2020考研英語(yǔ)閱讀理解精讀100篇：Unit 79

Unit 79

The best public higher education in the world is to be found at the University of California（UC）. This claim is backed up by Shanghai Jiao Tong University in China, which provides an authoritative ranking of research universities. The UC’s campus at Berkeley ranks third behind two private universities, Harvard and Stanford. Several of the other ten UC sites, such as Los Angeles and San Diego, are not far behind. Californians are justifiably proud. It is therefore no small matter that this glory may be about to end. “We are in irreversible decline,” says Sandra Faber, a professor of astrophysics at UC Santa Cruz who has inadvertently become a mouthpiece for a fed-up faculty. University excellence, she says, “took decades to build. It takes a year to destroy it.”

California has been suffering serial budget crises, the latest of which was resolved last month in a rather desperate deal between the governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger, and the legislature. It contained huge cuts, including $2 billion lopped from higher education. The UC alone has lost a cumulative $813m of state funding in the last fiscal year and the current one, a cut of 20%. The second-tier California State University（Cal State）, with 23 campuses the largest in the country, and the third-tier community colleges have also been clobbered.

The cuts threaten the legacy of two visionaries, Edmund “Pat” Brown, governor from 1959 to 1967, and Clark Kerr, who was in charge of the UC during those years. Kerr envisioned the state’s public universities as “bait to be dangled in front of industry, with drawing power greater than low taxes or cheap labour.” In a 1960 master-plan he created the three-tiered system.

His ambition was simple. First, to educate as many young Californians as affordably as possible. The best students would go to the UC, the next lot to Cal State and the rest to community colleges with the possibility of trading up. Second, to attract academic superstars. Kerr went about this like a talent scout, and his successors have continued the practice. The UC campuses have collectively produced more Nobel laureates than any other university.

But the master-plan has been under strain for years. State spending per student in the UC system, adjusted for inflation, has fallen by 40% since 1990, says Mark Yudof, the current UC president. The Public Policy Institute of California, a non-partisan think-tank, projects that California’s economy will face a shortfall of 1m college graduates by 2025, depressing the prosperity of the entire state. Public universities, which award 75% of all the state’s bachelor degrees, will be largely responsible.

Academic excellence is likely to be the first victim. Both the UC and Cal State are planning to send professors and staff on leave, cram more students into classrooms and offer fewer courses. Attracting and keeping academic stars, and the research dollars that usually follow them, will become much harder. It is already happening, says Ms Faber. She recently hired three world-class assistant professors whose salaries are now at risk. Other universities have begun to get in touch with them, she says, and they will probably leave. Their best students may go with them. “We are eating our seed corn,” the professor laments.

注（1）：本文選自Economist；

注（2）：本文習(xí)題命題模仿對(duì)象為2005年真題Text 1。

1. In the opening paragraph, the author introduces his topic by ______.

A) explaining a phenomenon

B) justifying an assumption

C) posing a contrast

D) making a comparison

2. The statement “It takes a year to destroy it.” （Line 8, Paragraph 1） implies that ______.

A) it usually takes one year to destroy university excellence

B) university excellence is much harder to build than to destroy

C) it takes a short time to destroy university excellence

D) to build university excellence is more time-consuming than to destroy it

3. Clark Kerr designed the three-tiered system for California in order to ______.

A) make public higher education more available and recruit more talents

B) fulfill his job as the head of UC when Edmund “Pat” Brown was the governor

C) make public higher education more attractive than low taxes and cheap labour

D) produce as many Nobel laureates as possible

4. The statistics in Paragraph 5 help us draw a conclusion that ______.

A) the Californian public universities are suffering from financial crises

B) California will soon face the embarrassing situation of talent shortage

C) due to lacking fund, the Californian public universities will have fewer graduates

D) California is going to sink in a long-term economic recession

5. What can we infer from the last paragraph?

A) The UC and Cal State are forced to fire some faulty and staff.

B) The Californian higher education may lose its core competitiveness.

C) The UC and Cal State are actively fighting against the financial constraint.

D) The Californian higher education will lose all its best professors and students.

篇章剖析

本文討論的主要問(wèn)題是，經(jīng)濟(jì)危機(jī)給加州帶來(lái)的財(cái)政限制將給加州卓越的高等教育帶來(lái)久遠(yuǎn)的負(fù)面影響。第一、二段先介紹了加州大學(xué)在全世界聲譽(yù)卓著，但現(xiàn)在可能將失去這種榮譽(yù)，原因在于加州政府預(yù)算大幅削減，其中包括教育支出；第三、四段介紹了加州教育體系創(chuàng)始人的辦學(xué)理念；最后兩段進(jìn)一步分析了削減預(yù)算對(duì)加州的公立大學(xué)造成的影響，包括學(xué)生的減少及學(xué)術(shù)水準(zhǔn)的降低。

詞匯注釋

astrophysics /??str???f?z?ks/ n. 天體物理學(xué)

inadvertently /??n?d?v??t?ntli/ adv. 無(wú)心地，非故意地

mouthpiece /?ma?θpi?s/ n. 代言人；喉舌

lop /l?p/ v. 砍，刪，削減

cumulative /?kju?mjul?t?v/ adj. 累積的，累加的

clobber /?kl?b?/ v. 痛打；擊倒

legacy /?leg?si/ n. 遺產(chǎn)；遺贈(zèng)

dangle /?d??gl/ v. 懸擺，懸蕩

scout /ska?t/ n. 球探、星探等人才發(fā)掘者

laureate /?l?r??t/ n. 得獎(jiǎng)?wù)?

partisan /?pɑ?t??z?n/ adj. 黨派的

cram /kr?m/ v. 填滿(mǎn)，塞滿(mǎn)

難句突破

The Public Policy Institute of California, a non-partisan think-tank, projects that California’s economy will face a shortfall of 1m college graduates by 2025, depressing the prosperity of the entire state.

主體句式：The Public Policy Institute of California projects that...

結(jié)構(gòu)分析：本句的主體句式比較簡(jiǎn)單，只不過(guò)中間夾了一個(gè)同位語(yǔ)a non-partisan think-tank，用來(lái)對(duì)前面提到的institute進(jìn)行補(bǔ)充說(shuō)明。that引導(dǎo)了一個(gè)賓語(yǔ)從句，該從句的主干是California’s economy will face a shortfall，句子最后的depressing...部分是分詞作狀語(yǔ)，說(shuō)明前面提到的問(wèn)題將造成的后果。

句子譯文：無(wú)黨派智囊團(tuán)，加州公共政策研究所預(yù)測(cè)，到2025年，加州將面臨短缺100萬(wàn)大學(xué)畢業(yè)生的問(wèn)題，這將給整個(gè)州的經(jīng)濟(jì)前景蒙上一層陰影。

題目分析

1. C 論證方式題。文中第一段先描述了加州大學(xué)一直以來(lái)在世界上享有盛譽(yù)，緊接著指出，現(xiàn)在這種榮耀可能即將結(jié)束。這其實(shí)是把加州大學(xué)的前后情況做了對(duì)比，因此C是正確答案。

2. B 語(yǔ)義題。引文是第一段最后桑德拉·費(fèi)伯說(shuō)的話(huà)，這句話(huà)前面說(shuō)道“創(chuàng)造卓越需要幾十年的時(shí)間”，下面馬上指出“毀掉它卻只需要一年”，這并不是說(shuō)一般要?dú)У舸髮W(xué)的卓越聲譽(yù)需要一年時(shí)間，因此可以首先排除A項(xiàng)。本題的難點(diǎn)在于C項(xiàng)和D項(xiàng)的從表面上看來(lái)都沒(méi)有問(wèn)題，關(guān)鍵是要理解文中對(duì)比的隱含意義，桑德拉·費(fèi)伯在這里要強(qiáng)調(diào)的是，毀掉一所大學(xué)的卓越聲譽(yù)要遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)比建立這種聲譽(yù)容易得多，所以B才是最佳答案。

3. A 細(xì)節(jié)題。本題主要針對(duì)文章第四段，該段第一句話(huà)就提到His ambition was simple，可見(jiàn)接下來(lái)要討論他建立這個(gè)三層體系的目的，主要有兩點(diǎn)：首先，在能力可承受的范圍內(nèi)，盡量為更多的加州年輕人提供受教育的機(jī)會(huì)；其次，吸引學(xué)術(shù)界的超級(jí)明星。各個(gè)選項(xiàng)中只有A項(xiàng)最好地概括了這兩點(diǎn)。

4. C 推理題。本題主要針對(duì)文章第五段，這一段主要有三個(gè)數(shù)據(jù)，分別是40%、100萬(wàn)、75%，分別指教育財(cái)政支出的下降比例、畢業(yè)生的短缺數(shù)量和加州公立大學(xué)授予學(xué)位的比例。首先看A項(xiàng)，該項(xiàng)只與第一個(gè)數(shù)據(jù)40%有關(guān)，不夠全面，所以可以排除。B項(xiàng)的描述不夠準(zhǔn)確，原文說(shuō)的是到2025年，并非很快就要面臨大學(xué)畢業(yè)生短缺的問(wèn)題，因此可以排除該項(xiàng)。雖然原文中提到“這將給整個(gè)州的經(jīng)濟(jì)前景蒙上一層陰影”，但這并不意味著加州的經(jīng)濟(jì)會(huì)長(zhǎng)期陷入蕭條，所以D項(xiàng)也不正確。只有C項(xiàng)比較好地概括了資金短缺和由此導(dǎo)致的未來(lái)畢業(yè)生短缺的情況，所以C是正確答案。

5. B 推理題。本題考查對(duì)文章最后一段的理解。A項(xiàng)的描述不準(zhǔn)確，因?yàn)樵奶岬降膐n leave是“休假”的意思，而不是說(shuō)要解雇教職員工。C項(xiàng)針對(duì)的是該段中提到的各種應(yīng)對(duì)措施，但是我們可以看出這并不是積極的應(yīng)對(duì)，而是無(wú)奈的舉措，而且最后一段重點(diǎn)要說(shuō)明的問(wèn)題是資金的短缺將導(dǎo)致人才的流失和學(xué)術(shù)水平的降低，所以該項(xiàng)也不正確。文章最后一句引用了費(fèi)伯教授的話(huà)“我們現(xiàn)在可是在吃玉米種呀！”這句話(huà)的意思是我們現(xiàn)在根本沒(méi)有為今后著想，而D選項(xiàng)的表述中說(shuō)lose all its best professors and students，all一詞過(guò)于絕對(duì)，所以也不正確。從前面提到的人才流失和學(xué)術(shù)水平降低，可以推斷這將必然影響這些大學(xué)的核心競(jìng)爭(zhēng)力，因此B是正確答案。

參考譯文

要說(shuō)世界上最好的公立高等教育恐怕非加州大學(xué)莫屬，這一說(shuō)法得到了由中國(guó)上海交通大學(xué)發(fā)布的一份研究型大學(xué)權(quán)威排名的鼎力支持。在這份排名中，加州大學(xué)伯克利分校位居第三，僅次于哈佛大學(xué)和斯坦福大學(xué)這兩所私立大學(xué)。而加州大學(xué)其他十所分校中還有另外幾所，如洛杉磯和圣地亞哥分校的排名也相當(dāng)靠前。加州人完全有理由因此而感到自豪。這也是為何我們不能把這種榮耀可能行將終結(jié)視為小事。“我們的處境正在不可逆轉(zhuǎn)地日益惡化?！奔又荽髮W(xué)圣克魯斯分校的天體物理學(xué)教授桑德拉·費(fèi)伯說(shuō)，她的話(huà)道出了教職員工的心聲，目前他們已經(jīng)怨聲載道。談及大學(xué)的卓越，費(fèi)伯說(shuō)：“我們花了幾十年的時(shí)間來(lái)創(chuàng)造，但毀掉它卻只需要一年”。

加州一直處于一系列預(yù)算危機(jī)之中，最近的一次直到上個(gè)月州長(zhǎng)阿諾德·施瓦辛格與立法機(jī)關(guān)達(dá)成了一項(xiàng)幾乎令人絕望的協(xié)定而得以解決。根據(jù)該協(xié)定，加州預(yù)算大幅削減，其中高等教育部門(mén)的預(yù)算被砍掉了20億美元。光是加州大學(xué)就在上一財(cái)年累積喪失了8.13億美元國(guó)家基金，本財(cái)年則被削減了20%。處于第二層級(jí)的加州州立大學(xué)有23個(gè)分校，是全美最大的州立大學(xué)系統(tǒng)，它與處于第三層級(jí)的社區(qū)大學(xué)都在財(cái)政上遭受了沉重的打擊。

這些削減威脅到兩位富有遠(yuǎn)見(jiàn)的人士留下的遺產(chǎn)，他們是1959至1967年任加州州長(zhǎng)的埃德蒙·“帕特”·布朗，和那幾年加州大學(xué)的負(fù)責(zé)人克拉克·克爾?？藸栴A(yù)見(jiàn)到加州的公立大學(xué)是“實(shí)業(yè)面前晃來(lái)晃去的誘餌，比低稅率或廉價(jià)勞動(dòng)力更具吸引力。”在一份1960年做出的整體規(guī)劃中，他創(chuàng)造了三個(gè)層級(jí)的體系。

他的目標(biāo)很簡(jiǎn)單。首先，在能力可承受的范圍內(nèi)，盡量為更多的加州年輕人提供受教育的機(jī)會(huì)。最優(yōu)秀的學(xué)生入讀加州大學(xué)，較為優(yōu)秀的人就讀加州州立大學(xué)，其余人則進(jìn)入社區(qū)大學(xué)，而且也有可能升入前兩個(gè)層級(jí)的大學(xué)。其次，吸引學(xué)術(shù)界的超級(jí)明星。克爾像人才發(fā)掘者那樣開(kāi)展了這項(xiàng)工作，其繼任者也紛紛效仿。加州大學(xué)各分校造就的諾貝爾獎(jiǎng)獲得者總?cè)藬?shù)比任何一所大學(xué)都要多。

但是，這個(gè)三層級(jí)的規(guī)劃多年來(lái)都面臨著各種壓力。加州大學(xué)現(xiàn)任校長(zhǎng)馬克·尤多夫表示，自1990年以來(lái)，按通貨膨脹因素進(jìn)行調(diào)整后，分?jǐn)偟郊又荽髮W(xué)體系內(nèi)每個(gè)學(xué)生的州財(cái)政支出下降了40%。無(wú)黨派智囊團(tuán)，加州公共政策研究所預(yù)測(cè)，到2025年，加州將面臨短缺100萬(wàn)大學(xué)畢業(yè)生的問(wèn)題，這將給整個(gè)州的經(jīng)濟(jì)前景蒙上一層陰影。授予該州75%學(xué)士學(xué)位的公立大學(xué)將對(duì)此負(fù)有主要責(zé)任。

首先犧牲掉的就是學(xué)術(shù)水準(zhǔn)。加州大學(xué)和加州州立大學(xué)正計(jì)劃讓教授和工作人員休假、擴(kuò)大班級(jí)規(guī)模，并減少課程數(shù)量。要想吸引并留住學(xué)術(shù)明星以及隨他們而來(lái)的研究資金將更為困難。費(fèi)伯女士說(shuō)，現(xiàn)在這個(gè)問(wèn)題已經(jīng)出現(xiàn)了。她最近聘請(qǐng)了三位世界一流的助理教授，但現(xiàn)在他們的工資可能不保。她說(shuō)，其他大學(xué)已經(jīng)開(kāi)始與他們接洽，他們很可能會(huì)離開(kāi)加州大學(xué)，而他們最優(yōu)秀的學(xué)生也可能隨之而去。費(fèi)伯教授感嘆道：“我們現(xiàn)在可是在吃玉米種呀（根本不替今后著想）”。