问题 写作题

阅读下面的文字,按要求作文。(60分+5分)

人生需要沉淀,要有足够的时间去反思,才能让自己变得更完美;人生需要积累,只有常回头看看,才能在品味得失和甘苦中升华。向前看是梦想、是目标;向后看是结果、是修正。有多少事,如果当初回头看看,就会做得更好;有多少人,如果能回头一看,就可以拥有自己想要的。

请以“常回头看看”为话题,自拟题目,自选文体写一篇文章。要求:(1)600字以上;(2)文中不得出现真实的地名、校名、人名。(3)不能用本试卷阅读题的材料作为写作内容;(4)书写规范,卷面整洁。

答案

题目分析:这个文题从引导语和话题本身来看,是要求写回顾自己的生活经历,对一段生活做一总结评价,“回头”指的是“回顾”,“看看”,看的是自己一段生活,当然可以这样写,但不妨采取另外一个思路,以“自省”为题旨,写“自视”。 “常回头看看”,就是常常“自省”,就是“了解自己”以“告诫自己”“警示自己”。可从孔子的说的“日有三省”谈起,强调“自省”的重要性,以此起篇。文章内容上,可以罗列古今中外善于“自省”而为人尊重和景仰的事例,说明“自省”对人格精神形的重要作用。可以叙述自己的事例,写自己经常自我反省而获得进步。此作文中可多引用名词,丰富文章的内容,增加文章的文雅之气。

点评:本题比较难写,话题的角度比较小,学生不好运用材料,不过,多接触不同类型的文题,对学生开拓思路,提高写作水平是有一定益处。

选择题
单项选择题

Come on—Everybody’s doing it. That whispered message, half invitation and half forcing, is what most of us think of when we hear the words peer pressure. It usually leads to no good—drinking, drugs and casual sex. But in her new book Join the Club, Tina Rosenberg contends that peer pressure can also be a positive force through what she calls the social cure, in which organizations and officials use the power of group dynamics to help individuals improve their lives and possibly the word.

Rosenberg, the recipient of a Pulitzer Prize, offers a host of examples of the social cure in action: In South Carolina, a state-sponsored antismoking program called Rage Against the Haze sets out to make cigarettes uncool. In South Africa, an HIV-prevention initiative known as LoveLife recruits young people to promote safe sex among their peers.

The idea seems promising, and Rosenberg is a perceptive observer. Her critique of the lameness of many pubic-health campaigns is spot-on: they fail to mobilize peer pressure for healthy habits, and they demonstrate a seriously flawed understanding of psychology. "Dare to be different, please don’t smoke!" pleads one billboard campaign aimed at reducing smoking among teenagers teenagers, who desire nothing more than fitting in. Rosenberg argues convincingly that public-health advocates ought to take a page from advertisers, so skilled at applying peer pressure.

But on the general effectiveness of the social cure, Rosenberg is less persuasive. Join the Club is filled with too much irrelevant detail and not enough exploration of the social and biological factors that make peer pressure so powerful. The most glaring flaw of the social cure as it’s presented here is that it doesn’t work very well for very long. Rage Against the Haze failed once state funding was cut. Evidence that the LoveLife program produces lasting changes is limited and mixed.

There’s no doubt that our peer groups exert enormous influence on our behavior. An emerging body of research shows that positive health habits—as well as negative ones—spread through networks of friends via social communication. This is a subtle form of peer pressure: we unconsciously imitate the behavior we see every day.

Far less certain, however, is how successfully experts and bureaucrats can select our peer groups and steer their activities in virtuous directions. It’s like the teacher who breaks up the troublemakers in the back row by pairing them with better-behaved classmates. The tactic never really works. And that’s the problem with a social cure engineered from the outside: in the real world, as in school, we insist on choosing our own friends.

According to the first paragraph, peer pressure often emerges as()

A. a supplement to the social cure

B. a stimulus to group dynamics

C. an obstacle to school progress

D. a cause of undesirable behaviors