首页
登录
职称英语
In the college-admissions wars, we parents are the true fighters. We’re push
In the college-admissions wars, we parents are the true fighters. We’re push
游客
2023-09-17
62
管理
问题
In the college-admissions wars, we parents are the true fighters. We’re pushing our kids to get good grades, take SAT prep courses and build resumes so they can get into the college of our first choice. We say our motives are selfless and sensible. A degree from Stanford or Princeton is the ticket for life. If Aaron and Nicole don’t get in, they’re forever doomed.
I’ve twice been to the wars, and as I survey the battlefield, something different is happening. It’s one-upmanship(能超越别人的本事) among parents. We see our kids’ college pedigrees(门第,出身) as trophies attesting to how well—or how poorly—we’ve raised them. But we can’t acknowledge that our obsession is more about us than them.
It’s true that getting into college has generally become tougher because the number of high-school graduates has grown. We have a full-blown prestige panic; we worry that there won’t be enough trophies to go around. Fearful parents urge their children to apply to more schools than ever.
Underlying the hysteria 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’s plausible—and mostly wrong. Selective schools don’t systematically employ better instructional approaches than less-selective schools, according to a study. 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. But even this advantage is probably a statistical fluke(侥幸的成功). 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 nor the only indicator and, paradoxically, its significance is declining. The reason: so many similar people go elsewhere. Getting into college isn’t life’s only competition. In the next competition—the job market, graduate school—the results may change.
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.
选项
答案
ticket for life/key to success
解析
由题干中的diploma,Stanford和Princeton定位到文章首段倒数第2句A degree from Stanford or Princeton is the ticket for life.此处需要填入名词性成分,与as一起作regard的宾语补足语.其结构为regard sth.as sth.表示“把…看作”。题目中的diploma与文中的degree近义,根据题意应填入ticket for life/key to success。
转载请注明原文地址:https://tihaiku.com/zcyy/3021239.html
相关试题推荐
WhatdoJapanesechildrenfeelfromtheirparents?Theyfeelheavy______fromthe
WhatdoJapanesechildrenfeelfromtheirparents?Theyfeelheavy______fromthe
Afterfinishinghishomeworkhewenton______(write)alettertohisparents.to
Hesaidithadbeen______(increase)difficulttocommunicatewithhisparents.i
Whatdoparentssayaboutthechildren?Parentssaythatchildrendonotshowth
Whatdoparentssayaboutthechildren?Parentssaythatchildrendonotshowth
Imaginethis:yourparentsgoawayonbusiness,butyouhavetostayath
Imaginethis:yourparentsgoawayonbusiness,butyouhavetostayath
Imaginethis:yourparentsgoawayonbusiness,butyouhavetostayath
Onweekendstherearealotofchildrenplayinginthepark,_______parentsseat
随机试题
RentalCarAgent:Hi.HowcanIhelpyou?Customer:Yeah.【D1】______Ag
RupertBrookeRupertBrooke,
[originaltext]TheworldwideorganizationoftheRedCrossstemsfromtheid
TheFrenchdivisionofMcDonald’shasrunadvertisementsthatincludedasur
社区健康教育计划应包括哪些内容()A.教育的内容、目的和目标 B.教育的时
下列关于非居民纳税人享受税收协定待遇的税务管理规定的表述,不正确的是()。A、非
以下关于有效期表述形式不正确的是A."有效期至××××.××."或者"有效期至
A.系指将酶和底物混合后,让其反应一定时间,然后停止反应,定量测定底物减少或产物
下列选项中,属于税收政策适用咨询的有( )。A.把握咨询的税务事项实质 B.收
关于新产品销售定价的撇脂性定价法,下列说法正确的有()。A.在新产品试销初期先定
最新回复
(
0
)