阅读下文，回答相关问题。

                                                                                                      阅读《最后一课》（节选）
        平常日子，学校开始上课的时候，总有一阵喧闹，就是在街上也能听到。开课桌啦，关课桌啦，大家怕吵捂着耳朵大声背书啦……还有老师拿着大铁戒尺在桌子上紧敲着，“静一点，静一点……”
        我本来打算趁那一阵喧闹偷偷地溜到我的座位上去；可是那一天，一切偏安安静静的，跟星期日的早晨一样。我从开着的窗子望进去，看见同学们都在自己的座位上了；韩麦尔先生呢，踱来踱去，胳膊底下夹着那怕人的铁戒尺。我只好推开门，当着大家的面走进静悄悄的教室。你们可以想象，我那时脸多么红，心多么慌！
         可是一点儿也没有什么。韩麦尔先生见了我，很温和地说：“快坐好，小弗郎士，我们就要开始上课，不等你了。”
       我一纵身跨过板凳就坐下。我的心稍微平静了一点儿，我才注意到，我们的老师今天穿上了他那件挺漂亮的绿色礼服，打着皱边的领结，戴着那顶绣边的小黑丝帽。这套衣帽，他只在督学来视察或者发奖的日子才穿戴。而且整个教室有一种不平常的严肃的气氛。最使我吃惊的是，后边几排一向空着的板凳上坐着好些镇上的人，他们也跟我们一样肃静。其中有郝叟老头儿，戴着他那顶三角帽，有从前的镇长，从前的邮递员，还有些旁的人。个个看来都很忧愁。郝叟还带着一本书边破了的初级读本，他把书翻开，摊在膝头上，书上横放着他那副大眼镜。
         我看见这些情形，正在诧异，韩麦尔先生已经坐上椅子，像刚才对我说话那样，又柔和又严肃地对我们说：“我的孩子们，这是我最后一次给你们上课了。柏林已经来了命令，阿尔萨斯和洛林的学校只许教德语了。新老师明天就到。今天是你们最后一堂法语课，我希望你们多多用心学习。”
       接着，韩麦尔先生从这一件事谈到那一件事，谈到法国语言上来了。他说，法国语言是世界上最美的语言——最明白，最精确；又说，我们必须把它记在心里，永远别忘了它，亡了国当了奴隶的人民，只要牢牢记住他们的语言，就好像拿着一把打开监狱大门的钥匙。说到这里，他就翻开书讲语法。真奇怪，今天听讲，我全都懂。他讲的似乎挺容易，挺容易。我觉得我从来没有这样细心听讲过，他也从来没有这样耐心讲解过。这可怜的人好像恨不得把自己知道的东西在他离开之前全教给我们，一下子塞进我们的脑子里去。
        语法课完了，我们又上习字课。那一天，韩麦尔先生发给我们新的字帖，帖上都是美丽的圆体字：“法兰西”“阿尔萨斯”“法兰西”“阿尔萨斯”。这些字帖挂在我们课桌的铁杆上，就好像许多面小国旗在教室里飘扬。个个都那么专心，教室里那么安静！只听见钢笔在纸上沙沙地响。有时候一些金甲虫飞进来，但是谁都不注意，连最小的孩子也不分心，他们正在专心画“杠子”，好像那也算是法国字。屋顶上鸽子咕咕咕咕地低声叫着，我心里想：“他们该不会强迫这些鸽子也用德国话唱歌吧！”

经济史专家认为中国近代工业发展曾出现三次热潮：19世纪六七十年代，中国资本主义工业兴起；19世纪末20世纪初，民族工业获得初步发展；一战期间，民族工业出现了短暂的春天。这“三次热潮”的相同作用是（  ）

         是我们国家的立国之本,必须毫不动摇地坚持。（   ）

下列各现象中，属于光的反射现象的是（　　）

阅读理解

    The question of what children learn, and how they should learn it, is continually being debated and redebated. Nobody dares any longer to defend the old system, the parrot-fashion（way of learning by repeating what others say）of learning lessons, the grammar-with-a-whip（鞭子）system, which was good enough for our grandparents. The theories of modern psychology have stepped in to argue that we must understand the needs of our children. Children are not just small adults; they are children who must be respected as such.

    Well, you may say, this is as it should be, and a good idea. But think further. What happens? “Education” becomes the responsibility not of teachers, but of psychologists. What happens then? Teachers worry too much about the psychological implications（暗示） of their lessons, and forget about the subjects themselves. If a child dislikes a lesson, the teacher feels that it is his fault, not the child's. So teachers worry whether history is “relevant” to modern young children. And do they dare to recount stories about violent battles? Or will this make the children themselves violent? Can they tell their classes about children of different races, or will this encourage racial hatred? Why teach children to write grammatical sentences? Oral expression is better. Sums? Arithmetic? No; real-life mathematical situations are more understandable.

    You see, you can go too far. Influenced by educational theorists, who have nothing better to do than write books about their ideas, teachers leave their teaching-training colleges filled with grand, psychological ideas about children and their needs. They make complicated preparations and try out their “modern methods” on the long-suffering children. Since one “modern method” rapidly replaces another, the poor kids will have well been fed up by the time they leave school. Frequently the modern methods are so complicated that they fail to be understood by the teachers, let alone the children; even more often, the relaxed discipline so necessary for the “informal” feeling the class must have, prevents all but a handful of children from learning anything.