Her name is Helen. She is 12 years old. She's a student in grade 6 at Royal High School. There are four people in her family: her father, her mother, her sister, and her. Her father is 40 years old. He is a teacher. Her mother is 35 years old. She is a doctor. Her sister is 10 years old. She's a student.

How many people in Helen’s family?

Read the passage and answer questions 3-4.

(Đọc đoạn văn và trả lời câu hỏi 3-4.)

There are four seasons in a year: spring, summer, fall and winter. In the spring, the weather is usually warm. There are many flowers. In the summer, people like to swim and go camping. The days are long and the nights are short. Fall is the season of fruit. People can enjoy different kinds of fruit, especially in tropical countries like Vietnam. In the winter, it is usually very cold. The days are short and the nights are long.

Which is the season of fruit?

There are four seasons in a year: spring, summer, fall and winter. In the spring, the weather is usually warm. There are many flowers. In the summer, people like to swim and go camping. The days are long and the nights are short. Fall is the season of fruit. People can enjoy different kinds of fruit, especially in tropical countries like Vietnam. In the winter, it is usually very cold. The days are short and the nights are long.

 The days are short and the nights are long in the summer.

Read the passage and answer questions 5-7.

(Đọc đoạn văn và trả lời câu hỏi 5-7.)

Rebecca Stevens was the first woman to climb Mount Everest. Before she went up the highest mountain in the world, she was a journalist and lived in South London.

In 1993, Rebecca left her job and her family and travelled to Asia with some other climbers. She found that life on Everest is very difficult. “You must carry everything on your back,” she explained, “so you can only take things that you will need. You can't wash on the mountain, and in the end I didn't even take a toothbrush. I am usually a clean person but there is no water, only snow. Water is very heavy so you only take enough to drink!”

Rebecca became famous when she reached the top of Mount Everest on May 17, 1993. After that, she wrote a book about the trip and people often asked her to talk about it. She got a new job too, on a science programme on television.

Before Rebecca climb Everest, she worked for:

Rebecca Stevens was the first woman to climb Mount Everest. Before she went up the highest mountain in the world, she was a journalist and lived in South London.

In 1993, Rebecca left her job and her family and travelled to Asia with some other climbers. She found that life on Everest is very difficult. “You must carry everything on your back,” she explained, “so you can only take things that you will need. You can't wash on the mountain, and in the end I didn't even take a toothbrush. I am usually a clean person but there is no water, only snow. Water is very heavy so you only take enough to drink!”

Rebecca became famous when she reached the top of Mount Everest on May 17, 1993. After that, she wrote a book about the trip and people often asked her to talk about it. She got a new job too, on a science programme on television.

Rebecca went to Everest with:

Rebecca Stevens was the first woman to climb Mount Everest. Before she went up the highest mountain in the world, she was a journalist and lived in South London.

In 1993, Rebecca left her job and her family and travelled to Asia with some other climbers. She found that life on Everest is very difficult. “You must carry everything on your back,” she explained, “so you can only take things that you will need. You can't wash on the mountain, and in the end I didn't even take a toothbrush. I am usually a clean person but there is no water, only snow. Water is very heavy so you only take enough to drink!”

Rebecca became famous when she reached the top of Mount Everest on May 17, 1993. After that, she wrote a book about the trip and people often asked her to talk about it. She got a new job too, on a science programme on television.

Rebecca became famous when she:

Read the passage and answer questions 8-10.

(Đọc đoạn văn và trả lời câu hỏi 8-10.)

For many years, people believed that the cleverest animals after man were chimpanzees. Now, however, there is proof that dolphins may be even cleverer than these big apes. 

Although a dolphin lives in the sea, it is not a fish. It is a mammal. It is in many ways, therefore, like a human being.

Dolphins have simple language. They are able to talk to one another. It may be possible for man to learn how to talk to dolphins. But this will not be easy because dolphins cannot hear the kind of sounds man can make. If man wants to talk to dolphins, therefore, he will have to make a third language which both he and dolphins can understand. 

Dolphins are also very friendly to man. They often follow ships. There are many stories of dolphins guiding ships through difficult and dangerous water.

Which animals do people think may be the cleverest?

For many years, people believed that the cleverest animals after man were chimpanzees. Now, however, there is proof that dolphins may be even cleverer than these big apes. 

Although a dolphin lives in the sea, it is not a fish. It is a mammal. It is in many ways, therefore, like a human being.

Dolphins have simple language. They are able to talk to one another. It may be possible for man to learn how to talk to dolphins. But this will not be easy because dolphins cannot hear the kind of sounds man can make. If man wants to talk to dolphins, therefore, he will have to make a third language which both he and dolphins can understand. 

Dolphins are also very friendly to man. They often follow ships. There are many stories of dolphins guiding ships through difficult and dangerous water.

What have scientists discovered about dolphins?

For many years, people believed that the cleverest animals after man were chimpanzees. Now, however, there is proof that dolphins may be even cleverer than these big apes. 

Although a dolphin lives in the sea, it is not a fish. It is a mammal. It is in many ways, therefore, like a human being.

Dolphins have simple language. They are able to talk to one another. It may be possible for man to learn how to talk to dolphins. But this will not be easy because dolphins cannot hear the kind of sounds man can make. If man wants to talk to dolphins, therefore, he will have to make a third language which both he and dolphins can understand. 

Dolphins are also very friendly to man. They often follow ships. There are many stories of dolphins guiding ships through difficult and dangerous water.

In what way are dolphins friendly to man?

Read the passage and answer questions 11-15.

(Đọc đoạn văn và trả lời câu hỏi 11-15.)

The diseases connected to smoking are a big problem. Doctors think that the annual medical cost for lung cancer, heart disease, and other illnesses connected to smoking is between 12 and 35 million pounds.

And smoking costs society money in other ways. Between 27 and 61 billion pounds are spent each year on sick days when people don't go to work, on wages that you don' get when you don't go to work, and on work lost at the company when you are sick.

This money counts the wages from people who die of cancer at young age and stop paying taxes. This does not count fire started by cigarettes, which kill fifteen hundred people yearly and injure another four thousand. 

Smoking costs every man, woman and child in the UK from one hundred and ten to two hundred and fifty pounds each year in the lost work and wages. When you add another fifty to one hundred and fifty pounds yearly in insurance cost, that comes to one hundred and sixty to four hundred and ten pounds. If everyone stopped smoking, a family of four could have up to one thousand six hundred and forty pounds a year more.

Smoking will also cause other problems. People who don't smoke will live longer, and so they will take money from the government when they are old. But they will also work for more years and pay more taxes.

In the end, the value of a non-smoking nation is not in pounds. The good health of the people is the true value for us all.

If everyone stopped smoking, all the United Kingdom:

The diseases connected to smoking are a big problem. Doctors think that the annual medical cost for lung cancer, heart disease, and other illnesses connected to smoking is between 12 and 35 million pounds.

And smoking costs society money in other ways. Between 27 and 61 billion pounds are spent each year on sick days when people don't go to work, on wages that you don' get when you don't go to work, and on work lost at the company when you are sick.

This money counts the wages from people who die of cancer at young age and stop paying taxes. This does not count fire started by cigarettes, which kill fifteen hundred people yearly and injure another four thousand. 

Smoking costs every man, woman and child in the UK from one hundred and ten to two hundred and fifty pounds each year in the lost work and wages. When you add another fifty to one hundred and fifty pounds yearly in insurance cost, that comes to one hundred and sixty to four hundred and ten pounds. If everyone stopped smoking, a family of four could have up to one thousand six hundred and forty pounds a year more.

Smoking will also cause other problems. People who don't smoke will live longer, and so they will take money from the government when they are old. But they will also work for more years and pay more taxes.

In the end, the value of a non-smoking nation is not in pounds. The good health of the people is the true value for us all.

Every year companies lose ___________ because of the diseases connected to smoking.

The diseases connected to smoking are a big problem. Doctors think that the annual medical cost for lung cancer, heart disease, and other illnesses connected to smoking is between 12 and 35 million pounds.

And smoking costs society money in other ways. Between 27 and 61 billion pounds are spent each year on sick days when people don't go to work, on wages that you don' get when you don't go to work, and on work lost at the company when you are sick.

This money counts the wages from people who die of cancer at young age and stop paying taxes. This does not count fire started by cigarettes, which kill fifteen hundred people yearly and injure another four thousand. 

Smoking costs every man, woman and child in the UK from one hundred and ten to two hundred and fifty pounds each year in the lost work and wages. When you add another fifty to one hundred and fifty pounds yearly in insurance cost, that comes to one hundred and sixty to four hundred and ten pounds. If everyone stopped smoking, a family of four could have up to one thousand six hundred and forty pounds a year more.

Smoking will also cause other problems. People who don't smoke will live longer, and so they will take money from the government when they are old. But they will also work for more years and pay more taxes.

In the end, the value of a non-smoking nation is not in pounds. The good health of the people is the true value for us all.

Fill in the correct number:

If everyone stopped smoking, a family of four could have ___________ pounds more each year. 

The diseases connected to smoking are a big problem. Doctors think that the annual medical cost for lung cancer, heart disease, and other illnesses connected to smoking is between 12 and 35 million pounds.

And smoking costs society money in other ways. Between 27 and 61 billion pounds are spent each year on sick days when people don't go to work, on wages that you don' get when you don't go to work, and on work lost at the company when you are sick.

This money counts the wages from people who die of cancer at young age and stop paying taxes. This does not count fire started by cigarettes, which kill fifteen hundred people yearly and injure another four thousand. 

Smoking costs every man, woman and child in the UK from one hundred and ten to two hundred and fifty pounds each year in the lost work and wages. When you add another fifty to one hundred and fifty pounds yearly in insurance cost, that comes to one hundred and sixty to four hundred and ten pounds. If everyone stopped smoking, a family of four could have up to one thousand six hundred and forty pounds a year more.

Smoking will also cause other problems. People who don't smoke will live longer, and so they will take money from the government when they are old. But they will also work for more years and pay more taxes.

In the end, the value of a non-smoking nation is not in pounds. The good health of the people is the true value for us all.

The true value for the UK of not smoking is:

The diseases connected to smoking are a big problem. Doctors think that the annual medical cost for lung cancer, heart disease, and other illnesses connected to smoking is between 12 and 35 million pounds.

And smoking costs society money in other ways. Between 27 and 61 billion pounds are spent each year on sick days when people don't go to work, on wages that you don' get when you don't go to work, and on work lost at the company when you are sick.

This money counts the wages from people who die of cancer at young age and stop paying taxes. This does not count fire started by cigarettes, which kill fifteen hundred people yearly and injure another four thousand. 

Smoking costs every man, woman and child in the UK from one hundred and ten to two hundred and fifty pounds each year in the lost work and wages. When you add another fifty to one hundred and fifty pounds yearly in insurance cost, that comes to one hundred and sixty to four hundred and ten pounds. If everyone stopped smoking, a family of four could have up to one thousand six hundred and forty pounds a year more.

Smoking will also cause other problems. People who don't smoke will live longer, and so they will take money from the government when they are old. But they will also work for more years and pay more taxes.

In the end, the value of a non-smoking nation is not in pounds. The good health of the people is the true value for us all.

This text is about:

Read the passage and answer questions 16-20.

(Đọc đoạn văn và trả lời câu hỏi 16-20.)

During the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, almost nothing was written about the contribution of women during the colonial period and the early history of the newly formed United States. Lacking the right to vote and absent from the seats of power, women were not considered an important force in history. Anne Bradstreet wrote some significant poetry in the 17th century, Mercy Otis Warren produced the best contemporary history of the American Revolution, and Abigail Adams penned important letters showing she exercised great political influence over her husband, John, the second President of the United States. But little or no notice was taken of these contributions. During these centuries, women remained invisible in history books.

Throughout the 19th century, this lack of visibility continued, despite the efforts of female authors writing about women. These writers, like most, of their male counterparts, were amateur historians. Their writings were celebratory in nature, and they were uncritical in their selection and use of sources.

During the 19th century, however, certain feminists showed a keen sense of history by keeping records of activities in which women were engaged. National, regional, and local women’s organizations compiled accounts of their doings. Personal correspondence, newspaper clippings, and souvenirs were saved and stored. These sources form the core of the two greatest collections of women’s history in the United States: one at the Elizabeth and Arthur Schlesinger Library at Radcliffe College, and the other the Sophia Smith Collection at Smith College. Such sources have provided valuable materials for later generations of historians.

Despite the gathering of more information about ordinary women during the 19th century, most of the writing about women conformed to the “great women” theory of history, just as much of mainstream American history concentrated on “great men”. To demonstrate that women were making significant contributions to American life, female authors singled out women leaders, and wrote biographies, and important women produced their autobiographies. Most of these leaders were involved in public life as reformers, activists working for women’s right to vote, or authors, and were not representative at all of the great of ordinary women. The lives of ordinary people continued, generally, to be untold in the American histories being published.

The passage mainly discusses:

During the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, almost nothing was written about the contribution of women during the colonial period and the early history of the newly formed United States. Lacking the right to vote and absent from the seats of power, women were not considered an important force in history. Anne Bradstreet wrote some significant poetry in the 17th century, Mercy Otis Warren produced the best contemporary history of the American Revolution, and Abigail Adams penned important letters showing she exercised great political influence over her husband, John, the second President of the United States. But little or no notice was taken of these contributions. During these centuries, women remained invisible in history books.

Throughout the 19th century, this lack of visibility continued, despite the efforts of female authors writing about women. These writers, like most, of their male counterparts, were amateur historians. Their writings were celebratory in nature, and they were uncritical in their selection and use of sources.

During the 19th century, however, certain feminists showed a keen sense of history by keeping records of activities in which women were engaged. National, regional, and local women’s organizations compiled accounts of their doings. Personal correspondence, newspaper clippings, and souvenirs were saved and stored. These sources form the core of the two greatest collections of women’s history in the United States: one at the Elizabeth and Arthur Schlesinger Library at Radcliffe College, and the other the Sophia Smith Collection at Smith College. Such sources have provided valuable materials for later generations of historians.

Despite the gathering of more information about ordinary women during the 19th century, most of the writing about women conformed to the “great women” theory of history, just as much of mainstream American history concentrated on “great men”. To demonstrate that women were making significant contributions to American life, female authors singled out women leaders, and wrote biographies, and important women produced their autobiographies. Most of these leaders were involved in public life as reformers, activists working for women’s right to vote, or authors, and were not representative at all of the great of ordinary women. The lives of ordinary people continued, generally, to be untold in the American histories being published.

The word “celebratory” in paragraph 2 means that the writings referred to were:

During the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, almost nothing was written about the contribution of women during the colonial period and the early history of the newly formed United States. Lacking the right to vote and absent from the seats of power, women were not considered an important force in history. Anne Bradstreet wrote some significant poetry in the 17th century, Mercy Otis Warren produced the best contemporary history of the American Revolution, and Abigail Adams penned important letters showing she exercised great political influence over her husband, John, the second President of the United States. But little or no notice was taken of these contributions. During these centuries, women remained invisible in history books.

Throughout the 19th century, this lack of visibility continued, despite the efforts of female authors writing about women. These writers, like most, of their male counterparts, were amateur historians. Their writings were celebratory in nature, and they were uncritical in their selection and use of sources.

During the 19th century, however, certain feminists showed a keen sense of history by keeping records of activities in which women were engaged. National, regional, and local women’s organizations compiled accounts of their doings. Personal correspondence, newspaper clippings, and souvenirs were saved and stored. These sources form the core of the two greatest collections of women’s history in the United States: one at the Elizabeth and Arthur Schlesinger Library at Radcliffe College, and the other the Sophia Smith Collection at Smith College. Such sources have provided valuable materials for later generations of historians.

Despite the gathering of more information about ordinary women during the 19th century, most of the writing about women conformed to the “great women” theory of history, just as much of mainstream American history concentrated on “great men”. To demonstrate that women were making significant contributions to American life, female authors singled out women leaders, and wrote biographies, and important women produced their autobiographies. Most of these leaders were involved in public life as reformers, activists working for women’s right to vote, or authors, and were not representative at all of the great of ordinary women. The lives of ordinary people continued, generally, to be untold in the American histories being published.

In paragraph 2, the author points out the weakness in 19th century histories that is:

During the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, almost nothing was written about the contribution of women during the colonial period and the early history of the newly formed United States. Lacking the right to vote and absent from the seats of power, women were not considered an important force in history. Anne Bradstreet wrote some significant poetry in the 17th century, Mercy Otis Warren produced the best contemporary history of the American Revolution, and Abigail Adams penned important letters showing she exercised great political influence over her husband, John, the second President of the United States. But little or no notice was taken of these contributions. During these centuries, women remained invisible in history books.

Throughout the 19th century, this lack of visibility continued, despite the efforts of female authors writing about women. These writers, like most, of their male counterparts, were amateur historians. Their writings were celebratory in nature, and they were uncritical in their selection and use of sources.

During the 19th century, however, certain feminists showed a keen sense of history by keeping records of activities in which women were engaged. National, regional, and local women’s organizations compiled accounts of their doings. Personal correspondence, newspaper clippings, and souvenirs were saved and stored. These sources form the core of the two greatest collections of women’s history in the United States: one at the Elizabeth and Arthur Schlesinger Library at Radcliffe College, and the other the Sophia Smith Collection at Smith College. Such sources have provided valuable materials for later generations of historians.

Despite the gathering of more information about ordinary women during the 19th century, most of the writing about women conformed to the “great women” theory of history, just as much of mainstream American history concentrated on “great men”. To demonstrate that women were making significant contributions to American life, female authors singled out women leaders, and wrote biographies, and important women produced their autobiographies. Most of these leaders were involved in public life as reformers, activists working for women’s right to vote, or authors, and were not representative at all of the great of ordinary women. The lives of ordinary people continued, generally, to be untold in the American histories being published.

On the basis of information in paragraph 3, nineteenth-century feminist organizations would most likely collect:

During the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, almost nothing was written about the contribution of women during the colonial period and the early history of the newly formed United States. Lacking the right to vote and absent from the seats of power, women were not considered an important force in history. Anne Bradstreet wrote some significant poetry in the 17th century, Mercy Otis Warren produced the best contemporary history of the American Revolution, and Abigail Adams penned important letters showing she exercised great political influence over her husband, John, the second President of the United States. But little or no notice was taken of these contributions. During these centuries, women remained invisible in history books.

Throughout the 19th century, this lack of visibility continued, despite the efforts of female authors writing about women. These writers, like most, of their male counterparts, were amateur historians. Their writings were celebratory in nature, and they were uncritical in their selection and use of sources.

During the 19th century, however, certain feminists showed a keen sense of history by keeping records of activities in which women were engaged. National, regional, and local women’s organizations compiled accounts of their doings. Personal correspondence, newspaper clippings, and souvenirs were saved and stored. These sources form the core of the two greatest collections of women’s history in the United States: one at the Elizabeth and Arthur Schlesinger Library at Radcliffe College, and the other the Sophia Smith Collection at Smith College. Such sources have provided valuable materials for later generations of historians.

Despite the gathering of more information about ordinary women during the 19th century, most of the writing about women conformed to the “great women” theory of history, just as much of mainstream American history concentrated on “great men”. To demonstrate that women were making significant contributions to American life, female authors singled out women leaders, and wrote biographies, and important women produced their autobiographies. Most of these leaders were involved in public life as reformers, activists working for women’s right to vote, or authors, and were not representative at all of the great of ordinary women. The lives of ordinary people continued, generally, to be untold in the American histories being published.

The nineteenth-century women’s history materials in the Schlesinger Library and the Sophia Smith Collection: