SAT考试分为北美考区和国际考区,本身两个考区的考试时间安排是不一样的。因此很多国际考生的考生,也喜欢利用北美考区的真题进行练习。那么具体的北美SAT考试真题都有哪些呢?下面小编为大家整理了详细的内容,供大家参考!

  第一篇:文学

  The Beautiful Things That Heaven Bears

  故事的背景在narrator自己的store, 主要讲Naomi与narrator一起读书的故事,整体难度不高,场景与2017年1月北美的文学有异曲同工之处。Naomi对于读书非常的专注,并且非常善于观察,作者感到与Naomi这个孩子一起读书是很美好的场景;有时作者与Naomi一起读书甚至影响了自己的responsibility--接待店里的客人。文章后半部分讲述narrator 对于读书的热爱是来源于父亲潜移默化的影响(父亲把读书的习惯带到家庭生活的方方面面,视storytelling为一个essential event, as grand and real as life) 全文长度在75行左右。

  第二篇:社会科学

  Drunk Tank Pink: And Other Unexpected Forces that Shape How We Think, Feel, and Behave

  By Adam Alter

  研究人类到底在public面前完成任务是否会更好(social facilitation vs social inhibition theory)。研究者A通过两个实验得出结论是人需要旁观者才能enabled to liberate potential energy;但是另外两个研究者B and C得出相反的结果,认为对于复杂的任务如迷宫人需要独处才能更好的完成。最后研究者D通过从鸟身上做实验reconcile了这个矛盾的结论:人们在public面前的表现取决于nature of the task。简单的任务在旁人观察时表现更好;反之复杂的任务独处表现更好。

  本篇文章难度相对较低,总体题目难度适中,有图表题。

  词汇题有考到simple(在两个不同的lines, line 27 & line 36?)。

  第三篇:科学对比

  P1:Why Do Zebras Have Stripes? New Study Offers Strong Evidence

  By Christine Dell’Amore

  P2:Why Do Zebras Have Stripes? It’s Not for Camouflage

  By Laura Poppick

  两篇文章都研究斑马有条纹(stripes)对于自己的生存有什么优势。第一篇开头列出一系列的假说(hypotheses) 然后Caro和她的同事用实验得出斑马条纹是为了ban biting flies,文章结尾让步提出实验结论的不确定性和需要more specific research。第二篇通过Larison的实验提出反驳意见,认为斑马条纹是为了regulate body temperature而不是avoid flies,注意第二篇文章结尾再次提到了Caro的实验结论,有考察观点求同题。

  第四篇:历史政治(单篇文章)

  本次历史类话题完全改变前几次真考考察经典话题(女权/黑人运动/美国建国文献)的风格,考到了Charles Dickens对于美国人民参与政治生活的评论。

  第五篇:科学

  Gut Bugs May Boost Flu Shot’s Effects

  By Kelly Servick

  文章主要通过实验来研究影响vaccine effectiveness的因素(intestinal bacteria) 能够更好地让抗体发挥作用,加强免疫系统的反应,从而更好对抗流感病毒。最后2道题目为图表题。

  主旨关键词:immune response to flu vaccine effectiveness

  本篇文章理解难度较高,主要是因为大量的学科生词可能会对于部分考生的理解造成一定的障碍,而且文章的内容相对陌生。

  第五篇阅读文章的阅读原文:

  Gut bugs may boost flu shot's effects

  By Kelly Servick

  Every year, some unlucky people get the flu even though they’ve had their seasonal shot. One reason, according to a new study, might be their gut bacteria. Researchers have shown that, at least in mice, a strong immune response to the flu vaccine relies in part on signals from intestinal microbes. The findings could help explain variation in the response to the vaccine and suggest ways to maximize its effectiveness.

  The microbes that inhabit our bodies—collectively known as the microbiome—may influence everything from obesity risk to food allergies. Recent studies have also shown that resident microbes affect how our immune system responds to infection. For example, mice with depleted microbiomes appear to be more susceptible to the flu. But it wasn’t clear what role the microbiome plays in the response to vaccines.

  The new evidence came out of a curious observation that researchers revealed in a 2011 paper. Bali Pulendran, an immunologist at Emory University in Atlanta, and colleagues were looking for genetic signatures in the blood of people injected with the trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine—a mixture of three flu strains. They wanted to know whether the expression of specific genes in the immune system’s white blood cells correlated with the amount of vaccine—specific antibodies in the blood—which indicates how strongly a person’s immune system responds to the shot, and how much protection that person will gain against future infections. In a long list of genes associated with strong vaccine response, the researchers found an unexpected one: the gene that codes for a protein called toll-like receptor 5 (TLR5).

  “We thought this must just be a coincidence,” Pulendran says. TLR5 is a sensor of flagellin, a protein that makes up the appendages of bacteria. Why would a receptor that interacts with bacteria in the gut have anything to do with the body’s response to a virus injected into muscle? Maybe, the group thought, B cells—the white blood cells that produce antibodies—receive a signal from bacteria that boosts their activity.

  To explore that possibility, the researchers designed a new study using mice. They gave the flu vaccine to three different groups: mice genetically engineered to lack the gene for TLR5, germ-free mice with no microorganisms in their bodies, and mice that had spent 4 weeks drinking water laced with antibiotics to obliterate most of their microbiome.

  Seven days after vaccination, all three groups showed significantly reduced concentrations of vaccine-specific antibodies in their blood—up to an eightfold reduction compared with vaccinated control mice, the group reports online today in Immunity. The reduction was less marked by day 28, as blood antibody levels appeared to rebound. But when the researchers observed the mice lacking Tlr5 on the 85th day after vaccination, their antibodies seemed to have dipped again, suggesting that without this bacterial signaling, the effects of the flu vaccine wane more quickly.

  The researchers saw similar results when they gave mice a polio vaccine, which, like the flu shot, uses an inactivated virus and doesn’t contain so-called adjuvants—additives that boost the body’s immune response. Pulendran and colleagues suggest that these weaker, adjuvant-lacking vaccines rely more heavily on bacterial signaling. (They didn’t see the same results with the live virus in the yellow fever vaccine, for example.)

  No specific type of bacteria seemed more important than another in prompting the vaccine response. But further experiments showed a major role for macrophages—immune cells that display pieces of the virus to activate B cells and that can also recognize flagellin. Pulendran’s favored explanation is that flagellin manages to break through the lining of the intestines to circulate in the body and activate B cells and macrophages, amping up antibody production. But where and how the interaction happens “is a huge mystery,” he says. “We don’t have the full answer.”

  以上就是关于“SAT3月北美真题答案整理”的内容,希望通过上述内容的学习,大家能够更好的掌握和练习这些考试题目,也希望大家在考试中有更好的发挥。


展开显示全文