2017年3月11日北美SAT考试真题汇总!本次SAT考试中阅读文章Science类型的文章占比进一步加大，
北美
第一篇: 文学类文章，小说，难度稍易
文章大意：节选的是小说中第一章刚开始的部分，描述了Briony这个孩子的一些性格特点和爱好。比如非常爱整洁，喜欢藏秘密，11岁开始写自己第一个故事等。将这个女孩栩栩如生的刻画出来。题目多为细节题。
第二篇: 社科类Social Science文章，难度适中
文章大意：本文讲述了一个概念 - metaphor(隐喻手法)，以及它对人心理产生的印象和作用。文章开头举了一个metaphor的例子，说如果没有去过一个城市，而另一个人对这个城市的描述是脏乱差，这个隐喻手法就会在我们脑子中根深蒂固，即使发现是不准确的，也很难被去除。文章随后用科学实验的例子，继续通过数据去说明metaphor对人心理产生的影响。例子是描述一个城市的犯罪，用两个不同的词汇描述，一个描述犯罪是“像猛兽肆虐城市”，一个是像“病毒散播城市”，然后让受访者选择解决方案，，结果完全不一样。
第三篇: 科学Science类，难度稍高
本文讲述的通过研究动物骨头标本的一种实验方法，来推断恐龙的年龄，以及它们体重和年龄的关系。文章给出了不同恐龙种族，如暴龙等，它们年龄和体重的关系图。本篇涉及多道图表题。
第四篇: ，难度稍高
文章大意：文章阐述的是Emerson对政府和个人之见关系的见解，也就是民主主义和个人主义之见的矛盾。感兴趣的同学可以阅读一下原文。
第五篇: 科学Science类，难度适中
文章大意：第五篇文章是Paired Passage。两篇文章，都是讲火星的。第一篇讲火星上在亿万年前，科学研究表明发现有湖泊 (warm little pond) 的存在。文章介绍了这个湖的地点，大小，并且论述因为这个湖的存在，具备了生命的基本条件，提出了一个理论设想。 而第二篇则提出，火星上有水源并且有较长时间孵化出史前生命这个传统观点，可能是错误的。研究表明火星有可能是在极短的时间内遭遇了地球从未经历的大变化，水源消失，没有足够的时间是的生命孵化。
点击下载》》
北美
第一篇
本文讲的是绿色能源的两种介绍。其中主要介绍了biofuel，举的例子是algae fuel，描述了建筑物如何使用绿色能源向建筑物提供energy，减少能源消耗。
第二篇
本文讲的是Dudley Randall这位诗人，在60年代的Black Arts Movement中，如何创办了Broadside Press，通过将诗歌印刷在传统的宣传页上，传播诗歌这个艺术内容。文章主要讲述的是传统宣传页在这个运动中如何被重新使用，以及Broadside Press的成功。
第三篇
本文讲的是2012到2022年期间，全美国的工作岗位会增加，而同期的基础劳动岗位(如基建，建设公人，暖通等)的需求量会增加的更多。所以文章从几个方面去举例阐述，希望现在更多的年轻人能加入并从事基础劳动岗位的技能学习。比如由于政府的规章制度更加严格，对基础设施的标准更加苛刻，使得这些岗位的技能要求更加高标准，并且是“铁饭碗”。
第四篇
本文讲的Frank Lloyd Wright这位建筑师在30年代构思的一个理想城市设计：Broadacre City。Wright这位建筑师觉得当时的城市设计非常糟糕，所以他一生致力于设计一个理想城市。文章描绘了Broadacre City的一些设计理念，比如较少的高楼大厦，通过高速公路连接城市周边的农场等。
点击下载》》
北美
SAT写作原文：
Everyone has opinions. You probably know what they say about that. But leaving aside the olfactory qualities of all the opinions to which we are entitled, we at least tend to know when our opinions are just opinions. But not with nutrition*, where not only does everyone have an opinion, but everyone seems to think theirs is an expert opinion. And our culture seems to be okay with that. I’m not.
By the same token, I’m not convinced that someone who happens to live through a bad car crash to drive again is automatically qualified to take over NHTSA, or set up shop as a motor vehicle safety expert, and dispense advice accordingly.
Call me crazy.
I am not at all sure that someone who inadvertently sets fire to his kitchen, and manages to put out the fire before burning everything entirely down, is a shoe-in as fire commissioner, or qualifies as a fire safety expert. I am not sure that he should go on to establish a cottage industry in fire safety, selling expert advice in books, blogs, and programs.
I would have my doubts if someone who has driven for 10 years without ever having an airbag deploy writes a book, starts an organization and launches a social movement to oppose airbags as a government conspiracy. She might be convinced that airbags are a ploy by the “Big Auto” industry to dupe the public and drive up prices, but that wouldn’t make it so.
I’m not entirely persuaded that someone who happens to have gone hiking in Alaska once without being eaten by a bear is de facto a leading authority on bears, and qualified to dispense expert guidance on how to handle them.
I don’t think someone who has been a passenger on a plane is automatically a credible source about how to fly one. I don’t think anyone who has driven over a suspension bridge necessarily knows how best to build one. I don’t think someone treated once by a neurosurgeon gets to offer expert commentary on the nuances of brain surgery.
I trust these examples all seem pretty silly. We would never allow for claims of expertise, and cottage industries based on them, to be established on such flighty nonsense.
Unless, of course, the claims of expertise and cottage industries pertained to nutrition and weight loss — in which case, that’s exactly what we would do. It’s exactly what we are doing.
Everyone who has ever gotten fat and then lost weight is embraced as an expert, fully authorized by our culture to dispense advice and sell books advising others on how to succeed. For the most part, every one of these makes a case different from every other — and yet every one is convinced they have found the universal formula. And over and over again, the faithful, or hopeful, line up and reach for their credit cards.
Don’t get me wrong — I am delighted for very individual who figures out how to lose weight, and more importantly, find health. I am delighted each time someone finds a path they can follow to lasting vitality. But the notion that this automatically registers as expertise is exactly analogous to the car crash and kitchen fire examples above. In any area other than nutrition and weight control, we would either laugh or roll our eyes.
Everyone who has ever eaten seems to be granted an equally authoritative opinion about nutrition.
This is not just nonsense. It’s dangerous nonsense.
I am not arguing that nutrition is special and should be treated differently simply because it is one of the most profound influences on human health (it is). I am not arguing that nutrition should be treated with particular respect because it makes the list of top three causes of premature death and chronic disease, and can exert a positive influence just as great (it does). I am not suggesting that nutrition should be shown unique deference because it represents the construction material for the growing bodies of children and grandchildren we love.
Quite the contrary; I am saying we need to stop treating nutrition differently. We simply need to treat it as we do any other subject that matters, and a whole lot of harm and confusion would go away. We need to stop treating nutrition with unique disdain.
What harm ensues from that disdain? Every silly diet to come down the pike gets the same treatment. I know this, because I do multiple media interviews every week about whatever the fad diet du jour happens to be (the latest theme is intermittent fasting, by the way). These diets are then featured on television and in print in a way that gives them all comparable credibility. And we are all kept in a state of perpetual confusion about what’s what.
The result? We already have far too many silly diets than any one of us could try in a lifetime, and we just keep getting fatter and sicker all the while. Competing versions of dogma are a catalyst for nothing but dissent and quagmire.
The recurrent promise of magic from sources given credibility they don’t deserve forestalls the unified, culture-wide commitment to eating well and being active that really could addyears to our lives, and life to our years. And yes — we really do know what eating well means. We are not by any means clueless about the basic care and feeding of Homo sapiens, and how bizarre it would be if we were! Our knowledge of optimal nutrition is by no means perfect, but it is genuine knowledge — and there is no need to make perfect the enemy of good.
Admittedly, there are differences of opinion among even legitimate experts in nutrition. To some extent, this is the inevitable parsing of details that occurs among experts in any field; it’s about the icing, not the cake. To some extent, this is a byproduct of our incomplete and evolving knowledge of nutrition and health.
But I do believe it is compounded by our tendency to treat any opinion on nutrition as an expert opinion. To get noticed at all in such context, some otherwise legitimate experts wind up exaggerating their perspectives to the point of disfigurement. I see this as the very unfortunate result of collusion among a culture that fails to require true expertise as a basis for expert opinion; a news media that profits from the perpetual uncertainty of their audience, and thus their receptivity to the next false promise; and experts willing to do whatever it takes to be heard above this din. Alas.
All it would take to fix this stultifying mess is to treat nutrition and weight management like every other legitimate field of inquiry. With no more respect than all the others, but no less either.
We don’t care what people not trained to do neurosurgery think about neurosurgical technique. They are not qualified to opine. When it comes to building airplanes or suspension bridges, we want to hear from the right kinds of highly-trained engineers, not some character who happened to ride in a plane once, or drive across a bridge. When it comes to flying those planes, we want things in the hands of trained pilots — not some guy with a lot of frequent-flyer miles and strong convictions. And I’m confident we want special military operations delegated to our elite troops, and not someone who saw Zero Dark Thirty and came out convinced he could have done a better job.
For now, anyone who shares opinions about nutrition or weight loudly and often enough — or cleverly enough — is embraced as an authority, with no one generally even asking what if any training they’ve had. This is compounded by the fact that, in the famous words of Bertrand Russell, “Fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser men so full of doubts.” It is the least substantiated, most uninformed opinions about how to eat that will come at you with the greatest conviction. That’s your first clue that something is awry, because true expertise always allows for doubt.
We have created a seething stew of opinion about everything to do with nutrition, including, presumably, stew. That leaves us with far too many cooks, many lacking credentials to be in the kitchen in the first place. I trust everyone knows what that means.
-fin
*I am by no means suggesting readers buy this textbook! Rather, I cite it simply to show I’ve done my homework. The third edition of ‘Nutrition in Clinical Practice’ is currently in the works.
点击下载》》
北美SAT数学考试真题
本次SAT数学考试真题并没有那么难，考试中有一个很明显的趋势就是几何题减少，代数题增么多。在考试中应用题不能忽视，需要考生耐心的读完题，看清楚问的是什么，然后进行答题。
点击下载》》