Question

While success is surely sweeter than failure, it seems failure is a far better teacher, and organizations that fail miserably often flourish (繁荣) more in the long run, according to a new study by Vinit Desai, assistant professor of management at the University of Colorado Denver Business School. Researchers have found that people missing their goals perform much better in the long run. That is because they gain more knowledge from their failures than their successes and the lessons are more likely to stay longer in their minds.

“We found that the knowledge gained from success was often fleeting while knowledge from failure stuck around for years,” said professor Desai, who led the study. “But companies often ignore failure. Managers may fire people or turn over the whole workforce while they should treat the failure as a learning opportunity.”

Prof Desai compared the flights of the space shuttle Atlantis and the Challenger. During the Atlantis flight last year, a piece of insulation (绝缘体) broke off and damaged the left solid rocket booster (助推火箭) but didn’t influence the program. There was little investigation. The Challenger was launched next and another piece of insulation broke off. This time the shuttle and its seven–person crew were destroyed. The disaster led to a major investigation resulting in 29 changes to prevent future disasters.

The difference in response in the two cases came down to this: Atlantis was considered a success and the Challenger a failure.

“Despite crowded skies, airlines are extremely reliable,” he said. “The number of failures is extremely small. And past researches have shown that older airlines, those with more experience in failure, have a lower number of accidents.”

Prof Desai doesn’t recommend finding out failure in order to learn. Instead, he advises organizations to analyze small failures to collect useful information rather than wait for major failures.

1. Why did experts pay little attention to the problem of Atlantis?

A．Because it worked perfectly.

B．Because the right booster was still OK.

C．Because nothing serious happened then.

D．Because fewer people died in the flight.

2.Fewer accidents happen to older airlines in that ________.

A．their planes couldn’t fly high in the sky

B．they gained much from experience in failure

C．their planes were often checked by the experts

D．they were unpopular among passengers

3.The passage is written mainly to ________.

A．show failure is a better teacher than success

B．explain why Challenger failed

C．introduce something about Prof Desai

D．tell managers how to achieve success

4. Which writing strategy is NOT used in developing the passage?

A．Giving definitions.

B．Making comparisons.

C．Analyzing causes.

D．Providing different examples.

 

Answer 1

【答案】

1.C

2.B

3.A

4.A

【解析】

试题分析:本文是一篇说明文，说明了尽管成功比失败甜美，但是失败更像一个好老师，从失败中得到教训比较多，对成功和失败进行比较、分析原因，举例说明

1.细节题，由第三段第二行a piece of insulation (绝缘体) broke off and damaged the left solid rocket booster (助推火箭) but didn’t influence the program可以知道答案，故选C。

2.细节题。由最后一段第三行those with more experience in failure,可以知道答案，所以选B。

3.推理题，由本文的主要意思“失败是个很好的老师”，所以选A

4.推理题，本文对成功和失败进行比较、分析原因，举例说明，没有下定义，所以选A

考点：本篇是一篇说明文

点评：做细节题的关键是找出原文的根据，认真核查题支和原文的异同，常犯错误有：绝对化语言，范围扩大或缩小，以偏概全，张冠李戴等。推断题测试考生在阅读基础上的逻辑推理能力，要求考生根据文章所述事件的逻辑关系，对未说明的趋势或结局作出合理的推断；或根据作者所阐述的观点理论，对文章未涉及的现象、事例给以解释。考生首先要仔细阅读短文，完整了解信息，准确把握作者观点。