英语六级 2015年12月·第3套 · 真题整卷

More than a decade ago, cognitive scientists John Bransford and Daniel Schwartz, both then at Vanderbilt University, found that what distinguished young adults from children was not the ability to retain facts or apply prior knowledge to a new situation but a quality they called "preparation for future learning." The researchers asked fifth graders and college students to create a recovery plan to protect bald eagles from extinction. Shockingly, the two groups came up with plans of similar quality (though the college students had better spelling skills). From the standpoint of a traditional educator, this outcome indicated that schooling had failed to help students think about ecosystems and extinction, major scientific ideas.

The researchers decided to go deeper, however. They asked both groups to generate questions about important issues needed to create recovery plans. On this task, they found large differences. College students focused on critical issues of interdependence between eagles and their habitat(栖息地). Fifth graders tended to focus on features of individual eagles ("How big are they?" and "What do they eat?"). The college students had cultivated the ability to ask questions, the cornerstone of critical thinking. They had learned how to learn.

Museums and other institutions of informal learning may be better suited to teach this skill than elementary and secondary schools. At the Exploratorium in San Francisco, we recently studied how learning to ask good questions can affect the quality of people's scientific inquiry. We found that when we taught participants to ask "What if?" and "How can?" questions that nobody present would know the answer to and that would spark exploration, they engaged in better inquiry at the next exhibit—asking more questions, performing more experiments and making better interpretations of their results. Specifically, their questions became more comprehensive at the new exhibit. Rather than merely asking about something they wanted to try, they tended to include both cause and effect in their question. Asking juicy questions appears to be a transferable skill for deepening collaborative inquiry into the science content found in exhibits.

This type of learning is not confined to museums or institutional settings. Informal learning environment tolerates failure better than schools. Perhaps many teachers have too little time to allow students to form and pursue their own questions and too much ground to cover in the curriculum. But people must acquire this skill somewhere. Our society depends on them being able to make critical decisions about their own medical treatment, say, or what we must do about global energy needs and demands. For that, we have a robust informal system that gives no grades, takes all comers, and is available even on holidays and weekends.

"There's an old saying in the space world: amateurs talk about technology, professionals talk about insurance." In an interview last year with The Economist, George Whitesides, chief executive of space-tourism firm Virgin Galactic, was placing his company in the latter category. But insurance will be cold comfort following the failure on October 31st of VSS Enterprise, resulting in the death of one pilot and the severe injury to another.

On top of the tragic loss of life, the accident in California will cast a long shadow over the future of space tourism, even before it has properly begun.

The notion of space tourism took hold in 2001 with a $20 million flight aboard a Russian spacecraft by Dennis Tito, a millionaire engineer with an adventurous streak. Just half a dozen holiday-makers have reached orbit since then, for similarly astronomical price tags. But more recently, companies have begun to plan more affordable "suborbital" flights—briefer ventures just to the edge of space's vast darkness. Virgin Galactic had, prior to this week's accident, seemed closest to starting regular flights. The company has already taken deposits from around 800 would-be space tourists, including Stephen Hawking.

After being dogged by technical delays for years, Sir Richard Branson, Virgin Galactic's founder, had recently suggested that a SpaceShipTwo craft would carry its first paying customers as soon as February 2015. That now seems an impossible timeline. In July, a sister craft of the crashed spaceplane was reported to be about half-finished. The other half will have to wait, as authorities of America's Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and National Transportation Safety Board work out what went wrong.

In the meantime, the entire space tourism industry will be on tenterhooks(坐立不安). The 2004 Commercial Space Launch Amendments Act, intended to encourage private space vehicles and services, prohibits the transportation secretary (and thereby the FAA) from regulating the design or operation of private spacecraft, unless they have resulted in a serious or fatal injury to crew or passengers. That means that the FAA could suspend Virgin Galactic's license to fly. It could also insist on checking private manned spacecraft as thoroughly as it does commercial aircraft. While that may make suborbital travel safer, it would add significant cost and complexity to an emerging industry that has until now operated largely as the playground of billionaires and dreamy engineers.

How Virgin Galactic, regulators and the public respond to this most recent tragedy will determine whether and how soon private space travel can transcend that playground. There is no doubt that spaceflight entails risks, and to pioneer a new mode of travel is to free those risks, and to reduce them with the benefit of hard-won experience.