扫描二维码，直接登录
题库 / OG2019-RC-451
Linda Kerber argued in the mid-1980s that after the American Revolution (1775–1783), an ideology of “republican motherhood” resulted in a surge of educational opportunities for women in the United States. Kerber maintained that the leaders of the new nation wanted women to be educated in order to raise politically virtuous sons. A virtuous citizenry was considered essential to the success of the country’s republican form of government; virtue was to be instilled not only by churches and schools, but by families, where the mother’s role was crucial. Thus, according to Kerber, motherhood became pivotal to the fate of the republic, providing justification for an unprecedented attention to female education.
Introduction of the “republican motherhood” thesis dramatically changed historiography. Prior to Kerber’s work, educational historians barely mentioned women and girls; Thomas Woody’s 1929 work is the notable exception. Examining newspaper advertisements for academies, Woody found that educational opportunities increased for both girls and boys around 1750. Pointing to “An Essay on Woman” (1753) as reflecting a shift in view, Woody also claimed that practical education for females had many advocates before the Revolution. Woody’s evidence challenges the notion that the Revolution changed attitudes regarding female education, although it may have accelerated earlier trends. Historians’ reliance on Kerber’s “republican motherhood” thesis may have obscured the presence of these trends, making it difficult to determine to what extent the Revolution really changed women’s lives.
The passage suggests that, with regard to the history of women’s education in the United States, Kerber’s work differs from Woody’s primarily concerning which of the following?
The extent to which women were interested in pursuing educational opportunities in the eighteenth century
The extent of the support for educational opportunities for girls prior to the American Revolution
The extent of public resistance to educational opportunities for women after the American Revolution
Whether attitudes toward women’s educational opportunities changed during the eighteenth century
Whether women needed to be educated in order to contribute to the success of a republican form of government
题目分析：
文章推断题： 在美国的女性教育史上，LK的研究和TW的研究在哪一方面不一样？
LK认为：revolution之后，女性受教育的诉求才增加，因为政府意识到女性在培养有政治觉悟的好公民方面的重要性。
TW认为：revolution之前就有许多人支持女性受教育，revolution只不过是加快了这个趋势。
选项分析：
A选项：十八世纪，女性对接受教育这件事有多大兴趣：两个人都认为女性是对接受教育有很大需求的。
B选项：正确。revolution之前，人们对女性受教育有多大的支持：LK认为revolution之前是没有的，而TW认为revolution之前就有的。
C选项：revolution之后，公众对女性受教育有多大反对：原文没提。两个人都讨论的是支持的事。
D选项：十八世纪，对女性受教育这件事的态度变没变：两个人都认为revolution改变了态度，但不同意的是到底改变了多少。LK认为是从无到有；TW认为只是在有的基础上助攻了一波。文章最后一句：到底revolution多大程度上改变了女性的生活。
E选项：女性是否需要受教育，为了给新政度做贡献：这个是LK讨论的内容，与两人的分歧无关。
这个题真的是醉了，我认为原文中women（18以上）和girl（18以下）是不同群体，直接把有girl的排出了。。。。
连续两题你和我的排除方法一样😂
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论
最后一句：Historians’ reliance on Kerber’s “republican motherhood” thesis may have obscured the presence of these trends, making it difficult to determine to what extent the Revolution really changed women’s lives.到底revolution多大程度上改变了女性的生活。
两个人都认为revolution改变了态度，但不同意的是到底改变了多少。LK认为是从无到有；TW认为只是在有的基础上助攻了一波。
而C是：revolution之后，公众对女性受教育有多大反对，两个人支持的都是revolution之后就不再反对了
rc| 错选d
extent 程度 范围
仔细选，重读定位，不要大意---||”选项说的没错，但是不是正确答案，不对题意“-||-”-还是要两个选项对比，才能选出正确，不要看到一个像正确的就去选，有陷阱。“||
问“Kerber’s work differs from Woody’s primarily主要 concerning” 其实kerber根本就没提态度的事，虽然后面“Woody’s evidence challenges the notion that the Revolution changed attitudes ”
但是！！kerber那里的描述重点并不是态度的事！题目问的事kerber和后者不同主要在于？注意抓住重点，文段重点！
kerber描述重点是“after the American Revolution”怎么样，而后者是“advocates before the Revolution”
rc| 错选d
extent 程度 范围
仔细选，重读定位，不要大意---”选项说的没错，但是不是正确答案，不对题意“
问“Kerber’s work differs from Woody’s primarily主要 concerning” 其实kerber根本就没提态度的事，虽然后面“Woody’s evidence challenges the notion that the Revolution changed attitudes ”
但是！！kerber那里的描述重点并不是态度的事！题目问的事kerber和后者不同主要在于？注意抓住重点，文段重点！
kerber描述重点是“after the American Revolution”怎么样，而后者是“advocates before the Revolution”
rc| 错选d
extent 程度 范围
仔细选，重读定位，不要大意
问“Kerber’s work differs from Woody’s primarily主要 concerning” 其实kerber根本就没提态度的事，虽然后面“Woody’s evidence challenges the notion that the Revolution changed attitudes ”
但是！！kerber那里的描述重点并不是态度的事！题目问的事kerber和后者不同主要在于？注意抓住重点，文段重点！
kerber描述重点是“after the American Revolution”怎么样，而后者是“advocates before the Revolution”
Woody’s evidence challenges the notion that the Revolution changed attitudes regarding female education.
W认为在revolution之前就已经开始转变对female efucation的态度了，但是L认为是revolution是导致female education增加的原因
观点型文章，要搞清不同观点的相同&不同点
这篇文章最重要的就是梳理各个人物和事件的时间轴：
LK是在1980研究18世纪的女性教育，在此之前没人关注，W是个例外，他在1929年发表研究。
革命发生在1775，LK认为革命创造了女性教育机会；W认为女性教育机会在1750就开始产生了，无论是人们的态度还是实践都支持女性教育。
这说明LK们认为革命创造女性教育机会的观点错误，模糊了革命对女性的影响程度。
LK认为 American Revolution 推动了女性受教育权利；TW认为在此之前女性受教育机会已经增加了。
这个要看differ怎么理解吧，如果说differ当做意见分歧来讲，那么B没有问题。但是如果当做不一样来理解的话，E选项，一个提及了一个没提及，不算不同么？我持保留态度
都提了
LK的观点可以从：Woody’s evidence challenges the notion that the Revolution changed attitudes regarding female education，这里的notion就是motherhood publication,即LK的观点
WT的观点是---Pointing to “An Essay on Woman” (1753) as reflecting a shift in view, Woody also claimed that
老哥你说啥呢。。你要认为都提了，而且是你说的那点，那E不就对了么。。woody的观点是revolution之前女性教育就被advocate了。LK的观点是，revolution之后才。。并说明了是因为government 需要，所以才有这些教育机会。woody的言论和government都没关系啊。你想多了吧？
D的问题是态度是否有转变，然后文章里两个人都提到的态度转变，所以他们之前在这方面没有differ啊
好叭我看花眼了..以为你讲的是d,忽略我吧
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论
Yes, option B is right. Both of them agreed that after the revolution, women has increased opportunities for education. Their opinions differed in the effect of revolution, which means they didn't agree to the extent of support for women education before revolution.