University education
英国高等教育

Making it pay
学有所值

Is a university degree still worth the time and money it takes?
现在为一个大学文凭花那么多时间和金钱还值得吗？

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。”这是Kingsley Amis1961年针对当时英国计划扩大高等教育规模所发的牢骚。他的这一预言所经历的验证是他怎么也想不到的。当时就已经新建了多所大学，到了上世纪九 十年代英国政府更是将之前所有工艺学校升级为大学。当时只有不到10%的年轻人继续接受高等教育，如今则接近40%。再过几天43万大学生即将迎来“新生 周”，他们是英国有史以来最多的一届大学生。

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先生的牢骚始，类似的争论就未曾停止过。由于现在分到每个学生头上实际的政府拨款比Amis先生当时少了，各高校不得不把学生集中起来教学， 以平衡书本开支。伯恩茅斯大学的一名考古学教授因校方否决他给十名学生不及格的判罚而辞职（上个月他由于所谓“合理有据的开除决定”而打赢了一个官司）。 白金汉大学的Geoffrey Alderman六月时举行了一个头脑风暴讲座，他指出现行考试制度中评卷人平庸无能；抄袭剽窃现象比比皆是，且惩处不力；高校现在玩着一种“令人啼笑皆 非的竞标游戏”，高分肆意分发，就为了能在大学排行榜上露个脸。他的这些言论引起了人们广泛的关注。

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先生此举可谓一石激起千层浪。一肚子窝火的学者们纷纷在网上倾吐怨言，同时也向负责督察大学的议员委员会发牢骚。忧心忡忡的委员会现今正 在考虑检查大学各项规范。有人则认为没这个必要，只当睁一只眼闭一只眼。“有人认为光是注意这个问题就足以使我国大学名誉扫地。”该委员会主席Phil Willis先生如是说。

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.
上述各种问题在美国也不新鲜：美国各高校里分数虚高问题频频发生；哪儿可以上网，哪儿就会有抄袭剽窃现象，而且愈演愈烈。但是英国的高校尤其经受不起任何名声的损害。美国的高校规模有英国五倍大，因为留学生很多，所以可以对本国学生学费实行限额。英国高校则不同，它只有通过在留学生可以承担的范围内尽量多收学费来维持平衡。发布于9月16号的数据表明，从留学生手上赚来的钱比政府提供的研究资金多出许多。

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.
为了保证水准，英格兰地区的高校面临着一个特别的问题（苏格兰地区高校教学体系与之不同）：它所提供的标准化、短平快专业学位只适合那些已经有良好 基础的学生；三年时间对于那种在欧洲通行的做法——先在第一年里严格筛选，最后决定主攻学科——实在不够，对于如美国的做法——在学生选定主攻科目之前先 对其进行通识教育——也十分不够用。然而，各高校中之前用于确保学生基础的评级（达到要求即是A级别）如今成了学生毕业离校时的要求，学校也因此必须要确 保教授内容的难度均衡。

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.
这样一个基于学生成绩而非其潜力的教学系统目前面临着政府施加的压力，政府希望高校得以录取更多公立学校的学生，而这些公立学校对学生在学术方面的 训练要求不高（给学生提供的在学术方面的教育十分概略）。这种冲突时常显露，比如，剑桥大学副校长Alison Richard9月10日曾有言，称剑桥的核心使命是“在研究性气氛里提高一流教学水平”，而不是让社会更具流动性。这一点可能大家都很清楚，但是专门负 责高校事务的国务大臣John Denham则表示他非常反对此观点。

Absent better state secondary schools, universities may have to take radical measures: Cambridge is considering a foundation year for students who show potential but are ill prepared. A review of the government-imposed cap on tuition fees, due next year, may also help. The current limit of £3,300 ($5,926), which nearly all universities are up against, is so low that many lose money on teaching. A higher cap would allow greater differentiation, thus helping to remove another flaw: the pretence that a degree of a particular class (a first, say) from one university is equivalent to the same class from any other.
因为缺乏良好的高中，各高校可能会采取较彻底措施，比如，剑桥大学如今在筹划给那些资质优良但基础薄弱的学生专门设立基础学年。另外，将于明年将会重新 审查对高校学费实施限额的规定，这可能也会起到一定作用。所有高校几乎都反对现行限额：3300英镑（亦即5926美元）。学费低的连支付教师工资都不 够。提高限额将有利于学校分化，这样一来就可以解决另一个问题：再不会有人谎称从一所大学一个班上（比方说优秀班级）拿到的学位跟另外一所大学相同班级所 得学位没有差别了。

So all is not lost—yet—in the battle for quality in what will be on offer to future freshers. But “more” could still mean “worse” if the jobs market is flooded with graduates. The Confederation of British Industry worries this is the case: on September 17th it launched a task-force to consider not only whether the wrong sort of graduates are being turned out but also whether supply risks outstripping demand.
这样就可以尽量确保将来的大学生们所得的教学质量。但是如果职场里大学毕业生过多，那么越多可能还是意味着越糟。英国工业联合会对此十分担忧，于是在9月17号开展了一项调查以确定高校是否在输出社会不需要的毕业生，以及人才的供给是否超出了社会的需求。

This is likely to be what concerns students most. A survey released on September 11th by Sodexo, an education-outsourcing company, found that for more than half of them the prime reason for pursuing a degree was to improve job or salary prospects, or that they had to for their chosen profession. Only 9% wanted to increase their knowledge of an area of interest.
该情况可能是学生所最为关心的。据一家教育外包公司Sodexo9月11日公布的一项调查显示，超过一半的大学生表示，继续深造主要是为了好工作以及高薪或者是由于本专业要求；然而只有9%的受访者表示为了能在感兴趣的领域学习更多知识。

At first glance, the earnings uplift looks worthwhile. An estimate in 2006 suggested that in purely financial terms a degree produced the same lifetime-income stream as giving an 18-year-old with two A-levels £160,000 to invest. But cracks are appearing in the “graduate premium”. For one thing, it varies immensely by field of study (see chart): men with arts degrees can expect to earn less than if they had skipped university entirely. (The relative returns for graduate women are higher not because they earn more than men but because less-qualified women earn very little.) For another, its value is increasingly dependent on the detail.
上表乍看上去，受过高等教育的人收入长的多。2006年有人估计，从纯粹经济角 度看，一个学位所能带来的终生收益相当于一个18岁青年获得32万投资资金所获的受益。但是这种“学位增值说”也有漏洞：首先，这种增值在不同领域差别巨 大（见上表），对于拥有艺术学科学位的男子而言，如果他们当初没有接受高等教育，他们拿得钱应该会多一些。（对于女性毕业生而言，她们的回报比男性多一 些，然而她们并不是比男性赚的多，仅仅是因为受教育程度低的女性的收入太低。）另外，学位的价值大不大与其具体内容关系越来越大。

Robin Naylor, at Warwick University, has found that the average return to a degree has held up well over the past 20 years, but it has become more variable: the university now matters greatly, as does the degree class. “The penalty for not having a degree is high, but the penalty for getting the wrong one can be even higher,” he says. And Francis Green, of Kent University, has discovered that in 2006 a third of graduates were working in jobs that did not require a degree, up from a quarter in 2001; they earned a third less than those who were using their degrees.
沃里克大学的Robin Naylor研究发现，过去二十年里学位的回报水平一直不错，但是现在的情况变因更多：从哪一所大学毕业以及学习课程等等。“没有学位的人在社会里会很吃 亏，但是如果拿的学位不对可能会更吃亏。”他说道。肯特大学的Francis Green则发现，2001年有四分之一的大学毕业生在不需要学位的地方工作，到2006年则增加到三分之一，他们比那些靠自己学位赚钱的人工资少三分之 一。

It is too late for this year’s freshers to reconsider their university careers; but what should next year’s batch do? Those who are in it for the money should be ruthless about what they study and where—and then be sure to work hard and get good marks. Or they could throw away the calculator and follow their hearts. “It’s a big risk, going to university, much bigger than it used to be,” says Mr. Naylor. “But if you study something you like, then even if you don’t earn so much, there is a better chance you’ll work in a field you love.”
今年的大学新生们现在再重新考虑专业选择有点迟了，但是明年的新生该怎么办？对于那些为了以后收入而读大学的人来说，他们必须非常明确自己要学什么以及 在哪儿学，然后就要勤学习，拿高分。或者也可以抛却精打细算，随性而为。Naylor先生有言，“现在读大学比以前的风险大得多，但是如果你学习的专业是 自己的兴趣所在，那么将来尽管你挣的钱不多，但是你更有可能在你喜欢的领域里工作。”