IELTS Reading: Giảm Thiểu Lãng Phí Trong Các Cơ Sở Giáo Dục – Đề Thi Mẫu Có Đáp Án Chi Tiết

Mở Bài

Chủ đề về giảm thiểu lãng phí trong các cơ sở giáo dục (How To Reduce Waste In Education Institutions) đã và đang trở thành một trong những đề tài nóng bỏng trong kỳ thi IELTS Reading. Với xu hướng toàn cầu ngày càng quan tâm đến môi trường và phát triển bền vững, các passage liên quan đến quản lý rác thải, tiết kiệm tài nguyên và giáo dục xanh xuất hiện thường xuyên trong các đề thi từ Cambridge IELTS 14 trở về sau.

Bài viết này cung cấp một bộ đề thi IELTS Reading hoàn chỉnh với 3 passages theo đúng chuẩn thi thật, từ mức độ dễ đến khó. Bạn sẽ được trải nghiệm 40 câu hỏi đa dạng dạng bài – từ True/False/Not Given, Matching Headings, Multiple Choice đến Summary Completion. Đặc biệt, mỗi câu hỏi đều có đáp án chi tiết kèm giải thích cụ thể về vị trí thông tin, kỹ thuật paraphrase và chiến lược làm bài hiệu quả.

Đề thi này phù hợp cho học viên có trình độ từ band 5.0 trở lên, muốn làm quen với chủ đề môi trường – giáo dục và rèn luyện kỹ năng đọc hiểu học thuật. Bạn sẽ không chỉ học cách tìm đáp án mà còn tích lũy được vốn từ vựng chuyên ngành về quản lý rác thải, hành vi tiêu dùng bền vững và các sáng kiến giáo dục xanh – những chủ điểm rất thường gặp trong IELTS.

Hướng Dẫn Làm Bài IELTS Reading

Tổng Quan Về IELTS Reading Test

IELTS Reading Test là bài kiểm tra kéo dài 60 phút với 3 passages và tổng cộng 40 câu hỏi. Mỗi câu trả lời đúng tương đương 1 điểm, không có điểm âm khi trả lời sai. Độ khó của các đoạn văn tăng dần từ Passage 1 (dễ) đến Passage 3 (khó).

Phân bổ thời gian khuyến nghị:

• Passage 1: 15-17 phút (13 câu hỏi)
• Passage 2: 18-20 phút (13 câu hỏi)
• Passage 3: 23-25 phút (14 câu hỏi)

Lưu ý dành 2-3 phút cuối để chuyển đáp án lên answer sheet. Không có thời gian bổ sung cho việc này trong phòng thi chính thức.

Các Dạng Câu Hỏi Trong Đề Này

Đề thi mẫu này bao gồm 7 dạng câu hỏi phổ biến nhất trong IELTS Reading:

1. Multiple Choice – Câu hỏi trắc nghiệm nhiều lựa chọn
2. True/False/Not Given – Xác định thông tin đúng/sai/không được đề cập
3. Matching Headings – Nối tiêu đề với đoạn văn
4. Summary Completion – Hoàn thành đoạn tóm tắt
5. Matching Features – Nối thông tin với đối tượng
6. Sentence Completion – Hoàn thành câu
7. Short-answer Questions – Câu hỏi trả lời ngắn

Học viên đang luyện tập IELTS Reading với chủ đề giảm thiểu lãng phí trong giáo dục

IELTS Reading Practice Test

PASSAGE 1 – Schools Leading the Way in Waste Reduction

Độ khó: Easy (Band 5.0-6.5)

Thời gian đề xuất: 15-17 phút

Educational institutions around the world are increasingly recognizing their responsibility to minimize environmental impact and teach students about sustainable practices. Schools, colleges, and universities generate substantial amounts of waste daily, ranging from food scraps in cafeterias to paper in classrooms and plastic bottles across campuses. However, many forward-thinking institutions have begun implementing innovative strategies to dramatically reduce their waste output while simultaneously educating the next generation about environmental stewardship.

One of the most effective approaches adopted by schools is the implementation of comprehensive recycling programs. These initiatives go beyond simply placing bins in hallways. Successful programs involve educating students and staff about what materials can be recycled, providing clearly labeled containers in strategic locations, and partnering with local recycling facilities to ensure proper processing. Jefferson Elementary School in California, for example, achieved a 75% reduction in landfill waste within two years by introducing a color-coded recycling system and conducting monthly awareness assemblies. Teachers incorporated waste sorting activities into science lessons, making environmental responsibility part of the curriculum rather than an afterthought.

Composting programs represent another powerful tool for educational waste reduction. School cafeterias produce enormous quantities of food waste daily – vegetable peelings, fruit cores, uneaten portions, and expired items. Rather than sending this organic material to landfills where it generates harmful methane gas, many schools have established on-site composting systems. Students learn to separate compostable materials from other waste, and the resulting nutrient-rich compost is often used in school gardens. Melbourne Grammar School in Australia transformed its waste management by installing industrial composters that process up to 200 kilograms of food waste weekly. The compost produced supplies their campus vegetable garden, which in turn provides fresh produce for the cafeteria, creating a closed-loop system that reduces both waste and food costs.

The shift toward digital learning materials has significantly decreased paper consumption in modern educational settings. While textbooks and printed worksheets once dominated classrooms, many schools now utilize tablets, laptops, and interactive whiteboards. Brookfield High School in the United Kingdom eliminated nearly 40,000 sheets of paper annually by transitioning to digital assignments and e-textbooks. Teachers share resources through online platforms, students submit homework electronically, and administrative communications occur via email rather than printed notices. This digital transformation not only reduces waste but also prepares students for technology-driven workplaces while lowering institutional costs for paper, ink, and storage.

Reusable alternatives to single-use items have gained traction in school cafeterias and events. Disposable plastic trays, cutlery, cups, and plates contribute enormously to educational waste streams. Progressive institutions have invested in durable, washable alternatives that can be used repeatedly. Stanford Middle School replaced all disposable cafeteria items with stainless steel trays and reusable utensils, installing commercial dishwashers to handle the cleaning. While the initial investment was substantial, the school calculated savings of approximately $12,000 annually on disposable supplies. Furthermore, students developed greater appreciation for resource conservation when they witnessed the daily cycle of use, wash, and reuse.

Student-led environmental clubs and green teams play a crucial role in sustaining waste reduction efforts. These groups conduct regular waste audits, identifying problem areas and proposing solutions. They organize campus clean-up events, design awareness campaigns, and advocate for policy changes. At Riverside University, the student Environmental Action Committee successfully lobbied for the elimination of plastic water bottles on campus, leading to the installation of 50 water refill stations. Within one semester, an estimated 45,000 plastic bottles were kept out of the waste stream. Such student initiatives foster leadership skills and demonstrate that young people can drive meaningful environmental change.

Educational institutions are also rethinking their approach to school supplies and equipment. Rather than encouraging families to purchase new materials each year, many schools have established supply exchanges where students can donate unused items at year’s end for others to use. Libraries of shared resources – including calculators, art supplies, and sports equipment – reduce the need for individual ownership. Some universities have implemented textbook rental programs or created digital repositories of course materials, dramatically cutting waste from discarded books. These sharing economy models teach students about collaborative consumption and challenge the disposable culture prevalent in many societies.

The impact of these waste reduction strategies extends far beyond environmental benefits. Students who participate in recycling programs, composting initiatives, and sustainability projects develop critical thinking skills and environmental awareness that influences their behavior throughout life. Schools that prioritize waste reduction often see improvements in community engagement, as environmental projects bring together students, teachers, parents, and local organizations. Financial savings from reduced waste disposal costs and lower supply expenses can be redirected to educational programs. Perhaps most importantly, educational institutions that model environmental responsibility prepare students to become conscientious global citizens capable of addressing the pressing ecological challenges facing our planet.

Questions 1-5

Do the following statements agree with the information given in Passage 1?

Write:

• TRUE if the statement agrees with the information
• FALSE if the statement contradicts the information
• NOT GIVEN if there is no information on this

1. Educational institutions produce various types of waste including food and paper.
2. Jefferson Elementary School reduced its waste by more than half in two years.
3. Composting programs in schools help reduce methane emissions from landfills.
4. All schools in the United Kingdom have switched to completely digital learning.
5. Stanford Middle School saves money each year by using reusable cafeteria items.

Questions 6-9

Complete the sentences below.

Choose NO MORE THAN THREE WORDS from the passage for each answer.

6. Melbourne Grammar School uses compost from its program to grow vegetables in a __.
7. Brookfield High School teachers share educational resources through __.
8. At Riverside University, students can now refill water bottles at fifty __.
9. Some schools have created __ where students can exchange unused supplies.

Questions 10-13

Choose the correct letter, A, B, C or D.

10. According to the passage, successful recycling programs in schools require:
    A. expensive equipment from foreign countries
    B. education for students and clearly marked bins
    C. government funding and support
    D. reduction in the number of students

11. Digital learning materials help schools by:
    A. replacing all teachers with computers
    B. eliminating the need for science classes
    C. reducing paper usage and preparing students for modern workplaces
    D. making education more expensive

12. Student environmental clubs contribute to waste reduction by:
    A. forcing other students to recycle
    B. conducting audits and proposing solutions
    C. replacing school administrators
    D. selling recycled products

13. The main benefit of waste reduction in educational institutions is:
    A. making schools smaller
    B. reducing the number of teachers needed
    C. developing environmental awareness that lasts a lifetime
    D. eliminating all costs associated with education

---

PASSAGE 2 – The Psychology Behind Waste Behavior in Academic Settings

Độ khó: Medium (Band 6.0-7.5)

Thời gian đề xuất: 18-20 phút

Understanding why educational institutions generate excessive waste requires examining the psychological and behavioral factors that influence how students, faculty, and staff interact with resources. While technological solutions and infrastructure improvements play important roles in waste reduction, the human element remains the most critical – and most challenging – aspect of creating truly sustainable academic environments. Research in environmental psychology reveals that waste generation in schools and universities is not merely a matter of inadequate facilities, but rather a complex interplay of habits, social norms, cognitive biases, and institutional culture.

One significant psychological barrier to waste reduction is the “tragedy of the commons” phenomenon, wherein individuals acting in their own self-interest deplete shared resources despite understanding that such behavior ultimately harms the collective good. In educational settings, this manifests when students discard recyclable materials in regular trash bins because the personal inconvenience of proper disposal outweighs their perception of individual impact. Behavioral economists have demonstrated that humans systematically underestimate the cumulative effect of small actions, a cognitive bias known as “present bias” or temporal discounting. A student throwing away a single plastic bottle may rationalize that one item makes negligible difference, failing to consider that this action, multiplied across thousands of individuals daily, creates substantial environmental consequences.

The concept of “diffusion of responsibility” further complicates waste reduction efforts in institutional settings. When responsibility for environmental stewardship is shared among many individuals, each person feels less personally accountable. Students may assume that janitorial staff will sort waste properly, while custodians believe that education about recycling falls under teachers’ purview, and administrators presume that facilities managers handle sustainability initiatives. This fragmentation of accountability results in a collective failure to address waste systematically. Research conducted at the University of British Columbia found that clearly assigning ownership of specific waste reduction goals to identifiable groups significantly improved compliance rates, suggesting that breaking down diffuse responsibility into concrete, personal obligations can overcome this psychological obstacle.

Social norming represents a powerful tool for influencing waste behavior in educational communities. Humans are profoundly influenced by perceived norms – what they believe others do and what they think others approve of. When students observe peers carelessly discarding recyclable materials, this behavior becomes normalized and self-perpetuating. Conversely, institutions that successfully establish visible environmental consciousness as the prevailing norm create self-reinforcing positive behaviors. Princeton University implemented a peer-to-peer education model where student “eco-representatives” living in dormitories modeled proper waste sorting and engaged residents in casual conversations about sustainability. This approach proved more effective than top-down administrative mandates because it leveraged the social proof principle – people’s tendency to adopt behaviors they observe in similar others, particularly within their immediate social group.

The “intention-action gap” poses another substantial challenge in educational waste reduction. Numerous studies reveal a striking disconnect between environmental attitudes and actual behavior. Surveys consistently show that the majority of students and faculty express concern about environmental issues and report positive intentions toward recycling and waste reduction. However, these stated intentions frequently fail to translate into consistent action. Environmental psychologists attribute this gap to several factors: the invisibility of consequences (waste disappears from view once discarded, providing no immediate feedback), lack of habit formation (sustainable behaviors have not been practiced sufficiently to become automatic), and contextual barriers (inconveniently located recycling bins, confusing sorting systems, or time pressure).

Addressing the intention-action gap requires strategic “choice architecture” – deliberately designing physical and informational environments to make sustainable behaviors the path of least resistance. Research in behavioral design demonstrates that small environmental modifications can produce significant behavioral changes without requiring conscious decision-making. Placing recycling bins directly adjacent to trash receptacles, rather than in separate locations, dramatically increases recycling rates by minimizing the additional effort required. Using visual cues such as color-coded bins with clear pictorial labels reduces cognitive burden and eliminates confusion about proper sorting. Some universities have experimented with “reverse defaults,” where compostable containers are the only option provided in dining facilities, eliminating the choice to use disposables entirely. These “nudge” strategies recognize that humans are cognitive misers who rely on mental shortcuts and that sustainable behavior becomes far more likely when it requires less thought and effort than unsustainable alternatives.

The role of intrinsic versus extrinsic motivation in sustaining environmental behaviors warrants consideration. While reward systems – such as competitions between dormitories for lowest waste generation – can produce short-term behavioral changes, research suggests that such extrinsic motivators may actually undermine long-term commitment to environmental values. When individuals engage in sustainable behaviors primarily to receive rewards or avoid penalties, they develop a transactional relationship with environmental stewardship rather than internalizing these practices as personally meaningful. Educational institutions seeking lasting cultural change should therefore emphasize intrinsic motivations – helping community members connect waste reduction to their core values, understand the broader significance of their actions, and experience the inherent satisfaction of contributing to collective well-being. Programs that enable students to witness the tangible results of their efforts – such as seeing compost produced from cafeteria waste nourishing a campus garden – help forge these deeper psychological connections.

Cognitive dissonance theory offers insights into resistance to waste reduction initiatives. When institutional policies conflict with individuals’ established habits or self-perception, they experience psychological discomfort. A student who identifies as environmentally conscious but regularly uses disposable coffee cups faces internal contradiction. Rather than changing behavior to align with values, individuals often employ rationalization strategies to reduce dissonance – “I’m too busy to carry a reusable mug,” or “my contribution is insignificant compared to industrial pollution.” Effective change initiatives anticipate and address these rationalizations directly, providing convenient alternatives (lending programs for reusable containers) and reframing narratives (emphasizing collective impact and modeling behavior change by respected community members).

Finally, the phenomenon of moral licensing can paradoxically undermine waste reduction efforts. When individuals perform one environmentally positive action, they subsequently feel licensed to engage in less sustainable behaviors without experiencing guilt. A student who diligently recycles might feel entitled to take extra paper towels or purchase disposable items, unconsciously “spending” the moral credit earned through recycling. This psychological mechanism suggests that educational institutions should present sustainability not as isolated actions but as an integrated lifestyle reflecting consistent values across contexts. Emphasizing the interconnectedness of environmental behaviors and celebrating sustained commitment rather than isolated actions may counteract moral licensing effects.

Understanding these psychological dimensions illuminates why technological solutions alone cannot solve waste problems in educational settings. Truly sustainable institutions must address the human factors that drive consumption and disposal patterns, designing systems that align with psychological realities rather than assuming rational actors will consistently make environmentally optimal choices when faced with competing demands on their attention and effort.

Questions 14-18

Choose the correct letter, A, B, C or D.

14. According to the passage, the “tragedy of the commons” in schools occurs when:
    A. students share educational resources effectively
    B. individuals prioritize personal convenience over collective environmental benefit
    C. schools run out of recycling bins
    D. teachers refuse to educate students about waste

15. The study at the University of British Columbia found that:
    A. janitorial staff should handle all recycling
    B. giving specific groups clear responsibility improves waste reduction
    C. diffusion of responsibility is beneficial
    D. administrators work harder than teachers

16. Princeton University’s peer-to-peer education model was successful because:
    A. it was mandated by government regulation
    B. students respond better to similar peers than administrative orders
    C. it was cheaper than other methods
    D. it eliminated all waste on campus

17. The “intention-action gap” refers to:
    A. the space between recycling bins
    B. different time zones in education
    C. the difference between what people say they will do and what they actually do
    D. gaps in educational curriculum

18. According to the passage, “nudge” strategies work because they:
    A. force people to recycle through punishment
    B. make sustainable behavior require less effort and thought
    C. eliminate all choices for students
    D. reward students with money

Questions 19-23

Complete the summary below.

Choose NO MORE THAN TWO WORDS from the passage for each answer.

Waste reduction in educational institutions faces several psychological challenges. Students often underestimate the 19. __ of small actions, believing one person’s behavior doesn’t matter. The concept of 20. __ means that when many people share responsibility, individuals feel less accountable. However, 21. __ can be powerful – when students see peers behaving sustainably, they tend to follow. Unfortunately, there is often a disconnect between environmental attitudes and behavior, called the 22. __. To address this, schools can use 23. __ to design environments where sustainable choices are easiest.

Questions 24-26

Do the following statements agree with the claims of the writer in Passage 2?

Write:

• YES if the statement agrees with the claims of the writer
• NO if the statement contradicts the claims of the writer
• NOT GIVEN if it is impossible to say what the writer thinks about this

24. Reward systems for waste reduction create lasting environmental commitment.
25. Students who see tangible results of their waste reduction efforts develop stronger connections to environmental values.
26. All universities should implement mandatory recycling courses for first-year students.

---

PASSAGE 3 – Systemic Approaches to Waste Minimization in Higher Education

Độ khó: Hard (Band 7.0-9.0)

Thời gian đề xuất: 23-25 phút

The escalating environmental crisis has propelled institutions of higher education into positions of unprecedented responsibility as both contributors to ecological degradation and potential catalysts for transformative change. Universities and colleges, functioning as microcosms of broader society, offer unique laboratories for developing, testing, and disseminating innovative waste management paradigms that extend far beyond conventional recycling initiatives. Contemporary discourse among sustainability scholars emphasizes that meaningful waste reduction in academic settings necessitates nothing less than a fundamental reconceptualization of institutional operations, pedagogical approaches, and the very purpose of higher education within the Anthropocene epoch.

The limitations of linear “take-make-dispose” economic models have become increasingly apparent within academic contexts, prompting forward-thinking institutions to embrace circular economy principles that treat waste not as an endpoint but as feedstock for subsequent production cycles. This systems-thinking approach requires comprehensive analysis of material flows throughout the institutional ecosystem – from procurement and consumption to disposal and potential recovery. The Ellen MacArthur Foundation’s framework for circular higher education advocates for designing out waste at the conceptual stage rather than managing it post-creation, prioritizing durability and reparability in purchased goods, and establishing closed-loop systems where materials cycle continuously within the campus economy. Implementation of these principles demands sophisticated life-cycle assessment capabilities and cross-departmental collaboration that transcends traditional administrative silos.

Several pioneering universities have operationalized circular economy concepts through comprehensive zero-waste initiatives that fundamentally restructure institutional operations. The University of California system’s ambitious goal of achieving zero waste by 2025 exemplifies this systemic transformation. Rather than focusing solely on downstream waste diversion, their strategy encompasses upstream interventions: renegotiating procurement contracts to specify minimal packaging, requiring suppliers to accept responsibility for end-of-life product management through extended producer responsibility agreements, and prioritizing purchasing of remanufactured or repairable equipment. Campus dining services have been restructured around bulk purchasing of locally sourced ingredients to minimize packaging waste, while standardized reusable container systems eliminate single-use foodservice items. These initiatives are supported by sophisticated waste characterization studies that identify specific material streams requiring targeted intervention and establish metrics for assessing progress toward quantified reduction targets.

The integration of waste minimization objectives into academic programming represents a crucial dimension of institutional commitment that extends beyond operational improvements. Universities serve not merely as physical campuses but as intellectual incubators where future decision-makers develop worldviews and competencies. Embedding sustainability principles within curricula across disciplines ensures that graduates enter professional fields equipped with both technical knowledge and normative frameworks that prioritize environmental stewardship. Some institutions have established graduation requirements mandating sustainability-focused coursework, while others have infused environmental considerations throughout existing programs. Architecture students at the Rhode Island School of Design, for instance, are required to complete projects using cradle-to-cradle design principles, considering the full lifecycle environmental impact of their creations. Business schools increasingly incorporate sustainable supply chain management and industrial ecology into core curricula, preparing future corporate leaders to implement waste reduction strategies at organizational scales.

Living laboratories initiatives blur boundaries between operational improvements and pedagogical opportunities, transforming campus sustainability projects into experiential learning platforms. Students engage directly with institutional waste challenges through research projects, internships, and applied coursework that generate actionable solutions while developing practical competencies. The University of British Columbia’s Social Ecological Economic Development Studies (SEEDS) program has produced over 300 student-led sustainability projects addressing campus waste challenges, from optimizing collection logistics to analyzing behavioral interventions. These initiatives provide institutions with cost-effective consulting while offering students authentic problem-solving experiences that transcend abstract textbook learning. The pedagogical value extends beyond technical skills to encompass collaborative capacities and systems literacy – understanding how interventions in one domain cascade through interconnected systems.

The concept of organizational culture as a determinant of waste behavior has gained recognition among scholars of institutional sustainability. Culture encompasses the shared assumptions, values, and practices that constitute “how things are done” within an organization. Institutions with deeply embedded disposability cultures – where convenience takes precedence over conservation and newness is privileged over longevity – face substantial challenges in implementing waste reduction initiatives, as these efforts conflict with prevailing norms. Conversely, institutions that cultivate cultures of environmental consciousness through consistent leadership communication, visible commitment of resources, and alignment of incentive structures create conditions where sustainable practices become self-reinforcing. Research on organizational change management suggests that cultural transformation requires sustained, multi-faceted interventions: symbolic actions by institutional leaders demonstrating prioritization of environmental values, structural changes that embed sustainability into decision-making processes and accountability mechanisms, and grassroots initiatives that foster bottom-up ownership of environmental objectives.

The role of governance structures in enabling or constraining waste reduction efforts warrants examination. Traditional university governance often distributes authority across multiple semi-autonomous units – academic departments, facilities management, dining services, residence operations – each operating according to distinct priorities and performance metrics. This fragmented governance impedes the coordinated action required for systemic waste reduction. Some institutions have addressed this challenge by establishing sustainability coordination offices with authority to convene cross-functional teams, access centralized funding for campus-wide initiatives, and implement standardized policies. Others have adopted sustainability-focused budget models that internalize environmental costs, creating financial incentives for units to minimize waste. The University of New Hampshire’s EcoLine fund, for instance, charges departments for waste disposal while offering rebates for diversion, directly linking operational decisions to budget outcomes and fostering entrepreneurial problem-solving around waste reduction.

Technological innovation continues to expand possibilities for waste management in educational settings. Smart waste systems equipped with sensors monitor bin capacity and contamination rates, enabling optimized collection routes and identifying locations requiring additional education or infrastructure. Artificial intelligence applications can analyze waste stream data to predict seasonal patterns, evaluate intervention effectiveness, and identify anomalies requiring investigation. Some universities have implemented automated sorting systems using machine learning to separate recyclables from contaminated materials with greater accuracy than manual sorting. However, technology scholars caution against techno-optimism that positions technological solutions as sufficient absent behavioral and systemic changes. The most effective approaches integrate technological tools within comprehensive strategies that address cultural, behavioral, and structural dimensions.

The diffusion of innovation from pioneering institutions to broader higher education constitutes a critical challenge for scaling waste reduction impacts. While exemplary programs at well-resourced universities demonstrate what is possible, translating these models to institutions with different characteristics, resources, and contexts requires careful adaptation. Professional networks such as the Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education (AASHE) facilitate knowledge exchange, providing platforms for institutions to share innovations, learn from others’ experiences, and access tools for assessing progress. The STARS rating system (Sustainability Tracking, Assessment & Rating System) establishes standardized metrics enabling comparative assessment and fostering healthy competition among institutions. However, critics note that prevailing models often reflect the priorities and contexts of affluent institutions in developed nations, potentially limiting applicability to resource-constrained universities in developing regions where waste challenges, infrastructure capacities, and cultural contexts differ substantially.

Ultimately, the significance of waste reduction in higher education transcends the environmental benefits achieved within campus boundaries. Universities function as influential societal actors whose practices and priorities shape broader norms, influence policy discourse, and prepare future leaders. Institutions that successfully model comprehensive waste minimization demonstrate feasibility, develop transferable knowledge, and cultivate human capital equipped to advance sustainability agendas across sectors. The transformation of higher education’s relationship with waste from a peripheral operational concern to a central dimension of institutional mission reflects evolving understandings of universities’ societal obligations in an era defined by ecological constraints and the imperative of sustainable development.

Các trường đại học hàng đầu triển khai chương trình giảm thiểu rác thải và nền kinh tế tuần hoàn

Questions 27-31

Choose the correct letter, A, B, C or D.

27. According to the passage, circular economy principles in universities focus on:
    A. increasing waste production to create jobs
    B. designing products and systems to eliminate waste from the beginning
    C. building more landfills on campus
    D. exporting waste to other countries

28. The University of California’s zero waste strategy includes:
    A. only focusing on recycling programs
    B. eliminating all campus dining services
    C. upstream interventions like renegotiating procurement contracts
    D. banning all students from campus

29. Living laboratories initiatives are valuable because they:
    A. replace traditional classrooms entirely
    B. combine operational improvements with student learning opportunities
    C. cost more money than conventional programs
    D. focus only on theoretical knowledge

30. According to the passage, fragmented governance in universities:
    A. improves waste reduction efforts
    B. has no effect on sustainability
    C. hinders coordinated action for waste reduction
    D. should be maintained permanently

31. The author’s view on technological solutions for waste management is that:
    A. they are completely ineffective and should be abandoned
    B. they can solve all waste problems independently
    C. they work best when integrated with behavioral and systemic changes
    D. universities should never invest in technology

Questions 32-36

Complete each sentence with the correct ending, A-H, below.

32. Architecture students at Rhode Island School of Design
33. The University of New Hampshire’s EcoLine fund
34. The STARS rating system
35. Traditional university governance structures
36. Smart waste systems with sensors

A. distribute authority across multiple semi-autonomous units that operate independently.

B. enables comparative assessment between different institutions using standardized metrics.

C. monitor bin capacity and optimize collection routes for improved efficiency.

D. must complete projects considering full lifecycle environmental impacts.

E. eliminates the need for any human involvement in waste management.

F. charges departments for waste disposal while offering rebates for diversion.

G. prohibits students from using any technology on campus.

H. requires all students to major in environmental science.

Questions 37-40

Answer the questions below.

Choose NO MORE THAN THREE WORDS from the passage for each answer.

37. What term describes the approach that treats waste as feedstock for future production rather than an endpoint?

38. What type of studies help universities identify specific waste materials requiring targeted intervention?

39. What framework do students develop through living laboratory initiatives that helps them understand how changes in one area affect interconnected systems?

40. What professional network facilitates knowledge exchange among institutions working on sustainability?

---

Answer Keys – Đáp Án

PASSAGE 1: Questions 1-13

1. TRUE
2. TRUE
3. TRUE
4. FALSE
5. TRUE
6. school garden / campus vegetable garden
7. online platforms
8. water refill stations
9. supply exchanges
10. B
11. C
12. B
13. C

PASSAGE 2: Questions 14-26

14. B
15. B
16. B
17. C
18. B
19. cumulative effect
20. diffusion of responsibility
21. Social norming / Social norms
22. intention-action gap
23. choice architecture
24. NO
25. YES
26. NOT GIVEN

PASSAGE 3: Questions 27-40

27. B
28. C
29. B
30. C
31. C
32. D
33. F
34. B
35. A
36. C
37. circular economy principles
38. waste characterization studies
39. systems literacy
40. AASHE / Association for the Advancement of Sustainability

---

Giải Thích Đáp Án Chi Tiết

Passage 1 – Giải Thích

Câu 1: TRUE

• Dạng câu hỏi: True/False/Not Given
• Từ khóa: educational institutions, various types of waste, food, paper
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 1, dòng 3-4
• Giải thích: Bài đọc nói rõ “Schools, colleges, and universities generate substantial amounts of waste daily, ranging from food scraps in cafeterias to paper in classrooms and plastic bottles across campuses.” Đây là paraphrase trực tiếp của câu hỏi.

Câu 2: TRUE

• Dạng câu hỏi: True/False/Not Given
• Từ khóa: Jefferson Elementary School, reduced waste, more than half, two years
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 2, dòng 5-6
• Giải thích: Bài viết nói “achieved a 75% reduction in landfill waste within two years”. 75% là hơn 50% (more than half), câu hỏi đúng.

Câu 3: TRUE

• Dạng câu hỏi: True/False/Not Given
• Từ khóa: composting programs, reduce methane emissions, landfills
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 3, dòng 3-4
• Giải thích: Passage nói “Rather than sending this organic material to landfills where it generates harmful methane gas, many schools have established on-site composting systems.” Điều này xác nhận rằng compost giúp giảm khí methane.

Câu 4: FALSE

• Dạng câu hỏi: True/False/Not Given
• Từ khóa: all schools, United Kingdom, completely digital
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 4
• Giải thích: Bài chỉ đề cập “Brookfield High School in the United Kingdom” – một trường cụ thể, không phải tất cả các trường. Từ “all” làm cho câu này sai.

Câu 5: TRUE

• Dạng câu hỏi: True/False/Not Given
• Từ khóa: Stanford Middle School, saves money, reusable cafeteria items
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 5, dòng 5-6
• Giải thích: “the school calculated savings of approximately $12,000 annually” – xác nhận họ tiết kiệm tiền hàng năm.

Câu 6: school garden / campus vegetable garden

• Dạng câu hỏi: Sentence Completion
• Từ khóa: Melbourne Grammar School, compost, grow vegetables
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 3, dòng 7-8
• Giải thích: “The compost produced supplies their campus vegetable garden” hoặc có thể viết ngắn hơn là “school garden” – cả hai đều chấp nhận được.

Câu 7: online platforms

• Dạng câu hỏi: Sentence Completion
• Từ khóa: Brookfield High School teachers, share resources
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 4, dòng 5
• Giải thích: “Teachers share resources through online platforms” – đáp án trực tiếp từ bài.

Câu 8: water refill stations

• Dạng câu hỏi: Sentence Completion
• Từ khóa: Riverside University, fifty, refill water bottles
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 6, dòng 4-5
• Giải thích: “leading to the installation of 50 water refill stations” – “50” được paraphrase thành “fifty” trong câu hỏi.

Câu 9: supply exchanges

• Dạng câu hỏi: Sentence Completion
• Từ khóa: students, exchange unused supplies
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 7, dòng 2-3
• Giải thích: “many schools have established supply exchanges where students can donate unused items at year’s end for others to use.”

Câu 10: B

• Dạng câu hỏi: Multiple Choice
• Từ khóa: successful recycling programs, require
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 2, dòng 2-3
• Giải thích: “Successful programs involve educating students and staff about what materials can be recycled, providing clearly labeled containers” – tương ứng với đáp án B.

Câu 11: C

• Dạng câu hỏi: Multiple Choice
• Từ khóa: digital learning materials, help schools
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 4
• Giải thích: “This digital transformation not only reduces waste but also prepares students for technology-driven workplaces” – giảm giấy và chuẩn bị cho nơi làm việc hiện đại.

Câu 12: B

• Dạng câu hỏi: Multiple Choice
• Từ khóa: student environmental clubs, contribute
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 6, dòng 2-3
• Giải thích: “These groups conduct regular waste audits, identifying problem areas and proposing solutions” – khớp với đáp án B.

Câu 13: C

• Dạng câu hỏi: Multiple Choice
• Từ khóa: main benefit, waste reduction
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 8, dòng 2-3
• Giải thích: “Students who participate… develop critical thinking skills and environmental awareness that influences their behavior throughout life” – lợi ích chính là nhận thức môi trường kéo dài suốt đời.

Passage 2 – Giải Thích

Câu 14: B

• Dạng câu hỏi: Multiple Choice
• Từ khóa: tragedy of the commons, schools
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 2, dòng 3-5
• Giải thích: “individuals acting in their own self-interest deplete shared resources… students discard recyclable materials in regular trash bins because the personal inconvenience of proper disposal outweighs their perception” – ưu tiên tiện lợi cá nhân hơn lợi ích môi trường chung.

Câu 15: B

• Dạng câu hỏi: Multiple Choice
• Từ khóa: University of British Columbia, study found
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 3, dòng 7-9
• Giải thích: “clearly assigning ownership of specific waste reduction goals to identifiable groups significantly improved compliance rates” – đưa trách nhiệm cụ thể cho nhóm cải thiện kết quả.

Câu 16: B

• Dạng câu hỏi: Multiple Choice
• Từ khóa: Princeton University, peer-to-peer education, successful
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 4, dòng 5-7
• Giải thích: “This approach proved more effective than top-down administrative mandates because it leveraged the social proof principle – people’s tendency to adopt behaviors they observe in similar others” – sinh viên phản ứng tốt hơn với bạn đồng trang lứa.

Câu 17: C

• Dạng câu hỏi: Multiple Choice
• Từ khóa: intention-action gap, refers to
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 5, dòng 1-3
• Giải thích: “a striking disconnect between environmental attitudes and actual behavior… stated intentions frequently fail to translate into consistent action” – khoảng cách giữa ý định và hành động thực tế.

Câu 18: B

• Dạng câu hỏi: Multiple Choice
• Từ khóa: nudge strategies, work because
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 6, dòng 8-10
• Giải thích: “sustainable behavior becomes far more likely when it requires less thought and effort than unsustainable alternatives” – hành vi bền vững dễ hơn khi cần ít suy nghĩ và nỗ lực.

Câu 19: cumulative effect

• Dạng câu hỏi: Summary Completion
• Từ khóa: underestimate, small actions
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 2, dòng 6
• Giải thích: “humans systematically underestimate the cumulative effect of small actions”

Câu 20: diffusion of responsibility

• Dạng câu hỏi: Summary Completion
• Từ khóa: many people share responsibility, individuals feel less accountable
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 3, tiêu đề và dòng 1
• Giải thích: “The concept of diffusion of responsibility… When responsibility… is shared among many individuals, each person feels less personally accountable.”

Câu 21: Social norming / Social norms

• Dạng câu hỏi: Summary Completion
• Từ khóa: students see peers behaving sustainably, tend to follow
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 4, dòng 1-2
• Giải thích: “Social norming represents a powerful tool… Humans are profoundly influenced by perceived norms”

Câu 22: intention-action gap

• Dạng câu hỏi: Summary Completion
• Từ khóa: disconnect between environmental attitudes and behavior
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 5, dòng 1
• Giải thích: Thuật ngữ được định nghĩa rõ ràng trong đoạn này.

Câu 23: choice architecture

• Dạng câu hỏi: Summary Completion
• Từ khóa: design environments, sustainable choices easiest
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 6, dòng 1-2
• Giải thích: “Addressing the intention-action gap requires strategic choice architecture – deliberately designing physical and informational environments”

Câu 24: NO

• Dạng câu hỏi: Yes/No/Not Given
• Từ khóa: reward systems, lasting environmental commitment
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 7, dòng 2-4
• Giải thích: “such extrinsic motivators may actually undermine long-term commitment to environmental values” – tác giả cho rằng các hệ thống thưởng có thể làm suy yếu cam kết lâu dài, trái ngược với câu hỏi.

Câu 25: YES

• Dạng câu hỏi: Yes/No/Not Given
• Từ khóa: students see tangible results, develop stronger connections
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 7, dòng 8-10
• Giải thích: “Programs that enable students to witness the tangible results of their efforts… help forge these deeper psychological connections” – tác giả đồng ý với ý này.

Câu 26: NOT GIVEN

• Dạng câu hỏi: Yes/No/Not Given
• Từ khóa: all universities, mandatory recycling courses, first-year students
• Vị trí trong bài: Không có thông tin
• Giải thích: Bài viết không đề cập đến việc tất cả các trường đại học nên bắt buộc các khóa học về tái chế cho sinh viên năm nhất.

Nghiên cứu tâm lý học hành vi sinh viên trong việc phân loại và xử lý rác thải tại trường

Passage 3 – Giải Thích

Câu 27: B

• Dạng câu hỏi: Multiple Choice
• Từ khóa: circular economy principles, universities, focus on
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 2, dòng 4-6
• Giải thích: “circular economy principles that treat waste not as an endpoint but as feedstock… designing out waste at the conceptual stage rather than managing it post-creation” – thiết kế để loại bỏ rác thải ngay từ đầu.

Câu 28: C

• Dạng câu hỏi: Multiple Choice
• Từ khóa: University of California, zero waste strategy, includes
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 3, dòng 4-6
• Giải thích: “Rather than focusing solely on downstream waste diversion, their strategy encompasses upstream interventions: renegotiating procurement contracts” – các can thiệp ngược dòng bao gồm đàm phán lại hợp đồng mua sắm.

Câu 29: B

• Dạng câu hỏi: Multiple Choice
• Từ khóa: living laboratories, valuable because
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 5, dòng 1-2
• Giải thích: “Living laboratories initiatives blur boundaries between operational improvements and pedagogical opportunities, transforming campus sustainability projects into experiential learning platforms” – kết hợp cải tiến hoạt động với cơ hội học tập.

Câu 30: C

• Dạng câu hỏi: Multiple Choice
• Từ khóa: fragmented governance, universities
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 7, dòng 3-4
• Giải thích: “This fragmented governance impedes the coordinated action required for systemic waste reduction” – quản trị phân mảnh cản trở hành động phối hợp.

Câu 31: C

• Dạng câu hỏi: Multiple Choice
• Từ khóa: author’s view, technological solutions
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 8, dòng 7-9
• Giải thích: “The most effective approaches integrate technological tools within comprehensive strategies that address cultural, behavioral, and structural dimensions” – công nghệ hoạt động tốt nhất khi kết hợp với thay đổi hành vi và hệ thống.

Câu 32: D

• Dạng câu hỏi: Matching Sentence Endings
• Từ khóa: Architecture students, Rhode Island School of Design
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 4, dòng 7-8
• Giải thích: “Architecture students at the Rhode Island School of Design… are required to complete projects using cradle-to-cradle design principles, considering the full lifecycle environmental impact”

Câu 33: F

• Dạng câu hỏi: Matching Sentence Endings
• Từ khóa: University of New Hampshire’s EcoLine fund
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 7, dòng 8-9
• Giải thích: “EcoLine fund… charges departments for waste disposal while offering rebates for diversion”

Câu 34: B

• Dạng câu hỏi: Matching Sentence Endings
• Từ khóa: STARS rating system
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 9, dòng 4-5
• Giải thích: “The STARS rating system establishes standardized metrics enabling comparative assessment”

Câu 35: A

• Dạng câu hỏi: Matching Sentence Endings
• Từ khóa: Traditional university governance structures
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 7, dòng 2-3
• Giải thích: “Traditional university governance often distributes authority across multiple semi-autonomous units”

Câu 36: C

• Dạng câu hỏi: Matching Sentence Endings
• Từ khóa: Smart waste systems, sensors
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 8, dòng 2-3
• Giải thích: “Smart waste systems equipped with sensors monitor bin capacity and contamination rates, enabling optimized collection routes”

Câu 37: circular economy principles

• Dạng câu hỏi: Short-answer Questions
• Từ khóa: approach, treats waste as feedstock, not endpoint
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 2, dòng 1-2
• Giải thích: “embrace circular economy principles that treat waste not as an endpoint but as feedstock for subsequent production cycles”

Câu 38: waste characterization studies

• Dạng câu hỏi: Short-answer Questions
• Từ khóa: studies, identify specific waste materials, targeted intervention
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 3, dòng 9-10
• Giải thích: “supported by sophisticated waste characterization studies that identify specific material streams requiring targeted intervention”

Câu 39: systems literacy

• Dạng câu hỏi: Short-answer Questions
• Từ khóa: framework, living laboratory, understand changes affect interconnected systems
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 5, dòng 8-9
• Giải thích: “The pedagogical value extends beyond technical skills to encompass collaborative capacities and systems literacy – understanding how interventions in one domain cascade through interconnected systems”

Câu 40: AASHE / Association for the Advancement of Sustainability

• Dạng câu hỏi: Short-answer Questions
• Từ khóa: professional network, facilitates knowledge exchange, sustainability
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 9, dòng 2-3
• Giải thích: “Professional networks such as the Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education (AASHE) facilitate knowledge exchange”

---

Từ Vựng Quan Trọng Theo Passage

Passage 1 – Essential Vocabulary

Từ vựng	Loại từ	Phiên âm	Nghĩa tiếng Việt	Ví dụ từ bài	Collocation
minimize	v	/ˈmɪnɪmaɪz/	giảm thiểu, thu nhỏ	minimize environmental impact	minimize waste, minimize costs
sustainable	adj	/səˈsteɪnəbl/	bền vững, có thể duy trì	sustainable practices	sustainable development, sustainable growth
dramatically	adv	/drəˈmætɪkli/	một cách đáng kể	dramatically reduce their waste output	dramatically increase, dramatically improve
comprehensive	adj	/ˌkɒmprɪˈhensɪv/	toàn diện, bao quát	comprehensive recycling programs	comprehensive approach, comprehensive study
composting	n	/ˈkɒmpɒstɪŋ/	ủ phân hữu cơ	composting programs	composting system, composting facility
closed-loop	adj	/kləʊzd luːp/	vòng khép kín	closed-loop system	closed-loop economy, closed-loop recycling
reusable	adj	/riːˈjuːzəbl/	có thể tái sử dụng	reusable alternatives	reusable containers, reusable bags
durable	adj	/ˈdjʊərəbl/	bền, lâu bền	durable, washable alternatives	durable materials, durable goods
advocacy	n	/ˈædvəkəsi/	vận động, ủng hộ	advocate for policy changes	advocacy group, advocacy campaign
leadership skills	n	/ˈliːdəʃɪp skɪlz/	kỹ năng lãnh đạo	foster leadership skills	develop leadership skills, demonstrate leadership
collaborative consumption	n	/kəˈlæbərətɪv kənˈsʌmpʃn/	tiêu dùng hợp tác	teach about collaborative consumption	collaborative economy, collaborative approach
critical thinking	n	/ˈkrɪtɪkl ˈθɪŋkɪŋ/	tư duy phản biện	develop critical thinking skills	critical thinking abilities, critical thinking approach

Passage 2 – Essential Vocabulary

Từ vựng	Loại từ	Phiên âm	Nghĩa tiếng Việt	Ví dụ từ bài	Collocation
interplay	n	/ˈɪntəpleɪ/	sự tương tác	complex interplay of habits	interplay between, interplay of factors
tragedy of the commons	n phrase	/ˈtrædʒədi əv ðə ˈkɒmənz/	bi kịch của tài nguyên chung	tragedy of the commons phenomenon	classic tragedy, environmental tragedy
cognitive bias	n	/ˈkɒɡnətɪv ˈbaɪəs/	thiên kiến nhận thức	cognitive bias known as present bias	cognitive biases, unconscious bias
temporal discounting	n	/ˈtempərəl dɪsˈkaʊntɪŋ/	chiết khấu thời gian	present bias or temporal discounting	temporal patterns, temporal aspects
diffusion of responsibility	n phrase	/dɪˈfjuːʒn əv rɪˌspɒnsəˈbɪləti/	khuếch tán trách nhiệm	diffusion of responsibility complicates efforts	responsibility diffusion, shared responsibility
accountability	n	/əˌkaʊntəˈbɪləti/	trách nhiệm giải trình	fragmentation of accountability	personal accountability, hold accountable
social norming	n	/ˈsəʊʃl ˈnɔːmɪŋ/	chuẩn mực xã hội	social norming represents a powerful tool	social norms, norm formation
prevailing norm	n	/prɪˈveɪlɪŋ nɔːm/	chuẩn mực phổ biến	establish as the prevailing norm	prevailing attitudes, prevailing conditions
peer-to-peer	adj	/pɪə tə pɪə/	ngang hàng	peer-to-peer education model	peer-to-peer learning, peer-to-peer support
intention-action gap	n phrase	/ɪnˈtenʃn ˈækʃn ɡæp/	khoảng cách ý định-hành động	intention-action gap poses challenge	bridge the gap, close the gap
choice architecture	n	/tʃɔɪs ˈɑːkɪtektʃə/	kiến trúc lựa chọn	strategic choice architecture	design choice architecture, behavioral architecture
nudge strategies	n	/nʌdʒ ˈstrætədʒiz/	chiến lược thúc đẩy nhẹ	nudge strategies recognize humans	nudge theory, gentle nudge
intrinsic motivation	n	/ɪnˈtrɪnsɪk ˌməʊtɪˈveɪʃn/	động lực nội tại	emphasize intrinsic motivations	intrinsic value, intrinsic rewards
extrinsic motivators	n	/ekˈstrɪnsɪk ˈməʊtɪveɪtəz/	yếu tố động viên bên ngoài	extrinsic motivators may undermine commitment	extrinsic factors, extrinsic rewards
cognitive dissonance	n	/ˈkɒɡnətɪv ˈdɪsənəns/	bất hòa nhận thức	cognitive dissonance theory offers insights	experience dissonance, reduce dissonance

Passage 3 – Essential Vocabulary

Từ vựng	Loại từ	Phiên âm	Nghĩa tiếng Việt	Ví dụ từ bài	Collocation
unprecedented	adj	/ʌnˈpresɪdentɪd/	chưa từng có	unprecedented responsibility	unprecedented scale, unprecedented challenges
catalyst	n	/ˈkætəlɪst/	chất xúc tác, tác nhân	potential catalysts for change	catalyst for transformation, act as catalyst
paradigm	n	/ˈpærədaɪm/	mô hình, khuôn mẫu	innovative waste management paradigms	paradigm shift, new paradigm
reconceptualization	n	/ˌriːkənˌseptʃuəlaɪˈzeɪʃn/	tái khái niệm hóa	fundamental reconceptualization	require reconceptualization, conceptual framework
Anthropocene epoch	n phrase	/ˈænθrəpəsiːn ˈiːpɒk/	kỷ nguyên Nhân Sinh	within the Anthropocene epoch	Anthropocene era, geological epoch
circular economy	n	/ˈsɜːkjələr ɪˈkɒnəmi/	nền kinh tế tuần hoàn	embrace circular economy principles	circular economy model, circular approach
systems-thinking	n	/ˈsɪstəmz ˈθɪŋkɪŋ/	tư duy hệ thống	systems-thinking approach	systems approach, holistic thinking
life-cycle assessment	n	/laɪf ˈsaɪkl əˈsesmənt/	đánh giá vòng đời	sophisticated life-cycle assessment	life-cycle analysis, full life-cycle
zero-waste initiatives	n phrase	/ˈzɪərəʊ weɪst ɪˈnɪʃətɪvz/	sáng kiến không rác thải	comprehensive zero-waste initiatives	zero-waste goal, zero-waste strategy
extended producer responsibility	n phrase	/ɪkˈstendɪd prəˈdjuːsə rɪˌspɒnsəˈbɪləti/	trách nhiệm mở rộng của nhà sản xuất	through extended producer responsibility	producer responsibility, manufacturer responsibility
intellectual incubators	n phrase	/ˌɪntəˈlektʃuəl ˈɪŋkjubeɪtəz/	vườn ươm trí tuệ	serve as intellectual incubators	innovation incubator, business incubator
normative frameworks	n phrase	/ˈnɔːmətɪv ˈfreɪmwɜːks/	khung chuẩn mực	develop normative frameworks	normative approach, normative standards
cradle-to-cradle design	n phrase	/ˈkreɪdl tə ˈkreɪdl dɪˈzaɪn/	thiết kế từ nôi đến nôi	using cradle-to-cradle design principles	cradle-to-cradle approach, circular design
living laboratories	n phrase	/ˈlɪvɪŋ ləˈbɒrətriz/	phòng thí nghiệm sống	living laboratories initiatives	living lab concept, experimental space
experiential learning	n	/ɪkˌspɪəriˈenʃl ˈlɜːnɪŋ/	học tập trải nghiệm	experiential learning platforms	experiential education, hands-on learning
organizational culture	n	/ˌɔːɡənaɪˈzeɪʃənl ˈkʌltʃə/	văn hóa tổ chức	organizational culture as determinant	corporate culture, workplace culture
fragmented governance	n	/ˈfræɡmentɪd ˈɡʌvənəns/	quản trị phân mảnh	fragmented governance impedes action	governance structure, governance system
techno-optimism	n	/ˈteknəʊ ˈɒptɪmɪzəm/	chủ nghĩa lạc quan công nghệ	caution against techno-optimism	technological optimism, blind optimism
diffusion of innovation	n phrase	/dɪˈfjuːʒn əv ˌɪnəˈveɪʃn/	khuếch tán sáng tạo	diffusion of innovation from pioneering institutions	innovation diffusion, spread of innovation

---

Kết Bài

Chủ đề giảm thiểu lãng phí trong các cơ sở giáo dục không chỉ là một đề tài nóng trong IELTS Reading mà còn phản ánh xu hướng toàn cầu về phát triển bền vững và trách nhiệm môi trường. Qua bộ đề thi hoàn chỉnh này với ba passages từ dễ đến khó, bạn đã được trải nghiệm đầy đủ các dạng câu hỏi thường gặp trong kỳ thi IELTS thực tế.

Passage 1 giới thiệu những chiến lược cơ bản và dễ hiểu về tái chế, composting và chuyển đổi số trong trường học. Passage 2 đào sâu vào các yếu tố tâm lý phức tạp ảnh hưởng đến hành vi quản lý rác thải, từ “bi kịch của tài nguyên chung” đến “khoảng cách ý định-hành động”. Passage 3 mang đến góc nhìn học thuật cao về nền kinh tế tuần hoàn và cách các trường đại học hàng đầu đang dẫn dắt thay đổi hệ thống.

Với 40 câu hỏi đa dạng cùng đáp án chi tiết và giải thích cụ thể, bạn không chỉ kiểm tra được trình độ hiện tại mà còn hiểu rõ cách paraphrase, xác định vị trí thông tin và áp dụng chiến lược làm bài hiệu quả. Hơn 50 từ vựng chuyên ngành được tổng hợp kèm phiên âm, nghĩa và collocation sẽ giúp bạn tự tin hơn khi gặp các chủ đề môi trường – giáo dục trong kỳ thi thật.

Để đạt kết quả tốt nhất trong IELTS Reading, hãy luyện tập thường xuyên với các đề thi mẫu chất lượng như thế này và phân tích kỹ lưỡng từng câu trả lời. Đừng chỉ tập trung vào việc tìm đáp án đúng mà hãy hiểu tại sao đó là đáp án đúng và làm thế nào để nhận diện nhanh các dấu hiệu trong bài đọc. Chúc bạn ôn tập hiệu quả và đạt band điểm cao trong kỳ thi IELTS sắp tới!

Như một chuyên gia đã đề cập trong tác phẩm về How to promote sustainability in education, việc tích hợp các giá trị bền vững vào giáo dục không chỉ mang lại lợi ích cho môi trường mà còn tạo ra những thế hệ công dân toàn cầu có trách nhiệm. Bạn có thể tìm hiểu thêm về cách các trường đại học đang áp dụng những chiến lược này thông qua bài viết How sustainability education is shaping future leaders, nơi khám phá sâu hơn về mối liên hệ giữa giáo dục môi trường và phát triển kỹ năng lãnh đạo. Nếu bạn quan tâm đến các mô hình phát triển bền vững trong lĩnh vực khác, đừng bỏ qua The rise of smart agriculture in rural development, một ví dụ điển hình về cách công nghệ và tư duy hệ thống đang thay đổi cách chúng ta tiếp cận các vấn đề môi trường phức tạp.