Some of the questions asked in IBPS PO Preliminary Exam 23/10/16(All Shifts) are listed below. If you have any more questions from the exam, then kindly share it in the comment section.
Follow this page.. We’ll update more Questions & thanks to all readers
- 11, 12, 26, 81, ?
- 11, 13, 18, 35, 100, ?
- 48, 53, 46 ,57, 44, ?
- 12, 7, 6, 10, 19, ?
- 3, 10, 21, 40 ,71, ?
- 7, 14, 30, 56, 93, ?
- 23, 39, 32, 48, 41, ?
- 11, 13, 20, 48, 111, ?
- 13, 17, 33, 97, ?, 1377
- 6, 3.5, 4.5, 11, 48, ?
- Beijing’s annual bill for traffic congestion amounts to 70 billion yuan ($11.3 billion), a recent study has found. According to a 2014 survey conducted by Peking University’s National Development Research Institute, 80 percent of total loss relates to time wasted waiting, 10 percent to gas and 10 percent to environmental damage. Statistics drawn up by Beijing Department of Transportation shows that in 2013, the capital’s average daily congestion time came to one hour and 55 minutes, 25 minutes longer than in 2012. The waste in gas is increasing rapidly as more and more cars hit the road. In 2013, 21.98 million vehicles were sold in China, up by 14 percent over 2012. Idling time also adds to Beijing’s already-bad environmental problem via increased emissions. The city started tackling the problem years ago. In 2011, it introduced a lottery system to rein in the number of vehicles people buy. It also launched a policy to ban private cars one work-day a week based on the last digit of the number plate. Beijing has put restrictions on the number of vehicles from outside the city and raised parking fees in urban areas. However, such measures have done little in reducing congestion.What’s worse, traffic jams have also become a problem for third- and fourth-tier cities, a report jointly issued by China Central Television, National Statistics Bureau and the Postal Service revealed. In future, Beijing will continue studying proper economic policies and use technology to build a smart city and improve the public traffic experience.
2. DURING the past two decades astonishing progress has been made in fighting infectious diseases in poor countries. Polio has almost been eradicated; malaria is being tamed (see article); HIV/AIDS is slowly being brought under control. Yet almost unnoticed, another epidemic is raging across the developing world, this one man-made.Road crashes now kill 1.3m people a year, more than malaria or tuberculosis. On present trends, by 2030 they will take a greater toll than the two together, and greater even than HIV/AIDS.Building roads is a highly effective way of boosting growth: the World Bank finds many projects to fund that do better than its minimum acceptable economic rate of return of 12%.
3. Accidents are common for many reasons. Aside from the fact that China’s population is so large, most have to do with the fact that China is so new to the business of driving cars. In 2013 it added more cars to its roads than were driving in the whole country in 1999. In China, the number of vehicles has been increasing by 15m cars every single year for a decade. The number of licence-holders has risen even faster; one in five Chinese now has a licence. In the rich world, by contrast, the number of licence-holders is flat or falling. Speed of development plays a large part. There had been a gradual increase in the number of drivers in rich countries. In China, as in nations such as Indonesia, car ownership has risen so fast that a large portion of those on the road are new drivers with limited experience. In every country insurance premiums for new drivers are high for a reason: people who have only just passed their test are more likely to be involved in an accident than those who have driven for years. China certainly has some safety regulations in place. Drivers and passengers must wear seatbelts, for example, and mobile phones can only be used hands-free when driving. Unfortunately these laws are entirely ignored. Most taxis value keeping their seats clean over keeping their customers safe, so they cover the back seat and thus block the use of seat belts.
- Global competition and the workforce In today’s technology-enabled knowledge economy, many universities find themselves facing a new challenge: how not only to equip students with an adequate education in their field of study, but also to arm them with the skills and knowledge required to leverage technology effectively in the workplace. How well do current graduates fare? Some academics in the US warn that the quality of their domestic university brand may be slipping. Private-sector respondents are particularly concerned, with 46% expressing worry that the US is lagging behind other countries in its ability to produce high quality professionals. In fact, only about 40% of all survey respondents believe that current graduates are able to compete successfully in today’s global marketplace. Generational issues also play a role in training the workforce of the future. For more than a decade, author Amy Lynch has studied Generation Y (individuals born between 1982 and 2001, also referred to as “millennials”) and the American culture shaping it. When considering overall job-readiness, she says that “today’s millennials are open to collaboration, have an enormous facility for multi-tasking, and are at ease with new technologies. But they seem to have more limited experience in independent decision-making than past generations.” To help impart that experience, universities may need to ensure that collaborative student projects have not only an online instructional component but defined areas of individual responsibility as well. Although employers expect graduates to have amassed most of the requisite technology skills before joining their organisations, more than one-third of those responding from the private sector say that they assume some on-the-job training will be necessary to acclimatise new employees. “This generation is not content with passive involvement,” says Ms Lynch. “Companies need to make training programmes more engaging, retention programmes more personalised, and process improvement initiatives more open to employee input.”.
2. Higher education is in the vanguard. Barely a year from its launch, Coursera, one of the pioneers in offering “massive open online courses”, now boasts more than 3.9m students worldwide, taking courses supplied by 83 partner institutions. Colleges have always been keen to experiment with technology: Britain’s television-based Open University is now 44 years old. But this time schools are following. Four years after Salman Khan gave up his job at a hedge fund to focus on making maths videos, the Khan Academy has 6m registered users, who solve (or try to solve) 3m problems a day, and it has broadened its curriculum far beyond maths. It is spreading beyond America, too. Carlos Slim, one of the world’s richest men, is said to be paying for a version of Khan Academy’s curriculum to be developed for schoolchildren in his native Mexico. Edtech has collected other impressive advocates. Bill Gates calls this “a special moment” for education. Private-sector money is piling in. Rupert Murdoch, hardly a rose-tinted-specs technophile, is allowing Amplify, his digital education business, to run up losses of around $180m this year in hope of dominating an edtech market that News Corporation reckons will soon be worth $44 billion in America alone. GEMS, a Dubai-based education provider, wants to expand its use of technology in India and Ghana to reach children in remote areas.Others are not so sure. Many parents already blame the “dumbest generation” on too much gaming, always-on computing and illiterate texting. Teachers may use edtech websites, but their unions are suspicious of anything suggesting that schools could get along with fewer teachers, and they dislike the idea of private companies such as Mr Murdoch’s News Corp making money out of education. There are also worries about privacy: edtech companies will end up with a vast store of personal data on pupils.Most of these fears are overdone. For-profit companies have long been in the business of selling printed textbooks, and there is no reason why data-privacy laws cannot extend to students. The biggest question remains: will children learn more? That in turn relies on the teachers, because even the best technology will get nowhere without their support.
3. Beefing up technology in the classroom doesn’t always lead to better education for children, according to a new study from an international consortium presented Tuesday. The report from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, or OECD, tracked educational outcome among students based on their use of technology at home and in the classroom. While student performance improves when they use technology in moderation, the group found, overexposure to computers and the Internet causes educational outcomes to drop. “Despite considerable investments in computers, Internet connections and software for educational use, there is little solid evidence that greater computer use among students leads to better scores in mathematics and reading,” the report said. The report suggested that “we have not yet become good enough at the kind of pedagogues that make the most of technology; that adding 21st century technologies to 20th century teaching practices will just dilute the effectiveness of teaching.” Report results are based on an assessment in 2012 that tracked students in more than 40 countries and surveyed them on computer habits and conducted both written and digital tests. On average, seven out of 10 students in countries surveyed use computers at school and students average at least 25 minutes a day online. In some countries, like Turkey and Mexico, about half of the students don’t have access to a computer at home. The survey found that students with more exposure to computers do better, on average, than those with little exposure to computers, but the OECD cautioned against drawing conclusions based on that result. The data could simply reflect that school systems that invest in technology also invest in better teachers and draw on students from a higher socio-economic class, who tend to do better in school.
4. It is possible to teach every branch of human knowledge with the motion picture,” observed Thomas Edison in 1913, predicting that books would soon be obsolete in the classroom. In fact the motion picture has had little effect on education. The same, until recently, was true of computers. Ever since the 1970s Silicon Valley’s visionaries have been claiming that their industry would change the schoolroom as radically as the office—and they have sold a lot of technology to schools on the back of that. Children use computers to do research, type essays and cheat. But the core of the system has changed little since the Middle Ages: a “sage on a stage” teacher spouting “lessons” to rows of students. Tom Brown and Huckleberry Finn would recognise it in an instant—and shudder. Now at last a revolution is under way. At its heart is the idea of moving from “one-size-fits-all” education to a more personalised approach, with technology allowing each child to be taught at a different speed, in some cases by adaptive computer programs, in others by “superstar” lecturers of one sort or another, while the job of classroom teachers moves from orator to coach: giving individual attention to children identified by the gizmos as needing targeted help. In theory the classroom will be “flipped”, so that more basic information is supplied at home via screens, while class time is spent embedding, refining and testing that knowledge (in the same way that homework does now, but more effectively). The promise is of better teaching for millions of children at lower cost—but only if politicians and teachers embrace it.