improvements would be attributable primarily to companies’ facing global competitive pressure.

　　13 group interview[附考古]

　　V1 by niubirs

　　好像是GWD原题or OG上的，我有印象，讲的是 group interview.大家可以找一下。考题分别是1.这篇文章第一段与后两段的关系?2，group interview 产生的影响是?3，一道infer题，定位在第二段，实在想不起来了抱歉。。

　　注：我在OG和GWD上没有找到，这里贴的是考古的内容，大家如果能找到原文请联系我，谢谢

　　考古[已确认]

　　V1

　　P1,说group interview有什么好处啦，可以降低训练interviewer的成本，可以看被interview的人在有竞争对手时的反应，以及看他在压力下的表现，也可以一次比较很多人，找出最适合的candidate...等等，这些好处使得越来越多公司选择group interview, regardless of "valid interview practice"，然后转折说还是有坏处的;(此处有主题题)。

　　P2, 指出它的不足，共有两点，分别是从interviewer和applicants的角度说明的。其中第一点是说面试官在记录的时候可能应接不暇，无法记录所有面试者的信息和反应，说interviewer可能无法接受大量的信息会影响selection。说研究结果说group interview考验interviewer mulitasking的能力，因为他们一次要注意很多人，结果可能做出NEGATIVE DECISION

　　P3,说第二坏处是面试者中人有些人可能在面试中有所警觉，不能完全发挥，interviewee要太多的关注其他人说过什么，使得他们没有办法充分的表达自己的想法。还有什么被interview的人在有其他人在场的时候self-disclose不够多，因为隐私等方面的原因不愿意多透露自己的信息而且不愿意完全表现自己，这又影响了selection。结果也导致面试官做出了NEGATIVE DECISION

　　大概有3道题 不难。

　　V2

　　第一段讲了为什么要use group interview(此处有主题题)。

　　第二段讲了2个problems，分别是从interviewer和applicants的角度说明的。说interviewer可能无法接受大量的信息会影响selection。Applicants因为隐私等方面的原因不愿意多透露自己的信息而且不愿意完全表现自己，这又影响了selection。

　　文章不难，题目也还好，认真读就行。

　　考题:有道题选作者最有可能怎么认为，我选的牺牲information accuracy换取time saving

更多出国留学最新动态，敬请关注澳际教育手机端网站，并可拨打咨询热线：400-601-0022