2017年5月6日SAT亚太考试真题回顾【汇总篇】!在本次考试中阅读部分的文章类型包括小说类、历史类、科学类以及社科类。语法部分考试难度系数相对较低，主要考察平行结构、动词时态等。数学和写作部分考察哪些内容一起来看一下。
2017年5月6日SAT
Passage 4
历史类，两篇文章在观点，论据和反驳上都是极相似的。Passage1 均来自Patrik Herny 的演讲，表明New government会危机public liberty，让大家慎重考虑。而Passage 2 都是通过反驳第一篇的观点从而支持新政府。
第一篇、
标题：Speech Before Virginia Ratifying Convention，作者：Patrick Henry
Passage 1
If a wrong step be nowmade, the republic may be lost forever. If this new government will not come upto the expectation of the people, and they shall be disappointed, their libertywill be lost, and tyranny must and will arise. I repeat it again, and I beggentlemen to consider, that a wrong step, made now, will plunge us into misery,and our republic will be lost. It will be necessary for this Convention to havea faithful historical detail of the facts that preceded the session of thefederal Convention, and the reasons that actuated its members in proposing anentire alteration of government, and to demonstrate the dangers that awaitedus.
If they were of such awful magnitude as towarrant a proposal so extremely perilous as this, I must assert, that thisConvention has an absolute right to a thorough discovery of every circumstancerelative to this great event. And here I would make this inquiry of thoseworthy characters who composed a part of the late federal Convention. I am surethey were fully impressed with the necessity of forming a great consolidatedgovernment, instead of a confederation. That this is a consolidated governmentis demonstrably clear; and the danger of such a government is, to my mind, verystriking. I have the highest veneration for those gentlemen; but, sir, give meleave to demand, What right had they to say, We, the people? My politicalcuriosity, exclusive of my anxious solicitude for the public welfare, leads meto ask, Who authorized them to speak the language of, We, the people, instead of,We, the states? States are the characteristics and the soul of a confederation.If the states be not the agents of this compact, it must be one great,consolidated, national government, of the people of all the states.
I have the highest respect for those gentlemenwho formed the Convention, and, were some of them not here, I would expresssome testimonial of esteem for them. America had, on a former occasion, put theutmost confidence in them — a confidence which was well placed; and I amsure, sir, I would give up any thing to them; I would cheerfully confide inthem as my representatives. But, sir, on this great occasion, I would demandthe cause of their conduct. Even from that illustrious man who saved us by hisvalor, I would have a reason for his conduct: that liberty which he has givenus by his valor, tells me to ask this reason; and sure I am, were he here, hewould give us that reason. But there are other gentlemen here, who can give usthis information. The people gave them no power to use their name. That theyexceeded their power is perfectly clear. It is not mere curiosity that actuatesme: I wish to hear the real, actual, existing danger, which should lead us totake those steps, so dangerous in my conception. Disorders have arisen in otherparts of America; but here, sir, no dangers, no insurrection or tumult havehappened; every thing has been calm and tranquil. But, notwithstanding this, weare wandering on the great ocean of human affairs. I see no landmark to guideus. We are running we know not whither. Difference of opinion has gone to adegree of inflammatory resentment in different parts of the country, which hasbeen occasioned by this perilous innovation.
The federal Convention ought to have amended theold system; for this purpose they were solely delegated; the object of theirmission extended to no other consideration. You must, therefore, forgive thesolicitation of one unworthy member to know what danger could have arisen underthe present Confederation, and what are the causes of this proposal to changeour government.
第二篇、
标题：Speech at the Virginia Ratifying Convention，作者：Edmond Pendleton
文章内容概括：，双篇，第一篇支持邦联政体，反对建立统一的联邦政府，觉得会给国家和人民带来危险;第二篇支持，觉得统一才是硬道理，才能给美国带来繁荣富强。
Mr. Chairman, my worthy friend (Mr. Henry) hasexpressed great uneasiness in his mind, and informed us that a great many ofour citizens are also extremely uneasy, at the proposal of changing our government...
But an objection is made to the form: theexpression, We, the people, is thought improper. Permit me to ask the gentlemanwho made this objection, who but the people can delegate powers? Who but thepeople have a right to form government? The expression is a common one, and afavorite one with me. The representatives of the people, by their authority, isa mode wholly inessential. If the objection be, that the Union ought to be notof the people, but of the state governments, then I think the choice of theformer very happy and proper. What have the state governments to do with it?Were they to determine, the people would not, in that case, be the judges uponwhat terms it was adopted.
But the power of theConvention is doubted. What is the power? To propose, not to determine. Thispower of proposing was very broad; it extended to remove all defects ingovernment: the members of that Convention, who were to consider all thedefects in our general government, were not confined to any particular plan.Were they deceived? This is the proper question here. Suppose the paper on yourtable dropped from one of the planets; the people found it, and sent us here toconsider whether it was proper for their adoption; must we not obey them? Thenthe question must be between this government and the Confederation. The latteris no government at all. It has been said that it has carried us, through adangerous war, to a happy issue. Not that Confederation, but common danger, andthe spirit of America, were bonds of our union: union and unanimity, and notthat insignificant paper, carried us through that dangerous war. “United,we stand divided, we fall!” echoed and re-echoedthrough Americafrom Congress to the drunken carpenterwas effectual, andprocured the end of our wishes, though now forgotten by gentlemen, if suchthere be, who incline to let go this stronghold, to catch at feathers; for suchall substituted projects may prove.
...
点击查看》》
2017年5月6日
Passage 1
内容：patient's electronic record 建立病人的电子版病历，这一改变在医学界有着重大突破和积极影响。它规避了很多纸质病历的缺点(比如存储空间、信息共享)，并且现在已在很多地区普及使用，有必要推动电子病历完全取代纸质病例。
Passage 2
内容：beaver被生态学家称为“ecological engineer”，因为海狸刨的dam对生态系统有积极影响，比如对抗干旱等问题。附了两个图，分别是1.有海狸的地区;2.没有海狸的地区，水量的增长一个幅度大一个幅度微小。
...
点击查看》》
2017年5月6日
标题：How To Increase the Number of Women Winning Nobel Prizes
作者：By Meredith Wadman Oct. 24, 2013 Time
1. The mother of tweens was folding laundry at 5 a.m. before going to an early spinning class when the phone rang. It was October 2009 and Carol Greider, a biologist at Johns Hopkins University, picked up and heard a voice from Stockholm. She had won that year’s Nobel Prize in medicine.
2. Unfortunately, Greider remains a rarity in the pantheon of Nobel scientists. And that’s partly because we haven’t done enough to help young female scientists balance the demands of academic research with the pull of family responsibility. That needs to change.
3. Admittedly, today’s situation is better than it was when Greider entered grad school in the early 80s, never mind in the dark days of the preceding decades. Then, when women were scarcely to be found at undergraduate lab benches, the results in the rarefied reaches of Stockholm couldn’t help but be dismal. Since the awards were launched in 1901, two physics laureates have been women: Marie Curie in 1903 and Maria Goeppert Mayer in1963. In chemistry,four of the 165 winners have been women. (Marie Curie was one of them, in 1911;she is the only woman to have won two Nobels.) Women have won 5 percent of the coveted awards in physiology or medicine. And it was 2009 before Elinor Ostrom, of Indiana University and Arizona State University, became the first-ever female laureate in economics.
4. In fact, 2009 was something of a banner year for women — Greider shared her award with her mentor, Elizabeth Blackburn, of the University of California at San Francisco; and Israel’s Ada Yonath shared the prize in chemistry. Since then, men have continued to sweep the science awards.
To be a female Nobel winner has not only required brilliance, but also preternatural determination in the face of cultural, social and political obstacles. The Italian neurologist Rita Levi-Montalcini secretly conducted experiments in her bedroom in Mussolini’s Italy. Francoise Barre-Sinoussi, the Parisian who co-discovered the AIDS virus – and whose father thought a women’s place was in the home –was in the lab on her wedding day. Her fiancé had to call her to remind her to turn up at the ceremony. Barbara McClintock, the U.S.geneticist who won the prize in 1983, was nearly prevented from attending college by her mother. She was afraid higher education would make her daughter unmarriageable.
5. All of this was decades ago, before recent campaigns to encourage more young women to choose STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) careers;and, in the US, before the Civil Rights Act, affirmative action and Title IX.What’s the excuse in 2013?
6. What, specifically, should institutions do to offer such support?Universities can make meaningful policy changes, such as allowing women with young children to stop the tenure clock for a period of time — an option available at some but not all academic centers. They should ensure that young female scientists have dedicated, top-notch mentors. And they can guarantee paid maternity land parental leave—something that’s woefully lacking for junior scientists at most U.S. institutions.
7. Federal agencies also have a role to play. Big funders, led by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) have already implemented policies like no-cost grant extensions that allow scientists with family obligations extra time to complete a project, and others that allow fellowship periods to be extended or deferred for childcare purposes. But agencies can, and should, do more. One task the government is especially suited to is longitudinal data collection on those family-friendly policies. Such data isn’t being collected systematically,and without it we can’t know what policy changes are working, and which ones aren’t.
8. If we want top-drawer women to stay in science careers — and this country, beset by daunting, and growing, global science competition, could certainly use them – institutions of all stripes need to show a far more serious commitment to supporting them.
9. To put it another way, if we want to see more women celebrating in Stockholm, we should strive to build a world in which the likes of Carol Greider are hardly ever to be found folding the laundry at 5 in the morning.
Meredith Wad man is a Future Tense Fellow at New America and an Oxford-educated physician. This article was written for the New America Foundation’s Weekly Wonk. The views expressed are solely her own.
本篇侧重于女权的分析：文章从personal anecdote出发，第一段和第二段构成了contrast，往后分别使用了concession，facts/examples，rhetorical questions，appeal to emotion等常见写作手法，基本上都是写作教学里的重点分析套路。
2017年5月6日
这次的数学部分依然比较常规，对于大部分大陆考生而言没有太大难度。考试涉及到了函数，概率，数据分析，几何等基本内容。在文字的理解和解题难度方面，只有个别的小难点。
点击查看》》
以上为2017年5月6日SAT亚太考试真题汇总内容，希望对大家备考有帮助。