2018年3月24日雅思真题回忆A类

北京雅思培训,雅思备考资料,雅思网课,雅思培训机构,雅思保分班,雅思真题,雅思课程

为大家带来2018年3月24日场雅思考试真题回忆。本场听力难度正常，备考复习时练习充分的考鸭，足够应付考试。而雅思考试阅读难度偏大，各位考生需注意平时的雅思阅读考试备考，阅读速度要提高。本场雅思考试的小作文题目是：The graphs below show the performance of the trains in a train company in October and November in 2008.大作文为：Some people believe that

newspaper is the best way to learn about news. However, others believe that a

more effective way is through other media.

Discuss both views and

give your opinions.请看雅思听力和雅思阅读真题回忆：

2018年03月24日 雅思听力考题回忆

Section One

场景：Garbage Collection Information

题型：填空10

内容概述：本文介绍了一位男士搬到了一个新的社区，然后向垃圾回收公司咨询有关垃圾回收的情况。

填空10：

1. 垃圾通常在Tuesday来收

2. 垃圾袋可以在grocery store里购买到

3. 垃圾要在前一天的8.15 pm之后放到指定位置

4. 一些物品是不能被回收的比如说TV

5. 具体的回收地点在公司的网站上有一个map可以查看

6. 垃圾需要按categories分装好

7. 收集品一：egg carton

8. 收集品二：juice bottles

9. 瓶子类产品需要提前撕掉labels

10. 收集品三：pizza boxes

Section Two

标题

题型：配对题4个+配对题6个

内容概述：本文介绍了一个男生在一家公司里实习，他的经理对于他工作内容以及工作流程的详细介绍。

配对4： 不同的工作需要什么时候去做？

11. A 收取信件 – 需要立刻去做

12. C 处理电话 – 不是他的任务

13. B 阅读邮件 – 可以几天后再做

14. A 更新信息 – 需要立刻去做

配对6： 采购流程图

15. B 在采购之前，需要向经理请求取得授权authorisation

16. E 然后向财务部申请一个购买单号purchase number

17. A 阅读供应商的名单suppliers list

18. D 填写一个采购单order form

19. F 对于贵重的物品要和供应商签订一个合同contract

20. C 在收到货品之后应该复印一份快递单delivery note

Section Three

场景：论文讨论

题型：配对题4个，五选二2个，配对题4个

内容概述：本文讲述了一个男生和一个女生对于一篇研究古代城市布局的论文讨论，两个人应该如何分工，研究的重点是什么，以及对这个城市古代平面图的讨论。

配对题4：

21. A 在网上查找资料 – 男生去做

22. B 在图书馆找资料 – 女生去做

23. C 研究城市的布局 – 一起去做

24. A 采访城市的居民 – 男生去做

五选二2： 男生和女生一直认为文章要重点讨论哪两个点？

25. A leisure activities

26. E medical services

地图配对题4：

27. G café

28. D prison

29. E railway station

30. B warehouse

Section Four

标题

题型：填空10

内容概述: 本文介绍了在英国，学校里对于教学任务以及如何提升教学状况的一个讨论。

填空10：

31. 在英国，学校太过注重学生取得qualification

32. 教育学家认为government不应该过多干预学校

33. 教育学家认为small school更利于孩子的发展

34. 教育学家认为boys更容易表现的不好

35. 在Russel School，课堂像是一个meeting

36. 学校里的一些课程可以教给学生开始自己的business

37. 学校可以提供机会让学生去参观university

38. 父母在教室里可以提升学生的reading水平

39. 新方法导致的结果就是一个班里学生的age会有所差异

40. 通过新的尝试，学生们觉得会在colleges里表现更加

2018年03月24日雅思阅读考题回忆

题目： Mungo Man and Mungo woman

题型：人名匹配题, 是非判断题

原文大致如下:

The latest

research suggests Australia's Adam and Eve are not as old as we thought -

and lived much richer lives than we suspected. Deborah Smith reports.

Fifty thousand years ago, a lush landscape

greeted the first Australians making their way towards the south-east of

the continent. Temperatures were cooler than now. Megafauna - giant

prehistoric animals such as marsupial lions, goannas and the

rhinoceros-sized diprotodon - were abundant. And the freshwater lakes of

the Willandra district in western NSW were brimming with fish. But change

was coming. By the time the people living at Lake Mungo ceremoniously

buried two of their dead, 40,000 years ago, water levels had begun to drop.

A study of the sediments and graves at Lake

Mungo, published this week in Nature, uncovers the muddy layers

deposited as the lake began to dry up. Twenty thousand years ago Lake Mungo

had become the dry dusty hole we know today, but 20,000 years before that

it had been a refuge from the encroaching desert, the study shows. Families

clustered around the lake left artefacts, 775 of which researchers used to

determine that the number of people living there peaked between 43,000 and

44,000 years ago, with the first wanderers arriving between 46,000 and

50,000 years ago.

This treasure-trove of history was found by the

University of Melbourne geologist Professor Jim Bowler in 1969. He was

searching for ancient lakes and came across the charred remains of Mungo

Lady, who had been cremated. In 1974, he found a second complete skeleton,

Mungo Man, buried 300 metres away.

The comprehensive study of 25 different

sediment layers at Mungo - a collaboration between four universities, the

CSIRO, and NSW National Parks and Wildlife and led by Bowler - concludes

that both graves are 40,000 years old.

This is much younger than the 62,000 years

Mungo Man was attributed with in 1999 by a team led by Professor Alan

Thorne, of the Australian National University. Because Thorne is the

country's leading opponent of the Out of Africa theory - that modern humans

evolved in Africa about 100,000 years ago and then spread around the globe

- the revision of Mungo Man's age has refocused

attention on academic disputes about mankind's origins.

Dr Tim Flannery, a proponent of the

controversial theory that Australia's megafauna was wiped out 46,000 years

ago in a"blitzkrieg" of hunting by the arriving people, also

claims the new Mungo dates support this view.

For Bowler, however, these debates are

irritating speculative distractions from the study's main findings. At

40,000 years old, Mungo Man and Mungo Lady remain Australia's oldest human

burials and the earliest evidence on Earth of cultural sophistication, he

says. Modern humans had not even reached North America by this time. In

Europe, they were just starting to live alongside the Neanderthals.

"At Lake Mungo we have a cameo of people

reacting to environmental change. It is one of the great stories of the

peoples of the world."

THE modern day story of the science of Mungo

also has its fair share of rivalry. In its 1999 study, Thorne's team used

three techniques to date Mungo Man at 62,000 years old, and it stands by

its figure. It dated bone, teeth enamel and some sand.

Bowler has strongly challenged the results ever

since. Dating human bones is "notoriously unreliable", he says.

As well, the sand sample Thorne's group dated was taken hundreds of metres

from the burial site."You don't have to be a gravedigger ... to

realise the age of the sand is not the same as the age of the grave,"

says Bowler. He says his team's results are based on careful geological

field work that was crosschecked between four laboratories, while Thorne's

team was "locked in a laboratory in Canberra and virtually

misinterpreted the field evidence".

Thorne counters that Bowler's team used one

dating technique, while his used three. Best practice is to have at least

two methods produce the same result. A Thorne team member, Professor Rainer

Grun, says the fact that the latest results were consistent between

laboratories doesn't mean they are absolutely correct. "We now have two

data sets that are contradictory. I do not have a plausible

explanation."

Two years ago Thorne made world headlines with

a study of Mungo Man's DNA that he claimed supported his idea that modern

humans evolved from archaic humans in several places around the world,

rather than striding out of Africa a relatively short time ago.

Other scientists have expressed scepticism. But

Thorne's old age for Mungo Man was also regarded as evidence for his

theory. Homo sapiens would have had to move pretty fast to get from Africa

to NSW by 62,000 years ago.

Now, however, Thorne says the age of Mungo Man

is irrelevant to this origins debate. Recent fossils finds show modern

humans were in China 110,000 years ago. "So he has got a long time to

turn up in Australia. It doesn't matter if he is 40,000 or 60,000 years

old."

In 2001 a member of Bowler's team, Dr Richard

Roberts of Wollongong University, along with Flannery, director of the

South Australian Museum, published research on their blitzkreig theory.

They dated 28 sites across the continent, arguing their analysis showed the

megafauna died out suddenly 46,600 years ago.

The conclusion has been challenged by other

scientists, including Dr Judith Field of the University of Sydney and Dr

Richard Fullager of the Australian Museum, who point to the presence of

megafauna fossils at the 36,000-year-old Cuddie Springs site in NSW.

Flannery praises the Bowler team's research on

Mungo Man as"the most thorough and rigorous dating"of ancient

human remains. He says the finding that humans arrived at Lake Mungo

between 46,000 and 50,000 years ago supports the idea that 47,000 years ago

was a critical time in Australia's history. There is no evidence of a

dramatic climatic change then, he says. "It's my view that humans

arrived and extinction took place in almost the same geological

instant."

Bowler, however, is sceptical of Flannery's

theory and says the Mungo study provides no definitive new evidence to

support it. He argues that climate change at 40,000 years ago was more

intense than had been previously realised and could have played a role in

the megafauna's demise. "To blame the earliest Australians for their

complete extinction is drawing a long bow."

人名匹配题:

1-8

B Alan

E Richard ; Tim

C Tim

D Rain

B Alan

F Judith ; Richard

A Jim

A Jim

是非判断题:

9-13True/Not Given/False/True/True

Passage Two

题目：commercial ice in nineteenth century

题型：小标题7，选择2，句子信息填空4

文章主旨:

主要讲了在十九世纪的商业冰块的发展和应用。

14-20 标题配对

14 iv eye-catching display

15 vii

16 iii basic requirement

17 ii doubt

18 vi

19 ix W’s insignificance

20 v new use of ice

21-22 选择：C、E

23-26 填空

23：unstable

24：India

25：Norway

26：待补充

Passage Three

题目： Termites

题型：简答题4，句子信息题4，流程图5

文章主旨:

主要讲了白蚁的巢穴的建造原理。

简答题:

27 白蚁的巢穴被比作什么?- chisel blades

28 magnetic termites

29 待补充

30 humid atmosphere

句子信息填空题:

31 insulate

32 hollow buttresses

33 gaseous exchange

34, chimneys flues

35 待补充

流程图:

36-40 antennae/fluid/

cement/moist mud/ head

更多2018年3月24日雅思真题回忆，请关注易伯华雅思频道。4月雅思考试倒计时，各位考鸭加油！