Angielski rozszerzony czytanie 3 matura maj 2018 ćwiczenie 6 – trzecie zadanie na rozumienie tekstu czytanego. Reading 3 – „nowa” matura.
Zadanie 6 – czytanie ćwiczenie 3.
Przeczytaj dwa teksty na temat podejmowania pracy. Z podanych odpowiedzi wybierz właściwą, zgodną z treścią tekstu. Zakreśl literę A, B, C albo D.
Tekst 1.
THE JOB
War was declared at eleven-fifteen and Mary North signed up at noon. She did it hurriedly at
lunch, before telegrams came, in case her mother said no. When she reached London, she went
straight to the War Office. The ink was still fresh on the map they issued her. She rushed across
town to her post, desperate not to miss a minute of the war. Any moment now it would start –
this dreaded and wonderful thing – and it could never be won without her. The morning rush
matched her mood. In London, thousands of young women were hurrying to their new
positions, on orders from Whitehall, and Mary joined gladly the great flow of the willing.
The War Office had given no further details, and that was a good sign. They might make her
an attaché to a general’s staff. It was even rumoured that they needed spies, which was most
appealing.
Mary stopped a cab and showed her map to the driver. He held it at arm’s length and looked at
the red cross that marked where she was to report.
“This big building, in Hawley Street?”
“Yes,” said Mary.
“It’s Hawley Street School, isn’t it?”
“I shouldn’t think so. I’m to report for war work, you see.”
“Oh. Only I don’t know what else it could be around there but the school. The rest is just
houses.”
Mary opened her mouth to argue, then stopped. Because, of course, they didn’t have a glittering
tower labelled MINISTRY OF WILD INTRIGUE. Naturally they would have her report
somewhere insignificant. How silly of me to chatter on like this, she thought.
“Right then,” she said. “I expect I am to be made a schoolmistress.”
The man nodded. “Makes sense, doesn’t it? Half the schoolmasters in London must be joining
up for the war.”
“Then, let’s hope the cane proves effective against the enemy’s tanks.”
Arriving at the school, Mary felt observed. She was careful to adopt the expression of
an ordinary young woman for whom the prospect of work as a schoolteacher would be thrilling.
This was her first test, after all.
She found the headmistress’s office and introduced herself. Miss Vine nodded but wouldn’t
look up from her desk.
“North,” said Mary again.
“Yes, I heard you quite well. You are to take Kestrel Class. Begin with the register. Read it and
learn the students’ names.”
“Very good,” said Mary.“Have you taught before?”
“No,” said Mary, “but I can’t imagine there’s much to it.”
“Your imagination is not on the syllabus. Be firm, organized, give no liberties, and do not
underestimate the importance of the child forming letters properly. As the hand, the mind.”
Mary felt that the “headmistress” was overdoing it and decided to mention it to the woman’s
superior, once she discovered who it was. Although in mitigation, the woman’s attention to
detail was impressive. Here were pots of sharpened pencils, tins of drawing pins and a tidy
stack of hymnbooks standing neatly on her desk.adapted from Everyone Brave is Forgiven by Chris Cleave
6.1. After her visit to the W ar Office, M ary
(!lost her way in the rushing crowds.) (!got scared of the responsibility her assignment demanded.) (headed for the place which had been indicated to her. ) (!still felt annoyed by her mother’s reaction to her decision.)
6.2. During the taxi ride, Mary
(!insisted the driver should change the route.) (realized she had better not discuss her assignment.) (!wondered why the driver was so inquisitive about her work.)(!expressed her anxiety about the job interview she was about to attend.)
6.3. Miss Vine advised M ary
(to keep discipline in the classroom) (!to develop the imagination of her students.) (!to neatly arrange her belongings on the desk.)(!to write the students’ names clearly in the register.)
Tekst 2.
TO INTERVIEW OR NOT TO INTERVIEW?
A friend of mine once had a curious experience at a job interview. Excited about the possible
position, she arrived five minutes early and was immediately ushered into the interview room
by the receptionist. Following an amicable discussion with a panel of interviewers, she was
offered the job. Afterwards, one of the interviewers remarked how impressed she was that my
friend could be so composed after showing up 25 minutes late for the interview. As it turned
out, my friend had been told the wrong start time by half an hour. She remained composed
because she didn’t know she was late. My friend isn’t the type of person who would have
remained cool if she had known she was late, but the interviewers reached the opposite
conclusion. Of course, they could have also concluded that her calmness showed disrespect.
Either way, they would have been wrong to draw conclusions about her future performance in
her work based on her behaviour at the interview. In this case, the outcome of the interview was
beneficial for the applicant. But it doesn’t have to end that way.
This is a widespread problem. Employers like to use free-form, unstructured interviews to “get
to know” a job candidate. Such interviews are also increasingly popular with admissions
officers at universities. But, as in my friend’s case, interviewers typically form strong but
unwarranted impressions.
One way to change this is to develop an interview protocol based on a careful analysis of what
is being looked for in the candidate. Interviews should be structured so that all candidates
receive the same questions, a procedure which makes interviews more reliable and more
predictive of job success. The employer should also make sure to include a number of questions
which test job-related skills.adapted from www.nytimes.com;www.theguardian.com
6.4. The author mentions his friend’s interview experience to
(!show that a successful interview is linked to future performance in the job.)(suggest that an interview may give a misleading image of a candidate)(!compare different factors which influence a candidate’s performance at an interview.)(!prove that each interviewer assesses the same candidate differently.)
6.5. In the last paragraph, we learn
(!in what way candidates’ behaviour changes when the job interview is structured.) (!why structured interviews are not recommended for testing some skills.) (!what alternative recruitment procedures should replace interviews.) (what improvements could be made to job interviews.)
