The nature deficit - how children are losing touch with nature
❓ Câu hỏi (questions)
Question 1 - 4
Choose the correct letter, A, B, C or D.
Write the correct letter in boxes on your answer sheet.
1
The researchers involved in the Pokémon experiment
A
were encouraged by how quickly children were able to learn creatures' names.
B
had anticipated that children would be able to identify many of the fantasy animals.
C
felt there was a clear reason why the children recognised so few natural species.
D
were pessimistic about trying to reconnect children with nature.
2
Why does the writer quote the example of a condor and a wren in the second paragraph?
A
to illustrate children's lack of interest in birds
B
to give examples of species that are in decline
C
to suggest birds that might stimulate an enthusiasm for nature
D
to highlight the importance of knowing about local species
3
The writer refers to George Monbiot in order to
A
highlight the difficulty of remembering plant and animal names
B
provide support for the idea that names are important
C
explain why some names have disappeared forever
D
argue that people have a genuine desire to name things
4
What is the writer's attitude to technology and the nature deficit?
A
There is no clear connection between technology and a lack of nature knowledge.
B
Technology can have a positive impact on children's relationship with nature.
C
Technology is more important to children in cities than in the countryside.
D
There is no point in trying to keep children away from technology.
Question 5 - 9
Complete each of the following statements with the best ending A-G from the box below.
List of Endings
A
children are reluctant to spend time outdoors
B
Britain’s wildlife was declining dramatically
C
there are many issues contributing to children’s lack of knowledge about wildlife
D
adults were aware of their lack of contact with nature
E
most adults were able to identify common species
F
people knew less about bird species than trees
G
children’s familiarity with wildlife was limited
The Pokémon study concluded that
5
The Bird Knowledge study aimed to discover whether
6
The Wildlife Trust's report highlighted the fact that
7
The State of Nature report revealed that
8
The Connecting with Nature report pointed out that
9
Question 10 - 14
Do the following statements agree with the information given in Reading Passage?
In following statements below, choose
YES if the statement agrees with the information
NO if the statement contradicts the information
NOT GIVEN if it is impossible to say what the writer thinks about this
10
Most people are unconcerned about research findings that show our lack of contact with nature.
11
The deterioration in children's knowledge of nature is only to be expected.
12
Developing a 'literacy of nature' will make very little difference to people's attitude to species loss.
13
There is a strong relationship between the decline in people's 'literacy of nature and recent social changes in Britain.
14
It is understandable that parents are unwilling to allow their children to spend time outdoors alone.
DOL IELTS Đình Lực
📖 Bài đọc (reading passage)
The nature deficit - How children are losing touch with nature
Children's unfamiliarity with the natural world was first highlighted in 2002 by researchers from Cambridge University who surveyed a cohort of four- to eleven-year-old children in Britain. They showed the children pictures of common species of British wildlife and also fantasy creatures from the very popular Pokemon game. Pokemon was originally invented by Satoshi Tajiri in Japan as a way of giving urban children the opportunity to collect pictures of insect-like animals. Participants in the study were shown a sample of pictures and asked to identify the names of the Pokemon creatures and natural species. The results were striking.
Children aged eight and over were substantially better at identifying Pokemon creatures than natural species. The researchers published their paper in the journal Science. Their conclusions were unusually direct and forthright - reflecting the depth of their concern. 'Young children clearly have tremendous capacity for learning about creatures (whether natural or man-made), ' they wrote, but they are presently more inspired by synthetic subjects than by living creatures'. They pointed to solid evidence linking loss of knowledge about the natural world to growing isolation from it. We need, the paper concluded, 'to re-establish children's links with nature if we are to win over the hearts and minds of the next generation', for 'we love what we know ... What is the extinction of a magnificent bird of prey such as the condor to a child who has never seen a tiny wren in their back garden or local park?'
Subsequent research has confirmed the Pokemon paper's broad findings. In their recent Bird Knowledge study, the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) smartly shifted the focus, assessing basic knowledge of nature in parents rather than children. Of 2,000 participants, half couldn't identify a house sparrow, a quarter didn't know a blue tit or a starling, and a fifth thought a red kite wasn't a bird - but nine out of ten said they wanted children to learn about common British wildlife. Similarly, a survey by The Wildlife Trust found a third of adults unable to identify a barn owl, three-quarters unable to identify an ash tree - and two-thirds feeling that they had 'lost touch with nature'.
Most of us are likely to react to the results of these surveys with a mixture of consternation and insecurity. But it should hardly come as a surprise that awareness of the natural world is vanishing from children's consciousness, for nature itself is vanishing. The RSPB's most recent State of Nature report found Britain to be 'among the most nature-depleted countries in the world', with a 53% drop in numbers of what were once common British species - among them barn owls, newts, sparrows, and starlings. Despite the growing interest in this problem, even the names of some of the most common bird and plant species are quickly being forgotten. Where have these lost names gone and does their vanishing matter? If so, how might we invigorate what anthropologist Beth Povinelli calls 'a literacy of nature ' in ourselves and our children?
Improving people's literacy of nature will undoubtedly help in the struggle to protect our vanishing species. As the environmentalist George Monbiot wrote recently, 'words possess a remarkable power to shape our perceptions.' Without names to give it detail, the natural world can quickly blur into a generalised wash of green - a disposable backdrop like wallpaper. But the right names, well used, can act as a key into the world of birds, animals, trees and insects. Leaming their names can trigger a thirst for further knowledge, greater respect and a sense of wonder.
Clearly the lack of nature literacy - especially of local nature - is associated with the major developments that have occurred in countries such as Britain, where children are now more likely to live in urban environments. Online culture has boomed and screen time has soared In Britain, the roaming range (the area within which children are permitted to play unsupervised) has shrunk by more than 90% in 40 years. Parental anxieties about traffic growth and the decrease of available green space are among the factors that have limited wild play and the knowledge it brings. "The children out in the woods, out in the fields, enjoying nature on their own - they're extinct, ' says Chris Packham, the presenter of the TV programme Nature Watch. The attention-grabbing headline of a recent report was that British children spend less time outdoors than prisoners.
Such headlines disguise a complex picture, though. Access to nature is hugely uneven across the population, with class, income and ethnicity playing strong determining roles. It's too easy to blame 'nature deficit', the gap in children's knowledge of the natural world, on the rise of technology, although that has certainly played its part. Technology is not an inherently bad thing, as it can provide a wealth of information for urban children who are disconnected from nature and help to generate further interest.
The RSPB's Connecting with Nature report, based on a three-year research project, sensibly recognised 'nature deficit' as a complex problem. Dismayingly, it found only one in five British children to be positively connected to nature. It emphasised 'nature connection' as not only a 'conservation' issue, but also one closely involved with education, physical health, emotional well-being and future attainment: what's good for nature is also good for the child.
Nature deficit needs structural and political fixes. Hearteningly, hundreds of organisations are striving to close the gap between childhood and nature, including working with schools to get more children regularly learning outdoors. Most of these organisations specifically aim to help children at risk of social exclusion, or who are otherwise unlikely to reach green places. There are promising signs presently visible in Britain and beyond.
🔥 Answer key (đáp án và giải thích)
1
C
Giải thích chi tiết
☺️ Ứng dụng Linearthinking để giải quyết dạng bài Multiple Choice
Step 01: Read the question to understand
Simplified: The researchers involved in the Pokémon experiment ___ ?
Main idea: Hỏi về thái độ / quan điểm của những nhà nghiên cứu trong thí nghiệm Pokémon.
-------
Step 02: Locate relevant information
🔍 Từ khóa: “researchers”, “Pokémon experiment”, “children”, “natural species”
-> Dựa vào các từ khoá trên, có thể tìm được trích dẫn ở đoạn 2.
-------
Step 03: Read relevant information to understand
📌 Trích dẫn:
“Children aged eight and over were substantially better at identifying Pokémon creatures than natural species. The researchers published their paper in the journal Science. Their conclusions were unusually direct and forthright – reflecting the depth of their concern. ‘Young children clearly have tremendous capacity for learning about creatures (whether natural or man-made),’ they wrote, but they are presently more inspired by synthetic subjects than by living creatures. They pointed to solid evidence linking loss of knowledge about the natural world to growing isolation from it.” (Đoạn 2)
Simplified: Children were better at identifying Pokémon creatures than natural species .
→ Reason:The researchers pointed to loss of knowledge + growing isolation from nature .
Main idea: Trẻ học tốt về Pokémon hơn loài thật → Nguyên nhân: bị cô lập khỏi thế giới tự nhiên → nhà nghiên cứu lo lắng và cho rằng đây là lý do trẻ ít nhận biết động vật thật.
-------
Step 04: Compare meaning with meaning
❌ A. were encouraged by how quickly children were able to learn creatures' names.
→ Sai vì các nhà nghiên cứu không “encouraged” mà “concerned” (lo lắng). “Their conclusions were unusually direct and forthright – reflecting the depth of their concern.”
❌ B. had anticipated that children would be able to identify many of the fantasy animals.
→ Sai vì không có bằng chứng họ expected điều này. Họ chỉ observed sau khi làm khảo sát.
✅ C. felt there was a clear reason why the children recognised so few natural species.
→ Đúng. Họ “pointed to solid evidence linking loss of knowledge about the natural world to growing isolation from it” → họ thấy nguyên nhân rõ ràng là do trẻ ngày càng tách khỏi tự nhiên.
❌ D. were pessimistic about trying to reconnect children with nature.
→ Sai vì họ đề nghị phải “re-establish children’s links with nature” → thể hiện hy vọng, không bi quan.
Children's unfamiliarity with the natural world was first highlighted in 2002 by researchers from Cambridge University who surveyed a cohort of four- to eleven-year-old children in Britain. They showed the children pictures of common species of British wildlife and also fantasy creatures from the very popular Pokemon game. Pokemon was originally invented by Satoshi Tajiri in Japan as a way of giving urban children the opportunity to collect pictures of insect-like animals. Participants in the study were shown a sample of pictures and asked to identify the names of the Pokemon creatures and natural species. The results were striking.
Children aged eight and over were substantially better at identifying Pokemon creatures than natural species. The researchers published their paper in the journal Science. Their conclusions were unusually direct and forthright - reflecting the depth of their concern. 'Young children clearly have tremendous capacity for learning about creatures (whether natural or man-made), ' they wrote, but they are presently more inspired by synthetic subjects than by living creatures'. They pointed to solid evidence linking loss of knowledge about the natural world to growing isolation from it. We need, the paper concluded, 'to re-establish children's links with nature if we are to win over the hearts and minds of the next generation', for 'we love what we know ... What is the extinction of a magnificent bird of prey such as the condor to a child who has never seen a tiny wren in their back garden or local park?'
Subsequent research has confirmed the Pokemon paper's broad findings. In their recent Bird Knowledge study, the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) smartly shifted the focus, assessing basic knowledge of nature in parents rather than children. Of 2,000 participants, half couldn't identify a house sparrow, a quarter didn't know a blue tit or a starling, and a fifth thought a red kite wasn't a bird - but nine out of ten said they wanted children to learn about common British wildlife. Similarly, a survey by The Wildlife Trust found a third of adults unable to identify a barn owl, three-quarters unable to identify an ash tree - and two-thirds feeling that they had 'lost touch with nature'.
Most of us are likely to react to the results of these surveys with a mixture of consternation and insecurity. But it should hardly come as a surprise that awareness of the natural world is vanishing from children's consciousness, for nature itself is vanishing. The RSPB's most recent State of Nature report found Britain to be 'among the most nature-depleted countries in the world', with a 53% drop in numbers of what were once common British species - among them barn owls, newts, sparrows, and starlings. Despite the growing interest in this problem, even the names of some of the most common bird and plant species are quickly being forgotten. Where have these lost names gone and does their vanishing matter? If so, how might we invigorate what anthropologist Beth Povinelli calls 'a literacy of nature ' in ourselves and our children?
Improving people's literacy of nature will undoubtedly help in the struggle to protect our vanishing species. As the environmentalist George Monbiot wrote recently, 'words possess a remarkable power to shape our perceptions.' Without names to give it detail, the natural world can quickly blur into a generalised wash of green - a disposable backdrop like wallpaper. But the right names, well used, can act as a key into the world of birds, animals, trees and insects. Leaming their names can trigger a thirst for further knowledge, greater respect and a sense of wonder.
Clearly the lack of nature literacy - especially of local nature - is associated with the major developments that have occurred in countries such as Britain, where children are now more likely to live in urban environments. Online culture has boomed and screen time has soared In Britain, the roaming range (the area within which children are permitted to play unsupervised) has shrunk by more than 90% in 40 years. Parental anxieties about traffic growth and the decrease of available green space are among the factors that have limited wild play and the knowledge it brings. "The children out in the woods, out in the fields, enjoying nature on their own - they're extinct, ' says Chris Packham, the presenter of the TV programme Nature Watch. The attention-grabbing headline of a recent report was that British children spend less time outdoors than prisoners.
Such headlines disguise a complex picture, though. Access to nature is hugely uneven across the population, with class, income and ethnicity playing strong determining roles. It's too easy to blame 'nature deficit', the gap in children's knowledge of the natural world, on the rise of technology, although that has certainly played its part. Technology is not an inherently bad thing, as it can provide a wealth of information for urban children who are disconnected from nature and help to generate further interest.
The RSPB's Connecting with Nature report, based on a three-year research project, sensibly recognised 'nature deficit' as a complex problem. Dismayingly, it found only one in five British children to be positively connected to nature. It emphasised 'nature connection' as not only a 'conservation' issue, but also one closely involved with education, physical health, emotional well-being and future attainment: what's good for nature is also good for the child.
Nature deficit needs structural and political fixes. Hearteningly, hundreds of organisations are striving to close the gap between childhood and nature, including working with schools to get more children regularly learning outdoors. Most of these organisations specifically aim to help children at risk of social exclusion, or who are otherwise unlikely to reach green places. There are promising signs presently visible in Britain and beyond.
Simplified: Children were better at identifying Pokémon creatures than natural species .
The researchers
pointed to
loss of knowledge + growing isolation from nature
Children's unfamiliarity with the natural world was first highlighted in 2002 by researchers from Cambridge University who surveyed a cohort of four- to eleven-year-old children in Britain. They showed the children pictures of common species of British wildlife and also fantasy creatures from the very popular Pokemon game. Pokemon was originally invented by Satoshi Tajiri in Japan as a way of giving urban children the opportunity to collect pictures of insect-like animals. Participants in the study were shown a sample of pictures and asked to identify the names of the Pokemon creatures and natural species. The results were striking.
Children aged eight and over were substantially better at identifying Pokemon creatures than natural species. The researchers published their paper in the journal Science. Their conclusions were unusually direct and forthright - reflecting the depth of their concern. 'Young children clearly have tremendous capacity for learning about creatures (whether natural or man-made), ' they wrote, but they are presently more inspired by synthetic subjects than by living creatures'. They pointed to solid evidence linking loss of knowledge about the natural world to growing isolation from it. We need, the paper concluded, 'to re-establish children's links with nature if we are to win over the hearts and minds of the next generation', for 'we love what we know ... What is the extinction of a magnificent bird of prey such as the condor to a child who has never seen a tiny wren in their back garden or local park?'
Subsequent research has confirmed the Pokemon paper's broad findings. In their recent Bird Knowledge study, the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) smartly shifted the focus, assessing basic knowledge of nature in parents rather than children. Of 2,000 participants, half couldn't identify a house sparrow, a quarter didn't know a blue tit or a starling, and a fifth thought a red kite wasn't a bird - but nine out of ten said they wanted children to learn about common British wildlife. Similarly, a survey by The Wildlife Trust found a third of adults unable to identify a barn owl, three-quarters unable to identify an ash tree - and two-thirds feeling that they had 'lost touch with nature'.
Most of us are likely to react to the results of these surveys with a mixture of consternation and insecurity. But it should hardly come as a surprise that awareness of the natural world is vanishing from children's consciousness, for nature itself is vanishing. The RSPB's most recent State of Nature report found Britain to be 'among the most nature-depleted countries in the world', with a 53% drop in numbers of what were once common British species - among them barn owls, newts, sparrows, and starlings. Despite the growing interest in this problem, even the names of some of the most common bird and plant species are quickly being forgotten. Where have these lost names gone and does their vanishing matter? If so, how might we invigorate what anthropologist Beth Povinelli calls 'a literacy of nature ' in ourselves and our children?
Improving people's literacy of nature will undoubtedly help in the struggle to protect our vanishing species. As the environmentalist George Monbiot wrote recently, 'words possess a remarkable power to shape our perceptions.' Without names to give it detail, the natural world can quickly blur into a generalised wash of green - a disposable backdrop like wallpaper. But the right names, well used, can act as a key into the world of birds, animals, trees and insects. Leaming their names can trigger a thirst for further knowledge, greater respect and a sense of wonder.
Clearly the lack of nature literacy - especially of local nature - is associated with the major developments that have occurred in countries such as Britain, where children are now more likely to live in urban environments. Online culture has boomed and screen time has soared In Britain, the roaming range (the area within which children are permitted to play unsupervised) has shrunk by more than 90% in 40 years. Parental anxieties about traffic growth and the decrease of available green space are among the factors that have limited wild play and the knowledge it brings. "The children out in the woods, out in the fields, enjoying nature on their own - they're extinct, ' says Chris Packham, the presenter of the TV programme Nature Watch. The attention-grabbing headline of a recent report was that British children spend less time outdoors than prisoners.
Such headlines disguise a complex picture, though. Access to nature is hugely uneven across the population, with class, income and ethnicity playing strong determining roles. It's too easy to blame 'nature deficit', the gap in children's knowledge of the natural world, on the rise of technology, although that has certainly played its part. Technology is not an inherently bad thing, as it can provide a wealth of information for urban children who are disconnected from nature and help to generate further interest.
The RSPB's Connecting with Nature report, based on a three-year research project, sensibly recognised 'nature deficit' as a complex problem. Dismayingly, it found only one in five British children to be positively connected to nature. It emphasised 'nature connection' as not only a 'conservation' issue, but also one closely involved with education, physical health, emotional well-being and future attainment: what's good for nature is also good for the child.
Nature deficit needs structural and political fixes. Hearteningly, hundreds of organisations are striving to close the gap between childhood and nature, including working with schools to get more children regularly learning outdoors. Most of these organisations specifically aim to help children at risk of social exclusion, or who are otherwise unlikely to reach green places. There are promising signs presently visible in Britain and beyond.
