ChaseDream

标题: 求教费费#59--->beautywawa转移 [打印本页]
作者: iselibra    时间: 2003-10-5 23:18
标题: 求教费费#59
59. Top college graduates are having more difficulty demonstrating their superiority to prospective employers than did the top students of twenty years ago when an honors degree was distinction enough. Today’s employers are less impressed with the honors degree. Twenty years ago no more than 10 percent of a given class graduated with honors. Today, however, because of grade inflation, the honors degree goes to more than 50 percent of a graduating class. Therefore, to restore confidence in the degrees they award, colleges must take steps to control grade inflation.
Which one of the following is an assumption that, if true, would support the conclusion in the passage?
(A) Today’s students are not higher achievers than the students of twenty years ago.
(B) Awarding too many honors degrees causes colleges to inflate grades.
(C) Today’s employers rely on honors ranking in making their hiring decisions.
(D) It is not easy for students with low grades to obtain jobs.
(E) Colleges must make employers aware of the criteria used to determine who receives an honor degree.

答案是A，我选B。
我认为逻辑结构中，achieve到什么程度并非主要因素，取非后，就算现在的学生成就更高，用人单位也未必就认可阿，不能weaken原文的conclusion。
作者: 秋水长天    时间: 2003-10-5 23:56
我试一下还望各位斑竹和大侠批评和指正呀~~)

Top college graduates are having more difficulty demonstrating their superiority to prospective employers than did the top students of twenty years ago when an honors degree was distinction enough. Today’s employers are less impressed with the honors degree. Twenty years ago no more than 10 percent of a given class graduated with honors. Today, however, because of grade inflation, the honors degree goes to more than 50 percent of a graduating class
这一部分是一个fact,可以说是本题的一个背景吧!
其中有一个推理:
because of grade inflation, the honors degree goes to more than 50 percent of a graduating class(这已经是一个fact,不可以反对)
而且明确了就是:
superiority是可以通过honors degree来体现的!

colleges must take steps to control grade inflation
这一部分可以说是前提A,也就是colleges所应该采取的措施吧!

to restore confidence in the degrees they award
最后这一部分当然是结论B,也可以说是措施A所要达到的一个目的吧!

从推导方向来看,(从fyhllj斑竹,大nn 所独门传授的推导方向来看)应该是:
A推出B(天呀!!fyhllj斑竹,大nn,你那个箭头怎么画出来的!![em00]工夫未到家呀!)

如果选择B,B实际上是在重复原文的背景,应该取不到任何假设的作用!
取非试一下:
Awarding too many honors degrees does not cause colleges to inflate grades.

那也就说不止50%,应该更多一点!
好象没有什么weaken的作用!
是一个无关选项!

看一下A!~
因为有原文未提到的higher achievers
那就只能从他因的角度来考虑!
桥梁明显不可以!
取非:
Today’s students are higher achievers than the students of twenty years ago.

明显直接否定了并不是因为inflation,而导致honors degree的增加的!
而是学生实实在在的supeirority!
实际上,已经直接否认了背景中的推导,
而且直接否认了B中的confidence in the degrees they award
因为背景中已经说明了:
superiority是可以通过honors degree来体现的!
那么也就说明了:Today’s employers are less impressed with the honors degree
(这帮employers相信honors degree并没有含水分)
那么学校即使再采取措施,也没有办法达到目的!
这便是一个weaken!

所以选A~
作者: iselibra    时间: 2003-10-6 01:15
秋水长天 老兄能言善辩，一口气能说这么多
pfpf
呵呵
作者: iselibra    时间: 2003-10-6 14:00
以下是引用秋水长天在2003-10-5 23:56:00的发言：
我试一下还望各位斑竹和大侠批评和指正呀~~)

Top college graduates are having more difficulty demonstrating their superiority to prospective employers than did the top students of twenty years ago when an honors degree was distinction enough. Today’s employers are less impressed with the honors degree. Twenty years ago no more than 10 percent of a given class graduated with honors. Today, however, because of grade inflation, the honors degree goes to more than 50 percent of a graduating class
这一部分是一个fact,可以说是本题的一个背景吧!
其中有一个推理:
because of grade inflation, the honors degree goes to more than 50 percent of a graduating class(这已经是一个fact,不可以反对)
而且明确了就是:
superiority是可以通过honors degree来体现的!

colleges must take steps to control grade inflation
这一部分可以说是前提A,也就是colleges所应该采取的措施吧!

to restore confidence in the degrees they award
最后这一部分当然是结论B,也可以说是措施A所要达到的一个目的吧!

从推导方向来看,(从fyhllj斑竹,大nn 所独门传授的推导方向来看)应该是:
A推出B(天呀!!fyhllj斑竹,大nn,你那个箭头怎么画出来的!![em00]工夫未到家呀!)

如果选择B,B实际上是在重复原文的背景,应该取不到任何假设的作用!
取非试一下:
Awarding too many honors degrees does not cause colleges to inflate grades.

那也就说不止50%,应该更多一点!
好象没有什么weaken的作用!
是一个无关选项!

看一下A!~
因为有原文未提到的higher achievers
那就只能从他因的角度来考虑!
桥梁明显不可以!
取非:
Today’s students are higher achievers than the students of twenty years ago.

明显直接否定了并不是因为inflation,而导致honors degree的增加的!
而是学生实实在在的supeirority!
实际上,已经直接否认了背景中的推导,
而且直接否认了B中的confidence in the degrees they award
因为背景中已经说明了:
superiority是可以通过honors degree来体现的!
那么也就说明了:Today’s employers are less impressed with the honors degree
(这帮employers相信honors degree并没有含水分)
那么学校即使再采取措施,也没有办法达到目的!
这便是一个weaken!

所以选A~


这里有一点我不太明白
原文的背景应该说是，因为过去的graduate通过比例少，10%，而现在多了50%，所以用人单位觉得不稀奇了，注意，他用的是“distinction enough”，并没有提到现在的学生的水平到底怎么样啊？
“Today’s students are higher achievers than the students of twenty years ago.
明显直接否定了并不是因为inflation,而导致honors degree的增加的!“
这个看不懂，学生水平高了又怎么样，就算现在的学生水平确实高了，也不能得出不是因为grade inflation而honor degree比例增加的阿。相反，我认为原文中所说的，grade inflation并非指graduate滥竽充数，而仅仅是说通过的比例过高，导致学位不值钱，物以稀为贵么，而与学生水平的高低无关。

以上是我的拙见，可能钻牛角尖了，还希望大家指点：）
作者: 秋水长天    时间: 2003-10-6 16:56
其实我觉得他这边有一个hidden assumption:
也就是其实那些employer以前是相信honor degree是学生实力superioirty的体现!
所以,就能够distinction enough!
而现在,他们已经不相信honor degree是学生实力superioirty的体现,而是觉得含有水分!
A就其实也就是说明了现在awarding honor degree的确是含有水分的!
而取非之后,便是honor degree并没有含水分!
那么其实也就否认employer的猜疑!
另一角度来说:A取非,是说明了employer现在根本就不用honor degree来判断学生的superiority了!
那么即使学校再采取措施,也无济于事!
所以是weaken!

我觉得背景中的hidden assumption是挺关键的!
不知道大家如何看的!
作者: iselibra    时间: 2003-10-6 22:41
有点味道了
再琢磨琢磨
感谢秋水老兄拉了一把
作者: fyhllj    时间: 2003-10-7 00:29
以下是引用秋水长天在2003-10-6 16:56:00的发言：
其实我觉得他这边有一个hidden assumption:
也就是其实那些employer以前是相信honor degree是学生实力superioirty的体现!
所以,就能够distinction enough!
而现在,他们已经不相信honor degree是学生实力superioirty的体现,而是觉得含有水分!
A就其实也就是说明了现在awarding honor degree的确是含有水分的!
而取非之后,便是honor degree并没有含水分!
那么其实也就否认employer的猜疑!
另一角度来说:A取非,是说明了employer现在根本就不用honor degree来判断学生的superiority了!
那么即使学校再采取措施,也无济于事!
所以是weaken!

我觉得背景中的hidden assumption是挺关键的!
不知道大家如何看的!



well done!
作者: foreinter    时间: 2005-9-22 16:51
C选项为什么错？NN们在哪里呀



欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) Powered by Discuz! X3.3