2018年全國(guó)英語(yǔ)等級(jí)考試一級(jí)閱讀理解模擬題（8）

　　Dropouts for Ph. D. s

　　Educators are seriously concerned aboutthe high rate of dropouts among the doctor of philosophy candidates and theconsequent loss of talent to a nation in need of Ph. D. s. Some have placed thedropouts loss as high as 50 percent. The extent of the loss was, however,largely a matter of expert guessing. Last week a well-rounded study waspublished. It was published. It was based on 22,000 questionnaires sent toformer graduate students who were enrolled in 24 universities and it seemed toshow many past fears to be groundless.

　　The dropouts rate was found to be 31per cent, and in most cases the dropouts, while not completing the Ph. D.requirement, went on to productive work. They are not only doing wellfinancially, but, according to the report, are not far below the income levelsof those who went on to complete their doctorates.

　　Discussing the study lastweek, Dr. Tucker said the project was initiated ‘because of the concernfrequently expressed by graduate faculties and administrators that some of theindividuals who dropped out of Ph. D. programs were capable of competing therequirement for the degree. Attrition at the Ph. D. level is also thought to bea waste of precious faculty time and a drain on university resources alreadybeing used to capacity. Some people expressed the opinion that the shortage ofhighly trained specialists and college teachers could be reduced by persuadingthe dropouts to return to graduate schools to complete the Ph. D.’

　　“Theresults of our research” Dr. Tucker concluded, “did not support theseopinions.”

　　1. Lack of motivation was the principal reason for droppingout.

　　2. Most dropouts went as far in their doctoral program as wasconsistent with their levels of ability or their specialities.

　　3. Mostdropouts are now engaged in work consistent with their education andmotivation.

　　Nearly 75 per cent of the dropouts said there was no academicreason for their decision, but those who mentioned academic reason cited failureto pass the qualifying examination, uncompleted research and failure to passlanguage exams. Among the single most important personal reasons identified bydropouts for non-completion of their Ph. D. program, lack of finances was markedby 19 per cent.

　　As an indication of how well the dropouts were doing, a chartshowed 2% in humanities were receiving $ 20,000 and more annually while none ofthe Ph. D. ‘s with that background reached this figure. The Ph. D. ‘s shone inthe $ 7,500 to $ 15,000 bracket with 78% at that level against 50% for thedropouts. This may also be an indication of the fact that top salaries in theacademic fields, where Ph. D. ‘s tend to rise to the highest salaries, are stilllagging behind other fields.

　　As to the possibility of getting dropouts backon campus, the outlook was glum. The main condition which would have to prevailfor at least 25 % of the dropouts who might consider returning to graduateschool would be to guarantee that they would retain their present level ofincome and in some cases their present job.

　　1. The author states thatmany educators feel that

　　[A] steps should be taken to get the dropouts backto campus.

　　[B] the fropouts should return to a lower quality school tocontinue their study.

　　[C] the Ph. D. holder is generally a better adjustedperson than the dropout.

　　[D] The high dropouts rate is largely attributableto the lack of stimulation on the part of faculty members.

　　2. Research hasshown that

　　[A] Dropouts are substantially below Ph. D. ‘s in financialattainment.

　　[B] the incentive factor is a minor one in regard to pursuing Ph.D. studies.

　　[C] The Ph. D. candidate is likely to change his field ofspecialization if he drops out.

　　[D] about one-third of those who start Ph. D.work do not complete the work to earn the degree.

　　3. Meeting foreignlanguage requirements for the Ph. D.

　　[A] is the most frequent reason fordropping out.

　　[B] is more difficult for the science candidate than for thehumanities candidate.

　　[C] is an essential part of many Ph. D.programs.

　　[D] does not vary in difficulty among universities.

　　4. Afterreading the article, one would refrain from concluding that

　　[A] optimismreigns in regard to getting Ph. D. dropouts to return to their pursuit of thedegree.

　　[B] a Ph. D. dropout, by and large, does not have what it takes tolearn the degree.

　　[C] colleges and universities employ a substantial numberof Ph. D. dropouts.

　　[D] Ph. D. ‘s are not earning what they deserve innonacademic positions.

　　5. It can be inferred that the high rate ofdropouts lies in

　　[A] salary for Ph. D. too low.

　　[B] academic requirementtoo high.

　　[C] salary for dropouts too high.

　　[D] 1000positions.

　　Vocabulary

　　1.dropout 　輟學(xué)者，中途退學(xué)

　　2.well-rounded 　全面的

　　3.attrition 　縮/減員，磨損

　　4.drain 　枯竭

　　5.bracket 　一類人，(尤指按收入分類的)階層

　　6.lagging behind other fields 　落后于其它領(lǐng)域

　　7.glum 　陰郁的

　　難句譯注

　　1.Educators are seriously concerned about the high rate ofdropouts among the doctor of philosophy candidates and the consequent loss oftalent to a nation in need of Ph. D. s.

　　「參考譯文」教育工作者嚴(yán)重關(guān)注博士生輟學(xué)的高比率;這對(duì)迫切需要博士生的國(guó)家是一個(gè)人才方面的嚴(yán)重?fù)p失。

　　2.It was base on 22，000questionnaires sent to former graduate students who wereenrolled in 24 universities and it seemed to show many past fears to begroundless.

　　「結(jié)構(gòu)分析」sent過(guò)去分詞，修飾questionnaires.Who定語(yǔ)從句修飾students.

　　「參考譯文」這份全面調(diào)查報(bào)告是以22000份調(diào)查表分送給以前在24所大學(xué)就讀的博士生為基礎(chǔ)的。這份全面調(diào)查報(bào)告似乎說(shuō)明過(guò)去許多擔(dān)心害怕是沒(méi)有根據(jù)的。

　　3.Attritionat the Ph. D. lever is also thought to be a waste of precious faculty time and adrain on university resources already being used to capacity.

　　「結(jié)構(gòu)分析」被動(dòng)句。Tocapacity滿額，全力。

　　「參考譯文」博士水平的人員的縮減被認(rèn)為是寶貴的教授時(shí)間的浪費(fèi)和已經(jīng)被使用到極限的大學(xué)資源的枯竭。

　　4.This may also be an indication of the fact that top salaries in the academicfields， where Ph. D. ‘s tend to rise to the highest salaries， are still laggingbehind other fields.

　　「結(jié)構(gòu)分析」the fact的同位語(yǔ)that從句中的where是定語(yǔ)從句，修飾academicfields.

　　「參考譯文」這也可能表明這樣一個(gè)事實(shí)：在博士能掙到最高工資的學(xué)術(shù)領(lǐng)域中，高工資仍然落后于其它領(lǐng)域。

　　寫作方法與文章大意

　　這是一篇論及“博士生輟學(xué)”的文章。采用對(duì)比和因果手法。文章一開始就提出教育工作者嚴(yán)重關(guān)注博士生輟學(xué)達(dá)50%的問(wèn)題。而調(diào)查報(bào)告證明，只有31%。輟學(xué)造成不良后果，有人建議中途退學(xué)者回爐再念博士學(xué)位學(xué)業(yè)。研究表明不行。列出理由并加以分析。

　　答案詳解

　　1.A.許多教育工作者感到應(yīng)采取步驟讓輟學(xué)者回校學(xué)習(xí)，特別是有些學(xué)科。這在第三段最后一句話：“有些人建議高級(jí)專家和大學(xué)教師短缺現(xiàn)象可以通過(guò)勸說(shuō)輟學(xué)者返回校園完成博士學(xué)位來(lái)減少。”

　　B.輟學(xué)者應(yīng)回到稍第幾的學(xué)校去完成學(xué)業(yè)。

　　C. 有博士學(xué)位的人一般比輟學(xué)者具有較好的適應(yīng)性。

　　D.高輟學(xué)率主要原因在于教師方面缺乏刺激鼓勵(lì)。這三項(xiàng)文內(nèi)沒(méi)有提。

　　2.D.約三分之一開始就讀博士學(xué)位的人沒(méi)有完成學(xué)業(yè)取得學(xué)位。第二段第一句：“輟學(xué)率為31%。大多數(shù)情況下，輟學(xué)人不能完成博士學(xué)位學(xué)業(yè)，就去從事生產(chǎn)性工作”。

　　A.輟學(xué)者的經(jīng)濟(jì)收入比博士生低許多。這是錯(cuò)的。見倒數(shù)第二段：“作為輟學(xué)者干得真不錯(cuò)的證明，統(tǒng)計(jì)圖表說(shuō)明2%人文學(xué)科的輟學(xué)者年收入為20000多沒(méi)勁，沒(méi)有一個(gè)同樣背景的博士生達(dá)到這個(gè)數(shù)字。7000至15000美元年收入水平為博士生的78%，輟學(xué)者僅為50%。“

　　B.在博士學(xué)習(xí)中刺激因素較小。

　　C. 博士預(yù)備生如果中途退學(xué)很可能改變其專業(yè)領(lǐng)域。

　　3.C.博士生應(yīng)達(dá)到外語(yǔ)要求的水平是許多博士生課程的一個(gè)基本組成部分。這在第四段有所表示：“約75%的退學(xué)者說(shuō)，他們決定退學(xué)并不是處于學(xué)術(shù)的原因，而處于學(xué)術(shù)原因的退學(xué)者提出：難以通過(guò)資格考試，難以完成研究，通不過(guò)外語(yǔ)考試“。這里看出外語(yǔ)是博士生課程的基本組成部分。

　　A.它是退學(xué)最頻繁的原因。

　　B. 它對(duì)理科博士生比文科博士應(yīng)考生更難。

　　D.它在大學(xué)中的難度并沒(méi)有不同。

　　4. A.讀完這篇文章，人們不會(huì)有這種結(jié)論。這在第三段末和最后一段。第三段末：“我們研究的結(jié)果并不支持這些一件(包括返回校園之意見)：⑴缺乏動(dòng)力是退學(xué)的主要原因。⑵大多數(shù)退學(xué)者在博士課程上已經(jīng)達(dá)到和他們的能力水平和專業(yè)水平相一致的水平。⑶大多數(shù)退學(xué)者現(xiàn)在從事的工作和他們所受教育和動(dòng)機(jī)相一致。“最后一段：”至于返回校園的可能性，前景不樂(lè)觀。至少有25%的退學(xué)生可能考慮返回研究生院就讀，條件是保證他們保留現(xiàn)有的收入水平，有些還要保留他們目前的工作。“

　　B.博士生退學(xué)者，大體而論，并不具備得到學(xué)位所需要的一切。

　　C. 學(xué)院和大學(xué)雇傭了許多退學(xué)生。

　　D.博士生在非學(xué)術(shù)崗位上沒(méi)有掙到他們應(yīng)得的錢。

　　B.C.兩項(xiàng)文內(nèi)沒(méi)提。D.不對(duì)，參見難句譯注4.

　　5. A. 博士生的工資太低。見第四題A.的譯注和難句譯注4.

　　B. 學(xué)術(shù)要求太高。這只是某些因?qū)W術(shù)原因輟學(xué)者之強(qiáng)調(diào)點(diǎn)。

　　C.輟學(xué)者工資太高。不是太高而是有一部分高于博士生。見第二題D項(xiàng)注釋。

　　D. 職位低。文內(nèi)沒(méi)有提。