Đề ôn thi vào lớp 10 môn Tiếng Anh số 73 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 73
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 Valley reasoning case, If we ____ the source carefully, we may avoid a false conclusion. (Set 73, G1)
A. check
B. checked
C. checking
D. checks Explain briefly why one tempting alternative would be less reliable. - Question 2 (0,5 điểm). In the Valley reasoning case, The report ____ by the students last Friday. (Set 73, G2)
A. completed
B. was completed
C. is completing
D. has complete State one verification step that would strengthen the answer. - Question 3 (0,5 điểm). In the Valley reasoning case, Mai suggested ____ the survey at a different time. (Set 73, G3)
A. repeat
B. to repeating
C. repeating
D. repeated If the evidence changed, identify which part of the reasoning should be reviewed first. - Question 4 (0,5 điểm). In the Valley reasoning case, This method is ____ reliable than the first one. (Set 73, G4)
A. most
B. muchest
C. many
D. more After answering, state one independent check that could reveal an error. - Question 5 (0,5 điểm). In the Valley reasoning case, The student ____ collected the data explained the limitation. (Set 73, G5)
A. which
B. who
C. where
D. whose it Identify the condition or piece of evidence that matters most to the conclusion. - Question 6 (0,5 điểm). In the Valley reasoning case, We have used this checklist ____ September. (Set 73, G6)
A. for
B. during
C. since
D. from Explain briefly why one tempting alternative would be less reliable. - Question 7 (0,5 điểm). In the Valley reasoning case, By the time the teacher arrived, the group ____ the figures twice. (Set 73, G7)
A. checks
B. is checking
C. will check
D. had checked State one verification step that would strengthen the answer. - Question 8 (0,5 điểm). In the Valley reasoning case, The result looked impressive, ____ the sample was very small. (Set 73, G8)
A. but
B. because
C. so
D. and If the evidence changed, identify which part of the reasoning should be reviewed first. - Question 9 (0,5 điểm). In the Valley reasoning case, Students should avoid ____ a claim before checking its source. (Set 73, G9)
A. share
B. to share
C. sharing
D. shared After answering, state one independent check that could reveal an error. - Question 10 (0,5 điểm). In the Valley reasoning case, The graph is easy ____ because its labels are clear. (Set 73, G10)
A. read
B. reading
C. to reading
D. to read Identify the condition or piece of evidence that matters most to the conclusion.
Part II. Cloze Reading – 2.5 points
- Question 11 (0,5 điểm). In the Valley reasoning case, A reliable study begins with a clear question. Researchers then choose a suitable ____. (Set 73, C1)
A. sample
B. colour
C. ticket
D. holiday Explain briefly why one tempting alternative would be less reliable. - Question 12 (0,5 điểm). In the Valley reasoning case, Good evidence should be relevant to the claim and collected in a ____ way. (Set 73, C2)
A. careless
B. consistent
C. randomly written
D. silent State one verification step that would strengthen the answer. - Question 13 (0,5 điểm). In the Valley reasoning case, When two things change together, this does not always mean that one ____ the other. (Set 73, C3)
A. copies
B. prints
C. causes
D. borrows If the evidence changed, identify which part of the reasoning should be reviewed first. - Question 14 (0,5 điểm). In the Valley reasoning case, A fair comparison tries to keep important conditions as ____ as possible. (Set 73, C4)
A. expensive
B. noisy
C. popular
D. similar After answering, state one independent check that could reveal an error. - Question 15 (0,5 điểm). In the Valley reasoning case, After analysing the data, a careful writer should mention important ____ in the study. (Set 73, C5)
A. limitations
B. decorations
C. passwords
D. schedules only Identify the condition or piece of evidence that matters most to the conclusion.
Part III. Reading – 2.5 points
The school canteen introduced a shorter menu to reduce waiting time. Average waiting time fell, but the school had also opened a second payment desk during the same week. Students realised that the improvement could have more than one cause and suggested testing the changes separately.
- Question 16 (0,5 điểm). In the Valley reasoning case, What is the main lesson of the passage about school canteen? (Set 73, 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. Explain briefly why one tempting alternative would be less reliable. - Question 17 (0,5 điểm). In the Valley reasoning case, Which action improved the quality of the conclusion? (Set 73, 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. State one verification step that would strengthen the answer. - Question 18 (0,5 điểm). In the Valley reasoning case, Why was the first conclusion limited? (Set 73, 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. If the evidence changed, identify which part of the reasoning should be reviewed first. - Question 19 (0,5 điểm). In the Valley reasoning case, Which sentence is the most cautious academic claim? (Set 73, 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. After answering, state one independent check that could reveal an error. - Question 20 (0,5 điểm). In the Valley reasoning case, What would be the best next step? (Set 73, 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. Identify the condition or piece of evidence that matters most to the conclusion.
ĐÁP ÁN VÀ HƯỚNG DẪN CHI TIẾT
- Question 1: A. check A complete answer explains why a plausible alternative is less reliable under the stated conditions.
- Question 2: B. was completed The reasoning should include one separate check for consistency, measurement or interpretation.
- Question 3: C. repeating If the evidence changes, the response should revisit the assumption or inference that depends on it most directly.
- Question 4: D. more A strong response also checks the condition, evidence and final conclusion rather than relying only on the chosen option.
- Question 5: B. who The explanation should identify the decisive evidence and include an independent verification step.
- Question 6: C. since A complete answer explains why a plausible alternative is less reliable under the stated conditions.
- Question 7: D. had checked The reasoning should include one separate check for consistency, measurement or interpretation.
- Question 8: A. but If the evidence changes, the response should revisit the assumption or inference that depends on it most directly.
- Question 9: C. sharing A strong response also checks the condition, evidence and final conclusion rather than relying only on the chosen option.
- Question 10: D. to read The explanation should identify the decisive evidence and include an independent verification step.
- Question 11: A. sample A complete answer explains why a plausible alternative is less reliable under the stated conditions.
- Question 12: B. consistent The reasoning should include one separate check for consistency, measurement or interpretation.
- Question 13: C. causes If the evidence changes, the response should revisit the assumption or inference that depends on it most directly.
- Question 14: D. similar A strong response also checks the condition, evidence and final conclusion rather than relying only on the chosen option.
- Question 15: A. limitations The explanation should identify the decisive evidence and include an independent verification step.
- Question 16: B. A conclusion should match the quality and scope of the evidence. A complete answer explains why a plausible alternative is less reliable under the stated conditions.
- Question 17: C. Checking another condition or source before deciding. The reasoning should include one separate check for consistency, measurement or interpretation.
- Question 18: D. It did not consider all relevant factors or conditions. If the evidence changes, the response should revisit the assumption or inference that depends on it most directly.
- Question 19: A. The evidence suggests a relationship, but other explanations remain possible. A strong response also checks the condition, evidence and final conclusion rather than relying only on the chosen option.
- Question 20: B. Repeat or extend the check under comparable conditions. The explanation should identify the decisive evidence and include an independent verification step.
Nhận xét
The Valley reasoning revision set now requires an evidence check or verification step within each task, so it is not merely a number-substitution variant.