IQ-Gene
      In the angry debate over how much of IQ comes from the genes that children inherit from parents and how much comes from experiences, one little fact gets overlooked: no one has identified any genes(other than those that cause retardation)that affect intelligence. So researchers led by Robert Plomin of London’s Institute of Psychiatry decided to look for some. They figured that if you want to find a “smart gene,” you should look in smart kids. They therefore examined the DNA of students like those who are so bright that they take college entrance exams four years early—and still score at Princeton-caliber levels. The scientists found what they sought. “We have,” says Plomin, “the first specific gene ever associated with general intelligence.”
      Plomin’s colleagues drew blood from two groups of 51 children each, all 6 to 15 years old and living in six counties around Cleveland. In one group, the average IQ is 103. All the children are white. Isolating the blood cells, the researchers then examined each child’s chromosome 6.  Of the 37 landmarks on chromosome 6 that the researchers looked for, one jumped out: a form of gene called IGF2R occurred in twice as many children in the high-IQ group as in the average group—32 percent versus 16 percent. The study, in the May issue of the journal Psychological Science, concludes that it is this form of the IGF2R gene that contributes to intelligence. 
      Some geneticists see major problems with the IQ-gene study. One is the possibility that Plomin’s group fell for “chopsticks fallacy”. Geneticists might think they’ve found a gene for chopsticks flexibility, but all they’ve really found is a gene more common in Asians than, say, Africans. Similarly, Plomin’s IQ gene might simply be one that is more common in groups that emphasize academic achievement. “What is the gene that they’ve found reflects ethnicity? “asks geneticist Andrew Feinberg of Johns Hopkins University.” That alone might explain the link to intelligence, since IQ tests are known for being culturally sensitive and affected by a child’s environment.” And Neil Risch of Standford University points out that if you look for 37 genes on a chromosome, as the researchers did, and find that one is more common in smarter kids, that might reflect pure chance rather than a causal link between the gene and intelligence. Warns Feinberg: “I would take these findings with a whole box of salt.”

1. In the beginning of paragraph one we are told that scientists can not agree
  A. how much of IQ comes from intelligence.
  B. how many children inherit genes from parents.
  C. how much of IQ comes from genes.
  D. how many children learn by experience.

2. What does “some “in the second sentence of paragraph one stands for?
  A. Parents.                                   B. Children.
  C. Experiences.                             D. Genes.

3. A gene for chopsticks flexibility is found to be
  A. unrelated to the ability to use chopsticks.
  B. related to the ability to use chopsticks.
  C. unrelated to the ability to use forks.
  D. related to the ability to use forks.

4. Plomin’s IQ-gene study is similar to the chopsticks gene finding in that
  A. there may not be a causal link between gene and intelligence.
  B. there is a close correlation between gene and intelligence.
  C. there may be a close relation between chopsticks flexibility and children’s academic score.
  D. there is not a close relation between chopsticks flexibility and children’s academic score.

5. What does Feinberg mean by saying “I would take these findings with a whole box of salt”?
  A. He would consider them while eating his meals.
  B. He definitely believes the findings.
  C. He would consider them while shopping for salt.
  D. He doubts the findings very much. Will Quality Eat up the U. S. Lead in Software?
      If U.S. software companies don’t pay more attention to quality, they could kiss their business good-bye. Both India and Brazil are developing a world-class software industry. Their weapon is quality and one of their jobs is to attract the top U. S. quality specialists whose voices are not listened to in their country. 
      Already, of the world’s 12 software houses that have earned the highest rating in the world, seven are in India. That’s largely because they have used new methodologies rejected by American software specialists. For example, for decades, quality specialists, W. Edwards Deming and J. M. Juran had urged U. S. software companies to change their attitudes to quality. But their quality call mainly fell on deaf ears in the U.S—but not in Japan. By the 1970s and 1980s, Japan was grabbing market share with better, cheaper products. They used Deming’s and Juran’s ideas to bring down the cost of good quality to as little as 5% of total production costs. In U. S. factories, the cost of quality then was 10 times as high: 50%. In software, it still is. 
      Watts S. Humphrey spent 27 years at IBM heading up software production and then quality assurance. But his advice was seldom paid attention to. He retired from IBM in 1986. In 1987, he worked out a system for assessing and improving software quality. It has proved its value time and again. For example, in 1990 the cost of quality at Raytheon Electronics Systems was almost 60% of total software production costs. It fell to 15% in 1996 and has since further dropped to below 10%.
      Like Deming and Juran, Humphrey seems to be winning more praises overseas than at home. The Indian government and several companies have just founded the Watts Humphrey Software Quality Institute at the Software Technology Park in Chennai, India. Let’s hope that U. S. lead in software will not be eaten up by its quality problems.

1. What country has more highest-rating companies in the world than any other country has?
  A. Germany.                                          B. The US.
  C. Brazil.                                          D. India.

2. Which of the following statements about Humphrey is true?
  A. He is now still an IBM employer.
  B. He has worked for IBM for 37 years.
  C. The US pays much attention to his quality advice.
  D. India honors him highly.

3. By what means did Japan grab its large market share by the 1970s and the 1980s?
  A. Its products were cheaper in price and better in quality.
  B. Its advertising was most successful.
  C. The US hardware industry was lagging behind.
  D. Japan hired a lot of Indian software specialists.

4. What does the founding of the Watts Humphrey Software Quality Institute symbolize?
  A. It symbolizes the US determination to move ahead with its software.
  B. It symbolizes the Indian ambition to take the lead in software.
  C. It symbolizes the Japanese efforts to solve the software quality problem.
  D. It symbolizes the Chinese policy on importing software.

5. What is the writer worrying about?
  A. Many US software specialists are working for Japan.
  B. The quality problem has become a worldwide problem.
  C. The US will no longer be the first software player in the world.
  D. India and Japan are joining hands to compete with the US.