Directions:

    Read the following text. Choose the best word(s) for each numbered blank and mark A, B, C or D on the ANSWER SHEET. (10 points)

    _1_ job applications to eliminate discrimination is not easy. Ten big employers in the public and private sectors—including the civil service, HSBC and Deloitte—have agreed to start _2_ on a “name-blind” basis in Britain; others may also follow suit. In such schemes, those drawing up shortlists of applicants cannot see their _3_ , with the aim of _4_ racial and sexual bias. But do they work?

    In France a law passed in 2006 made the anonymising of applicants’ CVs _5_ for firms of over 50 employees. But the government was slow in laying _6_ the conditions for how the law would operate, and only started _7_ it last year. In Sweden and the Netherlands there have been some trials. Discrimination  against  job  applicants  based  on  their  names  is  well _8_,  particularly  among ethnic minorities. An experiment in Germany found that candidates with German-sounding names were 14% more likely to be called _9_ an interview than candidates with Turkish ones. A review of various studies, by the Institute for the Study of Labour (IZA) , a German outfit, found that anonymised job applications _10_ the chances of ethnic-minority candidates being invited to a / an _11_ . A Swedish study found that it led to more _12_  candidates being  hired.

    However, the results from other trials are not _13_ . A second Swedish experiment found that only women, not immigrants, were boosted by anonymous recruitment. According to the IZA, experiments in the Netherlands showed no _14_ in the  likelihood  of  ethnic-minority  candidates being offered a job if their CVs were seen anonymously, suggesting that discrimination had _15_ at the interview stage.

    Ensuring