个人拙见：
1. 原版故事情节线和逻辑线清晰，但题目改编后的语言逻辑和表达令人困惑；2.无论改题还是选题，命题都应谨慎。
以下是题目分析：
（该题目原文来自一篇外国故事，首次改编来自于2024年出版的国内某教辅七选五百题刷题册，首次作为试题引用出现是在2024年宝鸡市的一份月考题，2026年青岛二模组卷选题使用了这道题目。）
文章类型：亲情故事类记叙文
核心故事线：父亲爱好广泛→ 童年一起收藏麦穗便士→ 父亲97岁离世 → 作者临终求一个来自父亲的“信号” → 整理衣物掉落1928年麦穗便士 → 邻居又找到两枚同款便士给作者
完整英文原文《A Wheat Penny Sign From Dad》，建议无论是老师还是同学们都看一看：
As a child growing up, I had many paths to walk from adolescence to adulthood. I was blessed with a father who guided me well, and he had countless hobbies throughout his long life. He never tired of sharing his passions with anyone who would listen.
One of his greatest loves was collecting old coins, especially Lincoln Wheat Cents — pennies minted between 1909 and 1958, affectionately called “Wheaties” by collectors. Inspired by him, I spent my childhood chasing pennies: hunting for change in stores, bending down to pick them off sidewalks, and carefully checking every coin to see if it was a rare Wheat penny. Some old Wheat Cents held great monetary value, but for me, the true joy lay in the simple search itself.
My father passed away peacefully last week, at the age of nearly 97. Though we grieved his loss, there was no sadness in his passing; he lived a full, rich, and meaningful life. In his final moments, I leaned close to his ear and whispered a quiet wish: I hoped he would send me a small, clear sign that he was still near, after he left us.
如果老师或同学对38题，以及其前后文的表达连贯性感到困惑，那么现在对比原文和试题，就可以知道为何会有如此感受了。
此处的原版故事语言自然流畅，该段尾句中，一个同位语从句“ that he was still near, after he left us”既解释了“sign”的含义，又使得这个“sign”给后文的“a 1928 Lincoln Wheat penny”埋下了自然的伏笔，原文故事情节的呼应已经非常明确。
而改编后的句子“I needed a sign after he left us”删掉了同位语从句，在语言表达上，既没有把非常重要的“what sign”交代明白，其次，为了特意出一道答案为F的38题，使得语言“看似前后呼应，实则赘余”。反推一下，改编者是想考察“It”对“sign”的指代，以及“1928 Lincoln Wheat penny”的前后呼应。
但改编者似乎并没有弄清楚这两个含义的区别：原文故事中的同位语从句是解释“what sign”，而改编后的F选项成了“什么东西可以作为sign”。这也是为什么F选项如此突兀且赘余，看似前后呼应了，实际语言表达已经失去了连贯性。
题目编辑为了适配七选五题型，删减了描写，保留了关键剧情，这没有问题，但是应当谨慎考虑删添的语句，不应以牺牲语言表达流畅性和逻辑性为代价。
如果非要在此段改编一道题出来，有没有更恰当的改法呢？个人拙见，若非要此处加上一个空，或许把原本被删去而造成表意不明的“that he was still near”改编为选项会更加合适。
说白了，大家作为老师，都具备了“就着答案讲题的”基本功了，对着答案很容易反推出出题人的出题逻辑，但很多时候，学生也许不是不能理解为什么一道题可以是这个标准答案，而是，为什么自己的答案是不对的，又或者像这道题目，“老师，为什么我觉得这个题很怪”。对于成绩优秀的学生，更是如此。
老师也好，教研组也好，这两个身份不该代表权威。老师应当永远跟学生一起反思，一起进步，让自己的对于题目的理解和判断更加敏锐。更何况，这其实是一道从百道七选五练习册中引用来的题目，一份练习册题量有了，质不见得都好。
但作为选题组卷者，是不是也应该同时考虑语言本身的逻辑和流畅，以及学生答题时会碰到的实际问题，而不是对着一份标准答案和解析，片面地考虑“这个选项可以考察代词和前后呼应”。当改编后的题目语言变得“非人话”，为题考题是否还有意义和价值呢？是否还能符合新英语改革对于学生语言运用能力的期盼呢？
（原文后文内容）The very next day, my sister and I sorted through his old clothes to pack them away. Suddenly, something slipped from a jacket pocket and clattered to the floor. It was a single penny — a 1928 Lincoln Wheat penny. No one could say how long it had been hidden in that pocket. Some might dismiss it as pure coincidence, but to me, it was unmistakable. The fact that it was a Wheat penny, the very coin we both loved, confirmed what my heart already knew: this was my father’s sign, letting me know he was still watching over me. It could have stayed tucked away in the clothes forever, yet it found its way straight to me.
A few days later, I told this tender story to my neighbor. At first, he listened quietly and did not say much. But just a short time later, he returned to my home with a whole bag of old pennies he had collected over the years. When he sorted through them, he found two more 1928 Wheat pennies — one for each of my sisters.
My father is no longer physically with us, but his love and spirit remain, gently surrounding us still.
（看到原文最后一句话，顺带一提，高考英语七选五真题中，若考察到记叙文或者夹叙夹议类文章，会结合时态挖空。虽然试题中给删掉了，不过以这篇文章为例，叙事是过去时，最后的感悟和总结则通常是现在时，若保留最后一段，并改编设空，非常符合高考英语。同学们，小技巧啊～）
文章的最后，给大家附上这篇七选五试题：
关于英语内容的分享，公众号持续更新，欢迎关注Yvonne，一起进步！
