Working out exactly what students and taxpayers get for the money they spend on universities is a tricky business. Now the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), a Paris-based think-tank for rich countries, is planning to make the task a bit easier, by producing the first international comparison of how successfully universities teach. B2Awdw3 =g
q}7Df!<|
“Rather than assuming that because a university spends more it must be better, or using other proxy measures for quality, we will look at learning outcomes,” explains Andreas Schleicher, the OECD's head of education research. Just as the OECD assesses primary and secondary education by testing randomly chosen groups of youngsters from each country in reading and mathematics, it will sample university students to see what they have learned. Once enough universities are taking part, it may publish league tables showing where each country stands, just as it now does for compulsory education. That may produce a fairer assessment than the two established rankings, though the British one does try to broaden its inquiry by taking opinions from academics and employers. j{Qbzczy,
*M**h-p2'
There is much to be said for the OECD's approach. Of course a Nobel laureate's view on where to study may be worth hearing, but dons may be so busy writing and researching that they spend little or no time teaching—a big weakness at America's famous universities. And changes in methodology can bring startling shifts. The high-flying London School of Economics, for example, tumbled from 17th to 59th in the British rankings published last week, primarily because it got less credit than in previous years for the impressive number of foreign students it had managed to attract. *F4G qX3
X H Zu>[
The OECD plan awaits approval from an education ministers' meeting in January. The first rankings are planned by 2010. They will be of interest not just as a guide for shoppers in the global market, but also as indicators of performance in domestic markets. They will help academics wondering whether to stay put or switch jobs, students choosing where to spend their time and money, and ambitious university bosses who want a sharper competitive edge for their institution. ;w YwiSVd
3!L<=X
The task the OECD has set itself is formidable. In many subjects, such as literature and history, the syllabus varies hugely from one country, and even one campus, to another. But OECD researchers think that problem can be overcome by concentrating on the transferable skills that employers value, such as critical thinking and analysis, and testing subject knowledge only in fields like economics and engineering, with a big common core. nH3b<k;S
*MyS 7<
Moreover, says Mr Schleicher, it is a job worth doing. Today's rankings, he believes, do not help governments assess whether they get a return on the money they give universities to teach their undergraduates. Students overlook second-rank institutions in favour of big names, even though the less grand may be better at teaching. Worst of all, ranking by reputation allows famous places to coast along, while making life hard for feisty upstarts. “We will not be reflecting a university's history,” says Mr Schleicher, “but asking: what is a global employer looking for?” A fair question, even if not every single student's destiny is to work for a multinational firm. 4 *2>R8SX~
1wH/ #K
1. The project by OECD is aimed to_____ t BXsWY{
M6 >\R$
[A] assess primary and secondary education of each school that subscribe to the service. HDXjH|of
T;pn -
[B] appraise the learning outcomes of university students as part of their academic performance. MsiC!j.-
sB1tce
[C] establish a new evaluation system for universities. BKlc{=
r3bvuq,6$
[D] set up a new ranking for compulsory education. u C8 T!z
/
)u,Oa
2. The assessment method by OECD is different from the established rankings in_____ }T*xT>p^3
x [uXD
[A] that its inquiry is broader as to include all the students and staff. v}*u[GWl]
lL+^n~g
[B] that its samples are chosen randomly based on statistical analysis of method. oP`M\KXau
L}S4Zz18
[C] that it attaches more importance to the learning efficiency. )aA9z(x
\
iE9&3Ie
[D] that it takes opinions from the students to see what they have learnt. Y,Zv0-"
fvfVB k#
3. By the case of London School of Economic, the author wants to show that_____ &``oZvu B
~ai '
M#
[A] the OECD’s approach is very fair. w3cK:
C 0
A
=#-u&l
[B] the Nobel laureate’s opinion is not worth hearing. iBW6<2@oZF
]TprPU39
[C] the British rankings pays more attention to the foreign students. 9F1stT0G%
?v~3zHK
[D] different assessment methods may lead to different ranking results. 7Cp_ 41._
s3!LR2qiF
4. The best universities in the Nobel laureate’s eye are _____ \k-juF80
% x;!s=U
[A] those of high reputation. 8mdd I
la 7QN QW
[B] those ambitious universities. sB
I%lrO
ZTC1t_
[C] the feisty upstarts. Z*3}L
-)+DVG.t
[D] those high-flying universities. ,w>?N\w!}
F;@&uXYgc
5. The OECD’s ranking system will probably be welcomed most by_____ P;/wb
/
K 8c #/o
[A] parents who pay for the children’s secondary education. '
uw&f;/E
+Z]%@"S?
[B] the famous colleges. Khd ,| pM
N,$o' \l
[C] those ambitious second-rank institutions. l);8y5
r0bPaAKw
[D] shoppers in the global market. a[ l5k
U#
B
[答案] U8z"{
5~0;R`D
1. C Mp=+*I[
B(dL`]@Xm
2. C R
L9BB.
[.,6~=}vP
3. D Jl ?Q}SB
J)NpG9iN
4. A o-= lH tR
(B#|3o
5. C
