2. 职称考试
  3. In the college-admissions wars, we parents are the true fighters． We're push...

In the college-admissions wars, we parents are the true fighters． We're push...

admin2020-12-24  48
问题 In the college-admissions wars, we parents are the true fighters． We're pushing our kids to get good grades, take SAT preparatory courses and build resumes so they can get into the college of our first choice． I've twice been to the wars, and as I survey the battlefield, something different is happening． We see our kids' college background as a prize demonstrating how well we've raised them． But we can't acknowledge that our obsession is more about us than them． So we've contrivedvarious justifications that turn out to be half-truths, prejudices or myths． It actually doesn't matter much whether Aaron and Nicole go to Stanford．
We have a full-blown prestige panic; we worry that there won't be enough prizes to go around． Fearful parents urge their children to apply to more schools than ever． Underlying the hysteria is the belief that scarce elite degrees must be highly valuable． Their graduates must enjoy more success because they get a better education and develop better contacts． All that is plausible--and mostly wrong． We haven't found any convincing evidence that selectivity or prestige matters． Selective schools don't systematically employ better instructional approaches than less selective schools． On two measures--professor's feedback and the number of essay exams--selective schools do slightly worse．
By some studies, selective schools do enhance their graduates' lifetime earnings． The gain is reckoned at 2-4% for every 100-point increase in a school's average SAT scores． But even this advantage is probably a statistical fluke． A well-known study examined students who got into highly selective schools and then went elsewhere． They earned just as such as graduates from higher-status schools．
Kids count more than their colleges． Getting into Yale may signify intelligence, talent and ambition． But it's not the only indicator and, paradoxically, its significance is declining． The reason:
so many similar people go elsewhere． Getting into college isn't life's only competition． In the next competition--the job market and graduate school--the results may change． Old-boy networks are breaking down． Princeton economist Alan Krueger studied admissions to one top Ph．D． program． High scores on the GRE helped explain who got in; degrees of prestigious universities didn' t．
So, parents, lighten up． The stakes have been vastly exaggerated． Up to a point, we can rationalize our pushiness． America is a competitive society; our kids need to adjust to that． But too much pushiness can be destructive． The very ambition we impose on our children may get some into Harvard but may also set them up for disappointment． One study found that, other things being equal, graduates of highly selective schools experienced more job dissatisfaction． They may have been so conditioned to being on top that anything less disappoints．
What does Krueger's study tell us?
选项 A.  Getting into Ph．D． programs may be more competitive than getting into college．
B.Degrees of prestigious universities do not guarantee entry to graduate programs,
C.Graduates from prestigious universities do not care much ahout their GRE scores．
D.Connections built in prestigious universities may he sustained long after graduation,
答案B
解析根据题干关键词定位到第四段最后两句。最后两句讲到Krueger的研究，其结果是GRE的高分有助于决定谁能继续博士学习，而名牌大学的学历不能做到这一点，换言之，名牌大学的学历并不能保证能继续研究生的学习。故选B。
转载请注明原文地址:https://ti.zuoweng.com/ti/ixT8KKKQ
相关试题推荐
随机试题