Passage six(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 輟學者，中途退學
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」教育工作者嚴重關注博士生輟學的高比率；這對迫切需要博士生的國家是一個人才方面的嚴重損失。
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.
「結構分析」sent過去分詞，修飾questionnaires.Who定語從句修飾students.
「參考譯文」這份全面調(diào)查報告是以22000份調(diào)查表分送給以前在24所大學就讀的博士生為基礎的。這份全面調(diào)查報告似乎說明過去許多擔心害怕是沒有根據(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.
「結構分析」被動句。Tocapacity滿額，全力。
「參考譯文」博士水平的人員的縮減被認為是寶貴的教授時間的浪費和已經(jīng)被使用到極限的大學資源的枯竭。
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.
「結構分析」the fact的同位語that從句中的where是定語從句，修飾academicfields.
「參考譯文」這也可能表明這樣一個事實：在博士能掙到最高工資的學術領域中，高工資仍然落后于其它領域。
寫作方法與文章大意
這是一篇論及“博士生輟學”的文章。采用對比和因果手法。文章一開始就提出教育工作者嚴重關注博士生輟學達50％的問題。而調(diào)查報告證明，只有31％。輟學造成不良后果，有人建議中途退學者回爐再念博士學位學業(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采取步驟讓輟學者回校學習，特別是有些學科。這在第三段最后一句話：“有些人建議高級專家和大學教師短缺現(xiàn)象可以通過勸說輟學者返回校園完成博士學位來減少�！�
B.輟學者應回到稍第幾的學校去完成學業(yè)。
C. 有博士學位的人一般比輟學者具有較好的適應性。
D.高輟學率主要原因在于教師方面缺乏刺激鼓勵。這三項文內(nèi)沒有提。
2.D.約三分之一開始就讀博士學位的人沒有完成學業(yè)取得學位。第二段第一句：“輟學率為31％。大多數(shù)情況下，輟學人不能完成博士學位學業(yè)，就去從事生產(chǎn)性工作”。
A.輟學者的經(jīng)濟收入比博士生低許多。這是錯的。見倒數(shù)第二段：“作為輟學者干得真不錯的證明，統(tǒng)計圖表說明2％人文學科的輟學者年收入為20000多沒勁，沒有一個同樣背景的博士生達到這個數(shù)字。7000至15000美元年收入水平為博士生的78％，輟學者僅為50％�！�
B.在博士學習中刺激因素較小。
C. 博士預備生如果中途退學很可能改變其專業(yè)領域。
3.C.博士生應達到外語要求的水平是許多博士生課程的一個基本組成部分。這在第四段有所表示：“約75％的退學者說，他們決定退學并不是處于學術的原因，而處于學術原因的退學者提出：難以通過資格考試，難以完成研究，通不過外語考試“。這里看出外語是博士生課程的基本組成部分。
A.它是退學最頻繁的原因。
B. 它對理科博士生比文科博士應考生更難。
D.它在大學中的難度并沒有不同。
4. A.讀完這篇文章，人們不會有這種結論。這在第三段末和最后一段。第三段末：“我們研究的結果并不支持這些一件（包括返回校園之意見）：⑴缺乏動力是退學的主要原因。⑵大多數(shù)退學者在博士課程上已經(jīng)達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)退學者現(xiàn)在從事的工作和他們所受教育和動機相一致�！白詈笠欢危骸敝劣诜祷匦@的可能性，前景不樂觀。至少有25％的退學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.博士生退學者，大體而論，并不具備得到學位所需要的一切。
C. 學院和大學雇傭了許多退學生。
D.博士生在非學術崗位上沒有掙到他們應得的錢。
B.C.兩項文內(nèi)沒提。D.不對，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. 學術要求太高。這只是某些因?qū)W術原因輟學者之強調(diào)點。
C.輟學者工資太高。不是太高而是有一部分高于博士生。見第二題D項注釋。
D. 職位低。文內(nèi)沒有提。 |
