Passage six

　　Educators are seriously concerned about the high rate of dropouts among the doctor of philosophy candidates and the consequent loss of talent to a nation in need of Ph. D. s. Some have placed the dropouts 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 was published. It was published. It was based on 22,000 questionnaires sent to former graduate students who were enrolled in 24 universities and it seemed to show many past fears to be groundless.

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

　　Discussing the study last week, Dr. Tucker said the project was initiated because of the concern frequently expressed by graduate faculties and administrators that some of the individuals who dropped out of Ph. D. programs were capable of competing the requirement for the degree. Attrition at the Ph. D. level is also thought to be a waste of precious faculty time and a drain on university resources already being used to capacity. Some people expressed the opinion that the shortage of highly trained specialists and college teachers could be reduced by persuading the dropouts to return to graduate schools to complete the Ph. D.

　　The results of our research Dr. Tucker concluded, did not support these opinions.

　　1.　Lack of motivation was the principal reason for dropping out.

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

　　3.　Most dropouts are now engaged in work consistent with their education and motivation.

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

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

　　As to the possibility of getting dropouts back on campus, the outlook was glum. The main condition which would have to prevail for at least 25 % of the dropouts who might consider returning to graduate school would be to guarantee that they would retain their present level of income and in some cases their present job.

　　1.　The author states that many educators feel that

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

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

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

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

　　2.　Research has shown that

　　[A] Dropouts are substantially below Ph. D. s in financial attainment.

　　[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 of specialization 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 foreign language requirements for the Ph. D.

　　[A] is the most frequent reason for dropping out.

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

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

　　[D] does not vary in difficulty among universities.

　　4.　After reading the article, one would refrain from concluding that

　　[A] optimism reigns in regard to getting Ph. D. dropouts to return to their pursuit of the degree.

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

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

　　[D] Ph. D. s are not earning what they deserve in nonacademic positions.

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

　　[A] salary for Ph. D. too low.

　　[B] academic requirement too high.

　　[C] salary for dropouts too high.

　　[D] 1000 positions.

　　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 of dropouts among the doctor of philosophy candidates and the consequent loss of talent 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;這對迫切需要博士生的國家是一個人才方面的嚴(yán)重?fù)p失。

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

　　【結(jié)構(gòu)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(xué)就讀的博士生為基礎(chǔ)的。這份全面調(diào)查報告似乎說明過去許多擔(dān)心害怕是沒有根據(jù)的。

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

　　【結(jié)構(gòu)分析】被動句。To capacity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 academic fields, where Ph. D. s tend to rise to the highest salaries, are still lagging behind other fields.

　　【結(jié)構(gòu)分析】the fact的同位語that從句中的where是定語從句，修飾academic fields。

　　【參考譯文】這也可能表明這樣一個事實(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%的問題。而調(diào)查報告證明，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：有些人建議高級專家和大學(xué)教師短缺現(xiàn)象可以通過勸說輟學(xué)者返回校園完成博士學(xué)位來減少。

　　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。這三項文內(nèi)沒有提。

　　2.　D.約三分之一開始就讀博士學(xué)位的人沒有完成學(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。這是錯的。見倒數(shù)第二段：作為輟學(xué)者干得真不錯的證明，統(tǒng)計圖表說明2%人文學(xué)科的輟學(xué)者年收入為20000多沒勁，沒有一個同樣背景的博士生達(dá)到這個數(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(xué)者說，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(xué)最頻繁的原因。 B. 它對理科博士生比文科博士應(yīng)考生更難。 D. 它在大學(xué)中的難度并沒有不同。

　　4.　A. 讀完這篇文章，人們不會有這種結(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機(jī)相一致。最后一段：至于返回校園的可能性，前景不樂觀。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)崗位上沒有掙到他們應(yīng)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(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項注釋。 D. 職位低。文內(nèi)沒有提。

　　Passage six

　　Educators are seriously concerned about the high rate of dropouts among the doctor of philosophy candidates and the consequent loss of talent to a nation in need of Ph. D. s. Some have placed the dropouts 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 was published. It was published. It was based on 22,000 questionnaires sent to former graduate students who were enrolled in 24 universities and it seemed to show many past fears to be groundless.

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

　　Discussing the study last week, Dr. Tucker said the project was initiated because of the concern frequently expressed by graduate faculties and administrators that some of the individuals who dropped out of Ph. D. programs were capable of competing the requirement for the degree. Attrition at the Ph. D. level is also thought to be a waste of precious faculty time and a drain on university resources already being used to capacity. Some people expressed the opinion that the shortage of highly trained specialists and college teachers could be reduced by persuading the dropouts to return to graduate schools to complete the Ph. D.

　　The results of our research Dr. Tucker concluded, did not support these opinions.

　　1.　Lack of motivation was the principal reason for dropping out.

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

　　3.　Most dropouts are now engaged in work consistent with their education and motivation.

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

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

　　As to the possibility of getting dropouts back on campus, the outlook was glum. The main condition which would have to prevail for at least 25 % of the dropouts who might consider returning to graduate school would be to guarantee that they would retain their present level of income and in some cases their present job.

　　1.　The author states that many educators feel that

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

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

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

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

　　2.　Research has shown that

　　[A] Dropouts are substantially below Ph. D. s in financial attainment.

　　[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 of specialization 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 foreign language requirements for the Ph. D.

　　[A] is the most frequent reason for dropping out.

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

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

　　[D] does not vary in difficulty among universities.

　　4.　After reading the article, one would refrain from concluding that

　　[A] optimism reigns in regard to getting Ph. D. dropouts to return to their pursuit of the degree.

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

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

　　[D] Ph. D. s are not earning what they deserve in nonacademic positions.

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

　　[A] salary for Ph. D. too low.

　　[B] academic requirement too high.

　　[C] salary for dropouts too high.

　　[D] 1000 positions.

　　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 of dropouts among the doctor of philosophy candidates and the consequent loss of talent 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;這對迫切需要博士生的國家是一個人才方面的嚴(yán)重?fù)p失。

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

　　【結(jié)構(gòu)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(xué)就讀的博士生為基礎(chǔ)的。這份全面調(diào)查報告似乎說明過去許多擔(dān)心害怕是沒有根據(jù)的。

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

　　【結(jié)構(gòu)分析】被動句。To capacity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 academic fields, where Ph. D. s tend to rise to the highest salaries, are still lagging behind other fields.

　　【結(jié)構(gòu)分析】the fact的同位語that從句中的where是定語從句，修飾academic fields。

　　【參考譯文】這也可能表明這樣一個事實(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%的問題。而調(diào)查報告證明，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：有些人建議高級專家和大學(xué)教師短缺現(xiàn)象可以通過勸說輟學(xué)者返回校園完成博士學(xué)位來減少。

　　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。這三項文內(nèi)沒有提。

　　2.　D.約三分之一開始就讀博士學(xué)位的人沒有完成學(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。這是錯的。見倒數(shù)第二段：作為輟學(xué)者干得真不錯的證明，統(tǒng)計圖表說明2%人文學(xué)科的輟學(xué)者年收入為20000多沒勁，沒有一個同樣背景的博士生達(dá)到這個數(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(xué)者說，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(xué)最頻繁的原因。 B. 它對理科博士生比文科博士應(yīng)考生更難。 D. 它在大學(xué)中的難度并沒有不同。

　　4.　A. 讀完這篇文章，人們不會有這種結(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機(jī)相一致。最后一段：至于返回校園的可能性，前景不樂觀。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)崗位上沒有掙到他們應(yīng)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(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項注釋。 D. 職位低。文內(nèi)沒有提。