雅思閱讀各部分考試分類介紹
雅思閱讀考試中，一共包括三篇文章，每一部分考試的重點都不同。各位考生要在備考中注意瞭解各個部分的考試內容。今天小編爲大家帶來的是雅思閱讀各部分考試分類介紹內容，希望能幫助到各位考生及時瞭解雅思閱讀考試內容，進行更有針對性的學習。
雅思閱讀各部分考試分類介紹
第一部分：雅思閱讀簡介
雅思閱讀考試分學術類和培訓類兩種，分別針對申請留學的學生和計劃在英語語言國家參加工作或移民的人士。三篇文章40道題目總共用時60分鐘，包括將答案謄寫到答題卡上的時間。
學術類(A類)閱讀考試形式：IELTS考試閱讀(學術類)部分共有三篇文章，考生需要回答40道題目。每一篇文章所需要回答的問題數量並不相同。每一道問題相對應一個分數。文章內容和題目均出現於問卷中。
培訓類(G類)閱讀考試形式：IELTS 考試閱讀(培訓類)部分共有三部分，文章難度由淺至深，考生需要回答40道題目。第一部分有14道題目，通常包含2到3篇短文或者若干段文字(如廣告 等)。第二和第三部分分別有13道題目。第二部分通常有2篇文章，第三部分則爲一段較長的文章。文章內容和題目均出現於問卷中。
第二部分：雅思閱讀文章來源
我們都知道，雅思閱讀文章多從世界著名的網站雜誌報刊中選取，但是瞭解具體是哪些網站嗎?下面就給大家分享一下，大家可以在休閒的時候多瀏覽一下上面的文章，對大家雅思閱讀備考非常有幫助。
一、 雅思閱讀A類的文章大部分選自國外人文類、經濟類和科學類的知名報紙、雜誌或各政府、組織的研究報告。例如：
1. New Scientist 這本雜誌被用到的頻率最高，如劍四中的Lost for Words, Play is a Serious Business，劍五中的What’s So Funny?, Flawed Beauty: the Problem with Toughened Glass，和劍六中的多篇文章 Australia’s Sporting Success, Climate Change and the Inuit, Graying Population Stays in the Pink, Do Literate Women Make Better Mothers?
2. The Economist 列居其次，如劍五中的The Truth about the Environment, 劍六中的Delivering the Goods
3. 還有American Scientist和Scientific American這兩個主要的美國學術期刊，例如劍五的Disappearing Delta和劍六的The Search for Anti-aging Pills
4. 當然還有National Geographic。但是值得注意的是，因爲這是休閒雜誌，所以只作爲了G類的閱讀，如劍六中的Pterosaurs
除了以上提到的若干來源之外，雅思A類的閱讀文章還出自Nature, Discover, Time (Europe), Boston Global, History Today等其餘期刊或雜誌。至於是哪次考試的哪篇文章，由於敏感原因在這裏就不在透露。
二、 G類的閱讀中前兩部分通常是實用性強的功能性短文，如菜單、產品說明、通知、住宿安排和廣告等，非常貼近西方的實際生活。這就要求考生們爭取每天閱讀一定 量的原版英文報刊、書籍，如time、reader’s digest等,尤其注意其中的各種各樣的廣告。並非要讀懂每一個字，或完全理解，只要能理解其中大至含義既可。
瞭解這些雅思文章出處之後對於廣大考生平時進行泛讀訓練具有很好的指導作用。考生可以從以上雜誌期刊的官方網站上搜索到相關背景文章進行有針對性的閱讀訓練。
第三部分：雅思閱讀文章類型
雅思閱讀難備考，可能是因爲文章的專業性。畢竟大多數同學平時都不太會深入瞭解一些自然類科技類醫學類……相關領域的最新知識。因爲背景知識的 缺乏，很多考生花費大量時間來理解文章，而導致做題時間緊張。所以，烤鴨們在平常的備考中要對一些不熟悉的領域涉獵一下，增強自己的背景知識理解能力。
雅思閱讀文章分類如下：
1. 關於歐洲及世界社會發展，經濟狀況，科學動向以及文化交流的文章
自1995年雅思考試的題型做出重大改革以後，有兩條原則就被命題的劍橋大學考試委員會(UCLES)反覆強調非專業原則和國際化原則。爲了使 不同地域，不同政治經濟體制，不同膚色，不同文化背景的人能平等且毫無理解困難地參與雅思,法律及專業性較強的醫學，生物學，哲學，文學，藝術等的文章已 經不再作爲雅思的考查範圍。
就可能涉獵的文章類型而言，以下幾個方面的內容經常作爲考點出現：
世界範圍的就業狀況
語言學，考古學，生物學，簡單醫學(單詞量不會影響對文章的理解)
世界範圍內的教育狀況，經濟發展的問題，機遇及挑戰(糧食，能源)
女權注意及女性歧視問題
環境保護(海洋，生物，陸地，森林等)及環境污染(化學，石油泄漏等)
種族，民族問題
人口爆炸及居住問題，城市化及相關問題(交通擁擠，設施缺乏，噪聲等)
2. 關於地球，自然界的科學現象及地理現象的文章
這種文章類型在I中最爲普遍，其涵蓋面之廣無從細分，但就最近一年以來考試文章分析，主要還是以下幾種類型：
太空，宇宙概況，以及外星生物探討等
全球氣候變暖，厄爾尼諾，洋流異常，臭氧層破壞
地球災難，火山爆發，地震，彗星撞地球，森林大火，生物滅絕
3. 人類歷史發展中重要事件，重要人物及重要標誌性產品
這也是雅思中經常出現的一種重要的文章類型，但自1998年開始對重要人物的考查總是和重要事件交織在一起，不再單獨羅列。人類歷史上的重大發明和表明人類文明輝煌成就的重大事件也是重點考查內容(發明電視，電影，計算機及登陸月球)。
第四部分：雅思閱讀文章結構
雅思閱讀的學術性決定了其深度和難度，卻也限制了文章的結構、使其必須符合一定的學術規範。學術性文章的寫作對象可以天南海北、作者觀點可以光 怪陸離，但是行文論證必須規範嚴密，所以雅思閱讀的層次結構相對固定。就目前出版的十本劍橋雅思系列而言，學術類閱讀大致可分爲兩類：說明文和議論文。其 中，說明文從客觀的角度介紹或陳述一個既定的事實，議論文則通常針對某個特定的問題進行分析和論證，有時一併提出解決的方案。
雅思閱讀練習：What make of Justin Bieber
Justin Bieber
He’s the YouTube sensation who turns 17 next month, making him the youngest singer to top the American Billboard Charts since Stevie Wonder in 1963. He has already earned nearly ￡100 million, and analysts claim he’s the most influential person on the internet, ahead of Barack Obama. But unless you’re an eight-year-old girl (or living in close proximity to one), you’re likely to be a bit vague on the whole Justin Bieber phenomenon.
Just who is this Canadian cutie pie with the spray-on mop top and the cartoon grin? Did he deserve the Brit award (for best international breakthrough artist) we gave him earlier this week? And what’s the secret of his appeal to the hordes of hopelessly devoted “Beliebers” who’ll be screaming and swooning their way through his new 3D movie, Never Say Never, when it opens in British cinemas tomorrow, and packing concert venues when he tours here next month?
Like most child stars, Bieber inherited his ambition. His mother’s dreams of an acting career were derailed when she became pregnant with him at 18. Although she kept in contact with his father, Pattie Mallette raised her boy alone, working in a series of low-paid office jobs in Stratford, Ontario.
Little Bieber discovered a passion for music early. In the movie, fans will coo over home video of him, aged about five, staring out from beneath a floppy blond fringe and announcing, “Mummy, this is how I drum!”, before banging out a tight, enthusiastic rhythm on a cheap kitchen chair. He taught himself to play the piano, guitar, drums and trumpet, came second in a talent contest at 12 and began uploading videos of himself to YouTube. That summer, he set down his guitar case in front of a theatre and made almost $3,000 busking covers of songs by his R&B heroes, Usher and Ne-Yo. In a rather adorable, role-reversing moment, he used the money to take his mum on holiday to Disneyland.
Meanwhile, those homemade YouTube videos had been spotted by aspiring music executive Scooter Braun. Mallette, a devout Christian, was hesitant because Braun is Jewish. “God, I gave him to you,” she is reported to have said. “You could send me a Christian man, a Christian label!” But after praying with church elders, she decided to hand Braun the reins of her son’s career. And Braun had a strategy ready to roll. “I wanted to build him up more on YouTube first,” he has said. “We supplied more content. I said: 'Justin, sing like there’s no one in the room. But let’s not use expensive cameras.’ We’ll give it to kids, let them do the work, so they feel like it’s theirs.”
雅思閱讀材料：Chevron's dirty fight in Ecuador
石油污染的樹木
The giant oil corporation has been fined $8.6bn for an environmental disaster that has been called 'the Amazon's Chernobyl'. But guess what? It may end up paying nothing
No regrets, no apologies and not a penny in damages. The US energy giant Chevron came out fighting last night after a court in Ecuador ordered it to pay $8.6bn (￡5.3bn) in fines and clean-up costs, plus $900m reparations, to the victims of oil pollution that fouled a swathe of Amazon rainforest along the country's remote north-eastern border.
The sum was the largest ever levied in an environmental lawsuit anywhere in the world.
Supporters of the indigenous villagers who brought the case said they were celebrating a landmark victory in the wider battle to hold multinational corporations to account for their conduct overseas.
Chevron will not be admitting defeat, however. Its lawyers, who have already spent 18 years and tens of millions of dollars contesting the lawsuit, pledged yesterday to appeal against the fine through every conceivable legal avenue, on at least three continents. In statements, the oil company branded Ecuador's legal system corrupt and "illegitimate", and said the court's ruling formed part of a vast "extortion scheme". A spokesman for Chevron claimed that the fine, imposed by a judge in the town of Lago Agrio, was "unenforceable in any court that observes the rule of law".
Chevron's lawyers have already filed appeals and counter-suits related to the case in six US courts. The company no longer has assets in Ecuador, so it intends to force the plaintiffs to pursue it internationally if they wish to see any of the damages. Chevron is also attempting to take the case to arbitration at a tribunal in the Netherlands.
A New York judge, Lewis A Kaplan, took the extraordinary step last week of pre-emptively blocking any financial judgment against the US-based company, anywhere in the world, for at least 28 days. He suggested that attempts to collect Chevron's assets might disrupt the day-to-day business of a company that was vital to the global economy.
That the dispute has reached this heady stage is hardly surprising, given both its enormous complexity and the vast amounts of money now at stake. The case stretches all the way back to 1964, when Texaco entered a partnership with Ecuador's state oil company, Petroecuador, to extract oil from the country's remote Oriente region.
During almost 30 subsequent years of exploration, billions of gallons of waste oil and water were dumped into open pits, fouling fishing grounds, damaging crops, killing farm animals and leading to an increase in cancer cases among residents of villages in the region. So severe was the damage that the fallout has been widely described as "the Amazon's Chernobyl". Experts appointed by the Ecuadorean courts have calculated that the pollution from the oil wells killed at least 1,400 people.
When Texaco pulled out of the country, in 1992, it agreed to spend roughly $40m cleaning up some of the damage. Shortly afterwards, the first version of the current lawsuit was filed against Texaco in New York by lawyers representing 47 named residents of the region.
In 2001, Texaco was bought by California-based Chevron, which became America's second-biggest oil firm but inherited the still-ongoing lawsuit in the process. In 2003, its lawyers successfully argued that the case should be heard in Ecuador. It has taken almost eight years for it to come to court. In that time, the fate of the 47 plaintiffs, who are seeking damages for 30,000 fellow members of their community, has become an international cause clbre, gaining the support of Hollywood stars such as Darryl Hannah. The lawyer who represents the residents, Pablo Fajardo, won the Goldman Environmental Prize in 2008 for his work on the case.
Mr Fajardo called Monday's 188-page ruling, which will roughly double the ￡5.75bn fine if Chevron does not admit wrongdoing in the next 14 days, a "triumph of justice", saying he was only disappointed that the level of damages wasn't higher. "Today's judgment affirms what the plaintiffs have contended for the past 18 years about Chevron's intentional and unlawful contamination of Ecuador's rainforest," he added. "Rather than accept that responsibility, Chevron has launched a campaign of warfare against the Ecuadorean courts and the impoverished victims of its unfortunate practices."
Despite its earlier efforts to have the case held in Ecuador, Chevron now claims that the local court system is institutionally corrupt. Using undercover investigators with hidden recording devices, it claims to have found proof of illegal collusion between the plaintiffs and the judges. "The evidence of fraud on the part of the plaintiffs' lawyers is overwhelming," said a spokesman. "We intend to see that the perpetrators of this fraud are held accountable for their misconduct."
Analysts think it unlikely that Chevron, which reported earnings of $19bn last year, will agree to pay any damages, since the cost of continuing to appeal is far less than the amount it would have to pay to settle. However, the row may be taking some of the gloss off its performance: while shares in BP and Shell rose yesterday, Chevron's stock was down by about 1 per cent in early afternoon trade in New York.
