众所周知，在历年考研英语真题中很多试题都选自西方主流报刊杂志，比如经济学人、卫报、新闻周刊等都是考研英语命题组的最 爱，所以把他们作为练习阅读的材料是有一定帮助的，也可作为阅读背景和写作材料、积累单词和积累语法结构等。新航道好轻松考研小编给大家整理了历年考研英语外刊常考热点：教育，一起来看看吧。

　　原文标题：

　　The Easiest Reform for College Admissions

　　本文来源于2020年1月29日The Atlantic《大西洋月刊》上一篇名为The Easiest Reform for College Admissions（最容易的大学招生改革）。文章主要讲述美国高校传承录取有违“公平招生”的道德准则，约翰斯·霍普金斯大学废除这一政策值得称赞。

　　脉络:

　　介绍事件“约翰斯·霍普金斯大学决定废除传承录取政策”（第 一、二段）--分析问题“传承录取是一种有违公平的道德妥协”（第三、四段）--总结观点“大学应把精力放在维持良好的财政状况、确保招生质量上，而非为传承录取辩解”（第五段）。

　　Part 1原文

　　Ⅰ  Johns Hopkins recently made public a decision to stop giving an admissions boost to applicants who have a parent who attended Johns Hopkins. Giving weight to legacy status takes attention away from consideration of an applicant's accomplishments, raw talent, leadership ability, academic achievement, and athletic skills. And it does that without offering much in return: It doesn't measure the obstacles that a student has overcome, or her potential to contribute to peers' learning. Nor does a broad legacy-admissions preference guarantee that alumni will donate to an institution in any meaningful way.

　　Ⅱ The strongest legacy applicants will be admitted anyway; they make up about 3.5 percent of the current freshman class at Johns Hopkins, down from about 12.5 percent several years ago. But reducing the number of legacies makes room in a college class for top students from all backgrounds; the percentage of students who are eligible for Pell Grants at the school has more than doubled during the same period. Johns Hopkins's experience since eliminating legacy admissions undermines other colleges' claims that they are engines of social mobility, that they select the very best candidates from their deep pool of applicants, and that the admissions process is fundamentally meritocratic.

　　Ⅲ  Legacy admissions do not rise to the level of the Varsity Blues celebrity scandal, in which dozens of wealthy parents paid big dollars to a private consultant to enable their children to cheat on the SAT and to bribe coaches to claim that their children were needed on sports teams. However, they represent different versions of the same problem: a special admissions door for applicants who have already enjoyed major advantages in life.

　　Ⅳ  American colleges and universities are unwilling to acknowledge the moral tradeoffs that they obviously make. This policy of essentially selling seats further compromises universities' claims of fairness in admissions. At the same time, universities seem to rely on large donations, and even people outside a school's fundraising office are capable of viewing these transactions in ruthlessly utilitarian terms. Many students on Ivy League campuses suggested this compromise: If one legacy admission meant the university could pay for five packages of financial aid for disadvantaged students, it was worth it. One executive at the Harvard Management Company has even suggested that colleges simply auction a small number of seats to the highest bidders, which would eliminate the need for the more subtle admissions boosts given to a much larger group of legacy applicants and the children of donors.

　　Ⅴ  Not much in college admissions is simple. Selective colleges have multiple goals in mind when they admit students. Compromises need to be made and then justified to families, alumni, lawyers and more. Universities need to make sure they remain financially sound, to ensure that the students admitted have the academic skills necessary to thrive on campus. Why expend any energy or moral capital on defending an indefensible policy like legacy admissions?

　　Part 2 长难句语法点拨

　　本句主句为倒装句，正常语序是a broad legacy-admissions preference  doesn't guarantee……传承录取的普遍偏好也无法保证，guarantee动词后接宾语从句，无法保证的内容：校友会以任何有意义的方式向学校捐款。

　　Part 3 写作句型借鉴

　　Giving weight to XX takes attention away from AA，BB and CC.重视XX，会忽视AA,BB 和 CC。

　　原文例句：Giving weight to legacy status takes attention away from consideration of an applicant's accomplishments, raw talent, leadership ability, academic achievement, and athletic skills. And it does that without offering much in return重视(申请人的)传承地位会忽视申请人的成就、天赋、领导才能、学业成绩和运动能力,同时也不会有 什么回报20年前，（司法部）取消微软类似的排他性协议既无碍于微软当时的成功，也与微软当下无法与谷歌竞争毫无影响，但司法部对谷歌的诉讼甚至连取消排他性协议这样的措施都没有。

　　今天新航道好轻松考研小编整理的历年考研英语外刊常考热点：教育就到这里了，希望大家能在题目与答案中找到解题思路。