—________. I won't expose him to a slight possibility of danger.
I'm standing in a class of wild 14－year－old girls as they throw paper and howl with laughter. They won't1to me.
I was 22 and I didn't know what I was doing. I never wanted to teach. I wanted to be a 2. But when I arrived in London, they were short of teachers. My3 at teaching were hopeless. When the bell finally rang, I rushed to the 4 room, red 5anger. The other teachers weren't surprised. "That's 4B, the worst class in school," one said.
I was afraid of our next meeting, but I couldn't give up, because I needed the job. Therefore, I 6formal lessons.7 ， I brought topics for class discussions. One of the liveliest talks was about the arguments they had with their 8. They paid attention and shared about their families. Then I had them write about themselves. As time went on, their essays became a 9 between us. I think they 10 my interest in their lives.
The musical My Fair Lady was playing in the West End, but they had never seen a(n) 11 stage performance. I asked if they would like to see the musical. They thought I was 12. No teacher had ever 13 taking them out. A few weeks later, 4B and I were 14 in a theatre. They loved the music and the characters. It was the 15 of their year, and they talked about it for days.
Near the end of the semester, someone16 on the door of the staff room. The two girls most unwilling to 17 rules in 4B were there—with flowers. I was 18to know I had touched their lives, but they had also touched mine. When I returned to Australia several years later, I still wanted to be a writer. For the first time in my life, I stopped 19and started writing. My first story was 20, My Fair Ladies. Teaching wasn't the end of my writing career; it was the beginning.
Assistant Professor of Chemistry
The University of Chicago: Physical Sciences Division: Department of Chemistry
Location
Chicago, Illinois
Description
The Department of Chemistry at The University of Chicago invites applications for the position of Assistant Professor of Chemistry in all areas of chemistry.
Applicants must apply online at apply.interfolio.com/66199 and upload a cover letter, a curriculum vitae with a list of publications, a brief outline of research plans and a one-page teaching statement. In your cover letter, please specify(注明) one sub-discipline that best represents your research interests (inorganic, materials, organic, physical, theoretical or chemical biology). In addition, three reference letters are required.
Qualifications
At the time of hire the successful candidate must have completed all requirements for a PhD in Chemistry or a related field. Joint appointments with other departments are possible.
Application Instructions
Review of applications will begin on October 7, 2020 and will continue until all positions are filled.
Apply to: apply.interfolio.com/66199
Equal Employment Opportunity Statement
The University of Chicago is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity/Disabled/Veterans Employer and does not discriminate on the basis of race, colour, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, national or ethnic origin, age, status as an individual with a disability, protected veteran status, genetic information, or other protected classes under the law. For additional information please see the University's Notice of Nondiscrimination.
Job seekers in need of a reasonable accommodation to complete the application process should call 7737021032 or e-mail equalopportunity@uchicago.edu with their request.
I took a job as a receptionist for a vet almost five decades ago. As an enthusiastic animal lover, I accepted the position on the condition that I wouldn't have to assist with any wounded animals. I couldn't bear to see any creature in pain.
At the end of my first week, we were closing the office for the day when a young man ran up to us holding a severely injured Doberman Pinscher puppy in his arms and begging us to save his life. The four-month-old pup had been hit by a car.
The doctor and I ran back into the operating room. The only place the skin was still attached to this poor little animal's body was around one shoulder. The vet worked tirelessly for what seemed like hours, sewing him back together again. That was the easy part. The puppy had broken multiple bones, including his spine. If he survived the next few days, we were quite sure he would never walk again.
That day forever changed my life. The vet mentored me, and I became his assistant in all things medical. One of my first jobs was to give that Doberman puppy daily physical therapy. I remember moving his tiny legs to try to keep his muscles from withering.
Weeks went by until one day, I felt this little fighter push back ever so slightly. And he continued to push back till he could finally use his legs.
Fast-forward about a year. I walked into the clinic's crowded waiting room and called the name of the next client. Suddenly, a huge Doberman who had been standing quietly with his owner on the opposite side of the room ran toward me. I found myself pinned against the wall with this magnificent dog standing on his hind legs, his front paws on my shoulders, washing my face with abundant and joyful kisses!
I still tear up in amazement at the display of love and gratitude the dog had for me that day all those years ago. I went on to be a vet for 14 years, and since retirement, I've volunteered at a no-kill animal shelter. In all the time that has passed and all the experiences I have had, I've never met a dog who didn't know it had been rescued in one way or another.
Bees can be harmed by low levels of neonicotinoid(新烟碱类农药) pesticides, and now it seems birds can too. Migrating white-crowned sparrows have been found to lose weight after eating seeds treated with one of these chemicals, imidacloprid (吡虫啉〈一种杀虫剂〉), delaying their onward migration by several days.
Such a delay could hamper their chances of successfully breeding. However, the main manufacturer of the pesticide disputes the findings.
The latest twist in the debate over neonicotinoids is the result of work by Christy Morrissey at the University of Saskatchewan in Canada and her team.They caught migrating sparrows, tagged them with tiny radio transmitters and gave them feed containing imidacloprid or an alternative without the chemical. The birds given the pesticide lost up to 6 per cent of their body weight in the 6 hours before release, whereas the other birds hardly lost any. Scans also showed a decline in body fat among the first group.
When released, the birds not fed imidacloprid continued their migration after half a day. Those given the pesticide took four days, on average, to do the same. Morrissey says she also has unpublished evidence that two other neonicotinoids have similar effects.
Birds that arrive late at breeding grounds are less likely to raise the young successfully and may not breed at all, says Morrissey. "This has serious impacts on populations."
The study shows sublethal(亚致死的) doses of neonicotinoids can have adverse effects on seed-eating birds as well as on beneficial insects such as bees, says Caspar Hallmann of Radboud University in the Netherlands. "Birds—especially small birds—are really dependent on having sufficient body fat during migration."
The findings are disputed by Bayer, the main manufacturer of imidacloprid. Real-world neonicotinoid exposure levels are far below those that disrupt migratory behaviour, and the pesticides are safe when applied according to instructions, says a Bayer spokesperson.
Morrissey says the birds were given realistic amounts. They could get the highest dose given in the study by eating just one-tenth of a treated maize seed, a fifth of a soya bean or three canola seeds, for instance. "It's tiny, tiny amounts，" she says.
In North America, 57 of the 77 bird species associated with farmland are in decline, with neonicotinoids one possible factor. However, Morrissey says that banning these pesticides isn't the answer because farmers will just use alternatives that may turn out to be as bad. Instead, we need to find ways of farming that don't rely on any chemical fixes, she says.
The Democratic debate on health care has to date centred around who should be covered and who should pay the bill. That debate, which has been going on for decades, has no clear answers and cannot be easily resolved because of two fundamental realities: Health care is expensive, and Americans are sick.
Instead of debating who should pay for all these, no one is asking the far more simple and imperative question: What is making us so sick, and how can we reverse this so we need less health care? The answer is staring us in the face, on average three times a day: our food.
Poor diet is the leading cause of mortality in the United States, causing more than half a million deaths per year. Just 10 dietary factors are estimated to cause nearly 1,000 deaths every day from heart disease(心血管疾病), stroke and diabetes alone. These conditions are dizzyingly expensive. Cardiovascular disease costs $351 billion annually in health care spending and lost productivity, while diabetes costs $327 billion annually. The total economic cost of obesity is estimated at $1.72 trillion per year, or 9.3 per cent of gross domestic product.
Fortunately, advances in nutrition science and policy now provide a road map for addressing this national nutrition crisis. The "Food Is Medicine" solutions are win－win, promoting better well－being, lower health care costs, greater sustainability, reduced disparities among population groups, improved economic competitiveness and greater national security.
Some simple, measurable improvements can be made in several health and related areas. For example, Medicare, Medicaid, private insurers and hospitals should include nutrition in any electronic health record; update medical training, licensing and continuing education guidelines to put an emphasis on nutrition; offer patient prescription programmes for healthy produce; and, for the sickest patients, cover home－delivered, medically－tailored meals. Just the last action, for example, can save a net $9，000 in health care costs per patient per year.
Taxes on sugary beverages and junk food can be paired with subsidies on protective foods like fruits, nuts, vegetables, beans, plant oils, whole grains, yogurt and fish. Emphasizing protective foods represents an important positive message for the public and food industry that celebrates and rewards good nutrition. Levels of harmful additives like sodium, added sugar and trans fat can be lowered through voluntary industry targets or regulatory safety standards.
The private sector can also play a key role. Changes in shareholder criteria and new investor coalitions should financially reward companies for tackling obesity, diabetes and other diet－related illness. Public－private partnerships should emphasize research and development on best agricultural and food－processing practices. All work sites should demand healthy food when negotiating with cafeteria vendors and include incentives for healthy eating in their wellness benefits.
Government plays a crucial role. The significant impacts of the food system on well－being, health care spending, the economy and the environment—together with mounting public and industry awareness of these issues—have created an opportunity for government leaders to champion real solutions.
Yet with rare exceptions, the current presidential candidates are not being asked about these critical national issues. Every candidate should have a food platform, and every debate should explore these positions. A new emphasis on the problems and promise of nutrition to improve health and lower health care costs is long overdue for the presidential primary debates and should be prominent in the 2020 general election and the next administration.
每个空格只填1个单词。
According to the recently published cultural mindset study from Culture Trip, 60% of people in the US and UK say that their outlook on life is shaped by influences from different cultures. At the same time, the economic landscape of the last decade has resulted in younger generations being more interested in collecting experiences than possessions.
Welcome to the "new culture economy"
The collision of the two trends—globalization and the experience economy—has caused a new travel concept with cultural curiosity at its heart. This is the "new culture economy". The phenomenon is having a profound impact on people's interactions and definitions of cultural exploration and presents an incredible commercial opportunity.
Education, travel, exposure to other customs and the cultural mashup that energes are the more influential social effects of globalization. More than half of respondents from the cultural mindset study have friends living overseas, while 78% have friends or family of different nationalities. Besides, the confines of student debt and unaffordable housing have created a shift in spending patterns, and so a new set of values has emerged in which experiences matter more than ownership.
Why we travel
People's social networks expose them to digital influencers and keep them connected to friends or family living in other parts of the world. The combination of these cultural, social and personal drivers has helped us to identify four cultural mindsets.
1 Culturally aware—The motivation to travel among this group is anchored in pleasure. They seek out familiarity and select destinations close to home or reflective of their own culture.
2 Culturally curious—Those with this mindset travel to discover new things and disrupt their everyday routines. They seek some familiarity, but also want to explore boundaries. They want to be seen as someone who is interested in culture, but this is often expressed in terms of visual interest and well-known sites.
3 Culturally immersive—For this group, travel is all about adventure and personal growth. They want to be seen as highly cultured and as "explorers"; they are happy to celebrate when things go wrong, which they see as the key ingredient to making memories.
4 Culturally fluid—The group's identity is shaped by their familiarity with travel. They feel at home everywhere and have adopted a hybrid cultural identity. Memories are often tied to experiences with people that represent the culture they are travelling to rather than sites.
The environmental trade-off
The cultural mindset research also sheds light on how people perceive the effect of tourism on the environment and the measures they take to reduce their impact. Two in five millennials—more than any other generation—worry that tourism has a negative impact on the environment and over a third limit how much they travel to reduce their impact.
While most people won't control their desire to travel entirely, good news is that those who see the world are also the ones taking measures in their everyday lives to reduce their impact on the environment.
| How Curiosity and Globalization Are Driving A New Approach to Travel |
|
| Introduction |
Being to different cultures has an impact on people's outlook on life. |
| The economic situation of the past ten years can for young people's shift in values away from materialism. |
|
| Welcome to the |
|
| "new culture economy" |
The collision of globalization and the experience economy has given birth to a new travel pattern, which cultural curiosity. |
| A shift in spending patterns has appeared in that a trip is more than a house. |
|
| Why we travel |
|
| How the cultural, social and personal factors helps the researchers identify different cultural mindsets. |
|
| Culturally |
|
| aware |
People in this group travel for the fun of it and prefer close to where they live to seek some familiarity. |
| Culturally |
|
| curious |
People with this mindset can be regarded as someone interested in culture and for exploring boundaries. |
| Culturally |
|
| immersive |
People belonging to this group think travel will to personal growth and create something worth recalling. |
| Culturally |
|
| fluid |
For this group, they are with travel and experiences with the local people representing the culture count. |
The environmental trade-off, of the negative effect tourism has on the environment, those travelling are willing to take measures like setting a limit to their travel.
Smartphones have become a necessary part of daily life. A study shows that smartphones owners usually start to use their phones in the morning. It appears that they can hardly go without their phones even for one day.
"I feel chained to the phone all the time. I use it for everything and I am in cellphone prison. It is time that I should do something to change the situation，" 17－year－old Johnson said to CGTN.
According to new research carried out by Asurion, a global tech protection and support company, people all over the world check their phone on average once every 12 minutes—burying their heads in their phones 80 times a day and spending over five hours on the phones. That seriously affects their daily lives.
"Using smartphones definitely causes poor attention control，" Abraham Zangen, a professor told CGTN. "It also leads to social stress ‘What are they thinking of me?'"
【写作内容】
1）以约30个单词概括文章大意；
2）举例简要说明手机的不当使用给学生带来的消极影响；
3）就高中学生合理使用智能手机这一话题谈谈你的观点(不少于两点)。
【写作要求】
1）写作过程中不能直接引用原文语句；
2）作文中不能出现真实姓名和学校名称；
3）不必写标题。
【评分标准】
内容完整、语言规范、语篇连贯、词数适当。
