Тест 1. Чтение. ЕГЭ по английскому языку

1) Установите соответствие между заголовками 1 — 8 и текстами A — G. Используйте каждую цифру только один раз. В задании один заголовок лишний.

1. Remembering the 3D’s
2. Having Self-Belief
3. Taking Action
4. Choosing a Course of Action
5. Staying Focused
6. Investing Money
7. Having Commitment
8. Setting Goals

A. One of the first steps in the process of becoming successful is to make the decision to achieve something. All of us know that nothing can move forward until that first decision to do so is made. The initial action is always the decision to go ahead, which many people tend to overlook. So, decide on moving forward, put your decision down in writing, just to keep it in focus, and then carry on from there.

B. Having clarity of vision and purpose is perhaps one of the most important factors of achieving success. The fact is that most people simply have no idea about what they really want. Clarity means understanding exactly what you want and how it will affect your life. Once you acquire clarity of vision and purpose, the next vital step of becoming successful is determining aims you want to achieve.

C. You should be able to accomplish what you set out to do with unwavering concentration. Life is full of distractions — TV, family, e-mail and telephones — all of which can be completely overwhelming. How can you concentrate on your goals? Willpower is one of the factors although willpower alone will not be sufficient to achieve your aims. One of the best ways is to make a plan and then stick to it.

D. Before beginning any new activity, examine it to see if it will help in moving you nearer to your goals. If a certain activity can be put away for a later time, defer it. If that activity can be done by somebody else, delegate it. And if it does not really need to be done at all, it can be deleted. This kind of close examination of each activity will help in keeping you focused on the things that are really important.

E. Success often involves being willing to pay the price that everything has. The price may not be in monetary terms. It could be sacrifice, effort, time, and also money, or maybe something else. The point is that in order to become successful, you must be ready to work hard and to put all your effort into achieving your purpose. Success takes a lot of dedication.

F. Lack of confidence is one of the biggest hurdles that many people need to get over in order to become successful. People often think they are not good enough or not smart enough, which can actually prevent them from finding the success they seek. It is common knowledge that if you think you can do something, you will, and conversely, if you think that it cannot be done, it will lead to failure.

G. Nothing can be achieved until action is taken to achieve it. After all the above steps of taking a decision, setting goals, making plans and choosing a strategy, you will need to go ahead and act on what you want to achieve. By putting your plan of action into play, you will get to what you set out to achieve — becoming successful!

A	B	C	D	E	F	G

🔗

2) Прочитайте текст и заполните пропуски A — F частями предложений, обозначенными цифрами 1 — 7. Одна из частей в списке 1—7 лишняя.

‘Tune In, Turn On, and Drop Out’ was the motto of the hippie movement that grew partially out of young America’s disillusionment with the Vietnam War. Hippies were mainly white teenagers and young adults ___ (A).

The immediate precursor to the hippies was the so-called Beat Generation of the late 1950s. But where the intellectual beats tended to stay out of politics, the hippies were known as much for their political outspokenness ___ (B). Their opposition to the Vietnam War became one of the most significant aspects of the growing antiwar movement throughout the latter half of the 1960s.

To express their protests, and to ‘turn on’ others, the hippies used art, street theatre and particularly music. This culture reached its peak in the summer of 1967, when a concert in San Francisco’s Golden Gate Park introduced the music of the hippies to a wider audience. The concert inspired thousands of young people around the country to head to San Francisco, ___ (C).

In the 60’s, hippies sought to free themselves from societal restrictions, choose their own way and find new meaning in life. This made hippies instantly recognizable to one another and served ___ (D).

Hippies often chose brightly coloured clothing. Much of hippie clothing was selfmade, and hippies often purchased their clothes from flea markets and second-hand shops. Natural and foreign accessories for both men and women included Native American jewellery, headbands and long beaded necklaces. Tie-dyeing was very fashionable ___ (E).

Hippie culture spread worldwide through a fusion of rock music, folk and blues. It also found expression in literature, fashion, and the visual arts, ___ (F).

Eventually the hippie movement extended far beyond the United States, the United Kingdom, Europe, and appeared in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Japan, Brazil and many other countries.

1. which were against the war and the government
2. who shared distrust towards traditional values and authority
3. some wearing flowers in their hair
4. including film, posters and album covers
5. as part of hippie style and still is today
6. as a visual symbol of their willingness to question authority
7. as for their long hair and colourful clothing

A	B	C	D	E	F

🔗

3) Прочитайте текст и запишите в поле ответа цифру 1, 2, 3 или 4, соответствующую выбранному Вами варианту ответа.

Показать текст. ⇓

Increasingly, I see that home educating is so much more than ‘equipping children for life’. We all begin somewhere, and this is a good starting point, but if that is all that happens, then we only scratch the surface of something so important.

We began educating our children at home in January 1993, and it was supposed to be a short term solution to an immediate problem, namely the fact that I did not have transport to get my three-year-old daughter to nursery school. That was almost 17 years ago, and I am so glad we made that choice and for the direction in which that choice led us. Home education has turned out to be much more than a way of schooling; it is a way of life, a family building and enhancing opportunity, and a key to self-knowledge and growth.

We started with a programme called Babies Bible Class and a second-hand Letterland teacher’s guide. Using these two, I developed a series of unit studies which we pursued with interest and enthusiasm. This alone was considered very radical. In the far off days when home education was still illegal for over 7’s, no-one dared deviate from the National Curriculum. In fact, no-one even thought it was possible to do so. How could you teach without a prescribed scheme of work? But I felt, right from the beginning, that the curriculum should fit the child, not the other way around.

As the years went by, and more children were added into our family, we continued our eclectic mix of unit studies. I developed the units around specific interests of the children at any given time, and where possible, followed these up with outings, movies or books about the subject. The children were bright, eager, and willing. I have many special memories of these years.

Initially we had a lot of fun, but as time went on, schoolwork gradually became a battle, especially with my second daughter. She was one of those self-directed thinkers, a child who wanted to know what the point was of any given activity, and who was not interested in doing tasks just for the sake of doing them. Increasingly, our schoolwork took up long and unpleasant hours, filled with strife and disappointment. We lost the joy in the learning, and I felt like the fire breathing dragon.

I’m a researcher and a problem-solver by nature, so I began to ask questions about our educational approach and methodology. At this time I came into contact with Martie Du Plessis, an educational consultant who was particularly interested in helping the people in home educating families to identify and understand their particular learning styles, and to consider the ways in which they interacted with one another. A session spent with Martie was very enlightening, as we began to realise the obvious — that people, in their uniqueness, both gather and organise information in different ways. Thus a child who seemed oppositional and difficult and downright disobedient quite possibly just had a different learning style to the parent.

In 2000, I read all six of Charlotte Mason’s insightful books. Her last book ‘Towards a Philosophy of Education’ gave me a lot to think about. It was directly because of her influence that we introduced a strong literature focus as the foundation for our learning. We had always enjoyed reading to the children. Craig and I both love books, but now we recognised that reading books was more than the activity. It was how one obtained food for the mind.

In 2001, we bought our first pre-packaged curriculum ‘Year 1’ of Sonlight’s excellent literature based programme. We loved the books. However, we quickly dispensed with the curriculum guide, preferring to read the books at our own pace. There was only one problem — we finished reading the whole year’s books within a few months! I found myself motivating why we needed a larger educational budget. Step by step our own individualised educational approach was developing.

All of the discoveries I was making about education now crystallised into one key word — respect. I recognised that many educational approaches were inherently disrespectful to learners. They presumed too much, elevated teachers to a status that was not real, discounted previous knowledge and wisdom on the part of the learner. Many methodologies erupted from an erroneous notion that the learner was an empty vessel waiting to be filled up by the all wise educator. But Charlotte Mason believed that the learner was not ‘less’ than the teacher.

Increasingly I became uneasy with a prescriptive, teacher directed approach to my children’s education. Although I had designed a curriculum that was sensitive to my children’s interests, it was still a curriculum chosen by me. Like the adults around me, I had been led to believe that the children would not learn unless I made them learn. But Charlotte Mason said that learning was to humans what swimming was to fish — something they did naturally, unconsciously, and all the time.

Looking back, our home education has been a wonderful journey. Two of my children are now beyond compulsory education. I found that our educational philosophy evolved, and our methodology changed accordingly from year to year, and as the children developed. I tried out things that didn’t work, and found things that did. This process, of course, continues.

The narrator began educating her children at home because she
1) felt home education was a key to self-knowledge and growth.
2) didn’t want her daughter to be educated with other children.
3) had a short-term problem at work.
4) could not get her daughter to nursery school.

🔗

4) Прочитайте текст и запишите в поле ответа цифру 1, 2, 3 или 4, соответствующую выбранному Вами варианту ответа.

Показать текст. ⇓

Increasingly, I see that home educating is so much more than ‘equipping children for life’. We all begin somewhere, and this is a good starting point, but if that is all that happens, then we only scratch the surface of something so important.

We began educating our children at home in January 1993, and it was supposed to be a short term solution to an immediate problem, namely the fact that I did not have transport to get my three-year-old daughter to nursery school. That was almost 17 years ago, and I am so glad we made that choice and for the direction in which that choice led us. Home education has turned out to be much more than a way of schooling; it is a way of life, a family building and enhancing opportunity, and a key to self-knowledge and growth.

We started with a programme called Babies Bible Class and a second-hand Letterland teacher’s guide. Using these two, I developed a series of unit studies which we pursued with interest and enthusiasm. This alone was considered very radical. In the far off days when home education was still illegal for over 7’s, no-one dared deviate from the National Curriculum. In fact, no-one even thought it was possible to do so. How could you teach without a prescribed scheme of work? But I felt, right from the beginning, that the curriculum should fit the child, not the other way around.

As the years went by, and more children were added into our family, we continued our eclectic mix of unit studies. I developed the units around specific interests of the children at any given time, and where possible, followed these up with outings, movies or books about the subject. The children were bright, eager, and willing. I have many special memories of these years.

Initially we had a lot of fun, but as time went on, schoolwork gradually became a battle, especially with my second daughter. She was one of those self-directed thinkers, a child who wanted to know what the point was of any given activity, and who was not interested in doing tasks just for the sake of doing them. Increasingly, our schoolwork took up long and unpleasant hours, filled with strife and disappointment. We lost the joy in the learning, and I felt like the fire breathing dragon.

I’m a researcher and a problem-solver by nature, so I began to ask questions about our educational approach and methodology. At this time I came into contact with Martie Du Plessis, an educational consultant who was particularly interested in helping the people in home educating families to identify and understand their particular learning styles, and to consider the ways in which they interacted with one another. A session spent with Martie was very enlightening, as we began to realise the obvious — that people, in their uniqueness, both gather and organise information in different ways. Thus a child who seemed oppositional and difficult and downright disobedient quite possibly just had a different learning style to the parent.

In 2000, I read all six of Charlotte Mason’s insightful books. Her last book ‘Towards a Philosophy of Education’ gave me a lot to think about. It was directly because of her influence that we introduced a strong literature focus as the foundation for our learning. We had always enjoyed reading to the children. Craig and I both love books, but now we recognised that reading books was more than the activity. It was how one obtained food for the mind.

In 2001, we bought our first pre-packaged curriculum ‘Year 1’ of Sonlight’s excellent literature based programme. We loved the books. However, we quickly dispensed with the curriculum guide, preferring to read the books at our own pace. There was only one problem — we finished reading the whole year’s books within a few months! I found myself motivating why we needed a larger educational budget. Step by step our own individualised educational approach was developing.

All of the discoveries I was making about education now crystallised into one key word — respect. I recognised that many educational approaches were inherently disrespectful to learners. They presumed too much, elevated teachers to a status that was not real, discounted previous knowledge and wisdom on the part of the learner. Many methodologies erupted from an erroneous notion that the learner was an empty vessel waiting to be filled up by the all wise educator. But Charlotte Mason believed that the learner was not ‘less’ than the teacher.

Increasingly I became uneasy with a prescriptive, teacher directed approach to my children’s education. Although I had designed a curriculum that was sensitive to my children’s interests, it was still a curriculum chosen by me. Like the adults around me, I had been led to believe that the children would not learn unless I made them learn. But Charlotte Mason said that learning was to humans what swimming was to fish — something they did naturally, unconsciously, and all the time.

Looking back, our home education has been a wonderful journey. Two of my children are now beyond compulsory education. I found that our educational philosophy evolved, and our methodology changed accordingly from year to year, and as the children developed. I tried out things that didn’t work, and found things that did. This process, of course, continues.

The narrator was sure that
1) it is impossible deviate from the National Curriculum.
2) the National Curriculum should meet the child’s needs.
3) she should develop a series of unit studies according to the National Curriculum.
4) she could not teach without a prescribed scheme of work.

🔗

5) Прочитайте текст и запишите в поле ответа цифру 1, 2, 3 или 4, соответствующую выбранному Вами варианту ответа.

Показать текст. ⇓

Increasingly, I see that home educating is so much more than ‘equipping children for life’. We all begin somewhere, and this is a good starting point, but if that is all that happens, then we only scratch the surface of something so important.

We began educating our children at home in January 1993, and it was supposed to be a short term solution to an immediate problem, namely the fact that I did not have transport to get my three-year-old daughter to nursery school. That was almost 17 years ago, and I am so glad we made that choice and for the direction in which that choice led us. Home education has turned out to be much more than a way of schooling; it is a way of life, a family building and enhancing opportunity, and a key to self-knowledge and growth.

We started with a programme called Babies Bible Class and a second-hand Letterland teacher’s guide. Using these two, I developed a series of unit studies which we pursued with interest and enthusiasm. This alone was considered very radical. In the far off days when home education was still illegal for over 7’s, no-one dared deviate from the National Curriculum. In fact, no-one even thought it was possible to do so. How could you teach without a prescribed scheme of work? But I felt, right from the beginning, that the curriculum should fit the child, not the other way around.

As the years went by, and more children were added into our family, we continued our eclectic mix of unit studies. I developed the units around specific interests of the children at any given time, and where possible, followed these up with outings, movies or books about the subject. The children were bright, eager, and willing. I have many special memories of these years.

Initially we had a lot of fun, but as time went on, schoolwork gradually became a battle, especially with my second daughter. She was one of those self-directed thinkers, a child who wanted to know what the point was of any given activity, and who was not interested in doing tasks just for the sake of doing them. Increasingly, our schoolwork took up long and unpleasant hours, filled with strife and disappointment. We lost the joy in the learning, and I felt like the fire breathing dragon.

I’m a researcher and a problem-solver by nature, so I began to ask questions about our educational approach and methodology. At this time I came into contact with Martie Du Plessis, an educational consultant who was particularly interested in helping the people in home educating families to identify and understand their particular learning styles, and to consider the ways in which they interacted with one another. A session spent with Martie was very enlightening, as we began to realise the obvious — that people, in their uniqueness, both gather and organise information in different ways. Thus a child who seemed oppositional and difficult and downright disobedient quite possibly just had a different learning style to the parent.

In 2000, I read all six of Charlotte Mason’s insightful books. Her last book ‘Towards a Philosophy of Education’ gave me a lot to think about. It was directly because of her influence that we introduced a strong literature focus as the foundation for our learning. We had always enjoyed reading to the children. Craig and I both love books, but now we recognised that reading books was more than the activity. It was how one obtained food for the mind.

In 2001, we bought our first pre-packaged curriculum ‘Year 1’ of Sonlight’s excellent literature based programme. We loved the books. However, we quickly dispensed with the curriculum guide, preferring to read the books at our own pace. There was only one problem — we finished reading the whole year’s books within a few months! I found myself motivating why we needed a larger educational budget. Step by step our own individualised educational approach was developing.

All of the discoveries I was making about education now crystallised into one key word — respect. I recognised that many educational approaches were inherently disrespectful to learners. They presumed too much, elevated teachers to a status that was not real, discounted previous knowledge and wisdom on the part of the learner. Many methodologies erupted from an erroneous notion that the learner was an empty vessel waiting to be filled up by the all wise educator. But Charlotte Mason believed that the learner was not ‘less’ than the teacher.

Increasingly I became uneasy with a prescriptive, teacher directed approach to my children’s education. Although I had designed a curriculum that was sensitive to my children’s interests, it was still a curriculum chosen by me. Like the adults around me, I had been led to believe that the children would not learn unless I made them learn. But Charlotte Mason said that learning was to humans what swimming was to fish — something they did naturally, unconsciously, and all the time.

Looking back, our home education has been a wonderful journey. Two of my children are now beyond compulsory education. I found that our educational philosophy evolved, and our methodology changed accordingly from year to year, and as the children developed. I tried out things that didn’t work, and found things that did. This process, of course, continues.

The narrator had problems educating her second daughter because
1) she didn’t want to study.
2) she didn’t like doing tasks.
3) of her independent way of thinking.
4) their schoolwork took up long hours.

🔗

6) Прочитайте текст и запишите в поле ответа цифру 1, 2, 3 или 4, соответствующую выбранному Вами варианту ответа.

Показать текст. ⇓

Increasingly, I see that home educating is so much more than ‘equipping children for life’. We all begin somewhere, and this is a good starting point, but if that is all that happens, then we only scratch the surface of something so important.

We began educating our children at home in January 1993, and it was supposed to be a short term solution to an immediate problem, namely the fact that I did not have transport to get my three-year-old daughter to nursery school. That was almost 17 years ago, and I am so glad we made that choice and for the direction in which that choice led us. Home education has turned out to be much more than a way of schooling; it is a way of life, a family building and enhancing opportunity, and a key to self-knowledge and growth.

We started with a programme called Babies Bible Class and a second-hand Letterland teacher’s guide. Using these two, I developed a series of unit studies which we pursued with interest and enthusiasm. This alone was considered very radical. In the far off days when home education was still illegal for over 7’s, no-one dared deviate from the National Curriculum. In fact, no-one even thought it was possible to do so. How could you teach without a prescribed scheme of work? But I felt, right from the beginning, that the curriculum should fit the child, not the other way around.

As the years went by, and more children were added into our family, we continued our eclectic mix of unit studies. I developed the units around specific interests of the children at any given time, and where possible, followed these up with outings, movies or books about the subject. The children were bright, eager, and willing. I have many special memories of these years.

Initially we had a lot of fun, but as time went on, schoolwork gradually became a battle, especially with my second daughter. She was one of those self-directed thinkers, a child who wanted to know what the point was of any given activity, and who was not interested in doing tasks just for the sake of doing them. Increasingly, our schoolwork took up long and unpleasant hours, filled with strife and disappointment. We lost the joy in the learning, and I felt like the fire breathing dragon.

I’m a researcher and a problem-solver by nature, so I began to ask questions about our educational approach and methodology. At this time I came into contact with Martie Du Plessis, an educational consultant who was particularly interested in helping the people in home educating families to identify and understand their particular learning styles, and to consider the ways in which they interacted with one another. A session spent with Martie was very enlightening, as we began to realise the obvious — that people, in their uniqueness, both gather and organise information in different ways. Thus a child who seemed oppositional and difficult and downright disobedient quite possibly just had a different learning style to the parent.

In 2000, I read all six of Charlotte Mason’s insightful books. Her last book ‘Towards a Philosophy of Education’ gave me a lot to think about. It was directly because of her influence that we introduced a strong literature focus as the foundation for our learning. We had always enjoyed reading to the children. Craig and I both love books, but now we recognised that reading books was more than the activity. It was how one obtained food for the mind.

In 2001, we bought our first pre-packaged curriculum ‘Year 1’ of Sonlight’s excellent literature based programme. We loved the books. However, we quickly dispensed with the curriculum guide, preferring to read the books at our own pace. There was only one problem — we finished reading the whole year’s books within a few months! I found myself motivating why we needed a larger educational budget. Step by step our own individualised educational approach was developing.

All of the discoveries I was making about education now crystallised into one key word — respect. I recognised that many educational approaches were inherently disrespectful to learners. They presumed too much, elevated teachers to a status that was not real, discounted previous knowledge and wisdom on the part of the learner. Many methodologies erupted from an erroneous notion that the learner was an empty vessel waiting to be filled up by the all wise educator. But Charlotte Mason believed that the learner was not ‘less’ than the teacher.

Increasingly I became uneasy with a prescriptive, teacher directed approach to my children’s education. Although I had designed a curriculum that was sensitive to my children’s interests, it was still a curriculum chosen by me. Like the adults around me, I had been led to believe that the children would not learn unless I made them learn. But Charlotte Mason said that learning was to humans what swimming was to fish — something they did naturally, unconsciously, and all the time.

Looking back, our home education has been a wonderful journey. Two of my children are now beyond compulsory education. I found that our educational philosophy evolved, and our methodology changed accordingly from year to year, and as the children developed. I tried out things that didn’t work, and found things that did. This process, of course, continues.

After a session spent with Martie Du Plessis the narrator understood
1) that people can have different learning styles.
2) that her second daughter was disobedient.
3) her own learning style.
4) the way she interacted with her children.

🔗

7) Прочитайте текст и запишите в поле ответа цифру 1, 2, 3 или 4, соответствующую выбранному Вами варианту ответа.

Показать текст. ⇓

Increasingly, I see that home educating is so much more than ‘equipping children for life’. We all begin somewhere, and this is a good starting point, but if that is all that happens, then we only scratch the surface of something so important.

We began educating our children at home in January 1993, and it was supposed to be a short term solution to an immediate problem, namely the fact that I did not have transport to get my three-year-old daughter to nursery school. That was almost 17 years ago, and I am so glad we made that choice and for the direction in which that choice led us. Home education has turned out to be much more than a way of schooling; it is a way of life, a family building and enhancing opportunity, and a key to self-knowledge and growth.

We started with a programme called Babies Bible Class and a second-hand Letterland teacher’s guide. Using these two, I developed a series of unit studies which we pursued with interest and enthusiasm. This alone was considered very radical. In the far off days when home education was still illegal for over 7’s, no-one dared deviate from the National Curriculum. In fact, no-one even thought it was possible to do so. How could you teach without a prescribed scheme of work? But I felt, right from the beginning, that the curriculum should fit the child, not the other way around.

As the years went by, and more children were added into our family, we continued our eclectic mix of unit studies. I developed the units around specific interests of the children at any given time, and where possible, followed these up with outings, movies or books about the subject. The children were bright, eager, and willing. I have many special memories of these years.

Initially we had a lot of fun, but as time went on, schoolwork gradually became a battle, especially with my second daughter. She was one of those self-directed thinkers, a child who wanted to know what the point was of any given activity, and who was not interested in doing tasks just for the sake of doing them. Increasingly, our schoolwork took up long and unpleasant hours, filled with strife and disappointment. We lost the joy in the learning, and I felt like the fire breathing dragon.

I’m a researcher and a problem-solver by nature, so I began to ask questions about our educational approach and methodology. At this time I came into contact with Martie Du Plessis, an educational consultant who was particularly interested in helping the people in home educating families to identify and understand their particular learning styles, and to consider the ways in which they interacted with one another. A session spent with Martie was very enlightening, as we began to realise the obvious — that people, in their uniqueness, both gather and organise information in different ways. Thus a child who seemed oppositional and difficult and downright disobedient quite possibly just had a different learning style to the parent.

In 2000, I read all six of Charlotte Mason’s insightful books. Her last book ‘Towards a Philosophy of Education’ gave me a lot to think about. It was directly because of her influence that we introduced a strong literature focus as the foundation for our learning. We had always enjoyed reading to the children. Craig and I both love books, but now we recognised that reading books was more than the activity. It was how one obtained food for the mind.

In 2001, we bought our first pre-packaged curriculum ‘Year 1’ of Sonlight’s excellent literature based programme. We loved the books. However, we quickly dispensed with the curriculum guide, preferring to read the books at our own pace. There was only one problem — we finished reading the whole year’s books within a few months! I found myself motivating why we needed a larger educational budget. Step by step our own individualised educational approach was developing.

All of the discoveries I was making about education now crystallised into one key word — respect. I recognised that many educational approaches were inherently disrespectful to learners. They presumed too much, elevated teachers to a status that was not real, discounted previous knowledge and wisdom on the part of the learner. Many methodologies erupted from an erroneous notion that the learner was an empty vessel waiting to be filled up by the all wise educator. But Charlotte Mason believed that the learner was not ‘less’ than the teacher.

Increasingly I became uneasy with a prescriptive, teacher directed approach to my children’s education. Although I had designed a curriculum that was sensitive to my children’s interests, it was still a curriculum chosen by me. Like the adults around me, I had been led to believe that the children would not learn unless I made them learn. But Charlotte Mason said that learning was to humans what swimming was to fish — something they did naturally, unconsciously, and all the time.

Looking back, our home education has been a wonderful journey. Two of my children are now beyond compulsory education. I found that our educational philosophy evolved, and our methodology changed accordingly from year to year, and as the children developed. I tried out things that didn’t work, and found things that did. This process, of course, continues.

Literature became the foundation for the children’s education
1) because they had always enjoyed reading.
2) due to the influence of Charlotte Mason’s books.
3) because the narrator and her husband both loved books.
4) as books contained food for thought.

🔗

8) Прочитайте текст и запишите в поле ответа цифру 1, 2, 3 или 4, соответствующую выбранному Вами варианту ответа.

Показать текст. ⇓

Increasingly, I see that home educating is so much more than ‘equipping children for life’. We all begin somewhere, and this is a good starting point, but if that is all that happens, then we only scratch the surface of something so important.

We began educating our children at home in January 1993, and it was supposed to be a short term solution to an immediate problem, namely the fact that I did not have transport to get my three-year-old daughter to nursery school. That was almost 17 years ago, and I am so glad we made that choice and for the direction in which that choice led us. Home education has turned out to be much more than a way of schooling; it is a way of life, a family building and enhancing opportunity, and a key to self-knowledge and growth.

We started with a programme called Babies Bible Class and a second-hand Letterland teacher’s guide. Using these two, I developed a series of unit studies which we pursued with interest and enthusiasm. This alone was considered very radical. In the far off days when home education was still illegal for over 7’s, no-one dared deviate from the National Curriculum. In fact, no-one even thought it was possible to do so. How could you teach without a prescribed scheme of work? But I felt, right from the beginning, that the curriculum should fit the child, not the other way around.

As the years went by, and more children were added into our family, we continued our eclectic mix of unit studies. I developed the units around specific interests of the children at any given time, and where possible, followed these up with outings, movies or books about the subject. The children were bright, eager, and willing. I have many special memories of these years.

Initially we had a lot of fun, but as time went on, schoolwork gradually became a battle, especially with my second daughter. She was one of those self-directed thinkers, a child who wanted to know what the point was of any given activity, and who was not interested in doing tasks just for the sake of doing them. Increasingly, our schoolwork took up long and unpleasant hours, filled with strife and disappointment. We lost the joy in the learning, and I felt like the fire breathing dragon.

I’m a researcher and a problem-solver by nature, so I began to ask questions about our educational approach and methodology. At this time I came into contact with Martie Du Plessis, an educational consultant who was particularly interested in helping the people in home educating families to identify and understand their particular learning styles, and to consider the ways in which they interacted with one another. A session spent with Martie was very enlightening, as we began to realise the obvious — that people, in their uniqueness, both gather and organise information in different ways. Thus a child who seemed oppositional and difficult and downright disobedient quite possibly just had a different learning style to the parent.

In 2000, I read all six of Charlotte Mason’s insightful books. Her last book ‘Towards a Philosophy of Education’ gave me a lot to think about. It was directly because of her influence that we introduced a strong literature focus as the foundation for our learning. We had always enjoyed reading to the children. Craig and I both love books, but now we recognised that reading books was more than the activity. It was how one obtained food for the mind.

In 2001, we bought our first pre-packaged curriculum ‘Year 1’ of Sonlight’s excellent literature based programme. We loved the books. However, we quickly dispensed with the curriculum guide, preferring to read the books at our own pace. There was only one problem — we finished reading the whole year’s books within a few months! I found myself motivating why we needed a larger educational budget. Step by step our own individualised educational approach was developing.

All of the discoveries I was making about education now crystallised into one key word — respect. I recognised that many educational approaches were inherently disrespectful to learners. They presumed too much, elevated teachers to a status that was not real, discounted previous knowledge and wisdom on the part of the learner. Many methodologies erupted from an erroneous notion that the learner was an empty vessel waiting to be filled up by the all wise educator. But Charlotte Mason believed that the learner was not ‘less’ than the teacher.

Increasingly I became uneasy with a prescriptive, teacher directed approach to my children’s education. Although I had designed a curriculum that was sensitive to my children’s interests, it was still a curriculum chosen by me. Like the adults around me, I had been led to believe that the children would not learn unless I made them learn. But Charlotte Mason said that learning was to humans what swimming was to fish — something they did naturally, unconsciously, and all the time.

Looking back, our home education has been a wonderful journey. Two of my children are now beyond compulsory education. I found that our educational philosophy evolved, and our methodology changed accordingly from year to year, and as the children developed. I tried out things that didn’t work, and found things that did. This process, of course, continues.

The narrator dispensed with the curriculum guide because
1) the children read books faster than they were supposed to.
2) the children read books more slowly than they were supposed to.
3) they had a small educational budget.
4) the curriculum guide was boring.

🔗

9) Прочитайте текст и запишите в поле ответа цифру 1, 2, 3 или 4, соответствующую выбранному Вами варианту ответа.

Показать текст. ⇓

Increasingly, I see that home educating is so much more than ‘equipping children for life’. We all begin somewhere, and this is a good starting point, but if that is all that happens, then we only scratch the surface of something so important.

We began educating our children at home in January 1993, and it was supposed to be a short term solution to an immediate problem, namely the fact that I did not have transport to get my three-year-old daughter to nursery school. That was almost 17 years ago, and I am so glad we made that choice and for the direction in which that choice led us. Home education has turned out to be much more than a way of schooling; it is a way of life, a family building and enhancing opportunity, and a key to self-knowledge and growth.

We started with a programme called Babies Bible Class and a second-hand Letterland teacher’s guide. Using these two, I developed a series of unit studies which we pursued with interest and enthusiasm. This alone was considered very radical. In the far off days when home education was still illegal for over 7’s, no-one dared deviate from the National Curriculum. In fact, no-one even thought it was possible to do so. How could you teach without a prescribed scheme of work? But I felt, right from the beginning, that the curriculum should fit the child, not the other way around.

As the years went by, and more children were added into our family, we continued our eclectic mix of unit studies. I developed the units around specific interests of the children at any given time, and where possible, followed these up with outings, movies or books about the subject. The children were bright, eager, and willing. I have many special memories of these years.

Initially we had a lot of fun, but as time went on, schoolwork gradually became a battle, especially with my second daughter. She was one of those self-directed thinkers, a child who wanted to know what the point was of any given activity, and who was not interested in doing tasks just for the sake of doing them. Increasingly, our schoolwork took up long and unpleasant hours, filled with strife and disappointment. We lost the joy in the learning, and I felt like the fire breathing dragon.

I’m a researcher and a problem-solver by nature, so I began to ask questions about our educational approach and methodology. At this time I came into contact with Martie Du Plessis, an educational consultant who was particularly interested in helping the people in home educating families to identify and understand their particular learning styles, and to consider the ways in which they interacted with one another. A session spent with Martie was very enlightening, as we began to realise the obvious — that people, in their uniqueness, both gather and organise information in different ways. Thus a child who seemed oppositional and difficult and downright disobedient quite possibly just had a different learning style to the parent.

In 2000, I read all six of Charlotte Mason’s insightful books. Her last book ‘Towards a Philosophy of Education’ gave me a lot to think about. It was directly because of her influence that we introduced a strong literature focus as the foundation for our learning. We had always enjoyed reading to the children. Craig and I both love books, but now we recognised that reading books was more than the activity. It was how one obtained food for the mind.

In 2001, we bought our first pre-packaged curriculum ‘Year 1’ of Sonlight’s excellent literature based programme. We loved the books. However, we quickly dispensed with the curriculum guide, preferring to read the books at our own pace. There was only one problem — we finished reading the whole year’s books within a few months! I found myself motivating why we needed a larger educational budget. Step by step our own individualised educational approach was developing.

All of the discoveries I was making about education now crystallised into one key word — respect. I recognised that many educational approaches were inherently disrespectful to learners. They presumed too much, elevated teachers to a status that was not real, discounted previous knowledge and wisdom on the part of the learner. Many methodologies erupted from an erroneous notion that the learner was an empty vessel waiting to be filled up by the all wise educator. But Charlotte Mason believed that the learner was not ‘less’ than the teacher.

Increasingly I became uneasy with a prescriptive, teacher directed approach to my children’s education. Although I had designed a curriculum that was sensitive to my children’s interests, it was still a curriculum chosen by me. Like the adults around me, I had been led to believe that the children would not learn unless I made them learn. But Charlotte Mason said that learning was to humans what swimming was to fish — something they did naturally, unconsciously, and all the time.

Looking back, our home education has been a wonderful journey. Two of my children are now beyond compulsory education. I found that our educational philosophy evolved, and our methodology changed accordingly from year to year, and as the children developed. I tried out things that didn’t work, and found things that did. This process, of course, continues.

The narrator initially believed that
1) the learner was an empty vessel waiting to be filled up.
2) children learn unconsciously all the time.
3) the children would not learn without her motivating them.
4) the learner was not ‘less’ than the teacher.

🔗