The ladder of fame

　　ON AUGUST 18th US News & World Report released its 2007 rankings of America’s top colleges. The survey began in 1983 as a simple straw poll, when the magazine asked 662 college presidents to identify the country’s best places of learning. It has since mutated into an annual ordeal for reputable universities. A strong showing in the rankings spurs student interest and alumni giving; a slip has grave consequences for public relations.

　　University administrators deeply dislike the survey. Many reject the idea that schools can be stacked up against one another in any meaningful way. And the survey’s methodology is suspect. The rankings are still based partly on peer evaluations. They compare rates of alumni giving, which has little to do with the transmission of knowledge. Besides, the magazine’s data are supplied by the schools and uncorroborated.

　　But whether the rankings are fair is beside the point, because they are wildly influential. In the 1983 survey barely half of the presidents approached bothered to respond. Today, only a handful dare abstain.

　　Most, in fact, do more than simply fill out the survey. Competition between colleges for top students is increasing, partly because of the very popularity of rankings. Colin Diver, the president of Reed College in Oregon, considers that “rankings create powerful incentives to manipulate data and distort institutional behaviour.” A school may game the system by soliciting applications from students who stand no chance of admission, or by leaning on alumni to arrange jobs for graduates. Reed is one of the few prominent colleges that dares to disdain to take part in the US News survey.

　　In some ways, the scramble to attract applicants has helped students. Universities such as Duke in North Carolina and Rice in Houston are devoting more money to scholarships. That seems a reasonable response to the challenge of the rankings, as the National Centre for Education Statistics reckons that roughly two-thirds of undergraduates rely on financial aid.

　　Other colleges, though, are trying to drum up excitement by offering perks that would have been unheard of a generation ago. Students at the University of California, Los Angeles now appreciate weekly maid service in the dorms. “The elevators”, enthused a respondent to an online survey, “smell lemon fresh.” Students at Pennsylvania State University enjoy free access to Napster, the music-sharing service. Multi-million dollar gyms have become so common that they are unremarkable.

　　University officials, defending this strategy, often imply that they are only responding to student demand. Discouraging words for those who believe that a college’s job is to educate, not coddle.

　　考研詞匯：

　　spur[spə:]

　　n.①靴刺，馬刺;②刺激，刺激物;v.刺激，激勵(lì)

　　grave[greiv]

　　n.墳?zāi)?a.嚴(yán)肅的，莊重的

　　[真題例句]Lots of Americans bought that nonsense, and over three decades, some 10 million smokers went to early graves (n.).[2005年閱讀2]

　　[例句精譯] 竟然有許多美國人買這些謬論的帳，30年來，大約有一千萬煙民早早就進(jìn)了墳?zāi)埂?/p>

　　reject[riˈdʒekt]

　　v.①拒絕，抵制，駁回;②丟棄;③排斥，退掉

　　[真題例句]In fact it is simply shallow: the confused center is right to reject (②) it.[1997年翻譯]

　　[例句精譯] 事實(shí)上，它很膚淺;困惑的中間派正要放棄它。

　　[真題例句](65) Until these issues are resolved, a technology of behavior will continue to be rejected (③), and with it possibly the only way to solve our problems.[2002年翻譯]

　　[例句精譯] (65)(如果)這些問題得不到解決，研究行為的技術(shù)手段就會(huì)繼續(xù)受到排斥，解決問題的惟一方式可能也隨之繼續(xù)受到排斥。

　　peer[piə]

　　n.同等的人，貴族;vi.凝視，窺視;vt. 與……同等，封為貴族

　　[真題例句]38. In the author’s opinion, advertising__________.[2006年閱讀4]

　　[B]is a cause of disappointment for the general peer (n.)

　　[例句精譯] 38. 根據(jù)作者的觀點(diǎn)，廣告_________。

　　[B]是造成大部分人沮喪的原因

　　distort[diˈstɔ:t]

　　v.歪曲，扭曲

　　[真題例句]Hallucinogens have their primary effect on perception, distorting and altering it in a variety of ways including producing hallucinations.[1997年閱讀3]

　　[例句精譯] 迷幻劑主要影響人的感知，通過多種方式對感知加以扭曲或改變，其中包括產(chǎn)生幻覺。

　　scramble[ˈskræmbəl]

　　n./v.攀爬，爭奪

　　背景常識(shí)介紹：

　　近年來，各個(gè)機(jī)構(gòu)、各個(gè)組織都打著各種旗號(hào)來進(jìn)行所謂的大學(xué)排名，希望從一定方面來把大學(xué)的層次、水平進(jìn)行有序排列，列出個(gè)英雄榜來。一列英雄榜，那自然是排名有分先后，水平高低也不一了。面對各種繁多的排名花樣，僅從高校方就反映不一，有的寵辱不驚，安之若素，有的怒發(fā)沖冠、堅(jiān)決抵制。對于排名榜本身的科學(xué)性和權(quán)威性來說，人們也不知該如何參照，卻也全當(dāng)是小兒游戲“排排坐”，合己胃口便充分采納，反之則以其無科學(xué)依據(jù)缺乏權(quán)威等理由視而不見罷了。

　　參考譯文：

　　高校教育名譽(yù)之階

　　《美國新聞與世界報(bào)道(US News & World Report)》于8月18日刊登了2007年度美國名校的排名。這項(xiàng)調(diào)查最早在1983年以一種非正式投票的形式開始。當(dāng)時(shí)，為挑出全國最好的大學(xué)，雜志向662所高校的校長發(fā)出了調(diào)查。從此以后，這項(xiàng)調(diào)查就成了那些名校一年一度必經(jīng)的考核：如果學(xué)校名列前茅將吸引學(xué)生的興趣和校友的贊助;排名下滑的話就會(huì)嚴(yán)重影響學(xué)校的聲譽(yù)。

　　大學(xué)的主管們對這項(xiàng)調(diào)查深惡痛絕。他們認(rèn)為將學(xué)校依次排序沒有任何意義，而且調(diào)查的方法也令人生疑。排名仍要參考來自同僚的評(píng)估，調(diào)查還要比較各校的校友捐贈(zèng)率，而這與傳授知識(shí)并無干系。此外，雜志所采用的數(shù)據(jù)均由學(xué)校提供，并未經(jīng)過核實(shí)。

　　然而排名公平與否并不重要，因?yàn)檫@些排名早已深入人心。1983年的調(diào)查中，不到一半的校長愿意給予答復(fù);而今天，敢于不參與此項(xiàng)調(diào)查的學(xué)校寥寥無幾。

　　實(shí)際上，大多數(shù)學(xué)校所做的不僅是簡單地填寫調(diào)查表。大學(xué)之間招收優(yōu)等生的競爭日益激烈，部分原因是學(xué)生很看重大學(xué)排名。俄勒岡州里德大學(xué)校長科林·戴福爾(Colin Diver)認(rèn)為，“排名(的重要性)使人們有強(qiáng)烈的欲望去捏造數(shù)據(jù)，或采用非正當(dāng)手段(參與競爭)�！睂W(xué)校也許會(huì)給原本無望入學(xué)的學(xué)生發(fā)出邀請函，或者依靠校友為畢業(yè)生安排工作，以此來贏取好的排名。里德大學(xué)是為數(shù)不多的敢于拒絕《美國新聞》排名調(diào)查的名牌大學(xué)之一。

　　從某種程度上來說，生源的競爭使學(xué)生得益。加利福尼亞州北部的杜克(Duke)大學(xué)和休斯敦的萊斯(Rice)大學(xué)等均增加了獎(jiǎng)學(xué)金的投入。這顯然是為爭取排名而采取的合理應(yīng)對措施。因?yàn)閾?jù)美國教育中心統(tǒng)計(jì)數(shù)據(jù)表明，約有三分之二的本科生依賴助學(xué)金就學(xué)。

　　然而，其他一些大學(xué)所采取的擴(kuò)大生源的手段在幾十年前聞所未聞。加州大學(xué)洛杉磯分校的學(xué)生現(xiàn)在非常贊賞寢室里每周一次的女傭服務(wù)。一名熱心網(wǎng)友在網(wǎng)絡(luò)問卷中這樣說道“電梯聞起來有新鮮的檸檬味。賓夕法尼亞州立大學(xué)的學(xué)生可以免費(fèi)使用Napster(一種音樂共享服務(wù))。學(xué)校投入數(shù)百萬美元建設(shè)健身房也已司空見慣。

　　校方人員為此類行為辯解時(shí)通常表示，他們只是滿足學(xué)生的需求。對于那些認(rèn)為學(xué)校的職責(zé)是教育而非溺愛的人而言，這樣的話實(shí)在讓人氣餒。