《面积和面积单位》教学片断教师：
师：同学们都知道，每个物体都有它的表面，黑板有黑板的表面，桌子有桌子表面，课本有课本的表面，我们的脸面有它的面。请同学们用手摸一摸。
生：用手摸脸、桌面、书面，感受物体的表面。
师：①黑板的表面和桌面，哪个大？②数学课本和练习本的封面，哪个小？
师：物体的表面是有大有小的。那如何表示物体表面的大小呢？
生：（教师组织学生讨论）黑板的表面比较大，我们就说黑板的面积比较大，练习本的封面比较小，我们就说练习本的面积比较小。
师：面积的大小如何度量呢？常用的面积单位有平方厘米，平方分米和平方米。
师：我们先来认识平方厘米。1平方厘米是多大呢？
生：（教师组织学生讨论）边长是1厘米的正方形，面积是1平方厘米。
师：教师在黑板上画出示意图。然后要求学生：
第一：打个手势，来表示一下平方厘米的大小。
第二：举例说明，哪些物体的表面面积大约是1平方厘米。
第三：估一估教室地板的面积大约有多少平方厘米。
请对上述教学片断进行评析并对其中的问题进行改正。
学生在一系列用手摸身边熟悉物体的表面等活动中，已经建立了“面积”的表象。在教学平方厘米的面积单位时，教师有让学生进行讨论，整个教学活动过程中除了师生互动还有生生互动，激发了学生的兴趣，启发了学生思考，符合新课标，是值得肯定的。但是在最后老师让学生去估算教室地板的面积，这个活动安排的不是很妥当，忽略了较小的面积单位应该用来度量较小的面积，所以这个地方应该修改为让学生去估算课本是多少平方厘米。
Of all the changes that have taken place in English-language newspapers during the past quarter-century, perhaps the most far-reaching has been the inexorable decline in the scope and seriousness of their arts coverage.
It is difficult to the point of impossibility for the average reader under the age of forty to imagine a time when high-quality arts criticism could be found in most big-city newspapers. Yet a considerable number of the most significant collections of criticism published in the 20th century consisted in large part of newspaper reviews. To read such books today is to marvel at the fact that their learned contents were once deemed suitable for publication in general-circulation dailies.
We are even farther removed from the unfocused newspaper reviews published in England between the turn of the 20th century and the eve of World War II, at a time when newsprint was dirt-cheap and stylish arts criticism was considered an ornament to the publications in which it appeared． In those far-off days, it was taken for granted that the critics of major papers would write in detail and at length about the events they covered．Theirs was a serious business, and even those reviewers who wore their learning lightly, like George Bernard Shaw and Ernest Newman, could be trusted to know what they were about. These men believed in journalism as a calling, and were proud to be published in the daily press. "So few authors have brains enough or literary gift enough to keep their own end up in journalism," Newman wrote, "that I am tempted to define 'journalism' as a term of contempt applied by writers who are not read to writers who are."
Unfortunately, these critics are virtually forgotten. Neville Cardus, who wrote for the Manchester Guardian from 1917 until shortly before his death in 1975, is now known solely as a writer of essays on the game of cricket. During his lifetime, though, he was also one of England's foremost classical-music critics, a stylist so widely admired that his Autobiography (1947) became a best-seller. He was knighted in 1967, the first music critic to be so honored． Yet only one of his books is now in print, and his vast body of writings on music is unknown save to specialists.
Is there any chance that Cardus's criticism will enjoy a revival? The prospect seems remote.
Journalistic tastes had changed long before his death, and postmodern readers have little use for the richly upholstered Vicwardian prose in which he specialized． Moreover, the amateur tradition in music criticism has been in headlong retreat.
What would be the best title for the text?
Of all the changes that have taken place in English-language newspapers during the past quarter-century, perhaps the most far-reaching has been the inexorable decline in the scope and seriousness of their arts coverage.
It is difficult to the point of impossibility for the average reader under the age of forty to imagine a time when high-quality arts criticism could be found in most big-city newspapers. Yet a considerable number of the most significant collections of criticism published in the 20th century consisted in large part of newspaper reviews. To read such books today is to marvel at the fact that their learned contents were once deemed suitable for publication in general-circulation dailies.
We are even farther removed from the unfocused newspaper reviews published in England between the turn of the 20th century and the eve of World War II, at a time when newsprint was dirt-cheap and stylish arts criticism was considered an ornament to the publications in which it appeared． In those far-off days, it was taken for granted that the critics of major papers would write in detail and at length about the events they covered．Theirs was a serious business, and even those reviewers who wore their learning lightly, like George Bernard Shaw and Ernest Newman, could be trusted to know what they were about. These men believed in journalism as a calling, and were proud to be published in the daily press. "So few authors have brains enough or literary gift enough to keep their own end up in journalism," Newman wrote, "that I am tempted to define 'journalism' as a term of contempt applied by writers who are not read to writers who are."
Unfortunately, these critics are virtually forgotten. Neville Cardus, who wrote for the Manchester Guardian from 1917 until shortly before his death in 1975, is now known solely as a writer of essays on the game of cricket. During his lifetime, though, he was also one of England's foremost classical-music critics, a stylist so widely admired that his Autobiography (1947) became a best-seller. He was knighted in 1967, the first music critic to be so honored． Yet only one of his books is now in print, and his vast body of writings on music is unknown save to specialists.
Is there any chance that Cardus's criticism will enjoy a revival? The prospect seems remote.
Journalistic tastes had changed long before his death, and postmodern readers have little use for the richly upholstered Vicwardian prose in which he specialized． Moreover, the amateur tradition in music criticism has been in headlong retreat.
Which of the following would Shaw and Newman most probably agree on?
Of all the changes that have taken place in English-language newspapers during the past quarter-century, perhaps the most far-reaching has been the inexorable decline in the scope and seriousness of their arts coverage.
It is difficult to the point of impossibility for the average reader under the age of forty to imagine a time when high-quality arts criticism could be found in most big-city newspapers. Yet a considerable number of the most significant collections of criticism published in the 20th century consisted in large part of newspaper reviews. To read such books today is to marvel at the fact that their learned contents were once deemed suitable for publication in general-circulation dailies.
We are even farther removed from the unfocused newspaper reviews published in England between the turn of the 20th century and the eve of World War II, at a time when newsprint was dirt-cheap and stylish arts criticism was considered an ornament to the publications in which it appeared． In those far-off days, it was taken for granted that the critics of major papers would write in detail and at length about the events they covered．Theirs was a serious business, and even those reviewers who wore their learning lightly, like George Bernard Shaw and Ernest Newman, could be trusted to know what they were about. These men believed in journalism as a calling, and were proud to be published in the daily press. "So few authors have brains enough or literary gift enough to keep their own end up in journalism," Newman wrote, "that I am tempted to define 'journalism' as a term of contempt applied by writers who are not read to writers who are."
Unfortunately, these critics are virtually forgotten. Neville Cardus, who wrote for the Manchester Guardian from 1917 until shortly before his death in 1975, is now known solely as a writer of essays on the game of cricket. During his lifetime, though, he was also one of England's foremost classical-music critics, a stylist so widely admired that his Autobiography (1947) became a best-seller. He was knighted in 1967, the first music critic to be so honored． Yet only one of his books is now in print, and his vast body of writings on music is unknown save to specialists.
Is there any chance that Cardus's criticism will enjoy a revival? The prospect seems remote.
Journalistic tastes had changed long before his death, and postmodern readers have little use for the richly upholstered Vicwardian prose in which he specialized． Moreover, the amateur tradition in music criticism has been in headlong retreat.
Newspaper reviews in England before World War II were characterized by__
Of all the changes that have taken place in English-language newspapers during the past quarter-century, perhaps the most far-reaching has been the inexorable decline in the scope and seriousness of their arts coverage.
It is difficult to the point of impossibility for the average reader under the age of forty to imagine a time when high-quality arts criticism could be found in most big-city newspapers. Yet a considerable number of the most significant collections of criticism published in the 20th century consisted in large part of newspaper reviews. To read such books today is to marvel at the fact that their learned contents were once deemed suitable for publication in general-circulation dailies.
We are even farther removed from the unfocused newspaper reviews published in England between the turn of the 20th century and the eve of World War II, at a time when newsprint was dirt-cheap and stylish arts criticism was considered an ornament to the publications in which it appeared． In those far-off days, it was taken for granted that the critics of major papers would write in detail and at length about the events they covered．Theirs was a serious business, and even those reviewers who wore their learning lightly, like George Bernard Shaw and Ernest Newman, could be trusted to know what they were about. These men believed in journalism as a calling, and were proud to be published in the daily press. "So few authors have brains enough or literary gift enough to keep their own end up in journalism," Newman wrote, "that I am tempted to define 'journalism' as a term of contempt applied by writers who are not read to writers who are."
Unfortunately, these critics are virtually forgotten. Neville Cardus, who wrote for the Manchester Guardian from 1917 until shortly before his death in 1975, is now known solely as a writer of essays on the game of cricket. During his lifetime, though, he was also one of England's foremost classical-music critics, a stylist so widely admired that his Autobiography (1947) became a best-seller. He was knighted in 1967, the first music critic to be so honored． Yet only one of his books is now in print, and his vast body of writings on music is unknown save to specialists.
Is there any chance that Cardus's criticism will enjoy a revival? The prospect seems remote.
Journalistic tastes had changed long before his death, and postmodern readers have little use for the richly upholstered Vicwardian prose in which he specialized． Moreover, the amateur tradition in music criticism has been in headlong retreat.
It is indicated in Paragraphs 1 and 2 that__
Over the past decade, thousands of patents have been granted for what are called business methods. Amazon.com received one for its "one-click"online payment system. Merrill Lynch got legal protection for an asset allocation strategy. One inventor patented a technique for lifting a box.
Now the nation's top patent court appears completely ready to scale back on business-method patents, which have been controversial ever since they were first authorized 10 years ago. In a move that has intellectual-property lawyers abuzz, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit said it would use a particular case to conduct a broad review of business-method patents. In re Bil-ski, as the case is known, is "a very big deal," says Dennis D．Crouch of the University of Mis-souri School of law. It "has the potential to eliminate an entire class of patents."
Curbs on business-method claims would be a dramatic about-face, because it was the Federal Circuit itself that introduced such patents with its 1998 decision in the so-called State Street Bank case, approving a patent on a way of pooling mutual-fund assets. That ruling produced an explosion in business-method patent filings, initially by emerging internet companies trying to stake out exclusive rights to specific types of online transactions. Later, more established companies raced to add such patents to their files, if only as a defensive move against rivals that might beat them to the punch. In 2005, IBM noted in a court filing that it had been issued more than 300 business-method patents, despite the fact that it questioned the legal basis for granting them. Similarly, some Wall Street investment films armed themselves with patents for financial products, even as they took positions in court cases opposing the practice.
The Bilski ease involves a claimed patent on a method for hedging risk in the energy market. The Federal Circuit issued an unusual order stating that the case would be heard by all 12 of the court's judges, rather than a typical panel of three, and that one issue it wants to evaluate is whether it should "reconsider" its State Street Bank ruling.
The Federal Circuit's action comes in the wake of a series of recent decisions by the supreme Court that has narrowed the scope of protections for patent holders. Last April, for example, the justices signaled that too many patents were being upheld for "inventions" that are obvious. The judges on the Federal Circuit are "reacting to the anti-patent trend at the Supreme Court," says Harold C． Wegner, a patent attorney and professor at George Washington University Law School.
Which of the following would be the subject of the text?
Over the past decade, thousands of patents have been granted for what are called business methods. Amazon.com received one for its "one-click"online payment system. Merrill Lynch got legal protection for an asset allocation strategy. One inventor patented a technique for lifting a box.
Now the nation's top patent court appears completely ready to scale back on business-method patents, which have been controversial ever since they were first authorized 10 years ago. In a move that has intellectual-property lawyers abuzz, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit said it would use a particular case to conduct a broad review of business-method patents. In re Bil-ski, as the case is known, is "a very big deal," says Dennis D．Crouch of the University of Mis-souri School of law. It "has the potential to eliminate an entire class of patents."
Curbs on business-method claims would be a dramatic about-face, because it was the Federal Circuit itself that introduced such patents with its 1998 decision in the so-called State Street Bank case, approving a patent on a way of pooling mutual-fund assets. That ruling produced an explosion in business-method patent filings, initially by emerging internet companies trying to stake out exclusive rights to specific types of online transactions. Later, more established companies raced to add such patents to their files, if only as a defensive move against rivals that might beat them to the punch. In 2005, IBM noted in a court filing that it had been issued more than 300 business-method patents, despite the fact that it questioned the legal basis for granting them. Similarly, some Wall Street investment films armed themselves with patents for financial products, even as they took positions in court cases opposing the practice.
The Bilski ease involves a claimed patent on a method for hedging risk in the energy market. The Federal Circuit issued an unusual order stating that the case would be heard by all 12 of the court's judges, rather than a typical panel of three, and that one issue it wants to evaluate is whether it should "reconsider" its State Street Bank ruling.
The Federal Circuit's action comes in the wake of a series of recent decisions by the supreme Court that has narrowed the scope of protections for patent holders. Last April, for example, the justices signaled that too many patents were being upheld for "inventions" that are obvious. The judges on the Federal Circuit are "reacting to the anti-patent trend at the Supreme Court," says Harold C． Wegner, a patent attorney and professor at George Washington University Law School.
The word "about-face" (Paragraph 3) most probably means
Over the past decade, thousands of patents have been granted for what are called business methods. Amazon.com received one for its "one-click"online payment system. Merrill Lynch got legal protection for an asset allocation strategy. One inventor patented a technique for lifting a box.
Now the nation's top patent court appears completely ready to scale back on business-method patents, which have been controversial ever since they were first authorized 10 years ago. In a move that has intellectual-property lawyers abuzz, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit said it would use a particular case to conduct a broad review of business-method patents. In re Bil-ski, as the case is known, is "a very big deal," says Dennis D．Crouch of the University of Mis-souri School of law. It "has the potential to eliminate an entire class of patents."
Curbs on business-method claims would be a dramatic about-face, because it was the Federal Circuit itself that introduced such patents with its 1998 decision in the so-called State Street Bank case, approving a patent on a way of pooling mutual-fund assets. That ruling produced an explosion in business-method patent filings, initially by emerging internet companies trying to stake out exclusive rights to specific types of online transactions. Later, more established companies raced to add such patents to their files, if only as a defensive move against rivals that might beat them to the punch. In 2005, IBM noted in a court filing that it had been issued more than 300 business-method patents, despite the fact that it questioned the legal basis for granting them. Similarly, some Wall Street investment films armed themselves with patents for financial products, even as they took positions in court cases opposing the practice.
The Bilski ease involves a claimed patent on a method for hedging risk in the energy market. The Federal Circuit issued an unusual order stating that the case would be heard by all 12 of the court's judges, rather than a typical panel of three, and that one issue it wants to evaluate is whether it should "reconsider" its State Street Bank ruling.
The Federal Circuit's action comes in the wake of a series of recent decisions by the supreme Court that has narrowed the scope of protections for patent holders. Last April, for example, the justices signaled that too many patents were being upheld for "inventions" that are obvious. The judges on the Federal Circuit are "reacting to the anti-patent trend at the Supreme Court," says Harold C． Wegner, a patent attorney and professor at George Washington University Law School.
Which of the following is true of the Bilski case?
Over the past decade, thousands of patents have been granted for what are called business methods. Amazon.com received one for its "one-click"online payment system. Merrill Lynch got legal protection for an asset allocation strategy. One inventor patented a technique for lifting a box.
Now the nation's top patent court appears completely ready to scale back on business-method patents, which have been controversial ever since they were first authorized 10 years ago. In a move that has intellectual-property lawyers abuzz, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit said it would use a particular case to conduct a broad review of business-method patents. In re Bil-ski, as the case is known, is "a very big deal," says Dennis D．Crouch of the University of Mis-souri School of law. It "has the potential to eliminate an entire class of patents."
Curbs on business-method claims would be a dramatic about-face, because it was the Federal Circuit itself that introduced such patents with its 1998 decision in the so-called State Street Bank case, approving a patent on a way of pooling mutual-fund assets. That ruling produced an explosion in business-method patent filings, initially by emerging internet companies trying to stake out exclusive rights to specific types of online transactions. Later, more established companies raced to add such patents to their files, if only as a defensive move against rivals that might beat them to the punch. In 2005, IBM noted in a court filing that it had been issued more than 300 business-method patents, despite the fact that it questioned the legal basis for granting them. Similarly, some Wall Street investment films armed themselves with patents for financial products, even as they took positions in court cases opposing the practice.
The Bilski ease involves a claimed patent on a method for hedging risk in the energy market. The Federal Circuit issued an unusual order stating that the case would be heard by all 12 of the court's judges, rather than a typical panel of three, and that one issue it wants to evaluate is whether it should "reconsider" its State Street Bank ruling.
The Federal Circuit's action comes in the wake of a series of recent decisions by the supreme Court that has narrowed the scope of protections for patent holders. Last April, for example, the justices signaled that too many patents were being upheld for "inventions" that are obvious. The judges on the Federal Circuit are "reacting to the anti-patent trend at the Supreme Court," says Harold C． Wegner, a patent attorney and professor at George Washington University Law School.
Business-method patents have recendy aroused concern because of
A young man was getting ready to graduate from college, for many months he had admired a beautiful sports car in a dealer's showroom, and 21 his father could well afford it, he told him that was all he wanted．
On the morning of his graduation day, his father called him into his own study and told him how 22 he was to have such a fine son. He handed his son a beautiful gift box. Curious but slightly disappointed, the young man 23 the box and found a lovely book. Angrily, he raised his voice at his father and said．" 24 all your money you give me a book? " And rushed out of the house leaving the book in the study.
He did not contact his father for a whole year 25 one day he saw in the street an old man who looked like his father. He realized he had to go back home and see his father.
When he arrived at his father's house, he was told that his father had been in hospital for a week. The moment he was about to 26 the hospital. He saw on the desk the still new book, just as he had left it one 27ago. He opened it and began to turn the pages. Suddenly, a car key 28 from an envelope taped behind the book, it had a tag with dealer's name, the same dealer who had the sports car he had 29 on the tag was the date of his graduation, and the 30 :
PAID IN FULL.
____30___
A young man was getting ready to graduate from college, for many months he had admired a beautiful sports car in a dealer's showroom, and 21 his father could well afford it, he told him that was all he wanted．
On the morning of his graduation day, his father called him into his own study and told him how 22 he was to have such a fine son. He handed his son a beautiful gift box. Curious but slightly disappointed, the young man 23 the box and found a lovely book. Angrily, he raised his voice at his father and said．" 24 all your money you give me a book? " And rushed out of the house leaving the book in the study.
He did not contact his father for a whole year 25 one day he saw in the street an old man who looked like his father. He realized he had to go back home and see his father.
When he arrived at his father's house, he was told that his father had been in hospital for a week. The moment he was about to 26 the hospital. He saw on the desk the still new book, just as he had left it one 27ago. He opened it and began to turn the pages. Suddenly, a car key 28 from an envelope taped behind the book, it had a tag with dealer's name, the same dealer who had the sports car he had 29 on the tag was the date of his graduation, and the 30 :
PAID IN FULL.
____29__
