問題詳情
第二篇： Like an attorney arguing a case, Rodriguez pitched the applicant to fellow admissions officers seated as aninternal court of gatekeepers for the university. The student came from a suburban public high schools. She hadstrong grades but so-so SAT marks. Rodriguez liked her essay and extracurricular activity records, and saw a“pretty good upward trend” in performance. “She’s compelling,” agreed Nixon, leader of the committee. Butanother officer, skimming evidence from the file on his laptop, raised objections. He said he worried about thestudent’s class rank and course selection. Debate on the 18-member committee lasted 22 minutes until Nixon calledfor a vote. Only Rodriguez raised his hand for admission; others voted to deny. With that verdict, one case wassettled among more than 30,000 to be decided. The scene gave a glimpse of how a prominent U.S. university strives to fulfill its promise that everyprospective student will get a close look, or “holistic review,” even in an era of surging applications. It also showedthe complex and subjective interplay of factors determining who gets in — and who does not. Most anxiouscollege-bound students can only guess at what gets said about applications they toiled to complete. But this time theuniversity allowed journalists into the room to show how decisions unfold. “People believe it’s formulaic,” saidProfessor Gundy, director of undergraduate admissions. “That’s just not true.” Across U.S., major universities havebeen inundated by applications. The latest available data shows the 50 state flagship universities received 1.3million applications in 2016, up 79 percent compared with a decade earlier. The admissions frenzy intensified as thesize of entering classes grew at a far slower pace. The university employs about 60 “readers,” including year-round admissions staff as well as graduate studentsand retired admissions officers who work part-time in the high season. On average, a good reader can rate anapplication in about seven to eight minutes. It would be cheaper and more efficient to screen applicants primarily ongrade-point averages and test scores — which was, in fact, standard practice until 2006. But a by-the-numbersapproach would be totally destructive. Which applicant is stronger, a student with a 3.8 grade-point average or onewith a 3.5? Most people will say it depends, and that’s exactly right.
【題組】36. What is an appropriate title for this passage?
(A) Inside the black box of college admission.
(B) Unfolding the secrets of a court verdict.
(C) Keys to successful college application.
(D) Winning cases through debate formula.
參考答案
答案：A
難度：非常困難0
統計：A(0),B(0),C(1),D(0),E(0)
用户評論
【糖衣】評論
就像律師辯論案件一樣，羅德里格斯將申請人交給了作為大學守門人內部法院的招生人員。這名學生來自郊區公立高中。她的成績很好，但SAT考試也是如此。羅德里格斯喜歡她的論文和課外活動記錄，並且在表現上看到了“相當不錯的上升趨勢”。 “她很有說服力，”該委員會負責人尼克松表示同意。但另一名官員從他的筆記本電腦上的文件中撇去證據，提出異議。他說他擔心學生的班級和課程選擇。對18人委員會的辯論持續了22分鐘，直到尼克松要求投票。只有羅德里格斯舉手入場;其他人投票否認。根據該判決，有一個案件在30,000多個案件中得到了解決。 現場讓我們一睹美國著名大學如何努力履行承諾，即使在應用激增的時代，每個未來的學生都會近距離觀...