2018年5月北美SAT考试真题回顾今天三立在线教育SAT网为大家带来的是2018年5月北美SAT考试真题回顾的相关资讯，备考的烤鸭们，赶紧来看看吧！
考情汇总
1、难点还是集中在阅读上，小说和双篇文章登顶此次最难的两篇。
2、此次考试的语法部分没有特别难的问题，考生均反映难度适中。
3、写作部分选取的文章非常有利于考生展开分析！
4、此次考试数学非常容易，就连北美的同学（美国人）都反映此次数学几乎无压力！
5、加试部分为数学，难度依旧非常低。
阅读部分
第一篇：小说
小说选自美国经典现实主义小说Sister Carrie，作者为Theodore Dreiser，最早出版于1900年。小说描述了一个贫困的乡村姑娘来到大城市生活，内心向往富足的生活。为了摆脱穷困，先后跟推销员和酒店经理同居，最后历经磨难，终成一个著名演员。
小说截取的部分在论述Carrie 在看一出关于纽约奢华生活的舞台剧。台上演员华衣美服，居所装修华丽，生活应有尽有。Carrie 不免生出羡慕向往之心。
舞台剧还体现了这些生活在理想状态人还收到感情爱情嫉妒的折磨，这更让Carrie 羡慕，谁不愿意坐在金椅子里发愁，谁会不愿意在洒了香水的挂毯、有坐垫的家具和穿着制服的仆人那样的条件下受些折磨呢？
回到她小小的flat（套间），Carrie 暗暗下决心，假如我不能过上那样的生活，我就等于没有活过，或者说自己活过。
第二篇、自然科学科研型文章
研究的主要目的在于探究人类大脑如何区分现实和虚拟（广告/小说人物/童话)信息。
研究者呈现给受试者不同的场景：一，广播听到或报纸阅读到关于布什(总统)和灰姑娘，二，跟总统或跟灰姑娘共进晚餐。然后利用MRL 研究他们大脑不同区域的活跃度。
现实和虚拟信息都会激起大脑某些区域比如管记忆的海马沟。不同的是，现实信息还会激起独特的一个脑区域，这个脑区域跟短时记忆和注意力有关。一直相对，虚拟的信息会激起一个跟语言相关的脑区域。
研究者后来又在另一拨受试者重复了实验，这次根据跟受试者现实相关的程度设置信息。结果还是成立，研究者进一步拓展，现实和虚拟其实跟不在于人物本身的现实程度，更跟信息与受试者现实生活的相关度有关。
第三篇自然科学文章
讲述野猫到家猫的变化，研究其中的基因变化过程。
通过对比22种家猫和4种夜猫的基因组，科学家发现13种基因组发生变化，就是这些变化导致夜猫可以被驯化。
在文章后来提到了，家猫身上的一些细胞有迁移变化的现象。也就是经过了所谓的基因突变，这个改变会对猫的性情产生比较大的影响，让猫变得容易驯化。
最后，在文章的结尾处提问为什么相比猫，狗更容易被驯化。是因为人在驯化狗之前做了狗的筛选，筛选出类易于被驯化的狗，而猫则不是。
第四篇：历史类双篇文章
考到了美国历史上著名的“堪萨斯-内布拉斯加法案”，这个法案本身是对奴隶制的一个妥协，激化了国内废奴运动。
此次双篇文章的作者分别是史蒂芬·道格拉斯，和查尔斯·桑诺。其中前者基于自己的利益角度出发，认为奴隶制应该在国内存在妥协，即便要废除，也应该把这样的决定留给人民。
而查尔斯的观点则相当激进，认为奴隶制的存在就是不可被容忍的，所谓的“堪萨斯-内布拉斯加法案”就是一个骗局，人们连自己的政府都无法选择，怎么会有权力去选择要不要废奴。
第五篇：自然科学文章
主要讲述哈勃望远镜的一个探测历史的功能。目前哈勃望远镜可以到五块不同天空的宇宙组装近红外深超星系遗产技术（the Cosmic Assembly Near-infraredDeep Extragalactic Legacy Survey）来测量五块代表性天空。探测到一亿年前宇宙的形态。
这个研究有利于人类探索历史进程。同时，文章后半部分提到了哈勃望远镜在不同领域做出的研究成果、采集数据的有效性，同时提出这些数据是完全公开的，有助于科学家采用分析。
语法部分
语法部分这次考试难度中等，考察范围都是常规考点。
同学们一直很头疼的词汇部分，一道考察了relent, loose up 和cave 在语境里的styleand tone，另一道则需要辨析excessive, prolific, magnanimous 的意思。
语篇部分总体难度适中，值得注意的是会几个涉及到对段落开头部分的考察，包括段落首句是否该添加额外句子，两个段落之间过渡句以及句子排序（before the first sentence），需要大家对于段落内容有整体的把握。
由于此部分难度较低，学生对文章内容的反馈并不是非常全面，考到的Sherkock文章倒是让考生们甚为放松，考完了还在拿着个开玩笑。
第一篇：关于垃圾填埋场改建的问题，改成公园之后会让整个环境更好。
第二篇：关于神探Sherlock的小说创作问题，作者由于觉得整天构思Sherlock的故事太费脑子了，于是让Sherlock跟反面人物决斗之后死掉了。但这样的结果显然不能让读者满意，所以作者最后只好复活了Sherlock，并继续烧脑地写这个故事。
数学部分
此次美国本土同学反应的难点还是在函数图像上，此次考试考到了一个圆的半径计算，很多本土同学略一激动，把算出来的直径给写上了，考完之后一对答案后悔连连。所以根据大家此次的反应，还是要继续练习，不要放松自己平时的计时训练。
写作部分
原文如下：
Adapted from the Los Angeles Times Editorial Board, “Base food labeling on fact, not fear" ?2014 by the Los Angeles Times. Originally published May 5, 2014.
【1】The scientific evidence on genetically engineered food, which has been around for two decades, indicates that it is as safe for human consumption as any other food. A California bill that would require the labeling of bioengineered food — whose DNA has been modified in the laboratory to introduce certain traits —caters to a scare campaign that is not based on solid evidence.
【2】If a consumer has personal concerns about genetically modified food, there are other ways to avoid it. Trader Joe's, for example, has announced that food sold
under its label contains no genetically engineered ingredients. There are apps and Internet sites to inform consumers about other foods. And companies that do not bioengineer their foods are certainly free to say so on their labels. But the science does not support mandatory labeling.
【3】State Sen. Noreen Evans (D-Santa Rosa) has said that her bill doesn't make judgments about whether genetically engineered food is inherently good or bad but merely informs consumers. Yet the wording says otherwise. It's full of negative declarations about such food, with no mention of the positives. "United States government scientists have stated that the artificial insertion of genetic material into plants via genetic engineering can increase the levels of known toxicants or allergens in foods and create new toxicants or allergens with consequent health concerns," the bill says. It doesn't note that hundreds of studies, many by independent scientists who took no industry money, have found no credible evidence that bioengineered food has actually done any of those things, or is dangerous in any way to human health. Reviews by the American Medical Assn., the Food and Drug Administration, the World Health Organization and the National Academy of Sciences have all concluded that genetically engineered food appears to be as safe as any other.
【4】That's not to say there are no downsides. Studies have raised legitimate concerns, for instance, that bioengineered crops designed to withstand the herbicide glyphosate, more commonly known by the Monsanto brand name Roundup, encourage farmers to overuse it, fostering the growth of resistant weeds.
The AMA, though it has said that genetically engineered food should not be labeled, has also called on the federal government to require more safety testing before new bioengineered products can be marketed.
【5】These issues are worth consideration, but labeling would not resolve either one. Most farms use pesticides, including some more dangerous than glyphosate, but their products don't have to be labeled accordingly. Labeling requirements should have logical consistency; the campaign to label genetically engineered foods doesn't.
【6】SB 1381 would require conspicuous yet imprecise labels notifying consumers that the food contains some genetically engineered ingredients, without making it clear what the engineering was meant to accomplish. Food companies are developing products for reasons other than to make pesticide use easy, such as building resistance into crops, like oranges, that are threatened by disease, or creating non-allergenic forms of some grains. But the labels wouldn't give these details. They would serve mainly to frighten grocery shoppers by implying that there is something wrong with the food, without making them better informed. And the labels would be so ubiquitous as to be almost meaningless; it's widely estimated that 70% to 80% of the packaged food in conventional supermarkets contains genetically engineered ingredients.
【7】There are more worrisome agricultural practices that do affect human health, especially the overuse of antibiotics in livestock. "There is strong evidence that some antibiotic resistance in bacteria is caused by antibiotic use in food
animals," the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports. Yet no one has been campaigning for labels on meat that comes from antibiotic-treated livestock. As with bioengineered food, this is best dealt with by appropriate safety regulations, not labels.
【8】There's a limit to what manufacturers can tell consumers about their food — labels can't enumerate every possible or perceived concern. Labeling laws should set a priority on providing information that significantly affects consumer health. They should be based on facts, not fear.
如上就是三立网课教育小编为大家带来的2018年5月北美SAT考试真题回顾的相关资讯，掌握最新SAT资讯，敬请关注（三立在线教育SAT网）更多SAT考试资讯以及备考资料免费领！