Tốt nghiệp THPT · môn Tiếng Anh

Tốt nghiệp THPT 2026 · Tiếng Anh · Mã đề 1105

Đề thi chính thức kì thi tốt nghiệp THPT năm 2026, môn Tiếng Anh, mã đề 1105. Đề gồm 40 câu trắc nghiệm nhiều phương án, làm trong 50 phút.

Đề chính thứcCó lời giảiMiễn phí
40
câu hỏi
50
phút
10
điểm tối đa
0,25
điểm mỗi câu

Cấu trúc đề thi

  1. Đọc hiểu: chi phí cơ hội của dịch vụ môi trường

    Questions 1–10

    2,5 điểm
  2. Điền cụm từ, mệnh đề vào đoạn văn: Psychology of Money

    Questions 11–15

    1,25 điểm
  3. Điền từ vào quảng cáo: Summer Part-time Jobs for Undergraduates

    Questions 16–21

    1,5 điểm
  4. Điền từ vào tờ rơi: Green Hands Campaign

    Questions 22–27

    1,5 điểm
  5. Sắp xếp câu thành đoạn văn, lá thư, hội thoại

    Questions 28–32

    1,25 điểm
  6. Đọc hiểu: ghi chép bằng tay và bằng bàn phím

    Questions 33–40

    2 điểm

Câu hỏi mẫu

3 câu đầu của đề. Vào phần làm thử để trả lời và biết ngay mình đúng hay sai.

  1. Phần thông tin chung
    *Read the passage and mark the letter A, B, C or D on your answer sheet to indicate the best answer to each of the following questions from 1 to 10.* It is important to stress that environmental services have costs, even when they are produced without any human input. All costs ought to be measured as opportunity costs. The opportunity cost for environmental services is the net benefit **forgone** because the resources providing the service can no longer be used in the next most beneficial way. Resources are not free if they can be put to alternative uses. Consider a stretch of river that can be used either for white-water canoeing or for electric power generation. Because the dam that generates the power would flood the rapids, the two uses are incompatible. The opportunity cost of saving the river for white-water canoeing is the net benefit taken out – after accounting for the cost of generation and distribution – for electricity. Conversely, the opportunity cost of building the dam is everything the unspoiled river would have produced: the recreation, the wildlife, the scenery, and whatever value future generations might place upon experiencing the rapids themselves. This insight has far-reaching implications for development policy. **[I]** Many decisions that appear at first to be costless choices in favour of growth turn out, on closer inspection, to be choices against something else. **[II]** Cutting down a forest for cropland is not free; it is paid for in carbon storage, biodiversity, and the regulating services the forest performed silently. **[III]** Diverting a river to irrigate fields is not free; the price is whatever the river was doing before the diversion. **[IV]** Even leaving land untouched is not free, for the income that intensive use might have generated is traded off as well. Economic development, in this view, is never simply a question of whether a project yields a positive return. It is a question of whether the return exceeds the value of what must be relinquished. Policies that recognise this – by attaching prices to scarce environmental services, or by requiring decision-makers to weigh both sides of the account – do not stand against development. **They** insist that the development chosen be worth what it truly costs. The danger lies not in counting too much, but in counting too little. *(Adapted from Environmental Economics and Policy)*
    Câu 1
    Đọc hiểu · từ đồng nghĩa0,25 điểm

    Question 1. The word forgone in paragraph 1 is closest in meaning to _____.

  2. Phần thông tin chung
    *Read the passage and mark the letter A, B, C or D on your answer sheet to indicate the best answer to each of the following questions from 1 to 10.* It is important to stress that environmental services have costs, even when they are produced without any human input. All costs ought to be measured as opportunity costs. The opportunity cost for environmental services is the net benefit **forgone** because the resources providing the service can no longer be used in the next most beneficial way. Resources are not free if they can be put to alternative uses. Consider a stretch of river that can be used either for white-water canoeing or for electric power generation. Because the dam that generates the power would flood the rapids, the two uses are incompatible. The opportunity cost of saving the river for white-water canoeing is the net benefit taken out – after accounting for the cost of generation and distribution – for electricity. Conversely, the opportunity cost of building the dam is everything the unspoiled river would have produced: the recreation, the wildlife, the scenery, and whatever value future generations might place upon experiencing the rapids themselves. This insight has far-reaching implications for development policy. **[I]** Many decisions that appear at first to be costless choices in favour of growth turn out, on closer inspection, to be choices against something else. **[II]** Cutting down a forest for cropland is not free; it is paid for in carbon storage, biodiversity, and the regulating services the forest performed silently. **[III]** Diverting a river to irrigate fields is not free; the price is whatever the river was doing before the diversion. **[IV]** Even leaving land untouched is not free, for the income that intensive use might have generated is traded off as well. Economic development, in this view, is never simply a question of whether a project yields a positive return. It is a question of whether the return exceeds the value of what must be relinquished. Policies that recognise this – by attaching prices to scarce environmental services, or by requiring decision-makers to weigh both sides of the account – do not stand against development. **They** insist that the development chosen be worth what it truly costs. The danger lies not in counting too much, but in counting too little. *(Adapted from Environmental Economics and Policy)*
    Câu 2
    Đọc hiểu · chi tiết0,25 điểm

    Question 2. According to paragraph 1, the costs of environmental services are _____.

  3. Phần thông tin chung
    *Read the passage and mark the letter A, B, C or D on your answer sheet to indicate the best answer to each of the following questions from 1 to 10.* It is important to stress that environmental services have costs, even when they are produced without any human input. All costs ought to be measured as opportunity costs. The opportunity cost for environmental services is the net benefit **forgone** because the resources providing the service can no longer be used in the next most beneficial way. Resources are not free if they can be put to alternative uses. Consider a stretch of river that can be used either for white-water canoeing or for electric power generation. Because the dam that generates the power would flood the rapids, the two uses are incompatible. The opportunity cost of saving the river for white-water canoeing is the net benefit taken out – after accounting for the cost of generation and distribution – for electricity. Conversely, the opportunity cost of building the dam is everything the unspoiled river would have produced: the recreation, the wildlife, the scenery, and whatever value future generations might place upon experiencing the rapids themselves. This insight has far-reaching implications for development policy. **[I]** Many decisions that appear at first to be costless choices in favour of growth turn out, on closer inspection, to be choices against something else. **[II]** Cutting down a forest for cropland is not free; it is paid for in carbon storage, biodiversity, and the regulating services the forest performed silently. **[III]** Diverting a river to irrigate fields is not free; the price is whatever the river was doing before the diversion. **[IV]** Even leaving land untouched is not free, for the income that intensive use might have generated is traded off as well. Economic development, in this view, is never simply a question of whether a project yields a positive return. It is a question of whether the return exceeds the value of what must be relinquished. Policies that recognise this – by attaching prices to scarce environmental services, or by requiring decision-makers to weigh both sides of the account – do not stand against development. **They** insist that the development chosen be worth what it truly costs. The danger lies not in counting too much, but in counting too little. *(Adapted from Environmental Economics and Policy)*
    Câu 3
    Đọc hiểu · câu hỏi NOT0,25 điểm

    Question 3. Which of the following is NOT implied in paragraph 2?

Nộp bài xong là có đáp án và lời giải chi tiết cho từng câu.