One of the bitterest and most time-worm debates in student union bars up and down the country is resolved as academic research confirms that in financial terms at least, arts degrees are a complete waste of time.Getting through university boosts students’earnings by 25%, on a weighted average, or $220,000 over theirlifetime, according to Professor Ian Walker of Warwick University-but if they study Shakespeare or the peasants’revolt instead of anatomy of contract law, those gains are likely to be completely wiped out.

      The government is about to allow universities to charge students up to $3,000 a year for their degrees, arguing that it’s a small price to pay compared with the financial rewards graduates reap later in life. But Prof. Walker’s research shows there are sharp variations in returns according to which subject a student takes.

      Law, medicine and economics or business are the most lucrative choices, making their average earnings 25% higher, according to the article, published in the office for national statistics’monthly journal. Scientists get 10-15% extra. At the bottom of the list are arts subjects, which make only a “small ”differenceto earnings- a small negative one, in fact. Just ahead are degrees in education-which leave hard pressed teachers anaverage of 5% better off a year than if they had left school at 18.

      “it’s hard to resist the conclusion that what students learn does matter a lot; and some subject areas givemore modest financial returns than others,” Prof. Walker said. As an economist, he was quick to point outthat students might gain non-financial returns from arts degrees:”Studying economics might be very dull, forexample, and studying post-modernism might be a lot of fun.”

練習題：

     Choose correct answers to the question:

1.What is the best title for the passage?

    A.Professor Walker’s Research

    B.How to Make Big Money.

    C.Differences Between Science and Arts Degrees.

    D.Studying Arts Has Negative Financial Outcome.

2.Universities charge students a rather high tuition mainly because_____

     A.they provide the students with very prosperous subjects to learn

     B.they assume that their graduates can earn much more than they had paid

     C.they don’t get financial support from the government

     D.they need much revenue to support the educational expenses

3.The word “lucrative”(Line 1, Para. 4) most probably means _____

     A.sensible

     B.creative

     C.profitable

     D.reliable

4.Law, medical and business graduates could earn 25% more than ______

     A.education graduates

     B.arts graduates

     C.those who had not studied at the university

     D.the average income

5.We can safely conclude that the author ______

     A.regards arts degrees as meaningless

     B.finds this result disappointing and unfair

     C.wants the students to think twice before they decide what to learn in college

     D.holds that arts degrees are still rewarding despite its scarce financial returns 

答案：

1.[D] 主旨大意題。本文為Walker教授的研究成果，旨在說明不同專業的畢業生有不同的經濟回報，并非要傳授發財心得或者比較文理科的異同。文章首句即為本題解題關鍵，故D正確。

2.[B] 事實細節題。定位至第3段第1句。本文只有這一句與收取學費有關，后一個分句即前一個分句的理由，抓住其中隱含的因果關系就不難找到正確答案。

3.[C] 詞義理解題。通過下文數據earnings 25% higher和get 10-15% extra可以推測lucrative大意應為“給人帶來豐厚收入的”,故選C。

4.[C] 事實細節題。第4段中出現了幾個比較數字，考題要求找到此段首句提到的收人增加25%的參照點。第2段第1句中的Getting through university 表明這類學生收人增加25%的參照對象是沒讀大學的人，且從第4段第3句中的the list和第4句即可以確定這一段是在比較大學畢業與18歲畢業(即沒讀大學)收入的不同，因此C正確。

5.[D] 推理判斷題。結論往往出現在文章結尾,要想答對此題,一定要仔細體會本文末句。本文雖然重點討論文科沒有經濟效益，但是作者并沒有做出主觀判斷，故A、B、C都不正確，而作者在文章最后講到了人文學科雖然經濟效益不佳但學習過程更有趣，故D符合作者意思。 

     本文由培訓無憂網北京新東方考研課程顧問整理發布，希望能夠對愛課程的求學者有所幫助。更多英語四六級資訊歡迎關注培訓無憂網四六級培訓頻道或添加老師微信15033336050

      注：尊重原創文章,轉載請注明出處和鏈接 http://www.hebeijilong.cn/news-id-2173.html 違者必究！部分文章來源于網絡由培訓無憂網編輯部人員整理發布,內容真實性請自行核實或聯系我們，了解更多相關資訊請關注語言培訓頻道查看更多，了解相關專業課程信息您可在線咨詢也可免費申請試課。關注官方微信了解更多：150 3333 6050