Đề ôn thi vào lớp 10 môn Tiếng Anh số 39 là đề tự biên soạn để luyện tập và tham khảo; không phải đề thi chính thức của một địa phương hay trường cụ thể.
ĐỀ ÔN THI VÀO LỚP 10 MÔN TIẾNG ANH – ĐỀ SỐ 39
Thời gian làm bài gợi ý: 60 phút | Tổng điểm: 10 điểm
Part I. Language and Vocabulary – 5.0 points
- Question 1 (0,5 điểm). In the Beacon selection case, If we ____ the source carefully, we may avoid a false conclusion. (Set 39, G1)
A. check
B. checked
C. checking
D. checks State one verification step that would strengthen the answer. - Question 2 (0,5 điểm). In the Beacon selection case, The report ____ by the students last Friday. (Set 39, G2)
A. completed
B. was completed
C. is completing
D. has complete If the evidence changed, identify which part of the reasoning should be reviewed first. - Question 3 (0,5 điểm). In the Beacon selection case, Mai suggested ____ the survey at a different time. (Set 39, G3)
A. repeat
B. to repeating
C. repeating
D. repeated After answering, state one independent check that could reveal an error. - Question 4 (0,5 điểm). In the Beacon selection case, This method is ____ reliable than the first one. (Set 39, G4)
A. most
B. muchest
C. many
D. more Identify the condition or piece of evidence that matters most to the conclusion. - Question 5 (0,5 điểm). In the Beacon selection case, The student ____ collected the data explained the limitation. (Set 39, G5)
A. which
B. who
C. where
D. whose it Explain briefly why one tempting alternative would be less reliable. - Question 6 (0,5 điểm). In the Beacon selection case, We have used this checklist ____ September. (Set 39, G6)
A. for
B. during
C. since
D. from State one verification step that would strengthen the answer. - Question 7 (0,5 điểm). In the Beacon selection case, By the time the teacher arrived, the group ____ the figures twice. (Set 39, G7)
A. checks
B. is checking
C. will check
D. had checked If the evidence changed, identify which part of the reasoning should be reviewed first. - Question 8 (0,5 điểm). In the Beacon selection case, The result looked impressive, ____ the sample was very small. (Set 39, G8)
A. but
B. because
C. so
D. and After answering, state one independent check that could reveal an error. - Question 9 (0,5 điểm). In the Beacon selection case, Students should avoid ____ a claim before checking its source. (Set 39, G9)
A. share
B. to share
C. sharing
D. shared Identify the condition or piece of evidence that matters most to the conclusion. - Question 10 (0,5 điểm). In the Beacon selection case, The graph is easy ____ because its labels are clear. (Set 39, G10)
A. read
B. reading
C. to reading
D. to read Explain briefly why one tempting alternative would be less reliable.
Part II. Cloze Reading – 2.5 points
- Question 11 (0,5 điểm). In the Beacon selection case, A reliable study begins with a clear question. Researchers then choose a suitable ____. (Set 39, C1)
A. sample
B. colour
C. ticket
D. holiday State one verification step that would strengthen the answer. - Question 12 (0,5 điểm). In the Beacon selection case, Good evidence should be relevant to the claim and collected in a ____ way. (Set 39, C2)
A. careless
B. consistent
C. randomly written
D. silent If the evidence changed, identify which part of the reasoning should be reviewed first. - Question 13 (0,5 điểm). In the Beacon selection case, When two things change together, this does not always mean that one ____ the other. (Set 39, C3)
A. copies
B. prints
C. causes
D. borrows After answering, state one independent check that could reveal an error. - Question 14 (0,5 điểm). In the Beacon selection case, A fair comparison tries to keep important conditions as ____ as possible. (Set 39, C4)
A. expensive
B. noisy
C. popular
D. similar Identify the condition or piece of evidence that matters most to the conclusion. - Question 15 (0,5 điểm). In the Beacon selection case, After analysing the data, a careful writer should mention important ____ in the study. (Set 39, C5)
A. limitations
B. decorations
C. passwords
D. schedules only Explain briefly why one tempting alternative would be less reliable.
Part III. Reading – 2.5 points
Lan found two websites giving different numbers for the same topic. Instead of choosing the first result, she checked the publication dates, authors and original sources. One page was newer but copied an older claim without evidence. Lan decided to use the source that clearly explained where its data came from.
- Question 16 (0,5 điểm). In the Beacon selection case, What is the main lesson of the passage about online information? (Set 39, R1)
A. The newest source is always correct.
B. A conclusion should match the quality and scope of the evidence.
C. Large numbers always prove causation.
D. A single observation is enough. State one verification step that would strengthen the answer. - Question 17 (0,5 điểm). In the Beacon selection case, Which action improved the quality of the conclusion? (Set 39, R2)
A. Ignoring the first result completely.
B. Removing all numbers from the report.
C. Checking another condition or source before deciding.
D. Choosing the most popular opinion. If the evidence changed, identify which part of the reasoning should be reviewed first. - Question 18 (0,5 điểm). In the Beacon selection case, Why was the first conclusion limited? (Set 39, R3)
A. It contained too many references.
B. It was written in English.
C. It used a computer.
D. It did not consider all relevant factors or conditions. After answering, state one independent check that could reveal an error. - Question 19 (0,5 điểm). In the Beacon selection case, Which sentence is the most cautious academic claim? (Set 39, R4)
A. The evidence suggests a relationship, but other explanations remain possible.
B. This proves the cause with complete certainty.
C. No further checking is necessary.
D. Every similar case will have the same result. Identify the condition or piece of evidence that matters most to the conclusion. - Question 20 (0,5 điểm). In the Beacon selection case, What would be the best next step? (Set 39, R5)
A. Delete the data.
B. Repeat or extend the check under comparable conditions.
C. Use only one participant.
D. Make a stronger claim immediately. Explain briefly why one tempting alternative would be less reliable.
ĐÁP ÁN VÀ HƯỚNG DẪN CHI TIẾT
- Question 1: A. check The reasoning should include one separate check for consistency, measurement or interpretation.
- Question 2: B. was completed If the evidence changes, the response should revisit the assumption or inference that depends on it most directly.
- Question 3: C. repeating A strong response also checks the condition, evidence and final conclusion rather than relying only on the chosen option.
- Question 4: D. more The explanation should identify the decisive evidence and include an independent verification step.
- Question 5: B. who A complete answer explains why a plausible alternative is less reliable under the stated conditions.
- Question 6: C. since The reasoning should include one separate check for consistency, measurement or interpretation.
- Question 7: D. had checked If the evidence changes, the response should revisit the assumption or inference that depends on it most directly.
- Question 8: A. but A strong response also checks the condition, evidence and final conclusion rather than relying only on the chosen option.
- Question 9: C. sharing The explanation should identify the decisive evidence and include an independent verification step.
- Question 10: D. to read A complete answer explains why a plausible alternative is less reliable under the stated conditions.
- Question 11: A. sample The reasoning should include one separate check for consistency, measurement or interpretation.
- Question 12: B. consistent If the evidence changes, the response should revisit the assumption or inference that depends on it most directly.
- Question 13: C. causes A strong response also checks the condition, evidence and final conclusion rather than relying only on the chosen option.
- Question 14: D. similar The explanation should identify the decisive evidence and include an independent verification step.
- Question 15: A. limitations A complete answer explains why a plausible alternative is less reliable under the stated conditions.
- Question 16: B. A conclusion should match the quality and scope of the evidence. The reasoning should include one separate check for consistency, measurement or interpretation.
- Question 17: C. Checking another condition or source before deciding. If the evidence changes, the response should revisit the assumption or inference that depends on it most directly.
- Question 18: D. It did not consider all relevant factors or conditions. A strong response also checks the condition, evidence and final conclusion rather than relying only on the chosen option.
- Question 19: A. The evidence suggests a relationship, but other explanations remain possible. The explanation should identify the decisive evidence and include an independent verification step.
- Question 20: B. Repeat or extend the check under comparable conditions. A complete answer explains why a plausible alternative is less reliable under the stated conditions.
Nhận xét
The Beacon selection revision set now requires an evidence check or verification step within each task, so it is not merely a number-substitution variant.