2013年自考英语(二)课文译文:不公平的优势

    不公平的优势

　　According to the writer Walter Ellis, author of a book called the Oxbridge Conspiracy, Britain is still dominated by the old-boy network: it isn't what you know that matters, but who you know. He claims that at Oxford and Cambridge Universities (Oxbridge for short) a few select people start on an escalator ride which, over the years, carries them to the tops of British privilege and power. His research revealed that the top professions all continue to be dominated, if not 90 per cent, then 60 or 65 per cent, by Oxbridge graduates.

　　作家瓦尔特?埃利斯是《牛津――剑桥帮》一书的作者，他认为英国仍在牛津――剑桥老同学关系网的控制下：一个人懂什么不重要，重要的是他认识谁。他说，在牛津和剑桥两所大学(简称牛津――剑桥)求学的少数经过严格选拔的优秀人才一开始就登上了青云之梯，几年之后，他们便乘青云之梯登上了特权和权力的顶峰。他的研究表明，所有最好的职位仍继续由剑桥毕业生把持着，百分比不到90%，也有60%或65%。

　　And yet, says Ellis, Oxbridge graduates make up only two per cent of the total number of students who graduate from Britain's universities. Other researches also seem to support his belief that Oxbridge graduates start with an unfair advantage in the employment market. In the law, a recently published report showed that out of 26 senior judges appointed to the High Court last year, all of them went to private schools and 21 of them went to Oxbridge.

　　然而，埃利斯指出，牛津――剑桥毕业生只占全英国大学毕业生的20%。另外一些研究似乎也证实了他的这一看法，即牛津――剑桥毕业生在就业市场上从一开始就拥有不公平的优势。一份新近发表的报告表明，在法律界，去年由高等法院任命的26名高级法官都上过私立学校，其中21名曾就读过牛津――剑桥。

　　But can this be said to amount to a conspiracy? Not according to Dr. John Rae, a former headmaster of one of Britain's leading private schools, Westminster:

　　但这能说明形成了帮派吗?英国最好的私立学校威斯敏斯特学校的前任校长约翰?雷博士对此持反对看法。

    "I would accept that there was a bias in some key areas of British life, but that bias has now gone. Some time ago -- in the 60s and before ?entry to Oxford and Cambridge was not entirely on merit. Now, there's absolutely no question in any objective observer's mind that, entry to Oxford and Cambridge is fiercely competitive."

　　“我承认过去在英国生活的某些重要领域里存在着偏见，但现在这种偏见已不存在了。在60年代或更早的某个时期，进入牛津或剑桥大学不一定全靠学业成就。现在毫无疑问，在任何客观的观察者眼里，入牛津和剑桥大学的竞争是异常的激烈。”

　　However, many would disagree with this. For, although over three-quarters of British pupils are educated in state schools, over half the students that go to Oxbridge have been to private, or "public" schools. Is this because pupils from Britain's private schools are more intelligent than those from state schools, or are they simply better prepared?

　　然而，许多人不同意这种看法。因为尽管英国3/4以上的学生在国立大学接受教育，但去牛津――剑桥大学读书的学生的半数以上曾上过私立学校，即所谓的“公学”。这难道是私立学校的学生比那些公立学校的学生更聪明吗?或是就是比他们准备得更充分吗?

　　On average, about $ 5,000 a year is spent on each private school pupil, more than twice the amount spent on state school pupils. So how can the state schools be expected to compete with the private schools when they have far fewer resources? And how can they prepare their pupils for the special entrance exam to Oxford University, which requires extra preparation, and for which many public school pupils traditionally stay at school and do an additional term?

　　每年每个私立学校的平均费用是五仟英磅，是国立学生的两倍多。所以，如果公立学校开设的课程少得多，怎么能指望他们与私立学校竞争呢?又怎么能让学生准备好牛津大学的专门入学考试呢?这个考试需要额外的准备，为此，许多公立学校的学生一般要在校多学一个学期。

　　Until recently, many blamed Oxford for this bias because of the university's special entrance exam (Cambridge abolished its entrance exam in 1986). But last February,Oxford University decided to abolish the exam to encourage more state school applicants. From autumn 1996, Oxford University applicants, like applicants to other universities, will be judged only on their A level results and on their performance at interviews, although some departments might still set special tests.

　　直到最近，许多人还指责大学专门入学考试存有偏见(剑桥大学在1986年废止了入学考试)。不过，牛津大学在去年二月决定废止考试，以鼓励更多的国立学生申请入学。自1996九六年秋，申请就读牛津大学的学生像申请其他大学的学生一样，将只根据他们中学的A级学业成绩和面试表现来判断录取与否，当然有些系部可能会进行专门的考试。

　　However, some argue that there's nothing wrong in having elite places of learning, and that by their very nature, these places should not be easily accessible. Most countries are run by an elite and have centres of academic excellence from which the elite are recruited. Walter Ellis accepts that this is true:

　　不过，有些人反驳说，设置精英学校没有什么不妥;他们还说，从本质上讲，这类学校就不应该轻易地可以入学。多数国家是由杰出的人才领导着，并有高水平的人才集聚的学术中心。瓦尔特?埃利斯认为这一点是正确的。

　　"But in France, for example, there are something like 40 equivalents of university, which provide this elite through a much broader base. In America you've got the Ivy League, centred on Harvard and Yale, with Princeton and Stanford and others. But again, those universities together -- the elite universities -- are about ten or fifteen in number, and are being pushed along from behind by other great universities like, for example, Chicago and Berkeley. So you don't have just this narrow concentration of two universities providing a constantly replicating elite.”

　　“但比如在法国，有40所水平相当的大学，这些大学通过更宽的基础上培养精英人才。再比如美国，有“常春藤”联合会，核心是哈佛和耶鲁，其他的还有普林斯顿和斯坦福大学等等。不过这些大学――一流的大学，加起来总数有10～15所，并且有芝加哥、伯克利和其他院校紧随其后，这样就不存在集中在两所院校范围狭窄地培养近亲精英人才的局面了。”

　　When it comes to Oxford and Cambridge being elitist because of the number of private school pupils they accept, Professor Stone of Oxford University argues that there is a simple fact he and his associates cannot ignore:

　　当谈到牛津大学和剑桥大学因录取私立学校学生数量之多而成为一流大学时，牛津大学的斯顿教授说，他和他的同事们不能忽视这样一个简单的事实：

　　"If certain schools do better than others then we just have to accept it. We cannot be a place for remedial education. It's not what Oxford is there to do.”

　　“如果某些学校做得比别的学校好，我们必须接受这种现实。我们不是进行补习教育的场所，这不是牛津大学所做的事。”

　　However, since academic excellence does appear to be related to the amount of money spent per pupil, this does seem to imply that Prime Minister John Major's vision of Britain as a classless society is still a long way off. And it may be worth remembering that while John Major didn't himself go to Oxbridge, most of his ministers did.

　　19 不过，既然学习优异确实看来与在每个学生身上花的钱有关，那么这似乎在暗示，首相梅杰要让英国成为无阶级的社会的设想还十分遥远。而且值得注意的是，约翰?梅杰虽本人没有.

?2013年7月各省市自考成绩查询入口汇总

?各地10月自考时间

更多信息请访问：自学考试频道    自学考试论坛