2026年12月六级试题(模拟)

机密★启用前

2026年12月全国大学英语六级考试

College English Test Band-6

（试题册）

敬告考生

1.请认真阅读本“敬告考生”内容，严格按照要求完成考试操作。

2.本次考试实行“多题多卷”模式，每个考场有多套试题，用条形码区分试题类型。请勿试图偷看或抄袭他人试卷，否则按违规处理。

3.试题册背面印有作文题目、考生信息填写区域及条形码粘贴条。作文题目在试题册背面，使用黑色签字笔在答题卡1上作答，作文期间不得打开试题册。

4.收到试题册及答题卡后，请检查试题册背面条形码、答题卡1和答题卡2的印刷质量，如有问题立即向监考员报告。

5.非听力考试期间不得佩戴耳机且不得提前翻阅试题册，否则按违规处理。

6.考试过程中应独立完成自己的试卷，如有违纪行为，被教育部考试中心判定为违规作答的，成绩以零分记。

7.所有题目必须在答题卡上规定位置作答，不按规定要求填涂和作答的，一律无效。

★ 请勿在此页面作答 ★

（所有题目均在答题卡上作答）

版权所有 © 2026年教育部全国大学生英语四六级考试组织委员会

考试条形码（此处撕取）

考生信息：

姓名：

专业：

考号：

学校：

考区：

Part I Writing(30 minutes)

Directions:For this part, you are allowed 30 minutes to write an essay on the topic:“The Pursuit of Economic Growth vs. Environmental Protection: Is There a Middle Path?”In your essay, you should:analyze the inherent tensions between rapid economic development and ecological sustainability,discuss at least two real-world examples where this conflict has played out (e.g., the Amazon deforestation, China's renewable energy transition, or the European Green Deal),propose a nuanced strategy that acknowledges the legitimate needs of both developing and developed nations,conclude with your personal stance and the rationale behind it.You should write at least 300 words but no more than 350 words.

Part Ⅱ Listening Comprehension(25 minutes)

Section A

Directions:In this section, you will hear two long conversations. At the end of each conversation, you will hear four questions. Both the conversation and the questions will be spoken only once. After you hear a question, you must choose the best answer from the four choices marked A), B), C) and D). Then mark the corresponding letter on Answer Sheet 1 with a single line through the centre.

Questions 1 to 4 are based on the conversation you have just heard.

1. A) It has been losing its competitive edge in the global market. 

B) It has been struggling with a shortage of skilled workforce.

C) It has been facing challenges from emerging technologies. 

D) It has been experiencing a decline in consumer demand.

2. A) Expanding into new international markets. B) Investing more in research and development.C) Partnering with technology startups. D) Restructuring its management system.

3. A) The company’s long-term strategic vision.B) The government’s new regulatory policies.C) The rapid advancement of artificial intelligence. D) The changing preferences of young consumers.

4. A) They are optimistic about the company’s future. B) They are concerned about potential job losses.C) They are indifferent to the company’s situation. D) They are seeking alternative employment.

Questions 5 to 8 are based on the conversation you have just heard.

5. A) She is preparing for an important job interview. 

B) She is planning to pursue a graduate degree abroad.C) She is considering a career change into education.

D) She is struggling with her current research project.

6. A) It offers more flexible working hours. B) It provides better opportunities for promotion.C) It aligns more closely with her personal interests. D) It requires less travel than her current job.

7. A) Contacting former colleagues in the industry. B) Taking some professional development courses.C) Seeking advice from a career counselor. D) Applying for positions through online platforms.

8. A) She has already received a job offer. B) She has decided to stay in her current position.C) She has not yet made up her mind. D) She has been rejected by several companies.

Section B

Directions:In this section, you will hear two passages. At the end of each passage, you will hear three or four questions. Both the passage and the questions will be spoken only once. After you hear a question, you must choose the best answer from the four choices marked A), B), C) and D). Then mark the corresponding letter on Answer Sheet 1 with a single line through the centre.

Questions 9 to 11 are based on the passage you have just heard.

9. A) The increasing popularity of online education platforms. 

B) The growing concern over data privacy in the digital age.C) The declining quality of traditional classroom education. 

D) The rising cost of higher education in developed countries.

10.A) They are more effective than traditional teaching methods. 

B) They are convenient but have significant drawbacks.C) They have completely replaced physical classrooms. 

D) They are only suitable for certain subjects.

11.A) Students’ lack of self-discipline in online learning. 

B) The limited interaction between teachers and students.C) The difficulty of conducting laboratory work online. 

D) The high cost of maintaining online platforms.

Questions 12 to 15 are based on the passage you have just heard.

12.A) The history of space exploration in the 21st century. 

B) The commercialization of space travel and its implications.C) The environmental impact of rocket launches. 

D) The competition between government space agencies.

13.A) They have made space travel affordable for ordinary people. 

B) They have accelerated the development of new technologies.C) They have reduced government funding for space research. 

D) They have created new job opportunities in the aerospace industry.

14.A) The risk of space debris threatening satellites. 

B) The high failure rate of commercial rocket launches.C) The lack of international regulations for space tourism. 

D) The potential for space resources to trigger conflicts.

15.A) Optimistic about the future of commercial space ventures. 

B) Cautious about the rapid expansion of space activities.C) Indifferent to the developments in the space industry. 

D) Critical of the privatization of space exploration.

Section C 

Directions:In this section, you will hear three recordings of lectures or talks. At the end of each recording, you will hear three or four questions. Both the recording and the questions will be spoken only once. After you hear a question, you must choose the best answer from the four choices marked A), B), C) and D). Then mark the corresponding letter on Answer Sheet 1 with a single line through the centre.

Questions 16 to 18 are based on the recording you have just heard.

16.A) The impact of climate change on global food production. 

B) The development of sustainable agricultural practices.C) The role of technology in modern farming. 

D) The economic challenges facing small-scale farmers.

17.A) They are more resistant to extreme weather conditions. 

B) They require significantly less water than traditional crops.C) They can be grown in urban environments with limited space. 

D) They have higher nutritional value than conventional crops.

18.A) It remains too expensive for widespread adoption. 

B) It faces resistance from traditional farming communities.C) It has not yet been proven effective in large-scale trials. 

D) It requires substantial government subsidies to be viable.

Questions 19 to 21 are based on the recording you have just heard.

19.A) The psychological effects of social media on young people. 

B) The evolution of communication technologies over time.C) The relationship between language and cultural identity. 

D) The impact of digital devices on human attention spans.

20.A) They have improved young people’s ability to multitask. 

B) They have created new forms of social anxiety and isolation.C) They have enhanced young people’s creativity and self-expression. 

D) They have reduced the generation gap between parents and children.

21.A) Limit their daily usage of social media platforms. 

B) Develop more meaningful offline relationships.C) Use social media primarily for educational purposes. 

D) Avoid comparing themselves to others online.

Questions 22 to 25 are based on the recording you have just heard.

22.A) The history of urban planning in major world cities. 

B) The challenges of designing sustainable cities for the future.C) The social and economic benefits of green architecture. 

D) The relationship between city design and public health.

23.A) Reducing carbon emissions from transportation. 

B) Creating more green spaces within urban areas.C) Making cities more walkable and bike-friendly. 

D) Ensuring affordable housing for all residents.

24.A) The resistance from real estate developers. 

B) The lack of political will to implement changes.C) The high cost of retrofitting existing infrastructure. 

D) The difficulty of changing people’s daily habits.

25.A) They require a fundamental shift in how we think about cities. 

B) They can only be achieved through government regulation.C) They depend primarily on technological innovation. 

D) They are unrealistic given current economic constraints.

Part Ⅲ Reading Comprehension(40 minutes)

Section A

Directions: In this section, there is a passage with ten blanks. You are required to select one word for each blank from a list of choices given in a word bank following the passage. Read the passage through carefully before making your choices. Each choice in the bank is identified by a letter. Please mark the corresponding letter for each item on Answer Sheet 2 with a single line through the centre. You may not use any of the words in the bank more than once. 

The concept of “digital sovereignty” has emerged as a cornerstone of contemporary geopolitical discourse, yet its meaning remains remarkably fluid. At its core, digital sovereignty refers to a nation’s capacity to exercise control over its digital infrastructure, data flows, and technological development without undue external interference. This idea, however, is not merely a technical or legal matter; it is deeply (26)____ with questions of national security, economic competitiveness, and fundamental rights. For the European Union, digital sovereignty has become a rallying cry to reduce dependence on American cloud providers and Chinese telecommunications equipment, prompting a series of legislative initiatives such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the proposed Data Act. These measures seek to create a regulatory environment that fosters European champions while (27)____ the rights of citizens to privacy and data protection.

Yet the pursuit of digital sovereignty is not without its internal contradictions. On one hand, it requires heavy investment in indigenous research and development, which many member states find financially (28)____ given their fiscal constraints. On the other hand, it demands a degree of digital protectionism that risks (29)____ the very open, cross-border collaboration that has historically driven innovation in the tech sector. Critics argue that the EU’s approach, while (30)____ well-intentioned, may inadvertently fragment the global internet into isolated blocs, each with its own technical standards and content moderation rules. This fragmentation, they warn, would impose significant costs on multinational enterprises and stifle the free exchange of ideas that (31)____ with the internet’s original ethos.

The geopolitical dimension adds further complexity. The United States and China, each with their own (32)____ technological ecosystems, view digital sovereignty through the lens of great-power competition. For the US, it is about preserving its technological lead and preventing adversarial nations from gaining strategic advantages through espionage or supply-chain coercion. For China, digital sovereignty is (33)____ to maintaining social stability and political control, as seen in its stringent cybersecurity laws and content censorship mechanisms. These divergent interpretations have (34)____ international forums, making multilateral governance of digital issues extraordinarily difficult. Meanwhile, smaller nations and developing countries find themselves caught in the crossfire, forced to choose between competing technological alliances, a choice that often carries severe economic and security (35)____.

Section B

Directions: In this section, you are going to read a passage with ten statements attached to it. Each statement contains information given in one of the paragraphs. Identify the paragraph from which the information is derived. You may choose a paragraph more than once. Each paragraph is marked with a letter. Answer the questions by marking the corresponding letter on Answer Sheet 2. 

A)The rise of social media has fundamentally altered the landscape of political communication, transforminghow information is disseminated, how public opinion is formed, and how political campaigns are conducted. Unlike traditional mass media, which operated on a one-to-many model with professional gatekeepers, social media platforms enable a many-to-many flow where anyone can become a content creator and distributor. This democratization of voice has empowered grassroots movements and given a platform to marginalized groups, but it has also created an environment ripe for misinformation, echo chambers, and algorithmic polarization. The dynamics of engagement on these platforms—driven by likes, shares, and comments—tend to reward sensationalism and emotional content over nuanced analysis, thereby altering the very nature of public discourse.

B)One of the most studied phenomena in this context is the emergence of “filter bubbles” and “echo chambers.” Filter bubbles refer to the personalised information environment created by algorithms that prioritise content aligned with a user’s past behaviour, effectively insulating them from opposingviewpoints. Echochambers,on the other hand, describe the social environments where individuals interact primarily withlike-minded peers, reinforcing shared beliefs and amplifying group conformity. While both concepts are related, they operate through distinct mechanisms: the former is algorithmic, while the latter is social. Empirical studies have produced mixed results regarding the actual extent of these effects,with some showing limited real-world impact and others identifying significant distortions in political attitudes, particularly among highly partisan users.

C)The spread of misinformation, or “fake news,” has become a central concern for policymakers and platform companies alike. During major elections and public health crises, false narratives have been shown to travel faster and reach broader audiences than factual corrections, partly because novelty and emotional arousalincrease sharing rates. The economic incentives of content creators—who profit from viral traffic—further exacerbate the problem, as fabricated stories often generate higher engagement than accurate reporting. Efforts to combat misinformation include fact-checking labels, content removal, and down-ranking of suspicious sources, yet these interventions face significant challenges: they are resource-intensive, prone to accusations of bias, and often circumvented by sophisticated actors who adapt their tactics rapidly.

D)Beyond misinformation, social media has also been implicated in the deterioration of mental health,especially among adolescents and young adults. The curated, idealised portrayals of others’ lives on platforms like Instagram and TikTok can foster social comparison, leading to feelings of inadequacy, anxiety, anddepression. Longitudinal studies have correlated heavy social media use with reduced life satisfaction,particularly when usage is passive (e.g., scrolling without interacting) rather than active (e.g., messaging friends). In response, some platforms have introduced features like hiding like counts and providing well-being nudges, but critics argue that these are superficial fixes that do not address the underlying business model, which relies on maximising user attention and engagement.

E)The regulatory response to these challenges has been varied across jurisdictions. The European Union has adopted a proactive approach with the Digital Services Act and Digital Markets Act, imposing strict obligations on platforms regarding content moderation, algorithmic transparency, and antitrust compliance. The United Kingdom has established the Online Safety Act, which assigns a duty of care to platforms to protect users from harmful content, backed by hefty fines and potential executive liability. In contrast, the United States has relied primarily on Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which shields platforms from liability for user-generated content, though there is growing bipartisan support for reforming or revoking this provision. The contrasting approaches reflect deeper differences in legal traditions, free speech norms, and the relative power of technology lobbies.

F)Emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence and blockchain are poised to reshape the social media ecosystem once again. AI-generated content, including deepfakes and synthetic voices, further blurs the line between authentic and fabricated information, posing new threats to trust and authenticity. Meanwhile, decentralised social networks built on blockchain protocols promise to give users ownership of their data and more control over content moderation, potentially circumventing the centralised authority of current platforms. However, these alternatives face their own obstacles, including scalability issues, user adoption inertia, and the inherent difficulty of enforcing community standards in a permissionless environment.

G)The role of social media in social movements is another area of intense research. The Arab Spring, MeToo, Black Lives Matter, and climate activism have all leveraged digital platforms to organise, mobilise, and amplify their messages, often achieving goals that seemed unattainable through traditional means. Yet scholars caution against “slacktivism”—the superficial engagement of liking or sharing without meaningful commitment—which may create an illusion of participation while failing to produce substantive change. Moreover, governments have increasingly used social media surveillance to monitor and suppress dissent, turning the same tools into instruments of control. This duality underscores the ambivalent nature of digital technologies: they are neither inherently liberating nor oppressive; their impact depends on the political context and the strategies of those who wield them.

H)Commercial interests pervade social media, shaping not only the content we see but also the products we buy and the lifestyles we aspire to. Influencer marketing has become a multi-billion-dollar industry, with brands paying substantial sums to individual creators for product placements and endorsements. This form of advertising often blurs the line between organic content and promotion, raising ethical questions about transparency and consumer protection. Regulatory bodies in several countries have mandated disclosure requirements, but enforcement remains uneven, and many influencers continue to obfuscate their sponsorships. The psychological impact of influencer culture, particularly on young audiences who idealise unattainable lifestyles, has also drawn criticism from mental health advocates.

I)The data economy underlying social media generates immense value, but the distribution of that value ishighly concentrated. A handful of companies—Meta, Alphabet, ByteDance, and Twitter (now X)—capture the lion’s share of advertising revenues, while users receive no direct compensation for the data they produce, which is the raw material of these platforms. This asymmetry has prompted calls for data as labour, arguing that users should be recognised as workers whose productive activity is exploited for corporate profit. Some proposals advocate for data dividends or cooperatively owned platforms, but these models remain experimental and far from mainstream adoption. The debate touches on fundamental questions of property rights, fairness, and the future of work in a digitalised economy.

J)In the realm of international relations, social media has become a battleground for information warfare. State actors and non-state groups employ coordinated inauthentic behaviour, including bots and troll farms, to sway public opinion, destabilise rival nations, and advance geopolitical narratives. Disinformation campaigns targeting elections, referendums, and public health measures have been documented in numerous countries, with Russia, China, and Iran frequently cited as perpetrators, though Western nations have also engaged in such activities. The attribution of these attacks is technically challenging, and the responses have included sanctions, diplomatic protests, and cyber retaliation. The lack of a global framework to address this phenomenon leaves the digital public sphere highly vulnerable to manipulation.

K)The educational implications of social media are twofold. On the positive side, platforms provide unprecedented access to information, enabling lifelong learning and the democratisation of knowledge. Massive open online courses (MOOCs), educational YouTube channels, and academic communities on Twitter have expanded intellectual horizons for millions. On the negative side, the constant distraction and fragmented attention induced by social media may impair deep reading, critical thinking, and sustained concentration—skills essential for academic and professional success. Neurological research suggests that the habitual switching between short, unrelated stimuli alters neural pathways, potentially reducing the capacity for focused, linear reasoning. Educators are now grappling with how to integrate digital literacy into curricula while mitigating the cognitive costs.

L)Looking forward, the trajectory of social media is likely to be shaped by generational shifts. Younger users, particularly Generation Z, are increasingly favouring ephemeral content (e.g., Snapchat, Instagram Stories) over permanent posts, and they exhibit greater scepticism towards large platforms, seeking more private and intimate spaces like Discord or private messaging apps. This migration reflects a desire for authenticity and control, contrasting with the performative publicness of earlier social media eras. At the same time, the metaverse—an immersive, persistent virtual world—is being promoted by tech giants as the next evolution, though its feasibility, social acceptance, and regulatory implications remain highly uncertain. The ultimate direction of digital sociality will depend on how these trends interact with broader societal shifts, including privacy concerns, economic inequality, and environmental sustainability.

M)Environmental consequences of social media are often overlooked, yet they are substantial. Data centres that power these platforms consume vast amounts of electricity, contributing to carbon emissions, and the manufacturing of billions of devices requires rare earth minerals whose extraction causes ecological damage. While some companies have pledged carbon neutrality and invested in renewable energy, the rapid growth in data traffic—fuelled by video streaming and high-definition content—has outpaced efficiency gains. Moreover, the culture of constant upgrading and planned obsolescence in consumer electronics generates massive electronic waste. A more sustainable digital future would require not only greener infrastructure but also changes in user behaviour, such as reducing streaming quality or extending device lifespan.

N)Finally, the philosophical underpinnings of social media raise profound questions about human nature and society. Do these platforms enhance our capacity for empathy and collective action, or do they exploit our cognitive biases and tribal instincts for commercial gain? The answer is likely both, in a complex feedback loop that defies simple moral judgement. What is clear is that social media is not a neutral tool; it embodies specific design choices that privilege certain values—virality, engagement, and speed—over others, such as accuracy, reflection, and deliberation. Recognising this normative dimension is the first step towards reclaiming agency over our digital lives, whether through individual mindfulness, collective advocacy, or institutional reform. 

O)In conclusion, social media is a double-edged sword that has brought extraordinary benefits and equally extraordinary harms. Its ultimate legacy will be determined not by the technology itself, but by the social, political, and ethical frameworks we build around it. The path forward requires multi-stakeholder dialogue, adaptive regulation, and a renewed commitment to human values at the centre of technological design. This is not a task for any single actor, but a collective responsibility that spans governments, corporations, civil society, and every individual user.

36.The algorithmic personalisation of content can create an informational bubble that limits exposure to diverseperspectives.

37.There is considerable variation in how different countries have chosen to regulate social media platforms.

38.Social media has been used both to empower grassroots activism and to enable government surveillance.

39.The economic model of social media relies heavily on the unpaid provision of user data, leading to calls for alternative compensation schemes.

40.The introduction of blockchain-based social networks may challenge the current dominance of centralised platforms, though practical barriers remain.

41.Some research has linked prolonged passive consumption of social media content to lower levels of subjective well-being.

42.The environmental costs of social media, including energy consumption and e-waste, are a growing but often ignored concern.

43.The spread of false information is accelerated by the incentive structures that reward sensational content over accurate reporting.

44.Educational systems are facing a dilemma: how to harness the informational benefits of social media while mitigating its effects on attention and critical thinking.

45.The rise of ephemeral content and private messaging reflects a shift towards more controlled and authentic forms of digital interaction.

Section C

Directions: There are 2 passages in this section. Each passage is followed by some questions or unfinished statements. For each of them there are four choices marked A), B), C) and D). You should decide on the best choice and mark the corresponding letter on Answer Sheet 2 with a single line through the centre.  

Passage One 

Questions 46 to 50 are based on the following passage. 

The notion that cities are engines of economic growth, innovation, and cultural vibrancy has been a central tenet of urban economics for decades. Dense agglomerations of people, firms, and institutions are believed to generate spillover effects—knowledge sharing, matching of skills to jobs, and economies of scale—that enhance productivity and raise living standards. This narrative has underpinned policies favouring urban concentration, from investment in mass transit to deregulation of building heights. Yet a growing body of evidence challenges the uncritical celebration of density, revealing a more complex and ambivalent picture. While proximity does foster creativity, it also amplifies costs—congestion, pollution, inequality, and social alienation—that may offset or even exceed the benefits, particularly for the most vulnerable residents.

Consider the housing crisis that afflicts many global cities. In London, New York, San Francisco, and Hong Kong, skyrocketing property prices have pushed homeownership beyond the reach of middle-income families, while rents consume an ever-larger share of wages. The root cause is not simply a lack of construction, but a fundamental mismatch between supply and demand, exacerbated by speculation, foreign investment, and the use of housing as an asset class rather than a shelter. Dense urban environments, by their very nature, intensify land competition, and those with capital can outbid those without, leading to spatial segregation along class and ethnic lines. The result is a city that is simultaneously hyper-connected and deeply divided, where luxury towers overshadow public housing blocks, and gated communities coexist with informal settlements.

Transportation in dense cities presents another paradox. Public transit systems, when well-designed and adequately funded, offer an efficient and environmentally friendly alternative to private cars. High ridership justifies frequent service and supports dense land use patterns. However, many cities have underinvested in transit infrastructure, and the resulting overcrowding, delays, and maintenance backlogs turn daily commutes into ordeals. In developing megacities like Mumbai or Lagos, the formal transit network is overwhelmed, giving rise to informal alternatives—minibuses, rickshaws, or motorcycle taxis—that operate in a regulatory grey zone, often with unsafe vehicles and exploitative labour practices. The dream of seamless urban mobility remains elusive, and the density that makes public transit viable also makes its failure catastrophic.

Environmental sustainability is perhaps the most touted advantage of urban density. Proponents argue that compact cities reduce per-capita carbon emissions by shortening travel distances, enabling district heating, and preserving surrounding natural habitats. Empirical data from developed countries largely support this claim: residents of dense cities tend to have smaller carbon footprints than their suburban counterparts. Yet this aggregate picture obscures significant internal disparities. Low-income neighbourhoods, which often house essential workers, are disproportionately exposed to air pollution from nearby highways and industrial zones, while affluent areas enjoy cleaner air and more green space. Moreover, the embodied carbon of constructing dense high-rise buildings—including steel, cement, and glass—is substantial, and the energy efficiency gains of shared walls may be negated by the proliferation of energy-intensive amenities like air conditioning and heated swimming pools. The net environmental impact of density, therefore, is not a fixed value but depends on policy choices regarding building codes, energy sources, and waste management.

Social well-being in dense cities is equally fraught. On the one hand, the diversity and dynamism of urban life offer unparalleled opportunities for personal growth, artistic expression, and political participation. The sheer concentration of cultural institutions, educational facilities, and entertainment venues creates a vibrant public sphere. On the other hand, the anonymity and pace of city life can breed loneliness and mental stress. Social networks tend to be fragmented along occupational and lifestyle lines, and the transient nature of urban populations weakens the long-term community bonds that provide emotional support in times of crisis. The pandemic brought these tensions into sharp relief: residents of crowded apartments faced severe challenges in social distancing, while those with private gardens enjoyed a measure of respite. The digital realm partially compensated for physical isolation, but it also reinforced existing social divides, as access to high-speed internet and digital devices was far from universal.

The governance of dense cities adds another layer of complexity. Local administrations are often underfunded and overstretched, struggling to provide basic services like waste collection, policing, and education to growing populations. The fragmentation of metropolitan areas into multiple municipalities hinders coherent planning, leading to land-use conflicts and duplicated efforts. Moreover, the concentration of political power and economic resources in capital cities exacerbates regional disparities, as rural areas are drained of talent and investment. Some countries have attempted to counter this trend by decentralising administrative functions and investing in secondary cities, but the gravitational pull of established metropolises remains overwhelming.

Technological solutions, from smart city sensors to ride-sharing apps, are frequently promoted as remedies for urban ills. While these innovations can optimise traffic flows, reduce energy waste, and improve service delivery, they also raise concerns about privacy, surveillance, and the erosion of public spaces. The data generated by urban residents is a valuable commodity, often harvested by corporations with little accountability to communities. The promise of “citizen-centric” smart cities has often devolved into top-down, corporate-led projects that prioritise efficiency over equity. The challenge is to design technological interventions that are participatory, transparent, and responsive to the needs of all residents, not just the tech-savvy elite.

In the final analysis, the paradox of urban density is not a fatal flaw but a call for nuanced, context-sensitive policies. There is no one-size-fits-all formula for the ideal city. What works in Singapore may not work in São Paulo; what succeeded in the post-industrial West may not be replicable in the rapidly urbanising Global South. The guiding principle should be that cities exist for their inhabitants, not the other way round. This means prioritising affordable housing, investing in public goods, and fostering inclusive governance. It means acknowledging that density is not an end in itself but a means to achieving human flourishing, and that the measure of a city’s success is not its GDP per capita but the wellbeing of its most disadvantaged residents. The urban future is not predetermined; it is being shaped by choices made today, by policymakers, planners, investors, and citizens alike. Making those choices wisely requires both empirical rigour and moral clarity.

46.What is the main argument presented in the passage?

A)Urban density is uniformly beneficial for economic growth and sustainability.

B)Urban density produces both positive and negative effects, and its overall impact varies by context and policy.

C)Urban density should be actively reduced to improve quality of life.

D)The benefits of urban density are outweighed by its costs in all cities.

47.According to the passage, what is one of the major drivers of housing unaffordability in dense cities?

A)Insufficient public transportation.

B)The treatment of housing as an investment rather than living space.

C)Excessive government regulation on construction.

D)The decline of suburban populations.

48.The passage points out that environmental benefits of density:

A)are uniform across all income groups.

B)may be undermined by the carbon footprint of building materials and energy-intensive amenities.

C)are always greater than the benefits of suburban living.

D)are irrelevant compared to social considerations.

49.Social wellbeing in dense cities is described as:

A)uniformly positive due to cultural diversity.

B)problematic because of anonymity and weak community ties, despite some advantages.

C)improved by digital technology for all residents.

D)not affected by living conditions.

50.The author’s recommended approach to urban density policy is to:

A)adopt a single global model based on the most successful cities.

B)focus exclusively on technological innovations.

C)implement context-specific solutions that prioritise the welfare of vulnerable populations.

D)abandon density as a policy goal altogether.

Passage Two

Questions 51 to 55 are based on the following passage. 

For most of human history, work has been defined as a necessary means of survival—the exertion of physical or mental effort to obtain food, shelter, and security. The Industrial Revolution transformed this subsistence model into a market-based system where labour is exchanged for wages, and productivity is measured by output per hour. In the twentieth century, the rise of the welfare state and labour movements established standards for working hours, safety, and minimum compensation, elevating work from a mere necessity to a source of identity, dignity, and social status. Today, however, this conventional framework is being destabilised by automation, globalisation, and shifting cultural values, prompting a fundamental re-examination of what work means, why we do it, and how it should be organised.

The most immediate challenge is technological unemployment. Advances in artificial intelligence, robotics, and machine learning have enabled machines to perform tasks that were once the exclusive domain of humans, from manufacturing and logistics to legal research and medical diagnosis. Unlike previous waves of automation, which primarily affected routine manual labour, the current wave targets cognitive and even creative functions, raising the spectre of widespread job displacement across skill levels. Pessimistic forecasts suggest that up to half of all current occupations could be automated within the next two decades, although others argue that new jobs will emerge as old ones disappear, echoing the lessons of past technological transitions. The debate is not merely academic: it has profound implications for education policy, social security systems, and the distribution of income.

Even if the net effect on employment numbers is neutral, the nature of work is changing in ways that may increase precarity. The rise of the gig economy—epitomised by platforms like Uber, Deliveroo, and TaskRabbit—has expanded flexibility but eroded the stable employer-employee relationship. Gig workers are typically classified as independent contractors, excluding them from benefits such as paid leave, health insurance, and pension contributions. This classification has been contested in courts worldwide, with some rulings favouring worker status and others upholding the contractor model. The lack of a consistent legal framework creates uncertainty and undermines the social safety net that was built around full-time, permanent employment. Moreover, algorithmic management, which assigns and evaluates work through automated systems, introduces a new form of control that can be opaque and arbitrary, leaving workers with little recourse when they are unfairly deactivated.

The psychological dimension of work is equally critical. For many, employment provides not just income but also a sense of purpose, social connection, and daily structure. The loss of a job can trigger depression, anxiety, and even physical illness, as demonstrated by numerous epidemiological studies. Conversely, jobs that offer autonomy, mastery, and meaning are associated with higher life satisfaction and better health. The “great resignation” following the pandemic highlighted a widespread desire for more fulfilling work, as millions of workers quit their positions in search of better conditions, higher pay, or a different career path. This phenomenon suggests that the traditional trade-off—accepting boredom and stress in exchange for a steady paycheque—is no longer acceptable to a growing segment of the workforce.

Cultural narratives about work are also shifting. The Protestant work ethic, which equated hard work with moral virtue, has been progressively challenged by voices advocating for work-life balance, minimalism, and even anti-work philosophies. The concept of “bullshit jobs”—roles that are so meaningless that even the holder cannot justify their existence—has gained currency, sparking debates about the social utility of many white-collar occupations. Meanwhile, the environmental movement questions the imperative of perpetual economic growth, arguing that endless production and consumption are incompatible with planetary boundaries. These critiques converge on a fundamental question: should work remain the central organising principle of society, or should we distribute productive activities more evenly and reduce the overall burden of labour through automation and shared leisure?

Policy responses to these transformations are emerging but remain fragmented. Universal Basic Income (UBI) has been proposed as a safety net that decouples income from employment, allowing individuals to pursue education, caregiving, or creative projects without the fear of destitution. Pilot programmes in several countries have produced mixed results: some show reduced stress and increased well-being, while others find limited impact on job search behaviour. The fiscal cost of UBI is substantial, and its implementation would require significant tax reforms, possibly including wealth taxes or carbon taxes. Alternative approaches include job guarantees, where the state acts as the employer of last resort, and strengthened sectoral bargaining to improve wages and conditions for gig workers. None of these options is politically easy, and the choice among them reflects deeper ideological divides regarding the role of the state and the value of work itself.

Internationally, the disparities in work conditions are stark. In developed economies, the debate centres on automation and the quality of jobs, while in developing nations, the priority remains the creation of sufficient employment to absorb growing labour forces. The informal sector, which comprises a large share of employment in Africa, South Asia, and Latin America, operates outside formal regulations, offering little protection and low productivity. Global supply chains often depend on this informal labour, raising ethical questions for multinational corporations. The transition to a more equitable global labour market requires not only economic investment but also institutional capacity building and international labour standards that are effectively enforced.

Technological innovations themselves offer potential pathways to improve work. Remote collaboration tools enable distributed teams, reducing the need for geographic concentration and allowing workers to reside in lower-cost areas. Automation of hazardous tasks can enhance occupational safety. AI-powered platforms can match skills to opportunities more efficiently, reducing frictional unemployment. Yet these benefits are not automatic; they depend on how technology is designed, who controls it, and whose interests it serves. The principle of “human-centred AI” emphasises augmentation rather than replacement, aiming to enhance human capabilities rather than eliminate them. Realising this vision requires participatory design processes that involve workers, unions, and civil society, not just engineers and executives.

Ultimately, the future of work is not technologically determined but socially constructed. It will be shaped by the political choices we make, the values we prioritise, and the institutions we build. A desirable future would be one where work is meaningful, fairly rewarded, and compatible with family life and environmental sustainability. It would recognise that human flourishing encompasses more than productive output, and that leisure, art, and community are as essential as labour. Achieving such a future is a daunting task, but the alternative—continuing along the current trajectory of inequality, burnout, and ecological degradation—is even more daunting. The debate about work is, at its core, a debate about what kind of society we wish to create.

51.What is the primary concern about technological unemployment in the passage?

A)It only affects manufacturing jobs.

B)It may displace a wide range of cognitive and creative tasks, not just routine labour.

C)It will lead to a complete elimination of all jobs.

D)It is a problem that only developed countries face.

52.Why does the gig economy present challenges to traditional labour protections?

A)Gig workers are generally more productive.

B)Gig workers are often classified as independent contractors, excluding them from employee benefits.

C)Gig platforms do not use any form of management.

D)Gig workers are legally prohibited from unionising.

53.The psychological importance of work is highlighted by the fact that:

A)unemployment has no mental health effects.

B)meaningful work contributes to overall life satisfaction and health.

C)all jobs are equally fulfilling.

D)the “great resignation” was driven solely by pay concerns.

54.What does the passage say about Universal Basic Income (UBI)?

A)It has been proven to be a complete success in all trials.

B)It is a financially easy policy to implement.

C)Pilot results are mixed, and it faces significant fiscal challenges.

D)It is opposed by all political groups.

55.The author’s concluding message about the future of work is that:

A)technology will inevitably determine its course.

B)it will be determined by deliberate societal choices and value-driven policies.

C)it is too uncertain to discuss meaningfully.

D)the only viable solution is to return to pre-industrial labour models.

Part ⅣTranslation(30 minutes)

Directions: For this part, you are allowed 30 minutes to translate a passage from Chinese into English. You should write your answer on Answer Sheet 2.

中国社会科学研究是理解中国发展道路与社会变迁的重要窗口。自改革开放以来，中国社会科学经历了从引进借鉴到自主创新的深刻转型，学科体系日益完善，研究方法日趋多元。作为中国最高水平的人文社会科学综合类英文学术期刊，《中国社会科学》（英文版）创刊于1980年，面向海外读者系统介绍中国在哲学、经济学、法学、社会学、历史学等领域的学术成果与理论动态。该刊不仅是中国学术“走出去”的重要桥梁，也为国内学者参与国际学术对话提供了不可或缺的平台。当前，中国正致力于构建具有中国特色、中国风格、中国气派的社会科学学科体系，力求在全球化背景下贡献中国智慧与中国方案。

版权所有 © 2026年教育部全国大学生英语四六级考试组织委员会