人郵第二輯真題TEST 3 READING PART 3
　　In terms of pure quantity of research and debate, business schools have performed amazingly in promoting management as a distinctive activity. No other discipline has produced as much in such a short period. It is unclear yet how much of it will stand the test of time, but for sheer industry, the business school deserve credit. Not a day goes by without another wave of research papers, books, articles, and journals.
　　In these terms, schools have produced a generally accepted theoretical basis for management. When it comes to knowledge creation, however, they find themselves in difficulties. They are caught between the need for academic rigour and for real-world business relevance, which tend to pull in opposite directions. The desire to establish management as a credible discipline leads to research that panders to traditional academic criteria. The problem for business school researchers is that they seek the approval of their academic peers rather than the business community. In the United States this has led to the sort of grand ‘paper clip counting’ exercises that meet demands for academic rigour but fail to add one iota to the real sum of human knowledge.
　　Business schools have too often allowed the constraints of the academic world to cloud their view of the real world. Business school researchers seek provable theories – rather than helpful theories. They have championed a prescriptive approach to management based on analysis and, more recently, on fashionable ideas that soon disappear into the ether. The ‘one best way’ approach encourages researchers to mould the idiosyncrasies of managerial reality into their tightly defined models of behaviour. Figures and statistics are fitted into linear equations and tidy models. Economists and other social scientists label this cure smoothing. Meanwhile, reality continually refuses to co-operate.
　　Central to this is the tension between relevance and rigour. In a perfect world, there would be no need to choose between the two. But in the business school world, the need to satisfy academic criteria and be published in journals often tilts the balance away from relevance. In other words, it is often easier to pursue quantifiable objectives than it is to add anything useful to the debate about management. To a large extent, the entire business school system works against useful, knowledge-creating research. Academics have five years in which to prove themselves if they are to make the academic grade. It seems long enough. But it can take two or even three years to get into a suitable journal. They therefore have around three years, probably less, to come up with an area of interest and carry out meaningful and original research. This is a demanding timescale. The temptation must be to slice up old data in new ways rather than pursue genuinely groundbreaking, innovative research.
　　It is a criticism also made by some business school insiders. “Academic journals tend to find more and more techniques for testing more and more obscure theories. They are asking trivial questions and answering them exactly. There has to be a backlash,” says Julian Birkinshaw of London Business School. In large part, the problem goes back to a time when business schools were trying to establish themselves. Up until the 1960s, American business schools were dismissed as pseudo-academic institutions, including the universities of which they often formed a part, regarded them as a little more than vocational colleges. Since then, most of the leading schools have undergone major reassessments and introduced sweeping changes. However, it is questionable whether those changes have gone far enough.
　　15、What does the first paragraph suggest about the research generated by business schools?
　　A Its quality is variable.
　　B Its lasting value is uncertain.
　　C It has always been produced too quickly.
　　D It has had no influence on management.
　　16、In paragraph two, the writer argues that business school research
　　A takes a negative view of the business community.
　　B has failed to give credibility to management as a discipline
　　C is directed at the wrong audience.
　　D does not stand up to academic scrutiny.
　　17 In the third paragraph, the writer criticizes the theories of management produced by business schools for being
　　A incomprehensible.
　　B contradictory.
　　C vague.
　　D inflexible.
　　18、In the fourth paragraph, the writer says that the business school system causes academics to
　　A be satisfied with reinterpreting previous research
　　B avoid complicated business issues
　　C concentrate on very narrow fields of study.
　　D focus on topics no longer relevant to business needs.
　　19、What do we learn about business schools in the last paragraph?
　　A They are reluctant to admit to failings.
　　B They resent criticism of their academic journal.
　　C They used to be looked down on by other institutions.
　　D They are comfortable with the current situation.
　　20、What is the writer’s purpose in this text?
　　A to express regret at the growth of business schools
　　B to point out a weakness in the approach of business schools
　　C to criticize business school for producing bad academics
　　D to forecast the eventual collapse of business schools
　　這篇文章對business school提出了一些指責，認為他們過分的鉆了學術的牛角尖，不顧理論能否對現(xiàn)實有指導意義，閉門造車了。想起了以前西方經(jīng)濟學老師對當代經(jīng)濟學的指責：成了數(shù)學的游戲。
　　15題，答案是第一段的這么一句：It is unclear yet how much of it will stand the test of time,能否禁受住時間的檢驗還是個未知數(shù)。所以選B：價值能否持續(xù)還是不確定的
　　16題，答案是第二段的這么一句：The problem for business school researchers is that they seek the approval of their academic peers rather than the business community。他們追求的是學術同行而不是商業(yè)團體的認可。也就是說，作者認為學術研究應該為現(xiàn)實社會，即商業(yè)團體做貢獻，不是成為學術界里互相認可的工具。答案選C：觀眾不對。應該是做給business community看的。
　　17題，問第三段，作者對商業(yè)學校的管理理論的批評是什么。理解第三段甚至整篇文章的意思不難做出選擇。作者認為商業(yè)學校過分追求理論的證明，而不是有用的理論。答案在這一句里面揭示了：The ‘one best way’ approach encourages researchers to mould（模子） the idiosyncrasies（特性）of managerial reality into their tightly defined models of behaviour。將實際管理的特性套進牢牢限制的行為模型里。意思是要讓現(xiàn)實來適應僵硬的學術模型。答案選D：inflexible，僵硬的，不易變化的。
　　18題，這個題目有點迷惑性，很容易誤選C或者D，要嚴格按照原文提供的信息來。可原文的信息實在忒隱晦忒繞了。第四段有這么一句：To a large extent, the entire business school system works against useful, knowledge-creating research。整個商業(yè)學術系統(tǒng)就是和有用的、創(chuàng)造知識的研究相背離的。這句后面緊接著闡述了怎么個背離法。他們得有五年的時間來證明自己的academic grade，看起來時間好像很長。可是這當中的花兩到三年的時間來選擇合適的雜志，只剩不到三年的時間來進行研究。最后來了句總結(jié)：The temptation must be to slice up old data in new ways rather than pursue genuinely groundbreaking, innovative research。用新的方法來分割舊的數(shù)據(jù)，而不是追求創(chuàng)造性的研究。Slice up old data in news ways，那么還是證明舊的理論，新瓶裝舊酒。所以這題選A：重復解釋先前的研究。
　　 19題，答案是最后一段的這么一句：Up until the 1960s, American business schools were dismissed as pseudo-academic （偽學術）institutions。Dismiss as，treat as unworthy of serious consideration，對什么不屑的意思。Pseudo是假的。所以這題答案選C，有個look down on，正好和dismiss as對應。
　　20題，作者寫這篇文章的目的是什么。很明顯，這篇文章通篇都是對business school的指責，過分關注學術研究，不管這種研究對實際的business community有多大用處，形式很僵硬，說白了，就是指出business school的缺點。所以選B。C選項似是而非，的確是批評business school，但不是bad academic，只是認為business school鼓搗出來的東西不那么helpful，D選項也不對，在原文基礎上自己發(fā)揮了下，沒有預測。