ⅱfor most demographics whose access to higher education is restricted,condensingthe course doesn’t address the barriers they’re facing. if you’re balancing employment and childcare with a full-time education, especially if you’re relying onsketchypublic transport infrastructure, it’s unrealistic to squeeze any more into your schedule. many universities currentlystructuretheir courses around the reality that many students work, at least part-time, while studying. none of this is to mention those with disabilities who may face additional barriers to access.

ⅲ there are no doubt some —the independently wealthy, for example — who may benefit, but it seemsperversethat these people should be the focus of a major policy change. troublingly, we seem to have fully accepted the shift from education as a social good to a product sold to students on grounds of higher earnings in the job market. often, the grand promises of access to employment don’thold up. the labour market has been increasinglycasualisedand “hollowed out”, wi

th a gap emerging between the skilled and “unskilled”. progression through the ranks isvanishing, with a degree becoming a requirement for all sorts of jobs beyond simply those with high wages.

ⅳ even beyond the gap between the promise and reality, though, lies a philosophical flaw with the current approach. the two-year degree,in and of itself, is neither a good nor a bad thing. for some people it will be a positive, for the majority of others an irrelevance. what is troubling is what it represents about how britain’s political establishment sees education. it fits well into thereductivefree-market philosophy, where every aspect of life can be sold as a commodity. a government that sees the price of everything and the value of nothing will inevitably be drawn to the idea of squeezing maximum output into minimum time.

ⅴa government that really wanted to make higher education more flexible, open and accessible would be exploring options that made sense for those with restricted access. there is no evidence, though, that this government thinks the choice between being stuck in a low-wage hellscape or taking on thousands of pounds in debt to play a roulette wheel with better odds is a bad thing. the days of education policies that address none of the problems with education are far from over.

【翻译】：两年制学位又盛行起来了。大层面而言,“前进高级教育活络性”的主意是好的。但它反映出咱们过分痴迷于“以商场为中心”这一思维,致使于对这届政府而言,“活络性”体现为“将相同的课程使命量紧缩到一个更短的时刻期限内,以期最大化你日后的经济酬谢”。跟着非全日制学生数量的骤降,该作业阅历了一场“灾害”;政府的应对之策是采纳与非全日制截然相反的学位制方法,政府的这一反应标明晰其全体打点办法。

【点评】：引出文章论题:两年制学位重获盛行。首要开宗明义指出论题。随后指出其理念的优缺陷。最终具体阐明两年制学位东山复兴的缘由。

首要逻辑联接：① 第一至三句以 the two-year degree 、the idea of increased flexibility in higher education 、squeeze the same amount into a shorter period of time 完成回指联接,引入两年制学位这一主题。② 第二、三句以 but 完成语义转机,先介绍两年制学位这一理念的利益“前进高级教育的活络性”,随后转而指出其缺陷“过度痴迷于商场中心思维”。③ 第四句 the sector 回指第二句 higher education,从高级教育作业的现状分析两年制学位重获盛行的缘由。

中心要害词:the two-year degree (两年制学位)。

ⅱfor most demographics whose access to higher education is restricted,condensingthe course doesn’t address the barriers they’re facing. if you’re balancing employment and childcare with a full-time education, especially if you’re relying onsketchypublic transport infrastructure, it’s unrealistic to squeeze any more into your schedule. many universities currentlystructuretheir courses around the reality that many students work, at least part-time, while studying. none of this is to mention those with disabilities who may face additional barriers to access.

【翻译】：关于大大都“承受高级教育机缘受限”的集体而言,紧缩学位课程并不能处置他们面临的妨碍。假定你正在作业、育儿与全日制教育之间力求平衡,特别是假定你还得依靠不太健全的公共交通基础设备,那么想要再在你的日程表中添加任何一丁点东西都是不真实际的。其时,许多大学正环绕“许多学生在学习之余还在作业,最最少也在兼职”这一实际情况对其学位课程做出精心组织。一切这些都没有论及那些在承受高级教育疑问上可以还面临其他妨碍的残疾人集体。

【点评】：从两年制学位本身分析其晦气之处:无法处置承受高级教育机缘受限集体所面临的妨碍。首要总括晦气之处。随后具体介绍该集体所面临的许多妨碍。

首要逻辑联接：① 首句 condensing the course 回指上段第三句 squeeze the same amount into a shorter period of time (即两年制学位的内在:紧缩课程) doesn’t address the barriers 引出紧缩课程的坏处。② 第二至四句 balancing employment and childcare、many students work, at least part-time、those with disabilities 从统筹职场、育儿与全日制教育的人群,有兼职的学生和残障人士三注重点具体阐释首句“承受高级教育受限集体”。

中心要害词：①access to higher education is restricted (承受高级教育机缘受限); ②doesn’t address the barriers they’re facing (不能处置他们面临的妨碍)。

ⅲ there are no doubt some —the independently wealthy, for example — who may benefit, but it seemsperversethat these people should be the focus of a major policy change. troublingly, we seem to have fully accepted the shift from education as a social good to a product sold to students on grounds of higher earnings in the job market. often, the grand promises of access to employment don’thold up. the labour market has been increasinglycasualisedand “hollowed out”, with a gap emerging between the skilled and “unskilled”. progression through the ranks isvanishing, with a degree becoming a requirement for all sorts of jobs beyond simply those with high wages.

【翻译】：毫无疑问,有些人———比方那些殷实得万事不愁的人———可以会从中获益,但这些人竟然变成严峻方针改变的焦点如同有悖常理。令人担忧的是,咱们如同现已完全承受了教育“由一项社会福利到以作业商场更高收入为由售卖给学生的一个产品”的改动。一般来说,有关作业机缘的那些夸姣承诺忍不住检测。跟着熟练工与“非熟练工”之间间隔的呈现,劳作力商场变得越来越暂时化、越来越“空心化”。跟着学位逐骤变成各种作业而非只是高薪作业的必备条件,阶层之间的提升正在消逝。

【点评】：从教育意图视点分析晦气之处:教育并非更高收入、非常好作业的保证。首要指出将从中获益的有些人群不该变成严峻方针改动的重心。随后胪陈我们的实际心态,继而指出差错之处。

首要逻辑联接：① 首句 no doubt…but 引导句内让步转机,先让步指出一些人群会因而获益,随后转机指出这些人不该变成方针改动的焦点。② 第三句 the grand promises of access to employment 回指上句“教育会带来更高收入”,清楚这种观念站不住脚。③ 第四、五句 the labour market 、progression through the ranks从作业商场和阶层提升视点具体阐释缘由。

中心要害词：① a product sold to students on grounds of higher earnings (以更高收入为由售卖给学生的一个产品); ②a degree becoming a requirement for all sorts of jobs (学位变成各种作业的必备条件)。

ⅳ even beyond the gap between the promise and reality, though, lies a philosophical flaw with the current approach. the two-year degree,in and of itself, is neither a good nor a bad thing. for some people it will be a positive, for the majority of others an irrelevance. what is troubling is what it represents about how britain’s political establishment sees education. it fits well into thereductivefree-market philosophy, where every aspect of life can be sold as a commodity. a government that sees the price of everything and the value of nothing will inevitably be drawn to the idea of squeezing maximum output into minimum time.

【翻译】：可是,即便在承诺与实际两者间的间隔之外,其时这种做法还存在哲学缺陷。两年制学位,就其本身而言,并非一件功德,也并非一件坏事。对一些人来讲,是功德,对大大都其别人而言则无关重要。令人不安的是它所代表的英国政治机构对教育的观点。这一观点完全契合简化的安适商场哲学,今日子的方方面面都可以作为产品出售。一个看见一切东西的价格却看不见任何东西的价值的政府必定会为“将最大的产出紧缩到最小的时刻”的主意所招引。

【点评】：从教育理念视点分析其晦气之处:英国政治机构视教育为产品反映了其时教育办法的哲学坏处,首要承上指出该办法还存在哲学坏处。随后具体阐释。

首要逻辑联接：① 首句 the gap between the promise and reality 回指上段所述“教育承诺与实际之间的间隔(即,教育不能带来更高收入)”, even beyond…though 在上 段 基 础 上 更 进 一 步,引 出 两 年 制 学 位 存 在 的 哲 学 缺 陷。② 第 四 句 what is troubling is… 引导第二至四句的句际转机逻辑,先让步指出两年制学位本身无好坏之分,随后进而指出疑问地址:当权者对教育的观点有疑问。③ 第四至六句 how britain’s political establishment sees education…it…a government… 完成联接,指出英国政治机构对教育的观点:将其视作产品,故而认可“在最短的时刻里最大化产出(即紧缩课程)”的做法。

中心要害词：philosophical flaw (哲学缺陷)。

ⅴa government that really wanted to make higher education more flexible, open and accessible would be exploring options that made sense for those with restricted access. there is no evidence, though, that this government thinks the choice between being stuck in a low-wage hellscape or taking on thousands of pounds in debt to play a roulette wheel with better odds is a bad thing. the days of education policies that address none of the problems with education are far from over.

【翻译】：一个真实想要让高级教育变得愈加活络、愈加翻开、愈加简略获得的政府,就会去探究对那些机缘受限集体有意义的选择。可是,没有根据标明,这届政府认为在“是堕入低薪酬阴间仍是为赌非常好出息而背上数千英镑债款”中选择是一件坏事。不处置任何教育疑问的教育方针年代还远未结束。

【点评】：总结全文,宣告呼吁:高级教育变革应更重视那些机缘受限集体。首要承上宣告呼吁,随后转机指呈实际疑问。

首要逻辑联接：① 首句 really wanted to…flexible 照顾首段第二句 flexibility ,旁边面阐明两年制学位并不能真的使教育更活络,those with restricted access 回指第二段首句所述“承受高级教育受限集体(whose access to higher education is restricted)”,指出这些人才是政府教育变革的重视点。② 第二句以 though 转机指出其时实际, there is no evidence 暗示政府认为在低薪与为非常好出息而担负债款间的选择并非坏事。③ 第三句 the problems 回指第二句所述“堕入低薪酬阴间 vs 为赌非常好出息而担负债款”,指出其时教育方针仍然无法处置这些疑问。

中心要害词：exploring options that made sense for those with restricted access (探究对那些机缘受限集体有意义的选择)。

右下角的每一枚“在看”
都是修改找更多材料的动力