复合题

In the college-admissions wars, we parents are the true fights. 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(痴迷) is more about us than them. So we’ve contrived various 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(歇斯底里) 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—professors’ 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 (偶 然). A well-known study examined students who got into highly selective schools and then went elsewhere. They earned just as much 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 is not 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.

单选题 Why does the author say that parents are the true fighters in the college-admissions wars?
【正确答案】 D
【答案解析】题干内容出现在首段第一句话中, 第二句话指出“我们逼迫孩子们做取得更高的分数, 修读SAT预备课程, 丰富简历以使孩子们能够进入我们替他们选择的理想高校”, 可推测父母敦促孩子考大学比孩子们自己还用心。 D项符合题意。
单选题 Why do parents urge their children to apply to more schools than ever?
【正确答案】 A
【答案解析】文章第二段前两句话提到, 父母陷入对于孩子能否进入名牌大学的全面的恐慌(a full-blown prestige panic.中, 担心未来没有足够的荣誉用来炫耀。 于是忧心的父母们敦促孩子们申请更多的学校, 希望这样能提高孩子们进入名校的几率。 A项符合题意。
单选题 What does the author mean by “kids count more than their colleges” (Line 1, Para. 4)?
【正确答案】 C
【答案解析】“Kids count more than their colleges”是第四段的总领性句子, 从后文提到的进入最知名的大学“不是智商、 天分和野心唯一的标志, 而且, 它的重要性在降低”, 和“进入大学并非人生中唯一的竞争”来看, 作者想要表达的是“孩子们的自身情况比进入哪所大学重要”, C项符合题意。
单选题 What does Krueger’s study tell us?
【正确答案】 B
【答案解析】根据题干关键词“Krueger’s study”定位至倒数第二段最后两句, Krueger对某一流博士的项目录取进行了调查, 结果表明GRE高分能决定是否被录取, 而名牌大学学位并不能。 因此, B选项为正确答案, 表示“名校学位不能给与进入毕业项目的保证”。
单选题 One possible result of pushing children into elite universities is that _____
【正确答案】 C
【答案解析】根据最后一段中“The very ambition we impose on our children may…experienced more job dissatisfaction.”这两句话, 表明父母强加给孩子的名校目标可能会给孩子带来失望体验, 一项调查也证明了名校毕业生更容易体会到工作上的不满。 因此, C选项符合题意。