ม.6

ข้อสอบ GAT ภาษาอังกฤษ Reading ปี 2552

รายละเอียดข้อสอบ
รหัสข้อสอบ

: MB613140

จำนวนข้อ

: 15 ข้อ

วิชา

: GAT ภาษาอังกฤษ

ระดับชั้น

: ม.6

สร้างเมื่อ

: 25 ส.ค. 59 เวลา 14:59 น.

ผู้สร้าง : ❤Math❤

แชร์ข้อสอบนี้

เพิ่มในรายการโปรด

ให้คะแนน
00:00

1

ข้อที่ 1/15
คำถาม :

Read the following texts and choose the best answer.


ANYTHING TO ANYWHER, a unique shipping company, is celebrating its 21st year of service to business and individuals throughout the Phoenix, metropolitan area. What keeps this company growing and going? The proven ability to perform as advertised, taking the care and worry out of packaging, crating and shipping small, medium and large items across the country or around the world. What makes us different? Our knowledge and skill in maximizing protection during shipping.

With 21 years of experience, ANYTHING TO ANYWHERE is the one professional company many prestigious firms use when quality and care are called for to ship fine merchandise. Our many services include packaging and shipping.

   • fine furniture and antiques
   • heirlooms and other household items
   • fragile, bulky, heavy or exceptionally large items
   • art work and sculpture in need of TLC
   • cross-country moves too small for moves to handle

In celebration of our 21st ANNIVERSARY, we have a special gift for you--special rates. Just mention this letter when you call (480-649-0080) and ask for our special Anniversary Price. You'll be pleasantly surprised.
We even accept MasterCard and Visa. Just remember: By land, sea, or air, we ship ANYTHING TO ANYWHERE!

Which of the following does TLC refer to?

2

ข้อที่ 2/15
คำถาม :

Read the following texts and choose the best answer.


ANYTHING TO ANYWHER, a unique shipping company, is celebrating its 21st year of service to business and individuals throughout the Phoenix, metropolitan area. What keeps this company growing and going? The proven ability to perform as advertised, taking the care and worry out of packaging, crating and shipping small, medium and large items across the country or around the world. What makes us different? Our knowledge and skill in maximizing protection during shipping.

With 21 years of experience, ANYTHING TO ANYWHERE is the one professional company many prestigious firms use when quality and care are called for to ship fine merchandise. Our many services include packaging and shipping.

   • fine furniture and antiques
   • heirlooms and other household items
   • fragile, bulky, heavy or exceptionally large items
   • art work and sculpture in need of TLC
   • cross-country moves too small for moves to handle

In celebration of our 21st ANNIVERSARY, we have a special gift for you--special rates. Just mention this letter when you call (480-649-0080) and ask for our special Anniversary Price. You'll be pleasantly surprised.
We even accept MasterCard and Visa. Just remember: By land, sea, or air, we ship ANYTHING TO ANYWHERE!

Why has Anything To Anywhere been able to stay in business for 21 years?

3

ข้อที่ 3/15
คำถาม :

Read the following texts and choose the best answer.


ANYTHING TO ANYWHER, a unique shipping company, is celebrating its 21st year of service to business and individuals throughout the Phoenix, metropolitan area. What keeps this company growing and going? The proven ability to perform as advertised, taking the care and worry out of packaging, crating and shipping small, medium and large items across the country or around the world. What makes us different? Our knowledge and skill in maximizing protection during shipping.

With 21 years of experience, ANYTHING TO ANYWHERE is the one professional company many prestigious firms use when quality and care are called for to ship fine merchandise. Our many services include packaging and shipping.

   • fine furniture and antiques
   • heirlooms and other household items
   • fragile, bulky, heavy or exceptionally large items
   • art work and sculpture in need of TLC
   • cross-country moves too small for moves to handle

In celebration of our 21st ANNIVERSARY, we have a special gift for you--special rates. Just mention this letter when you call (480-649-0080) and ask for our special Anniversary Price. You'll be pleasantly surprised.
We even accept MasterCard and Visa. Just remember: By land, sea, or air, we ship ANYTHING TO ANYWHERE!

Why do many prestigious firms use Anything To Anywhere?

4

ข้อที่ 4/15
คำถาม :

Read the following texts and choose the best answer.


ANYTHING TO ANYWHER, a unique shipping company, is celebrating its 21st year of service to business and individuals throughout the Phoenix, metropolitan area. What keeps this company growing and going? The proven ability to perform as advertised, taking the care and worry out of packaging, crating and shipping small, medium and large items across the country or around the world. What makes us different? Our knowledge and skill in maximizing protection during shipping.

With 21 years of experience, ANYTHING TO ANYWHERE is the one professional company many prestigious firms use when quality and care are called for to ship fine merchandise. Our many services include packaging and shipping.

   • fine furniture and antiques
   • heirlooms and other household items
   • fragile, bulky, heavy or exceptionally large items
   • art work and sculpture in need of TLC
   • cross-country moves too small for moves to handle

In celebration of our 21st ANNIVERSARY, we have a special gift for you--special rates. Just mention this letter when you call (480-649-0080) and ask for our special Anniversary Price. You'll be pleasantly surprised.
We even accept MasterCard and Visa. Just remember: By land, sea, or air, we ship ANYTHING TO ANYWHERE!

How is Anything to Anywhere celebrating its 21st anniversary?

5

ข้อที่ 5/15
คำถาม :

Read the following texts and choose the best answer.


ANYTHING TO ANYWHER, a unique shipping company, is celebrating its 21st year of service to business and individuals throughout the Phoenix, metropolitan area. What keeps this company growing and going? The proven ability to perform as advertised, taking the care and worry out of packaging, crating and shipping small, medium and large items across the country or around the world. What makes us different? Our knowledge and skill in maximizing protection during shipping.

With 21 years of experience, ANYTHING TO ANYWHERE is the one professional company many prestigious firms use when quality and care are called for to ship fine merchandise. Our many services include packaging and shipping.

   • fine furniture and antiques
   • heirlooms and other household items
   • fragile, bulky, heavy or exceptionally large items
   • art work and sculpture in need of TLC
   • cross-country moves too small for moves to handle

In celebration of our 21st ANNIVERSARY, we have a special gift for you--special rates. Just mention this letter when you call (480-649-0080) and ask for our special Anniversary Price. You'll be pleasantly surprised.
We even accept MasterCard and Visa. Just remember: By land, sea, or air, we ship ANYTHING TO ANYWHERE!

How can one pay for Anything To Anywhere?

6

ข้อที่ 6/15
คำถาม :

Read the following texts and choose the best answer.
   The debate about global warming is about the outcome of a gamble. We are betting that the benefits of our industrial and agricultural activities--increasing standards of living for the rich and poor alike--will outweigh possible adverse consequences of an unfortunate by-product of our activities, an increase in the atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases that could lead to global warming and global climate changes. Some experts are warning that we are making poor bets, that global warming has started and that disasters are imminent. Others assure that the chances of global warming are so remote that the outcome of our wager will definitely be in our favor. The impasse is disquieting because the issue is of vital importance to each of us; it concerns the habitability of our planet. How long will it be before it is imperative that we take action?
   Some people are under the false impression that global warming is a theory that still has to be confirmed. They do not realize that scientists are in complete agreement that a continual rise in the atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases will inevitably lead to global warming and global climate changes. The disagreements are about the timing and amplitude of the expected warming. It is as if we are in a raft, gliding smoothly down a river, towards dangerous rapids and possibly a waterfall, and are uncertain of the distance to the waterfall. If we know what the distance is then we can tackle the very difficult political matter of deciding on the appropriate time to get out of the water. Suppose, however, that the scientific results have uncertainties, that the scientists can do no better than estimate that we will arrive at the waterfall in thirty minutes, plus or minus ten minutes. Pessimists will then insist that we will arrive in 20 minutes or less, while optimists will state confidently that we won’t be there for 40 minutes or more. Such disagreements usually result in the postponement of the political decision until more accurate scientific results are available—everyone knows that scientists should be capable of precise predictions—or until we are in sight of the waterfall. We recently had such an experience.
   It is in our interest to limit the growth in the atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases. It is wise to avoid comprehensive programs that decree a rigid course of action to reach a grand, final solution. It is better to take action, and to correct mistakes at an early stage before scarce resources have been wasted. We are courting a disaster and need to accept that uncertainties do not justify inaction.

What would be the best title for this text?

7

ข้อที่ 7/15
คำถาม :

Read the following texts and choose the best answer.
   The debate about global warming is about the outcome of a gamble. We are betting that the benefits of our industrial and agricultural activities--increasing standards of living for the rich and poor alike--will outweigh possible adverse consequences of an unfortunate by-product of our activities, an increase in the atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases that could lead to global warming and global climate changes. Some experts are warning that we are making poor bets, that global warming has started and that disasters are imminent. Others assure that the chances of global warming are so remote that the outcome of our wager will definitely be in our favor. The impasse is disquieting because the issue is of vital importance to each of us; it concerns the habitability of our planet. How long will it be before it is imperative that we take action?
   Some people are under the false impression that global warming is a theory that still has to be confirmed. They do not realize that scientists are in complete agreement that a continual rise in the atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases will inevitably lead to global warming and global climate changes. The disagreements are about the timing and amplitude of the expected warming. It is as if we are in a raft, gliding smoothly down a river, towards dangerous rapids and possibly a waterfall, and are uncertain of the distance to the waterfall. If we know what the distance is then we can tackle the very difficult political matter of deciding on the appropriate time to get out of the water. Suppose, however, that the scientific results have uncertainties, that the scientists can do no better than estimate that we will arrive at the waterfall in thirty minutes, plus or minus ten minutes. Pessimists will then insist that we will arrive in 20 minutes or less, while optimists will state confidently that we won’t be there for 40 minutes or more. Such disagreements usually result in the postponement of the political decision until more accurate scientific results are available—everyone knows that scientists should be capable of precise predictions—or until we are in sight of the waterfall. We recently had such an experience.
   It is in our interest to limit the growth in the atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases. It is wise to avoid comprehensive programs that decree a rigid course of action to reach a grand, final solution. It is better to take action, and to correct mistakes at an early stage before scarce resources have been wasted. We are courting a disaster and need to accept that uncertainties do not justify inaction.

Which of the following does this text NOT discuss?

8

ข้อที่ 8/15
คำถาม :

Read the following texts and choose the best answer.
   The debate about global warming is about the outcome of a gamble. We are betting that the benefits of our industrial and agricultural activities--increasing standards of living for the rich and poor alike--will outweigh possible adverse consequences of an unfortunate by-product of our activities, an increase in the atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases that could lead to global warming and global climate changes. Some experts are warning that we are making poor bets, that global warming has started and that disasters are imminent. Others assure that the chances of global warming are so remote that the outcome of our wager will definitely be in our favor. The impasse is disquieting because the issue is of vital importance to each of us; it concerns the habitability of our planet. How long will it be before it is imperative that we take action?
   Some people are under the false impression that global warming is a theory that still has to be confirmed. They do not realize that scientists are in complete agreement that a continual rise in the atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases will inevitably lead to global warming and global climate changes. The disagreements are about the timing and amplitude of the expected warming. It is as if we are in a raft, gliding smoothly down a river, towards dangerous rapids and possibly a waterfall, and are uncertain of the distance to the waterfall. If we know what the distance is then we can tackle the very difficult political matter of deciding on the appropriate time to get out of the water. Suppose, however, that the scientific results have uncertainties, that the scientists can do no better than estimate that we will arrive at the waterfall in thirty minutes, plus or minus ten minutes. Pessimists will then insist that we will arrive in 20 minutes or less, while optimists will state confidently that we won’t be there for 40 minutes or more. Such disagreements usually result in the postponement of the political decision until more accurate scientific results are available—everyone knows that scientists should be capable of precise predictions—or until we are in sight of the waterfall. We recently had such an experience.
   It is in our interest to limit the growth in the atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases. It is wise to avoid comprehensive programs that decree a rigid course of action to reach a grand, final solution. It is better to take action, and to correct mistakes at an early stage before scarce resources have been wasted. We are courting a disaster and need to accept that uncertainties do not justify inaction.

Which of the following could replace the word “imminent” in the text?

9

ข้อที่ 9/15
คำถาม :

Read the following texts and choose the best answer.
   The debate about global warming is about the outcome of a gamble. We are betting that the benefits of our industrial and agricultural activities--increasing standards of living for the rich and poor alike--will outweigh possible adverse consequences of an unfortunate by-product of our activities, an increase in the atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases that could lead to global warming and global climate changes. Some experts are warning that we are making poor bets, that global warming has started and that disasters are imminent. Others assure that the chances of global warming are so remote that the outcome of our wager will definitely be in our favor. The impasse is disquieting because the issue is of vital importance to each of us; it concerns the habitability of our planet. How long will it be before it is imperative that we take action?
   Some people are under the false impression that global warming is a theory that still has to be confirmed. They do not realize that scientists are in complete agreement that a continual rise in the atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases will inevitably lead to global warming and global climate changes. The disagreements are about the timing and amplitude of the expected warming. It is as if we are in a raft, gliding smoothly down a river, towards dangerous rapids and possibly a waterfall, and are uncertain of the distance to the waterfall. If we know what the distance is then we can tackle the very difficult political matter of deciding on the appropriate time to get out of the water. Suppose, however, that the scientific results have uncertainties, that the scientists can do no better than estimate that we will arrive at the waterfall in thirty minutes, plus or minus ten minutes. Pessimists will then insist that we will arrive in 20 minutes or less, while optimists will state confidently that we won’t be there for 40 minutes or more. Such disagreements usually result in the postponement of the political decision until more accurate scientific results are available—everyone knows that scientists should be capable of precise predictions—or until we are in sight of the waterfall. We recently had such an experience.
   It is in our interest to limit the growth in the atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases. It is wise to avoid comprehensive programs that decree a rigid course of action to reach a grand, final solution. It is better to take action, and to correct mistakes at an early stage before scarce resources have been wasted. We are courting a disaster and need to accept that uncertainties do not justify inaction.

What is the main problem that delays the action to solve the greenhouse effect?

10

ข้อที่ 10/15
คำถาม :

Read the following texts and choose the best answer.
   The debate about global warming is about the outcome of a gamble. We are betting that the benefits of our industrial and agricultural activities--increasing standards of living for the rich and poor alike--will outweigh possible adverse consequences of an unfortunate by-product of our activities, an increase in the atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases that could lead to global warming and global climate changes. Some experts are warning that we are making poor bets, that global warming has started and that disasters are imminent. Others assure that the chances of global warming are so remote that the outcome of our wager will definitely be in our favor. The impasse is disquieting because the issue is of vital importance to each of us; it concerns the habitability of our planet. How long will it be before it is imperative that we take action?
   Some people are under the false impression that global warming is a theory that still has to be confirmed. They do not realize that scientists are in complete agreement that a continual rise in the atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases will inevitably lead to global warming and global climate changes. The disagreements are about the timing and amplitude of the expected warming. It is as if we are in a raft, gliding smoothly down a river, towards dangerous rapids and possibly a waterfall, and are uncertain of the distance to the waterfall. If we know what the distance is then we can tackle the very difficult political matter of deciding on the appropriate time to get out of the water. Suppose, however, that the scientific results have uncertainties, that the scientists can do no better than estimate that we will arrive at the waterfall in thirty minutes, plus or minus ten minutes. Pessimists will then insist that we will arrive in 20 minutes or less, while optimists will state confidently that we won’t be there for 40 minutes or more. Such disagreements usually result in the postponement of the political decision until more accurate scientific results are available—everyone knows that scientists should be capable of precise predictions—or until we are in sight of the waterfall. We recently had such an experience.
   It is in our interest to limit the growth in the atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases. It is wise to avoid comprehensive programs that decree a rigid course of action to reach a grand, final solution. It is better to take action, and to correct mistakes at an early stage before scarce resources have been wasted. We are courting a disaster and need to accept that uncertainties do not justify inaction.

How would you describe the text?

11

ข้อที่ 11/15
คำถาม :

Read the following texts and choose the best answer.
   Optimistic estimates place computing power equivalence to human brain functions at around or before 2030. Appropriate AI software may or may not be ready by then. A more conservative date would place the readiness of human equivalent AI robots at around 2050.
   But there is no reason why all robots would have full human equivalent intelligence. If robots are going to be used for specific tasks only then they could presumably be programmed with that level of intelligence or capability only.
   Robots designated for mental tasks could be programmed with a full range of general purpose capabilities but at a lower processing speed, equivalent to a low human IQ.
   It is assumed that most general purpose robots could be designated to perform most clerical tasks, mental tasks, most manufacturing production line tasks, and similar tasks. Any tasks that include elements of risk or danger would also be primarily targets for robot workers.
   It seems reasonable to assume that creative tasks like acting, journalism, fiction writing, and politics, executive management, policing, doctors, etc., would remain with the realm of humans.
   But for the majority of jobs currently performed by human robots should have adequate intelligence to complete the same tasks with equal or greater efficiency.
   If their intelligence is equivalent to humans then robots will also be self-aware. To what extent will this be a problem? Could it be construed that robots have become slaves? To what extent could robots be programmed to suppress self-awareness, and if that were possible, then how much would that affect their ability to complete their work tasks with the same competence as their human owners?
   As time passes further processor developments will enable robots to have much higher intelligence than humans.  This is likely to create two classes of robots, one set designed to work in place of their owners, and the other to exist as free individuals. Issues may need to be resolved though. Should such free robots be permitted to work as themselves and receive income? Should tree robots be permitted to own lesser robots to work for them?

What is the text mainly about?

12

ข้อที่ 12/15
คำถาม :

Read the following texts and choose the best answer.
   Optimistic estimates place computing power equivalence to human brain functions at around or before 2030. Appropriate AI software may or may not be ready by then. A more conservative date would place the readiness of human equivalent AI robots at around 2050.
   But there is no reason why all robots would have full human equivalent intelligence. If robots are going to be used for specific tasks only then they could presumably be programmed with that level of intelligence or capability only.
   Robots designated for mental tasks could be programmed with a full range of general purpose capabilities but at a lower processing speed, equivalent to a low human IQ.
   It is assumed that most general purpose robots could be designated to perform most clerical tasks, mental tasks, most manufacturing production line tasks, and similar tasks. Any tasks that include elements of risk or danger would also be primarily targets for robot workers.
   It seems reasonable to assume that creative tasks like acting, journalism, fiction writing, and politics, executive management, policing, doctors, etc., would remain with the realm of humans.
   But for the majority of jobs currently performed by human robots should have adequate intelligence to complete the same tasks with equal or greater efficiency.
   If their intelligence is equivalent to humans then robots will also be self-aware. To what extent will this be a problem? Could it be construed that robots have become slaves? To what extent could robots be programmed to suppress self-awareness, and if that were possible, then how much would that affect their ability to complete their work tasks with the same competence as their human owners?
   As time passes further processor developments will enable robots to have much higher intelligence than humans.  This is likely to create two classes of robots, one set designed to work in place of their owners, and the other to exist as free individuals. Issues may need to be resolved though. Should such free robots be permitted to work as themselves and receive income? Should tree robots be permitted to own lesser robots to work for them?

What time does the writer refer to when he mentions “a more conservative date”

13

ข้อที่ 13/15
คำถาม :

Read the following texts and choose the best answer.
   Optimistic estimates place computing power equivalence to human brain functions at around or before 2030. Appropriate AI software may or may not be ready by then. A more conservative date would place the readiness of human equivalent AI robots at around 2050.
   But there is no reason why all robots would have full human equivalent intelligence. If robots are going to be used for specific tasks only then they could presumably be programmed with that level of intelligence or capability only.
   Robots designated for mental tasks could be programmed with a full range of general purpose capabilities but at a lower processing speed, equivalent to a low human IQ.
   It is assumed that most general purpose robots could be designated to perform most clerical tasks, mental tasks, most manufacturing production line tasks, and similar tasks. Any tasks that include elements of risk or danger would also be primarily targets for robot workers.
   It seems reasonable to assume that creative tasks like acting, journalism, fiction writing, and politics, executive management, policing, doctors, etc., would remain with the realm of humans.
   But for the majority of jobs currently performed by human robots should have adequate intelligence to complete the same tasks with equal or greater efficiency.
   If their intelligence is equivalent to humans then robots will also be self-aware. To what extent will this be a problem? Could it be construed that robots have become slaves? To what extent could robots be programmed to suppress self-awareness, and if that were possible, then how much would that affect their ability to complete their work tasks with the same competence as their human owners?
   As time passes further processor developments will enable robots to have much higher intelligence than humans.  This is likely to create two classes of robots, one set designed to work in place of their owners, and the other to exist as free individuals. Issues may need to be resolved though. Should such free robots be permitted to work as themselves and receive income? Should tree robots be permitted to own lesser robots to work for them?

How does the writer think about the future of the robots?

14

ข้อที่ 14/15
คำถาม :

Read the following texts and choose the best answer.
   Optimistic estimates place computing power equivalence to human brain functions at around or before 2030. Appropriate AI software may or may not be ready by then. A more conservative date would place the readiness of human equivalent AI robots at around 2050.
   But there is no reason why all robots would have full human equivalent intelligence. If robots are going to be used for specific tasks only then they could presumably be programmed with that level of intelligence or capability only.
   Robots designated for mental tasks could be programmed with a full range of general purpose capabilities but at a lower processing speed, equivalent to a low human IQ.
   It is assumed that most general purpose robots could be designated to perform most clerical tasks, mental tasks, most manufacturing production line tasks, and similar tasks. Any tasks that include elements of risk or danger would also be primarily targets for robot workers.
   It seems reasonable to assume that creative tasks like acting, journalism, fiction writing, and politics, executive management, policing, doctors, etc., would remain with the realm of humans.
   But for the majority of jobs currently performed by human robots should have adequate intelligence to complete the same tasks with equal or greater efficiency.
   If their intelligence is equivalent to humans then robots will also be self-aware. To what extent will this be a problem? Could it be construed that robots have become slaves? To what extent could robots be programmed to suppress self-awareness, and if that were possible, then how much would that affect their ability to complete their work tasks with the same competence as their human owners?
   As time passes further processor developments will enable robots to have much higher intelligence than humans.  This is likely to create two classes of robots, one set designed to work in place of their owners, and the other to exist as free individuals. Issues may need to be resolved though. Should such free robots be permitted to work as themselves and receive income? Should tree robots be permitted to own lesser robots to work for them?

What does “that” in “…if that were possible…” refer?

15

ข้อที่ 15/15
คำถาม :

Read the following texts and choose the best answer.
   Optimistic estimates place computing power equivalence to human brain functions at around or before 2030. Appropriate AI software may or may not be ready by then. A more conservative date would place the readiness of human equivalent AI robots at around 2050.
   But there is no reason why all robots would have full human equivalent intelligence. If robots are going to be used for specific tasks only then they could presumably be programmed with that level of intelligence or capability only.
   Robots designated for mental tasks could be programmed with a full range of general purpose capabilities but at a lower processing speed, equivalent to a low human IQ.
   It is assumed that most general purpose robots could be designated to perform most clerical tasks, mental tasks, most manufacturing production line tasks, and similar tasks. Any tasks that include elements of risk or danger would also be primarily targets for robot workers.
   It seems reasonable to assume that creative tasks like acting, journalism, fiction writing, and politics, executive management, policing, doctors, etc., would remain with the realm of humans.
   But for the majority of jobs currently performed by human robots should have adequate intelligence to complete the same tasks with equal or greater efficiency.
   If their intelligence is equivalent to humans then robots will also be self-aware. To what extent will this be a problem? Could it be construed that robots have become slaves? To what extent could robots be programmed to suppress self-awareness, and if that were possible, then how much would that affect their ability to complete their work tasks with the same competence as their human owners?
   As time passes further processor developments will enable robots to have much higher intelligence than humans.  This is likely to create two classes of robots, one set designed to work in place of their owners, and the other to exist as free individuals. Issues may need to be resolved though. Should such free robots be permitted to work as themselves and receive income? Should tree robots be permitted to own lesser robots to work for them?

What specifically about the robot does the writer talks about in the last paragraph?

ระบบกำลังประมวลผล

  • ข้อปัจจุบัน
  • ข้อที่ทำแล้ว
  • ข้อที่ยังไม่ได้ทำ
  • ข้อที่ยังไม่ได้เปิด

กรุณาเลือกคำตอบ ก่อนกดปุ่มข้อถัดไป

ข้อแนะนำ : ท่านสามารถดูเฉลยของข้อสอบแต่ละข้อได้ เมื่อทำข้อสอบเสร็จและส่งข้อสอบแล้ว

ข้อความ..

ข้อความเตือน..

ส่งข้อสอบให้เพื่อน..


คลังข้อสอบข้อสอบรวมข้อสอบข้อสอบพร้อมเฉลยtu getเลขคณิตคณิตศาสตร์วิทย์วิทยาศาสตร์ฟิสิกส์เคมีชีวะชีววิทยาสุขศึกษาพละพลศึกษาสังคมสังคมศึกษาวิทย์ทั่วไปข้อสอบวัดระดับศิลปะการงานการงานอาชีพเทคโนโลยีภาษาจีนภาษาญี่ปุ่นภาษาอังกฤษpatgatข้อสอบ reading writinglistening ข้อสอบโอเน็ตข้อสอบ Onetเซลล์แรงปริมาตรดาราศาสตร์ห่วงโซ่อาหารการสืบพันธุ์พืชการลำเลียงจำนวนเต็มครนหรมคูณร่วมน้อยหารร่วมมากบวก ลบ คูณ หารตัวสะกดภาษาไทยคำควบกล้ำเก็งข้อสอบติวสอบแบบฝึกหัดเฉลยกฏหมายดนตรีดนตรีไทยดนตรีสากลเพลงเพลงชาติพุทธประวัติศาสนาคำศัพท์ข้อสอบปฐมวัยข้อสอบอนุบาลโตไปไม่โกงคณิตเบื้องต้นcu tepสอบเข้า ม.1รับตรง58สอบตรง58รับตรง59สอบตรง59clearing house เคลียร์ริ่งเฮ้าส์ ONETGAT PATติวติวGATเชื่อมโยงภาษาญี่ปุ่นความถนัดภาษาจีนเกษตรข้อสอบคลังข้อสอบadmissionsแอดมิชชั่นรับตรงโควต้าสอบตรงวิทยาศาสตร์คณิตศาสตร์สังคมภาษาไทยกลอนติวเข้มสอบเข้าสอบเข้า เตรียมสอบเข้าสาธิตสอบเข้ามหิดลสอบเข้าสวนกุหลาบ 
#Trending now
Adgang60ข่าวครูสื่อการสอนแผนการสอนเทคนิคการสอนสอบครูข่าวครูปฏิทินสอบเข้า ม.1 2560admissions 60ad60admissionsสอบตรง 60รับตรง 60ข้อสอบรับตรงอาเซียนAECข่าวกิจกรรมข่าวทุนข่าวเด่นเรียนต่อทุนทุนเรียนต่อทุนการศึกษาclearing houseเคลียร์ริ่งเฮ้าส์ค้นหาตัวเองปฎิทินสอบONETGATPATติวติว GATติว PATGAT เชื่อมโยงโครงงานวิทยาศาสตร์โครงงานเรียนต่อต่างประเทศข้อสอบคลังข้อสอบข่าว admissionsแอดมิชชั่นสาระน่ารู้โควตาแนะแนวสามเณรธรรมะว.วชิรเมธีธรรมท่องเที่ยวเก็งข้อสอบติวเข้มสอบเข้าสอบสัมภาษณ์สอบเข้า ม.1สอบเข้า ม.4สอบเข้าเตรียมอุดมฯสอบเข้าสาธิตสอบเข้ามหิดลทดลองวิทย์ฮอร์โมนHormoneจักรยานCU TEPTU GETสามเณรปลูกปัญญาธรรมtruelittlemonkของเล่นวิทยาศาสตร์เพลงชาติไทยวิศวะ จุฬาบัญชี จุฬาสอบทุนSmart ExamsTOEICTOEFLสูตรลัดคณิตศาสตร์วิสาขบูชาหน้าหนาวเชียงใหม่เชียงรายคำราชาศัพท์สุภาษิตเงินเดือนครูครูผู้ช่วยสมัครสอบครูTU starข้อสอบ o-net ป.6สอนศาสตร์quizเกมgameเข้าพรรษาโอลิมปิกในหลวงรัชกาลที่ 99 วิชาสามัญรัชกาลที่ 10สรุปสูตรคณิตศาสตร์เอนทรานซ์ 4.0
กลับด้านบน