2024北京高考新政策如下：
1、考试类别分为合格性考试与等级性考试。所有科目均设合格性考试。思想政治、历史、地理、物理、化学、生物6门科目设等级性考试。
2、考试科目普通高中课程方案所设定的科目均列入高中学业水平考试范围，考试设置语文、数学、外语、思想政治、历史、地理、物理、化学、生物、体育与健康、艺术（音乐、美术）、信息技术、通用技术13门科目。3、考试对象普通高中在校学生。高中阶段其他学校在校生和社会人员也可报名参加。考试时间体育与健康合格性考试安排在高三第二学期，艺术（音乐、美术）合格性考试安排在高三第一学期末。
4、其余11门科目合格性考试每学年组织2次，分别安排在每学期末。普通高中在校学生首次参加合格性考试时间为高一第二学期末。
5、学生在完成每门科目必修课程后即可参加合格性考试，做到随教、随考、随清。当次考试不合格，可参加以后学期同科目合格性考试，全市不单独组织补考。新高考的好处：
1、降低资源不平均
普通高中学校的师资条件是很难与重点中学相比，所以通过赋分制，校际间的资源不均衡会导致学生在赋分上的刚性不公平。“3 1 2”模式将物理和历史这两门科目取消赋分制，就可大幅度降低这种资源不均衡带来的不公平。
2、增加学生自主选择性
增加学生自主选择性，学生的兴趣爱好得到了有效的彰显，取消了学生文理分科，即除了语数外三科之外，物理和历史两科中2选1，在剩余的政治、地理、化学、生物中任选两门参加高考。3、更加合理安排课程
在走班人数巨大的情况下，这将给学校对学生的课程安排、教师安排、教室安排带来极大困难。组合少的“3 1 2”，不走班学生人数降低，将能更加合理地安排课程、教师和教室。
4、更加利于人才培养
“3 3”赋分制下，非重点中学的物理科目可能缺少竞争优势。从浙江上海实践的情况来看，物理选科总人数比例并不高。所以将物理取消赋分制，将排位赛变为实际分数，这有利于物理学科人才的培养。
高中选哪三科最吃香
高中选科目选物理、化学、政治三科最好。一、解释
这是新高考模式下专业覆盖率高的组合，这个选科组合因为文理兼备，还能走一些特殊专业，以及政治与考研或者国考相关，获得很多家长的青睐。二、其他选科：
1、物理 化学 生物
%，属于纯理科组合，学科之间联系紧密，对于理科思维较强且学有余力的同学来说，这个组合是不错的选择。
2、物理 地理 生物
该组合的可选专业覆盖率为99%，此组合偏理，学科之间的联系度也很大，且在赋分中也比较有优势，适合想学理科又不喜欢化学的学生。
3、化学 生物 地理
%，物理需要大量的逻辑分析和触类旁通，学习起来具有很大难度。该组合没有了物理，学习难度就降低了很多，三门科目又有一定的联系，学习压力较小，赋分制也比较有优势，是很推荐的一个组合。4、生物 地理 历史
%，尽管可选择的专业比较少，但是对于理科思维较差的同学来说，这个组合学习压力较小，且在赋分中占据优势，竞争力很大，是偏文科同学的绝佳选择。
女生高中选科
1、以自身实力为主高中的时候，不管男生还是女生一般都会有偏科的情况发生，因此便造成了有的科目成绩好，有的科目成绩一般。建议大家在选科的时候，可以根据自己的各科成绩来做选择，如果你某一科学起来比较轻松又能够拿高分，那一定是必选科目。
2、以成绩最大化为主
目前新高考部分学科采取等级赋分制，也就是说学生的分数越高，排名也就越高，赋分之后的成绩也会越好。因此在选科的时候，可以选择最好拿分的科目，如首选科目为物理的话，建议就不要选择化学，选择生物会比较好拿分，因为生物的记忆点较多，只要努力背诵和刷题就行。
如果首选科目是历史的话，建议再选科目就不要选择政治了，因为历史加上政治的背诵内容实在是太多了，会没有时间顾及另外一门科目，而且这两门科目想要拿高分是很不容易的。
3、以专业选择机会为主
如果女生想要在高考填报志愿时，有更多的院校和专业可选，一定要将文科和理科结合起来，这样文史类和理工类的专业大多都能报考。在考虑专业选择多不多的前提是成绩要好，反之会造成可选专业多但竞争不过的局面。
生物2023真题及答案
您好，我是专注留学考试规划和留学咨询的小钟老师。在追寻留学梦想的路上，选择合适的学校和专业，准备相关考试，都可能让人感到迷茫和困扰。作为一名有经验的留学顾问，我在此为您提供全方位的专业咨询和指导。欢迎随时提问！ 8月1号进行了八月初的第一场雅思的考试，相信大家对真题以及答案会非常的感兴趣、今天就由小钟老师为大家介绍2023年8月1日雅思阅读考试真题答案。一、考题解析P1 土地沙漠化P2 澳大利亚的鹦鹉P3 多重任务二、，有出现比较多的配对题，没有出现Heading题，其余主要以常规的填空，判断和选择题为主。文章的话题和题型搭配也是在剑桥真题中都有迹可循，所以备考重心依然还是剑桥官方真题。2. 整体分析：涉及环境类（P1）、动物类（P2）、社科类（P3）。本次考试的P2和P3均为旧题。P2是动物类的话题，题型组合为：段落细节配对 单选 summary填空，难度中等。题型上也延续19年的出题特点，出现配对题，考察定位速度和准确度。P3也出现了段落细节配对，主要是段落细节配对 单选 判断。三种题型难度中等，但是文章理解起来略有难度。3. 部分答案及参考文章：Passage 1：土地沙漠化题型及答案待确认Passage 2：澳大利亚的鹦鹉题型：段落细节配对 单选 Summary填空技巧分析：由于段落细节配对是完全乱序出题，在定位时需要先做后面的单选题及填空题，最大化利用已读信息来确定答案，尽量避免重复阅读，以保证充分的做题时间。文章内容及题目参考：A 概况，关于一个大的生物种类B 一些物种消失的原因，题干关键词：an example of one bird species extinctC 一种鹦鹉不能自己存活，以捕食另一种鸟为生，吃该鸟类的蛋。题干关键词：two species competed at the expense of oneanotherD 吸引鹦鹉的原因以及鹦鹉嘴的特点。题干关键词：analysis of reasons as Australian landscapeattract parrotsE 植物是如何适应鹦鹉。题干关键词：plants attract birds which make the animal adaptto the environmentF 南半球对英语的影响G 两种鹦鹉从环境改变中获益并存活下来。题干关键词：two species of parrots benefit fromm theenvironment changeH 外来物种及本地鹦鹉I 鸟类栖息地被破坏以及人类采取的措施J 作者对于鹦鹉问题的态度单选题：why parrots in the whole world are lineal descendants of选项关键词：continent split from Africathe writer thinks parrots species beak is for选项关键词：adjust to their suitable dietwhich one is not mentioned选项关键词：should be frequently maintained填空题：分布在文章的前两段one-sixth16th centurymapmakerJohn GouldPassage 3：多重任务题型：段落细节配对 单选 判断参考答案及文章28 F29I30C31B32G33C34B35A36YES37YES38NO39NOT GIVEN40NOPassage3： multitaskingMultitasking Debate—Can you do them at the same time？Talking on the phone while driving isn＇t the only situationwhere we＇re worse at multitasking than we might like to think we are. Newstudies have identified a bottleneck in our brains that some say means we arefundamentally incapable of true multitasking. If experimental findings reflectreal-world performance， people who think they are multitasking are probablyjust underperforming in all-or at best， all but one -of their parallelpursuits. Practice might improve your performance， but you will never be asgood as when focusing on one task at a problem， according to René Marois， a psychologist atVanderbilt University in Nashville， Tennessee， is that there＇s a sticking pointin the brain. To demonstrate this， Marois devised an experiment to locate nteers watch a screen and when a particular image appears， a red circle，say， they have to press a key with their index finger. Different colouredcircles require presses from different fingers. Typical response time is about half a second， and thevolunteers quickly reach their peak performance. Then they learn to listen todifferent recordings and respond by making a specific sound. For instance， whenthey hear a bird chirp， they have to say ＂ba＂； an electronic soundshould elicit a ＂ko＂， and so on. Again， no problem. A normal personcan do that in about half a second， with almost no effort. The trouble comeswhen Marois shows the volunteers an image， then almost immediately plays them asound. Now they＇re flummoxed. ＂If you show an image and play a sound atthe same time， one task is postponed，＂ he says. In fact，if the second taskis introduced within the half-second or so it takes to process and react to thefirst， it will simply be delayed until the first one is done. The largestdual-task delays occur when the two tasks are presented simultaneously； delaysprogressively shorten as the interval between presenting the tasks lengthens（See Diagram）.There are at least three points where we seem to getstuck， says Marois. The first is in simply identifying what we＇re looking can take a few tenths of a second， during which time we are not able tosee and recognise a second item. This limitation is known as the＂attentional blink＂： experiments have shown that if you＇re watchingout for a particular event and a second one shows up unexpectedly any timewithin this crucial window of concentration， it may register in your visualcortex but you will be unable to act upon it. Interestingly， if you don＇texpect the first event， you have no trouble responding to the second. Whatexactly causes the attentional blink is still a matter for second limitation is in our short-term visual ＇s estimated that we can keep track of about four items at a time， fewer ifthey are complex. This capacity shortage is thought to explain， in part， our astonishinginability to detect even huge changes in scenes that are otherwise identical，so-called ＂change blindness＂. Show people pairs of near-identicalphotos -say， aircraft engines in one picture have disappeared in the other -andthey will fail to spot the differences （if you don＇t believe it， check out theclips at /~rensink/flicker/download）. Here again， though， thereis disagreement about what the essential limiting factor really is. Does itcome down to a dearth of storage capacity， or is it about how much attention aviewer is paying？A third limitation is that choosing a response to astimulus -braking when you see a child in the road， for instance，or replyingwhen your mother tells you over the phone that she＇s thinking of leaving yourdad -also takes brainpower. Selecting a response to one of these things willdelay by some tenths of a second your ability to respond to the other. This iscalled the ＂response selection bottleneck＂ theory， first proposed December， Marois and his colleagues published apaper arguing that this bottleneck is in fact created in two different areas ofthe brain： one in the posterior lateral prefrontal cortex and another in thesuperior medial frontal cortex （Neuron， vol 52， p 1109）. They found this byscanning people＇s brains with functional MRI while the subjects struggled tochoose among eight possible responses to each of two closely timed tasks. Theydiscovered that these brain areas are not tied to any particular sense but aregenerally involved in selecting responses， and they seemed to queue theseresponses when presented with multiple tasks ？ What bottleneck？But David Meyer， a psychologist at the University ofMichigan， Ann Arbor， doesn＇t buy the bottleneck idea. He thinks dual-taskinterference is just evidence of a strategy used by the brain to prioritisemultiple activities. Meyer is known as something of an optimist by his has written papers with titles like ＂Virtually perfect time-sharing indual-task performance： Uncorking the central cognitive bottleneck＂（Psychological Science， vol 12， p101）. His experiments have shown that withenough practice -at least 2000 tries -some people can execute two taskssimultaneously as competently as if they were doing them one after the suggests that there is a central cognitive processor that coordinates allthis and， what＇s more， he thinks it uses discretion： sometimes it chooses todelay one task while completing with practice， not all people manage to achieve thisharmonious time-share， however. Meyer argues that individual differences comedown to variations in the character of the processor -some brains are just more＂cautious＂， some more ＂daring＂. And despite urban legend，there are no noticeabledifferences between men and women. So， according to him，it＇s not a central bottleneck that causes dual-task interference， but rather＂adaptive executive control＂， which ＂schedules task processesappropriately to obey instructions about their relative priorities and serialorder＂.Marois agrees that practice can sometimes eraseinterference effects. He has found that with just 1 hour of practice each dayfor two weeks， volunteers show a huge improvement at managing both his tasks atonce. Where he disagrees with Meyer is in what the brain is doing to achievethis. Marois speculates that practice might give us the chance to find lesscongested circuits to execute a task -rather like finding trusty back streetsto avoid heavy traffic on main roads -effectively making our response to thetask subconscious. After all， there are plenty of examples of subconsciousmultitasking that most of us routinely manage： walking and talking， eating andreading， watching TV and folding the while some dual tasks benefit from practice， otherssimply do not. ＂Certain kinds of tasks are really hard to do two atonce，＂ says Pierre Jolicoeur at the University of Montreal， Canada， whoalso studies multitasking. Dual tasks involving a visual stimulus andskeletal-motor response （which he dubs ＂in the eye and out the hand＂）and an auditory stimulus with a verbal response （＂in the ear and out themouth＂） do seem to be amenable to practice， he says. Jolicoeur has foundthat with enough training such tasks can be performed as well together asapart. He speculates that the brain connections that they use may be somehowspecial， because we learn to speak by hearing and learn to move by looking. Butpair visual input with a verbal response， or sound to motor， and there＇s nodramatic improvement. ＂It looks like no amount of practice will allow youto combine these，＂ he research purposes， these experiments have to be keptsimple. Real-world multitasking poses much greater challenges. Even the upbeatMeyer is sceptical about how a lot of us live our lives. Instant-messaging andtrying to do your homework？ ＂It can＇t be done，＂ he says. Conducting ajob interview while answering emails？ ＂There＇s no way you wind up being asgood.＂ Needless to say， there appear to be no researchers in the area ofmultitasking who believe that you can safely drive a car and carry on a phoneconversation. In fact， last year David Strayer at the University of Utah inSalt Lake City reported that people using cellphones drive no better thandrunks （Human Factors， vol 48， p 381）. In another study， Strayer found thatusing a hands-free kit did not improve a driver＇s response time. He concludedthat what distracts a driver so badly is the very act of talking to someone whoisn＇t present in the car and therefore is unaware of the hazards facing thedriver.“No researchers believe it＇s safe to drive a car andcarry on a phone conversation”It probably comes as no surprise that， generallyspeaking， we get worse at multitasking as we age. According to Art Kramer atthe University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign， who studies how ageing affectsour cognitive abilities， we peak in our 20s. Though the decline is slow throughour 30s and on into our 50s， it is there； and after 55， it becomes moreprecipitous. In one study， he and his colleagues had both young and oldparticipants do a simulated driving task while carrying on a conversation. Hefound that while young drivers tended to miss background changes， older driversfailed to notice things that were highly relevant. Likewise， older subjects hadmore trouble paying attention to the more important parts of a scene than ＇s not all bad news for over-55s， though. Kramer alsofound that older people can benefit from practice. Not only did they learn toperform better， brain scans showed that underlying that improvement was achange in the way their brains become ＇s clear that practice can often make a difference， especially as we age， thebasic facts remain sobering. ＂We have this impression of an almightycomplex brain，＂ says Marois， ＂and yet we have very humbling andcrippling limits.＂ For most of our history， we probably never needed to domore than one thing at a time， he says， and so we haven＇t evolved to be ableto. Perhaps we will in future， though. We might yet look back one day on peoplelike Debbie and Alun as ancestors of a new breed of true 。如果您有任何更详细的问题或需要进一步的协助，我强烈推荐您访问我们的留学官方网站 ，在那里您可以找到更多专业的留学考试规划和留学资料以及一对一的咨询服务。祝您留学申请顺利！
