当前位置:首页 → 职业资格 → 教师资格 → 小学教育教学知识与能力->请认真阅读下文,并按要求作答。山中访友走出门,就与微风撞个满
请认真阅读下文,并按要求作答。
山中访友
走出门,就与微风撞个满怀,风中含着露水和栀子花的气息。早晨,好清爽!
不坐车,不邀游伴,也不带什么礼物,就带着满怀的好心情,踏一条幽径,独自去访问我的朋友。
那座古桥,是我要拜访的第一个老朋友。啊,老桥,你如一位德高望重的老人,在这涧水上站了几百年了吧?你把多少人渡过对岸,滚滚河水流向远方,你弓着腰,俯身凝望着那水中的人影、鱼影、月影。岁月悠悠,波光明灭,泡沫聚散,唯有你依然如旧。
走进这片树林,鸟儿呼唤我的名字,露珠与我交换眼神。每一棵树都是我的知己,它们迎面送来无边的青翠,每一棵树都在望着我。我靠在一棵树上,静静地,仿佛自己也是一棵树。我脚下长出的根须,深深扎进泥土和岩层;头发长成树冠,胳膊变成树枝,血液变成树的汁液,在年轮里旋转、流淌。
这山中的一切,哪个不是我的朋友?我热切地跟它们打招呼:你好,清凉的山泉!你捧出一面明镜,是要我重新梳妆吗?你好,汩汩(gǔ)的溪流!你吟诵着一首首小诗,是邀我与你唱和吗?你好,飞流的瀑布!你天生的金嗓子,雄浑的男高音多么有气势。你好,陡峭的悬崖!深深的峡谷衬托着你挺拔的身躯,你高高的额头上仿佛刻满了智慧。你好,悠悠的白云!你洁白的身影,让天空充满宁静,变得更加湛蓝。喂,淘气的云雀,叽叽喳喳地在谈些什么呢?我猜你们津津乐道的,是飞行中看到的好风景。
捡起一朵落花,捧在手中,我嗅(xiù)到了大自然的芬芳清香;拾一片落叶,细数精致的纹理,我看到了它蕴含的生命的奥秘,在它们走向泥土的途中,我加入了这短暂而别有深意的仪式;捧起一块石头,轻轻敲击,我听见远古火山爆发的声浪,听见时间的隆隆回声。
忽然,雷阵雨来了,像有一千个侠客在天上吼叫,又像有一千个醉酒的诗人在云头吟咏。满世界都是雨,头顶的岩石像为我撑起的巨伞。我站立之处成了看雨的好地方,谁能说这不是天地给我的恩泽?
雨停了,幽谷里传出几声犬(quǎn)吠,云岭上掠过一群归鸟。我该回家了。我轻轻地挥手,告别山里的朋友,带回了满怀的好心情、好记忆,还带回一路月色。
问题(一):你怎么理解文中“走出门,就与微风撞了个满怀,风中含着露水和栀子花的气息”这句话。(10分)
问题(二):如指导高年段小学生学习本文,试拟定教学目标和教学重点。(8分)
问题(三):根据拟定的教学目标和教学重点,设计课堂教学环节并简要说明理由。(22分)
【参考设计】
问题(一):“撞了个满怀".形象地写出了沐浴在令人心矿神怡的和风中的那种感觉。因为风中含着“露水”,所以特别滋润心脾;也因为风中含着梔子花的气息,所以在滋润中还带着一丝甜蜜。这“走出门”后给作者的第"感受就不同寻常,说明了“山中访友”之行充满了好心情。同时,也间接地点明山中访友是在初夏的一个早晨。
问题(二):
1.教学目标
(1)知识目标:掌握本课8个生字,理解新词的意思,摘录好词好句。
(2)能力目标:有感情地朗读课文,把握文章主要内容,学习作者善于运用比喻、拟人、想象等手法来抒发情感的方法。
(3)情感目标:感受作者所描写的境界,激发学生类似的体验,培养学生热爱自然、亲近自然的美好情感。
2.教学重点
把握文章的结构,学会使用比喻、拟人等修辞手法。
问题(三):
第一课时
一、导入新课
看课题猜猜,作者拜访的会是怎样一位朋友?
二、初读课文,整体感知,并检査预习情况
1.看拼音,写词语。
2.比一比,再组词。
激()瀑()峦()洒()
三、你能判断出下面句子的修辞方法吗?用“——”选择
(1)走进这片树林,鸟儿呼唤我的名字,露珠与我交换眼神。(比喻,拟人,夸张,对偶)
(2)啊,老桥,你如一位德高望重的老人,在这涧水上站了几百年了吧?(比喻,拟人,夸张,对偶)
(3)这山中的一切,哪个不是我的朋友?(设问,反问,疑问)
(4)喂,淘气的云雀,叽叽喳喳地在谈些什么呢?我猜你们津津乐道的,是飞行中看到的好风景。(设问,反问,疑问)
四、读通课文,学习字词
(1)学生自由读,看谁能把课文读正确、读流畅。
(2)谁能把自己读得最流畅的一段读给大家听?(师随机纠正,重点点拨)
五、拜访古桥,朗读体验
1.理解“德高望重”。
2.老桥的“德高望重”体现在哪里?
六、抄写词语,自主背诵
1.抄写词语。
汩汩树冠唱和犬吠德高望重波光明灭津津乐道
2.熟读第三自然段,有能力的背诵下来。
第二课时
―、听写词语,复习引入
1.听写词语。
2.引入:上节课我们跟随作者访问了他的一个老朋友--那座古老的石桥。这节课我们继续走人深山去探望我们那些特殊的朋友!
二、交流探究,品评赏读
1.走进这片树林,鸟儿呼唤我的名字,露珠与我交换眼神。每一棵树都是我的知己,它们迎面送来无边的青翠,每一棵树都在望着我。
作者在这里用了什么表达方法?这样写有什么好处?用朗诵来加深自己的体会。
2.我脚下长出的根须,深深扎进泥土和岩层;头发长成树冠,胳膊变成树枝,血液变成树的汁液,在年轮里旋转、流淌。
(1)默读,想想作者描写的情景。
(2)小组互读,交流自己的体会。
(3)小组代表汇报对这句话的理解。重点点拨对树的有关句子的体验。读一读,体会作者当时人树相融的感受。
你好,清凉的山泉!你捧出一面明镜,是要我重新梳妆吗?你好,汩汩的溪流!……
(1)作者将山中的景物联想成什么了?
(2)通过朗读感受山泉的清明、溪流的欢快、瀑布的雄浑、悬崖的挺拔和巍峨、白云的洁白和宁静、云雀的欣喜和欢乐。
(3)有感情地朗读整段话,读得亲切、热情,像是在对老朋友打招呼。
三、回归整体,体会写法
1.有感情地朗读课文,想一想课文为什么以《山中访友》为题。
透过文章的字里行间,我们能够真切地感受到在作者眼中,这花草树木、鸟石溪蚁都成了有生命的人。它们能跟我们说话,能与我们交流,它们成为我们的朋友。作者进山看景,自然便成了“山中访友”。
2.请同学们快速浏览课文,去找找你最喜欢的山中朋友,说说你为什么喜欢它?用“我喜欢,是因为”的句式说一句话。
我喜欢( ),是因为( )。
四、课堂巩固作业
1.捡起一朵落花,捧在手中,我嗅到了大自然的芬芳清香;拾一片落叶,细数( )的纹理,我看到了它()的生命的奥秘,在它们走向泥土的途中,我加入了这短暂而别有深意的仪式;捧起一块石头,轻轻敲击,我听见远古火山爆发的声浪,听见时间的隆隆()。
2.作者在山中访友遇到了( ),采用了()修辞手法将这些朋友介绍给我们。
3.找出文中的动词,运用这些动词,好处有哪些?
4.带着好心情,有感情地朗读课文。
5.背诵积累,提升感悟。(选自己喜欢的句子或段落背下来)
五、小结
[设计理由]本教学设计注重对学生基本功的训练,在教学的开始和中间都涉及生字的学习;同时还特别重视学生的自学能力,在教学之前让学生进行预习,并在课堂上进行检查,有利于督促学生自我管理、自我学习。
Passage 2
Scientists have found that although we are prone to snap overreactions, if we take a moment and think about how we are likely to react, we can reduce or even eliminate the negative effects of our quick, hard-wired responses.
Snap decisions can be important defense mechanisms; if we are judging whether someone is dangerous, our brains and bodies are hard-wired to react very quickly, within milliseconds. But we need more time to assess other factors. To accurately tell whether someone is sociable, studies show, we need at least a minute, preferably five. It takes a while to judge complex aspects of personality, like neuroticism or open-mindedness.
But snap decisions in reaction to rapid stimuli aren′t exclusive to the interpersonal realm. Psychologists at the University of Toronto found that viewing a fast-food logo for just a few milliseconds primes us to read 20 percent faster, even though reading has little to do with eating. We unconsciously associate fast food with speed and impatience and carry those impulses into whatever else we′re doing. Subjects exposed to fast-food flashes also tend to think a musical piece lasts too long.
Yet we can reverse such influences. If we know we will overreact to consumer products or housing options when we see a happy face (one reason good sales representatives and real estate agents are always smiling), we can take a moment before buying. If we know female job screeners are more likely to reject attractive female applicants, we can help screeners understand their biases--or hire outside screeners.
John Gottman, the marriage expert, explains that we quickly "thin slice" information reliably only after we ground such snap reactions in"thick sliced" long-term study. When Dr. Gottman really wants to assess whether a couple will stay together, he invites them to his island retreat for a much longer evaluation: two days, not two seconds.
Our ability to mute our hard-wired reactions by pausing is what differentiates us from animals:dogs can think about the future only intermittently or for a few minutes. But historically we have spent about 12 percent of our days contemplating the longer term. Although technology might change the way we react, it hasn′ t changed our nature. We still have the imaginative capacity to rise above temptation and reverse the high-speed trend.
The author′ s attitude toward reversing the high-speed trend is__________.
Passage 2
Scientists have found that although we are prone to snap overreactions, if we take a moment and think about how we are likely to react, we can reduce or even eliminate the negative effects of our quick, hard-wired responses.
Snap decisions can be important defense mechanisms; if we are judging whether someone is dangerous, our brains and bodies are hard-wired to react very quickly, within milliseconds. But we need more time to assess other factors. To accurately tell whether someone is sociable, studies show, we need at least a minute, preferably five. It takes a while to judge complex aspects of personality, like neuroticism or open-mindedness.
But snap decisions in reaction to rapid stimuli aren′t exclusive to the interpersonal realm. Psychologists at the University of Toronto found that viewing a fast-food logo for just a few milliseconds primes us to read 20 percent faster, even though reading has little to do with eating. We unconsciously associate fast food with speed and impatience and carry those impulses into whatever else we′re doing. Subjects exposed to fast-food flashes also tend to think a musical piece lasts too long.
Yet we can reverse such influences. If we know we will overreact to consumer products or housing options when we see a happy face (one reason good sales representatives and real estate agents are always smiling), we can take a moment before buying. If we know female job screeners are more likely to reject attractive female applicants, we can help screeners understand their biases--or hire outside screeners.
John Gottman, the marriage expert, explains that we quickly "thin slice" information reliably only after we ground such snap reactions in"thick sliced" long-term study. When Dr. Gottman really wants to assess whether a couple will stay together, he invites them to his island retreat for a much longer evaluation: two days, not two seconds.
Our ability to mute our hard-wired reactions by pausing is what differentiates us from animals:dogs can think about the future only intermittently or for a few minutes. But historically we have spent about 12 percent of our days contemplating the longer term. Although technology might change the way we react, it hasn′ t changed our nature. We still have the imaginative capacity to rise above temptation and reverse the high-speed trend.
John Gottman says that reliable snap reactions are based on__________.
Passage 2
Scientists have found that although we are prone to snap overreactions, if we take a moment and think about how we are likely to react, we can reduce or even eliminate the negative effects of our quick, hard-wired responses.
Snap decisions can be important defense mechanisms; if we are judging whether someone is dangerous, our brains and bodies are hard-wired to react very quickly, within milliseconds. But we need more time to assess other factors. To accurately tell whether someone is sociable, studies show, we need at least a minute, preferably five. It takes a while to judge complex aspects of personality, like neuroticism or open-mindedness.
But snap decisions in reaction to rapid stimuli aren′t exclusive to the interpersonal realm. Psychologists at the University of Toronto found that viewing a fast-food logo for just a few milliseconds primes us to read 20 percent faster, even though reading has little to do with eating. We unconsciously associate fast food with speed and impatience and carry those impulses into whatever else we′re doing. Subjects exposed to fast-food flashes also tend to think a musical piece lasts too long.
Yet we can reverse such influences. If we know we will overreact to consumer products or housing options when we see a happy face (one reason good sales representatives and real estate agents are always smiling), we can take a moment before buying. If we know female job screeners are more likely to reject attractive female applicants, we can help screeners understand their biases--or hire outside screeners.
John Gottman, the marriage expert, explains that we quickly "thin slice" information reliably only after we ground such snap reactions in"thick sliced" long-term study. When Dr. Gottman really wants to assess whether a couple will stay together, he invites them to his island retreat for a much longer evaluation: two days, not two seconds.
Our ability to mute our hard-wired reactions by pausing is what differentiates us from animals:dogs can think about the future only intermittently or for a few minutes. But historically we have spent about 12 percent of our days contemplating the longer term. Although technology might change the way we react, it hasn′ t changed our nature. We still have the imaginative capacity to rise above temptation and reverse the high-speed trend.
To reverse the negative influences of snap decisions, we should__________.
Passage 2
Scientists have found that although we are prone to snap overreactions, if we take a moment and think about how we are likely to react, we can reduce or even eliminate the negative effects of our quick, hard-wired responses.
Snap decisions can be important defense mechanisms; if we are judging whether someone is dangerous, our brains and bodies are hard-wired to react very quickly, within milliseconds. But we need more time to assess other factors. To accurately tell whether someone is sociable, studies show, we need at least a minute, preferably five. It takes a while to judge complex aspects of personality, like neuroticism or open-mindedness.
But snap decisions in reaction to rapid stimuli aren′t exclusive to the interpersonal realm. Psychologists at the University of Toronto found that viewing a fast-food logo for just a few milliseconds primes us to read 20 percent faster, even though reading has little to do with eating. We unconsciously associate fast food with speed and impatience and carry those impulses into whatever else we′re doing. Subjects exposed to fast-food flashes also tend to think a musical piece lasts too long.
Yet we can reverse such influences. If we know we will overreact to consumer products or housing options when we see a happy face (one reason good sales representatives and real estate agents are always smiling), we can take a moment before buying. If we know female job screeners are more likely to reject attractive female applicants, we can help screeners understand their biases--or hire outside screeners.
John Gottman, the marriage expert, explains that we quickly "thin slice" information reliably only after we ground such snap reactions in"thick sliced" long-term study. When Dr. Gottman really wants to assess whether a couple will stay together, he invites them to his island retreat for a much longer evaluation: two days, not two seconds.
Our ability to mute our hard-wired reactions by pausing is what differentiates us from animals:dogs can think about the future only intermittently or for a few minutes. But historically we have spent about 12 percent of our days contemplating the longer term. Although technology might change the way we react, it hasn′ t changed our nature. We still have the imaginative capacity to rise above temptation and reverse the high-speed trend.
Our reaction to a fast-food logo shows that snap decisions__________.
Passage 2
Scientists have found that although we are prone to snap overreactions, if we take a moment and think about how we are likely to react, we can reduce or even eliminate the negative effects of our quick, hard-wired responses.
Snap decisions can be important defense mechanisms; if we are judging whether someone is dangerous, our brains and bodies are hard-wired to react very quickly, within milliseconds. But we need more time to assess other factors. To accurately tell whether someone is sociable, studies show, we need at least a minute, preferably five. It takes a while to judge complex aspects of personality, like neuroticism or open-mindedness.
But snap decisions in reaction to rapid stimuli aren′t exclusive to the interpersonal realm. Psychologists at the University of Toronto found that viewing a fast-food logo for just a few milliseconds primes us to read 20 percent faster, even though reading has little to do with eating. We unconsciously associate fast food with speed and impatience and carry those impulses into whatever else we′re doing. Subjects exposed to fast-food flashes also tend to think a musical piece lasts too long.
Yet we can reverse such influences. If we know we will overreact to consumer products or housing options when we see a happy face (one reason good sales representatives and real estate agents are always smiling), we can take a moment before buying. If we know female job screeners are more likely to reject attractive female applicants, we can help screeners understand their biases--or hire outside screeners.
John Gottman, the marriage expert, explains that we quickly "thin slice" information reliably only after we ground such snap reactions in"thick sliced" long-term study. When Dr. Gottman really wants to assess whether a couple will stay together, he invites them to his island retreat for a much longer evaluation: two days, not two seconds.
Our ability to mute our hard-wired reactions by pausing is what differentiates us from animals:dogs can think about the future only intermittently or for a few minutes. But historically we have spent about 12 percent of our days contemplating the longer term. Although technology might change the way we react, it hasn′ t changed our nature. We still have the imaginative capacity to rise above temptation and reverse the high-speed trend.
The time needed in making decisions may__________.
Passage 2
Consumers are being confused and misled by the hodge-podge (大杂烩) of environmental claims made by household products, according to a "green labeling" study published by Consumers International Friday.
Among the report′s more outrageous (令人无法容忍的) findings, a German fertilizer described itself as "earthworm friendly" a brand of flour said it was "non-polluting" and a British toilet paper claimed to be "environmentally friendlier".
The study was written and researched by Britain′s National Consumer Council (NCC) for lobby group Consumer International.It was funded by the German and Dutch governments and the European Commission.
"While many good and useful claims are being made, it is clear there is a long way to go in ensuring shoppers are adequately informed about the environmental impact of products they buy,"said Consumers International director Anna Fielder.
The 10-country study surveyed product packaging in Britain.Western Europe, Scandinavia and the United States.It found that products sold in Germany and the United Kingdom made the most environmental claims on average.
The report focused on claims made by specific products, such as detergent (洗涤剂 ) insect sprays and by some garden products.It did not test the claims, but compared them to labeling guidelines set by the International Standards Organization (ISO) in September,1999.
Researchers documented claims of environmental friendliness made by about 2,000 products and found many too vague or too misleading to meet ISO standards.
"Many products had specially-designed labels to make them seem environmentally friendly, but in fact many of these symbols mean nothing," said report researcher Philip Page.
"Laundry detergents made the most number of claims with 158.Household cleaners were second with 145 separate claims, while paints were third on our list with 73.The high numbers show how very confusing it must be for consumers to sort the true from the misleading." he said.
T he ISO labeling standards ban vague or misleading claims on product packaging, because terms such as "environmentally friendly" and "non-polluting" cannot be verified."What we are now pushing for is to have multinational corporations meet the standards set by the ISO." said Page.
It can be inferred from the passage that the lobby group Consumer International wants to __________.
Passage 2
Consumers are being confused and misled by the hodge-podge (大杂烩) of environmental claims made by household products, according to a "green labeling" study published by Consumers International Friday.
Among the report′s more outrageous (令人无法容忍的) findings, a German fertilizer described itself as "earthworm friendly" a brand of flour said it was "non-polluting" and a British toilet paper claimed to be "environmentally friendlier".
The study was written and researched by Britain′s National Consumer Council (NCC) for lobby group Consumer International.It was funded by the German and Dutch governments and the European Commission.
"While many good and useful claims are being made, it is clear there is a long way to go in ensuring shoppers are adequately informed about the environmental impact of products they buy,"said Consumers International director Anna Fielder.
The 10-country study surveyed product packaging in Britain.Western Europe, Scandinavia and the United States.It found that products sold in Germany and the United Kingdom made the most environmental claims on average.
The report focused on claims made by specific products, such as detergent (洗涤剂 ) insect sprays and by some garden products.It did not test the claims, but compared them to labeling guidelines set by the International Standards Organization (ISO) in September,1999.
Researchers documented claims of environmental friendliness made by about 2,000 products and found many too vague or too misleading to meet ISO standards.
"Many products had specially-designed labels to make them seem environmentally friendly, but in fact many of these symbols mean nothing," said report researcher Philip Page.
"Laundry detergents made the most number of claims with 158.Household cleaners were second with 145 separate claims, while paints were third on our list with 73.The high numbers show how very confusing it must be for consumers to sort the true from the misleading." he said.
T he ISO labeling standards ban vague or misleading claims on product packaging, because terms such as "environmentally friendly" and "non-polluting" cannot be verified."What we are now pushing for is to have multinational corporations meet the standards set by the ISO." said Page.
What is one of the consequences caused by the many claims of household products?
Passage 2
Consumers are being confused and misled by the hodge-podge (大杂烩) of environmental claims made by household products, according to a "green labeling" study published by Consumers International Friday.
Among the report′s more outrageous (令人无法容忍的) findings, a German fertilizer described itself as "earthworm friendly" a brand of flour said it was "non-polluting" and a British toilet paper claimed to be "environmentally friendlier".
The study was written and researched by Britain′s National Consumer Council (NCC) for lobby group Consumer International.It was funded by the German and Dutch governments and the European Commission.
"While many good and useful claims are being made, it is clear there is a long way to go in ensuring shoppers are adequately informed about the environmental impact of products they buy,"said Consumers International director Anna Fielder.
The 10-country study surveyed product packaging in Britain.Western Europe, Scandinavia and the United States.It found that products sold in Germany and the United Kingdom made the most environmental claims on average.
The report focused on claims made by specific products, such as detergent (洗涤剂 ) insect sprays and by some garden products.It did not test the claims, but compared them to labeling guidelines set by the International Standards Organization (ISO) in September,1999.
Researchers documented claims of environmental friendliness made by about 2,000 products and found many too vague or too misleading to meet ISO standards.
"Many products had specially-designed labels to make them seem environmentally friendly, but in fact many of these symbols mean nothing," said report researcher Philip Page.
"Laundry detergents made the most number of claims with 158.Household cleaners were second with 145 separate claims, while paints were third on our list with 73.The high numbers show how very confusing it must be for consumers to sort the true from the misleading." he said.
T he ISO labeling standards ban vague or misleading claims on product packaging, because terms such as "environmentally friendly" and "non-polluting" cannot be verified."What we are now pushing for is to have multinational corporations meet the standards set by the ISO." said Page.
A study was carried out by Britain′ s NCC to __________.
Passage 2
Consumers are being confused and misled by the hodge-podge (大杂烩) of environmental claims made by household products, according to a "green labeling" study published by Consumers International Friday.
Among the report′s more outrageous (令人无法容忍的) findings, a German fertilizer described itself as "earthworm friendly" a brand of flour said it was "non-polluting" and a British toilet paper claimed to be "environmentally friendlier".
The study was written and researched by Britain′s National Consumer Council (NCC) for lobby group Consumer International.It was funded by the German and Dutch governments and the European Commission.
"While many good and useful claims are being made, it is clear there is a long way to go in ensuring shoppers are adequately informed about the environmental impact of products they buy,"said Consumers International director Anna Fielder.
The 10-country study surveyed product packaging in Britain.Western Europe, Scandinavia and the United States.It found that products sold in Germany and the United Kingdom made the most environmental claims on average.
The report focused on claims made by specific products, such as detergent (洗涤剂 ) insect sprays and by some garden products.It did not test the claims, but compared them to labeling guidelines set by the International Standards Organization (ISO) in September,1999.
Researchers documented claims of environmental friendliness made by about 2,000 products and found many too vague or too misleading to meet ISO standards.
"Many products had specially-designed labels to make them seem environmentally friendly, but in fact many of these symbols mean nothing," said report researcher Philip Page.
"Laundry detergents made the most number of claims with 158.Household cleaners were second with 145 separate claims, while paints were third on our list with 73.The high numbers show how very confusing it must be for consumers to sort the true from the misleading." he said.
T he ISO labeling standards ban vague or misleading claims on product packaging, because terms such as "environmentally friendly" and "non-polluting" cannot be verified."What we are now pushing for is to have multinational corporations meet the standards set by the ISO." said Page.
As indicated in this passage, with so many good claims, the consumers __________.
Passage 2
Consumers are being confused and misled by the hodge-podge (大杂烩) of environmental claims made by household products, according to a "green labeling" study published by Consumers International Friday.
Among the report′s more outrageous (令人无法容忍的) findings, a German fertilizer described itself as "earthworm friendly" a brand of flour said it was "non-polluting" and a British toilet paper claimed to be "environmentally friendlier".
The study was written and researched by Britain′s National Consumer Council (NCC) for lobby group Consumer International.It was funded by the German and Dutch governments and the European Commission.
"While many good and useful claims are being made, it is clear there is a long way to go in ensuring shoppers are adequately informed about the environmental impact of products they buy,"said Consumers International director Anna Fielder.
The 10-country study surveyed product packaging in Britain.Western Europe, Scandinavia and the United States.It found that products sold in Germany and the United Kingdom made the most environmental claims on average.
The report focused on claims made by specific products, such as detergent (洗涤剂 ) insect sprays and by some garden products.It did not test the claims, but compared them to labeling guidelines set by the International Standards Organization (ISO) in September,1999.
Researchers documented claims of environmental friendliness made by about 2,000 products and found many too vague or too misleading to meet ISO standards.
"Many products had specially-designed labels to make them seem environmentally friendly, but in fact many of these symbols mean nothing," said report researcher Philip Page.
"Laundry detergents made the most number of claims with 158.Household cleaners were second with 145 separate claims, while paints were third on our list with 73.The high numbers show how very confusing it must be for consumers to sort the true from the misleading." he said.
T he ISO labeling standards ban vague or misleading claims on product packaging, because terms such as "environmentally friendly" and "non-polluting" cannot be verified."What we are now pushing for is to have multinational corporations meet the standards set by the ISO." said Page.
According to the passage, the NCC found it outrageous that __________.