A new analysis of federal money that public schools receive for low-income students shows that a record number of the nation’s school districts will receive less in the coming academic year than they did for theone just ended.
For the 2005-2006 school year, spending under the Department of Education’s Title I program, which helps low-achieving children in high-poverty areas, is increasing by 3.2 percent, to $12.6 billion. But because of population shifts, growing numbers of poor children, newer census data and complex formulas that determine how the money is divided, more than two-thirds of the districts, or 8,843, will not receive as much financing as before.
The analysis, based on data from the department, was made by the Center on Education Policy, a group advocating for public schools. A similar study by the group last year showed that 55 percent of the schools would receive less money than they did in the previous year.
“It's an alarming number,” said Tom Fagan, a former department official who conducted the analysis. “It’s clear that the amount of overall increase is not keeping pace with the number of poor kids.”
Susan Aspey, a department spokeswoman, defended the spending levels for Title I，saying, “President Bush and Congress have invested record amounts of funding to help the nation’s neediest students.”
But Mr. Fagan said the increasing number of districts that are losing money is making it harder for the schools to meet the goals of the federal No Child Left Behind Act, the Bush administration's signature education program, which measures progress through annual tests in math, reading and science. That is giving critics of the program more grounds to accuse the administration of not sufficiently financing the program while demanding greater results.
Title I provides the largest component of financing for No Child Left Behind.
“The federal government is concentrating more money in fewer districts," said John F. Jennings, the president and chief executive of the Center on Education Policy. “It means there is lots of anger and lots of tension. They're asking us to do more and more with less and less.”
Choose correct answers to the question:
1.As it is indicated in the passage, the new analysis _____.
A.studied the federal money spent on low-income students
B.aimed at promoting the establishment of more public schools
C.showed that about half the schools would receive less money
D.was conducted by the Department of Education’s Title I program
2.Which of the following factors does NOT lead to the result that more than two-thirds of thedistricts will get more poorly financed?
A.People often move from one place to another.
B.There are more children from poor families.
C.The way of distributing money has changed.
D.Spending under the Title I program decreased.
3.Susan Aspey looks at the funding by the government with _______.
4.According to Tom Fagan, ______.
A.the government has done its best to finance the poor children
B.the goals of No Child Left Behind Act are difficult to realize
C.the way of measuring progress by annual tests should be changed
D.the Bush government shouldn't have approved the Title I program
5.When the government concentrates more money in fewer districts, _____.
A.more poor children will get benefited
B.more public schools will have to be closed
C.it will arouse more people’s dissatisfaction
D.No Child Left Behind Act will be realized sooner
1.[A] 事实细节题。本题考査对长句的理解。从第1段首句中的“…of…”这一结构可知这个最 新分析是要研究联邦政府资金问题的。所以排除B。由第3段第1句可知这项最 新分析是由the Center on Education Policy 进行的，因此排除选项D。根据第3段最后一句，选项C中show的行为主体应为similar study。
2.[D] 事实细节题。本题考查因果关系。第2段第2句指出有三个原因造成超过2/3的地区得到的资金减少，选项A、B、C是对这三个原因的近义改写，但其中选项C与原句的形式分别最 大，容易造成误选。
3.[B] 观点态度题。本题考查文人物的观点。苏珊·阿斯贝的观点态度只能从第5段推断出，从这一段中的defended和record amount of funding可知她对教育部的拨款数是认同的。选项A和C都是贬义词，不可 能表达她的观点;选项D虽是褒义词,但苏珊是在陈述已发生的事实，而不是发表对教育部的期望。
4.[B] 推理判断题。本题考查对复合句的理解。由文中第6段第1句中的harder... to meet...可知选项B正确。选项C最 具干扰性，要排除这个干扰，关键是要理解第6段第1句中由which引导的非限制性定语从句的作 用。这个从句是对前面“the Bush administration's signature education program”的附加事实信息，不属于汤姆·法甘的看法。