Many everyday human behaviors are made up of a sequence of several simpler behaviors. In order to teach children to perform these complex behaviors, parents sometimes use a technique called chaining. First, parents identify each of the simpler component behaviors and determine the order in which these simpler behaviors are performed. Parents then start with the first task in the chain. When the child has mastered that element, parents then teach the second element together with the first and reinforce this effort. When these are performed satisfactorily, they move on to elements one, two, and three and so on, adding one behavior at a time. The behaviors are not taught in isolation; hence the term “chain.”
Question：Using the example of washing hands, explain the concept of chaining behavior.
Chaining behavior is a technique used by parents to teach children a sequence of complex behaviors. For example, professor taught his daughter how to wash her hands. He divided this complex behavior into 5 steps, and taught his daughter one step at a time. He first showed his daughter step 1 and practiced it with her for a couple of days. When she has mastered this action, he showed her step 2 and let her practice both steps for another few days until she can do both by herself. Then he added the third step after, and also let her practice for a while until she can do them all. For the last two steps, he did the same thing as the previous three steps. Finally she could finish the hand washing all by herself.
托福TPO1口語task4題目 Reading Part:
One process by which groups may make bad or irrational decisions is known as groupthink. Individual members of a group attempt to conform their opinions to what they believe to be the group consensus even though the result may be negative. There are many reasons why groupthink happens. These include the desire to be liked,fear of losing a job, or even not wanting to be the one employee delaying a decision that seems inevitable. These kinds of implicit pressures to conform lead group members to ultimately make decisions that each, by himself or herself, might normally not make.
托福TPO1口語task4題目 Listening Part:
Now listen to part of a lecture on this topic in a business management class.
So, let me tell you about my own experiences when I was working for a computer company a couple of years ago.
So, one day a co-worker and I suggested we should give our computers a design make-over: make them look more up-to-date. Market research was showing that new customers said they would be more interested in buying our computers if they looked cooler. Our technology was advanced but the outside design looked really old-fashioned.
At first, more than half the group supported us. There were a few senior managers here who didn’t support the design change. One o f the senior manager said, “Our focus has always been on technology, changing the look is an unnecessary cost.”
Almost immediately, some of our supporters changed their minds! Even my co-worker changed his mind! When I asked him why after the meeting, he told me he didn’t want to make a bad impression on the senior managers. He thought that disagreeing with them might jeopardize his chances of getting a promotion by not looking like a team-player.
What about me? I hate to admit it, but, after a few hours of discussion, I started wondering if it was worth everyone’s time to argue about this? As more people sided with the senior management, I started to feel that I was the only one holding up the vote. Everyone else seemed to think change wasn’t necessary. I voted against my own idea in the end.
So we unanimously decided to stay with the current old-looking design. But this decision ended up costing us a lot of money. That same year, our competitor came out with a new design that attracted some of our customers and prevented us from profiting from new customers.
The professor talks about groupthink which means sometimes people would make a bad decision as a group. In the example, the professor and his co-worker thought they need to change the look of their computers, but managers disagreed. So his co-worker changed his mind because he didn't want to leave a bad impression on the managers by not looking like a team player. In the end, the professor changed his mind too, because he didn't want to be the only person that’s holding up the vote. But they were all wrong, the same year, a competitor came out with a new design that attracted many of their customers.
Companies have designed new and improved ways to solve problems within their organizations. Rather than seeking a simple cause and a direct solution to problems, companies are now using an approach called systems thinking. Systems thinking involves solving problems long-term by considering the "big picture," that is, how the interaction of many different parts of a large system may contribute to a problem. Companies use systems thinking because, even though it may produce complex solutions that take a long time to implement, it is an effective way to solve problems and has a greater long-term benefit to the company.
The reading passage gives the definition of systems thinking, which means that companies use long-term method，putting all parts of the system together, to solve problems. The professor uses an example to further explain this concept. There's a corporation which hires a consultant to find the root of the absence of workers. After interviewing workers and researching other aspects of the company such as eating facilities and health services it offered, the consultant finally finds out that it is the lack of exercise opportunities and healthy meals that causes the workers' poor health. Then the company take relevant measures to ensure the workers' health and thus solve the problem of absence.
高分詞匯：reinforce, justify, territory
In the lecture, the professor mainly talked about the theory about agonistic behavior. To reinforce the theory, the professor gave an example about two rattlesnakes in his speech. In the example, scientists saw two rattlesnakes had found the same hole and both of them wanted to eat the food there. And what happened was the two rattlesnakes faced each other and made themselves as tall as possible. And then they began pushing each other and trying to control one another. But in this process, neither of those two rattlesnakes was trying to hurt each other. And the snake which could have easily bitten the other one, it didn’t, and let it go. Finally the winner got the food. So this example justify the agonistic behavior which is the certain animals species just simply want to show off the power of themselves in the regard of territory or food and prove their strength in the competition.