今天是周四, 又是雅思考试的日子.
昨天给几个学生上完课后, 我只能祝福他们在今天的考试中考出好成绩. 一路走下来, 我知道他们都走得很不容易. 自从他们决定备考雅思以后, 他们就放弃了学业和工作, 全身心地投入到这场没有硝烟的战场中, 从早到晚地学习, 包括记那无穷无尽的雅思词汇, 做那一本本真题, 写一篇篇被我改得 “满目疮桥痍” 的作文…… 由于他们的基础不太好, 所以学起来会更加吃力. 百分之九十以上的学生在做雅思阅读时根本没有时间把文章读完, 做题也只是匆忙地在文中找答案. 然而现在的雅思考试已经和几年多少钱前的有很大的不同, 阅读题也是一样. 有部分题目是很容易定位找到答案的, 可是更多的, 却是建立在理解的基础之上. 很多学生最怕的就是匹配题(match), 因为这种题如果不深入地了解文章的一些细节是无法做出来的.
有时我真的很佩服自己的学生. 他们为了考好雅思可以一连几个月甚至一年都很刻苦用功, 从早学到晚, 孜孜不倦. 英语哪怕我这么喜欢英语, 我想我也无法做到像他们那样从早学到晚. 所以每当我一天教六七个小时甚至有时九个小时的课而感到很疲惫时, 一想到他们认真学习的身影, 我的精神又会焕然一新, 继续投入到教学中. 看到他们桌上像小山般高的书, 我都感到有点恐怖. 我在同情和佩服他们时, 我也会很庆幸, 庆幸自己已经走过了他们现在正在走的苦路. 同时, 这也让我的头脑更加警醒: 学别的东西也像学英语一样, 一旦当初不努力, 后面想要再补时, 要花费比别人多几倍的功夫, 而且效果还没有别人的好. 拿英语来说, 我最老的一个学生差不多四十岁了基础. 他是一个相当勤奋的人, 为了考试把工作都辞了, 天天无比用功. 但是, 在同样的学习方式下, 我明显感觉到他的进步比不上和别的年轻的同学, 比如说一些大学生和高中生. 那一刻价格我才意识到, 学语言真的是越年轻越好. 一旦你错过了学语言的那段黄金时期, 你后面要想达到同样的水平, 就要比别人付出更多更多的努力.
其实不止是学三元语言, 学别的东西也一样. 趁自己年轻多看书多学点东西, 一来可以为未来的成功铺路, 二来也可以好好把握年轻的时光, 不让它虚度, 趁这段黄金时期快速掌握更多的东西, 否则将来等费用自英语己桥上了一定的岁数再来学, 那就真的是事倍功半了.
看着学生用功的情景, 我也会想起自己大学五年学习英语的岁月. 说实话, 我想起自己以前学习的情景, 现在都会三元桥
零基础英语培训多少钱感到有些 “后怕”. 可能比我刻苦用功的人很多, 但是对我本身来讲, 我以前对英语的学习可以说是到达了极限了. 那时候用 “热情如火” 或者是 “疯狂” 来形容我的热情, 真的是一点也不过分. 天天早晨我很早就起床去晨读, 然后上一些不喜欢的或者没用的课时, 我总是静静地坐在课室最后面看英语书; 下课了回到宿舍第一件事就是打看电脑听英语新闻或者培训看英语文零章; 晚上自习时总是背着一堆英语书; 深夜舍友都睡觉时, 我仍然在电脑前面写文章和做翻译…… 从早到晚, 我的脑子都被英语占据着. 那时候选了很多英语的选修课, 非常热价格衷于英语口语和演讲, 每次有机会总是主动上台演讲. 其实我也不知道自己讲得好不好, 我也不怕别人笑话我, 我当时只想抓住每一个锻炼的机会. 那种非常热爱某项事业而且全身心地零投入的感觉, 没有这种经历的人是无法体会到的.
那时候为了将专业和英语结合起来, 我还买了许多专业的英文书来看, 记一些自己专业的术语和表达. 整个大学期间我费用买的书基础几乎百分之九十五都是和英语相关的. 那时候宿舍的地上的空地以及我的床头和床上全是书, 一堆一堆的, 而且绝大部分是英语书, 像开书店一样. 有一次一个朋友进我宿舍三元桥
零基础英语培训费用看到琳琅满目的书时, 他惊叹地说我就像是一个教授在搞研究. 等到本科毕业要搬宿舍时, 我要托运五大箱书回家, 几乎全是英语书, 另外还扔了许多不看的书. 所以, 我在英语上投入的时间和金钱三元真的是 “不可估量”. 因此, 当有学生开玩笑地和我说: “老师, 怎么你的课收费这么高, 这么值钱啊?”时, 我会笑着对他说: “你没有看到我以前的投资究竟有多大.”
现在再回想起那段岁月, 我一方面感到无悔, 另一方面也感到后怕, 因为现在要我再回到以前那种状态已经是不可能的了. 我
三元桥零基础英语培训价格明白, 如今英语已经成为我生命中的沉淀, 就好比一对恋人, 刚开始恋爱时会很痴狂, 可是随时岁月的流逝, 两个人的感情尽管还是如此的深, 可是已经不会再像年少时那般浪漫. 如今我也深深地爱着英语, 可是我却无法像当年那般疯狂. 我留给她的, 只有永远不会磨灭的感激与深情. 我深信, 一路有她相伴, 不管我的人生遇到多少挫折与不顺, 我都不会感到孤独. 一个人在生活中有一个热衷多少钱的兴趣或培训者爱好, 而且这个兴趣和爱好可以为你的事业锦上添花时, 原来是最幸福的.
------------------------------------------------------------
Current woes call for smart reinvention not destruction
By Lawrence Summers
It would have been almost unimaginable five years ago that the Financial Times would convene a series of articles on “Capitalism in Crisis”. That it has done so is a reflection both of sour public opinion and distressing results on the ground in much of the industrial world.
Americans have traditionally been the most enthusiastic champions of capitalism. Yet, a recent public opinion survey found that among the US population as a whole 50 per cent had a positive opinion of capitalism while 40 per cent did not. The disillusionment was particularly marked among young people aged 18-29, African Americans and Hispanics, those with incomes under $30,000 and self-described Democrats.
Three elections in a row in the US have been, by recent standards, bloodbaths for incumbents. In 2006 and 2008 the left did well; in 2010 the right won comprehensively. But with the rise of the Tea Party on the right and the Occupy movement on the left, far more is up for grabs than usual in this election year.
So how justified is disillusionment with market capitalism? This depends on the answer to two critical questions. Do today’s problems inhere in the present form of market capitalism or are they subject to more direct solution? Are there imaginable better alternatives?
The spread of stagnation and abnormal unemployment from Japan to the rest of the industrialised world does raise doubts about capitalism’s efficacy as a promoter of employment and rising living standards for a broad middle class. The problem is genuine. Few would confidently bet that the US or Europe will see a return to full employment, as previously defined, within the next five years. The economies of both are likely to be demand constrained for a long time.
But does this reflect an inherent flaw in capitalism or, as Keynes suggested, a “magneto” problem – like the failure of a car alternator – that can be addressed with proper fiscal and monetary policies and which will not benefit from large scale structural measures. I believe the evidence overwhelmingly supports the latter. Efforts to reform capitalism are more likely to divert from the steps needed to promote demand than to contribute to putting people back to work. I suspect that if and when macro-economic policies are appropriately adjusted, much of the contemporary concern will fade.
That said, serious questions about the fairness of capitalism are being raised. These are driven by sharp increases in unemployment beyond the business cycle – one in six of American men aged 25-54 is likely to be out of work even after the economy recovers – combined with dramatic rises in the share of income going to the top 1 per cent (and even the top 0.01 per cent) of the population and declining social mobility. The problem is real and seems very unlikely to correct itself untended. Unlike cyclical concerns, there is no obvious solution at hand. Indeed, the observation that even Chinese manufacturing employment appears well below the level of 15 years ago suggests that the roots of the problem lie deep within the evolution of technology.
The agricultural economy gave way to the industrial one because progress enabled demands for food to be met by a small fraction of the population, freeing large numbers of people to work elsewhere. The same process is now under way with respect to manufacturing and a range of services, reducing employment prospects for most citizens. At the same time, just as in the early days of the industrial era the combination of substantial dislocations and greater ability to produce at scale is enabling a lucky few to acquire great fortunes.
