[유튜브] 210713 - 임용기출 16년 B4 정답 논란! 확실한 답이 여기에 (도전해보세요)

안녕하세요 오성호입니다. 2021년 7월 13일 유튜브 채널 업데이트 했습니다.

주제:#임용기출 16년 B4 정답 논란! 확실한 답이 여기에 https://youtu.be/XDXOu94mEak

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XDXOu94mEak

2021년 7월 3일 임용기출 무료특강 때 다뤘던 문제에요 2016년 B형 4번 강사들이 서로 자기 답이 맞다고 하는 그 문제 근데요~ 그렇게 싸울 문제는 아니에요 제대로 이해하면 답이 보이거든요 영상에서 확인하세요~~ ^^

임용시험 안 보더라도 영어 좋아하신다면 한 번 도전해보세요.

Read the passage and follow the directions. 【4 points】

“The average Yaleman, Class of ’24*, makes $25,111 a year.” Time magazine reported.

Well, good for him!

But, come to think of it, what does this improbably precise and salubrious figure mean? Is it, as it appears to be, evidence that if you send your boy to Yale you won’t have to work in your old age and neither will he? Is this average a mean or is it a median? What kind of sample is it based on? You could lump one Texas oilman with two hundred hungry free-lance writers and report their average income as $25,000-odd a year. The arithmetic is impeccable, the figure is convincingly precise.

In just such ways is the secret language of statistics, so appealing in a fact-minded culture, being used to sensationalize, inflate, confuse, and over-simplify. Statistical terms are necessary in reporting the mass data of social and economic trends, business conditions, “opinion” polls, this year’s census. But without writers who use the words with honesty and understanding and readers who know what they mean, the result can only be semantic nonsense.

In popular writing on scientific research, the abused statistic is almost crowding out the picture of the white-jacketed hero laboring overtime without time-and-a-half in an ill-lit laboratory. Like the “little dash of powder, little pot of paint,” statistics are making many an important fact “look like what she ain’t.”

• graduates of 1924

Write TWO consecutive words corresponding to the underlined words from the passage. Then explain why the average Yaleman’s annual income mentioned in the passage could be misleading.