University education
英國高等教育

Making it pay
學有所值

Is a university degree still worth the time and money it takes?
現在為一個大學文憑花那么多時間和金錢還值得嗎？

Guardian

“MORE will mean worse,” wrote an angry Kingsley Amis in 1961, contemplating plans to expand university education. His prediction has been tested past anything he could have imagined, as that era’s new universities were joined by the ex-polytechnics in the 1990s, and the proportion of youngsters who go on to university rose from less than 10% to almost 40% now. The 430,000 new undergraduates heading off to freshers’ weeks later this month will find themselves part of Britain’s largest university cohort ever.
“越多就是越糟?！边@是Kingsley Amis1961年針對當時英國計劃擴大高等教育規模所發的牢騷。他的這一預言所經歷的驗證是他怎么也想不到的。當時就已經新建了多所大學，到了上世紀九 十年代英國政府更是將之前所有工藝學校升級為大學。當時只有不到10%的年輕人繼續接受高等教育，如今則接近40%。再過幾天43萬大學生即將迎來“新生 周”，他們是英國有史以來最多的一屆大學生。

Similar rumblings have continued since Amis’s jeremiad. With less government money (in real terms) per student than in his day, universities have to pack them in and keep them in to balance the books. Paul Buckland, an archaeology professor at Bournemouth University, resigned when administrators overruled his failing grades for ten students (last month he won a case for “constructive dismissal”). In June a barnstorming lecture by Geoffrey Alderman, of Buckingham University, gained wide attention with its claims of impotent external examiners, widespread unpunished plagiarism and a “grotesque bidding game” in which universities dished out good grades in order to claw their way up league tables.
自Amis先生的牢騷始，類似的爭論就未曾停止過。由于現在分到每個學生頭上實際的政府撥款比Amis先生當時少了，各高校不得不把學生集中起來教學， 以平衡書本開支。伯恩茅斯大學的一名考古學教授因校方否決他給十名學生不及格的判罰而辭職（上個月他由于所謂“合理有據的開除決定”而打贏了一個官司）。 白金漢大學的Geoffrey Alderman六月時舉行了一個頭腦風暴講座，他指出現行考試制度中評卷人平庸無能；抄襲剽竊現象比比皆是，且懲處不力；高?，F在玩著一種“令人啼笑皆 非的競標游戲”，高分肆意分發，就為了能在大學排行榜上露個臉。他的這些言論引起了人們廣泛的關注。

Mr Alderman’s complaints opened the floodgates; disgruntled academics spilt their hearts out in internet chat rooms—and to the committee of MPs charged with overseeing universities. So worried is the committee that it is considering an inquiry into standards. Some think it should have turned a blind eye: “We have been told that simply by looking at this question we are bringing this country’s universities into disrepute,” says Phil Willis, its chairman.
Alderman先生此舉可謂一石激起千層浪。一肚子窩火的學者們紛紛在網上傾吐怨言，同時也向負責督察大學的議員委員會發牢騷。憂心忡忡的委員會現今正 在考慮檢查大學各項規范。有人則認為沒這個必要，只當睜一只眼閉一只眼。“有人認為光是注意這個問題就足以使我國大學名譽掃地?！痹撐瘑T會主席Phil Willis先生如是說。

Some of this is standard fare: American universities suffer periodic spasms over grade inflation; plagiarism is on the rise wherever students can use the internet. But British universities are particularly vulnerable to any loss of reputation. Only America, five times its size, has more foreign students, and with fees for local students capped, Britain’s universities break even only by charging overseas ones what the market will bear. Figures published on September 16th showed that for most, this source of income is now more valuable than government funding for research.
上述各種問題在美國也不新鮮：美國各高校里分數虛高問題頻頻發生；哪兒可以上網，哪兒就會有抄襲剽竊現象，而且愈演愈烈。但是英國的高校尤其經受不起任何名聲的損害。美國的高校規模有英國五倍大，因為留學生很多，所以可以對本國學生學費實行限額。英國高校則不同，它只有通過在留學生可以承擔的范圍內盡量多收學費來維持平衡。發布于9月16號的數據表明，從留學生手上賺來的錢比政府提供的研究資金多出許多。

In trying to maintain standards, English universities face a particular problem (the Scottish system is different). Their standard short, specialised degrees suit only the well prepared: in three years there is no time for a ruthless weeding-out after one year, as is common elsewhere in Europe, or for a broad education before choosing a major subject, as in America. But the A-levels which used to provide that preparation have changed into a school-leaving qualification, and universities have had to nip and tuck what they teach accordingly.
為了保證水準，英格蘭地區的高校面臨著一個特別的問題（蘇格蘭地區高校教學體系與之不同）：它所提供的標準化、短平快專業學位只適合那些已經有良好 基礎的學生；三年時間對于那種在歐洲通行的做法——先在第一年里嚴格篩選，最后決定主攻學科——實在不夠，對于如美國的做法——在學生選定主攻科目之前先 對其進行通識教育——也十分不夠用。然而，各高校中之前用于確保學生基礎的評級（達到要求即是A級別）如今成了學生畢業離校時的要求，學校也因此必須要確 保教授內容的難度均衡。

A system predicated on achievement, not potential, is under further pressure from a government that wants universities to admit more children from state schools, many of which offer a sketchy academic education. Sometimes the strain shows. On September 10th Alison Richard, Cambridge University’s vice-chancellor, said that her institution’s core mission was “to provide an outstanding education within a research setting”, not to promote social mobility. Obvious enough, perhaps, but John Denham, the secretary of state for universities, said he profoundly disagreed.
這樣一個基于學生成績而非其潛力的教學系統目前面臨著政府施加的壓力，政府希望高校得以錄取更多公立學校的學生，而這些公立學校對學生在學術方面的 訓練要求不高（給學生提供的在學術方面的教育十分概略）。這種沖突時常顯露，比如，劍橋大學副校長Alison Richard9月10日曾有言，稱劍橋的核心使命是“在研究性氣氛里提高一流教學水平”，而不是讓社會更具流動性。這一點可能大家都很清楚，但是專門負 責高校事務的國務大臣John Denham則表示他非常反對此觀點。