单项选择题

American economists once spoofed university education as the only industry in which those who consume its product do not purchase it; those who produce it do not sell it, and those who finance it do not control it. That apt description, made in the 1970s, has been undermined since then by the emergence of the first for-profit universities in the United States. Controlled by entrepreneurs, these schools which number about 700 and counting sell a practical education to career-minded students and make a good buck doing it. They are now expanding abroad, creating the first multinational corporations in a sector long suspicious of balance sheets.
The companies are lured by a booming market in which capitalist competition is still scarce. The number of university students is expected to double in the next 25 years to 170 million worldwide. Demand greatly exceeds supply, because the 1990s saw massive global investment in primary and secondary schools, but not in universities. The number of children enrolled in primary or secondary schools rose by 18 percent around the world—more than twice the rate of increase in any previous decade. Now these kids are often graduating from high school to find no openings in national universities, which nevertheless don’t welcome for-profit competition. The Brazilian university teachers’ union warned that foreign corporations would turn higher education into "a diploma industry". Critics raised the specter of declining quality and a loss of Brazil’s "sovereign control" over education.
For-profit universities met with similar suspicion when they first opened in the United States. By the 1980s they were regularly accused of offering substandard education and had to fight for acceptance and respect. Lately, they have flourished by catering to older students who aren’t looking for keg parties, just a shortcut to a better career. For-profit colleges now attract 8 percent of four-year students in the United States, up from 3 percent a decade ago. By cutting out frills, including sports teams, student centers and summer vacation, these schools can operate with profit margins of 20 to 30 percent.
In some countries, the American companies operate as they do at home. Apollo found an easy fit in Brazil, where few universities have dorms, students often take off time between high school and college, and there’s no summer vacation—just two breaks in July and December. In other Latin countries, Sylvan has taken a different approach, buying traditional residential colleges like the Universidad del Valle de Mexico (UVM). It has boosted enrollment by adding and heavily advertising courses in career-track fields like business and engineering, and adding no-frills satellite campuses. Sensitive to the potential hostility against foreign buyers, Sylvan keeps original school names, adding its own brand, Sylvan International Universities, to publicity materials, and keeps tuition in line with local private schools.
Most of the schools that Sylvan has purchased were managed by for-profits to begin with, including the prestigious Les Roches Hotel Management School in Switzerland. But in general, Says Urdan, Sylvan’s targets "have not been run with world-class business practices. They’re not distressed, but there’s an opportunity for them to be better managed." When Sylvan paid $50 million for a controlling stake in UVM two years ago, the school had revenues of about $80 million and an enrollment of 32,000. The success of the for-profits is nothing to be afraid of, says World Bank education expert Jamil Salmi: "I don’t think they will replace traditional universities, but they can push some more traditional providers to be more innovative and more attentive to the needs of the labor market."
Some students at Sylvan schools in Latin America welcome the foreign invasion. At the Universidad de las Americas in Santiago, Daniela Villagran says friends tease her for studying at "Yankeeland," but she figures Sylvan connections "will give me an edge when I go out to look for a job." The emphasis on independent thought is what separates UVM from other institutions in Mexico. And, for better or worse, more American schools are on the way.
The word "specter" in the second paragraph probably means

[A] something that people worry about.
B. something that people know about.
C. something that people are aware of.
D. something that people are afraid of.
热门 试题

单项选择题
Which of the following statements is TRUE of Jeremy Thomas and Carly Stevens’s surveys [A] They reported the results of the surveys to the government. [B] There were no such comprehensive surveys done before. [C] The surveys show there are more plant species extinct. [D] Other ecologists will do more surveys based on theirs.
Anecdotal evidence of a looming Crisis in biodiversity is now being reinforced by science. In their comprehensive surveys of plants, butterflies and birds over the past 20 to 40 years in Britain, ecologists Jeremy Thomas and Carly Stevens found significant population declines in a third of all native species. Butterflies ate the furthest along-71 percent of Britain’s 58 species are shrinking in number, and some, like the large blue and tortoiseshell, are already extinct. In Britain’s grasslands, a key habitat, 20 percent of all animal, plant and insect species are on the path to extinction. There’s hardly a corner of the country’s ecology that isn’t affected by this downward spiral.
The problem would be bad enough if it were merely local, but it’s not: because Britain’s temperate ecology is similar to that in so many other parts of the world, it’s the best microcosm scientists have been able to study in detail. Scientists have sounded alarms about species’ extinction in the past, but always specific to a particular animal or place--whales in the 1980s or the Amazonian rain forests in the 1990s. This time, though, the implications are much wider. The Amazon is a "biodiversity hot spot" with a unique ecology. But in Britain, "the main drivers of change are the same processes responsible for species’ declines worldwide, ’says Thomas. The findings, published in the journal Science, provide the first clear evidence that the world is in the throes of a massive extinction. Thomas and Stevens argue that we are facing a loss of 65 to 95 percent of the world’s species, on the scale of an ice age or the meteorite that may have wiped out the dinosaurs 65 million years ago.
If so, this would be only the sixth time such devastation had occurred in the past 600 million years. The other five were associated with one-off events like the ice ages, a volcanic eruption or a meteor. This time, ecosystems are dying a thousand deaths--from overfishing and the razing of the rain forests, but also from advances in agriculture. The British study, for instance, finds that one of the biggest problems is nitrogen pollution. Nitrogefi is released when fossil fuels burn in cars and power plants-but also when ecologically rich heath-lands are plowed and fertilizers are spread. Nitrogen-rich fertilizers fuel the growth of tall grasses, which in turn overshadow and kill off delicate flowers like harebells and eyebrights.
Even seemingly innocuous practices are responsible for vast ecological damage. When British farmers stopped feeding horses and cattle with hay and switched to silage, a kind of preserved short grass, they eliminated a favorite nesting spot of corncrakes, birds known for their raspy nightly mating calls; corncrake populations have fallen 76 percent in the past 20 years. The depressing list goes on and on.
Many of these practices are being repeated throughout the world, in one form or another, which is why scientists believe that the British study has global implications. Wildlife is getting blander. "We don’t know which species are essential to the web of life so we’re taking a massive risk by eliminating any of them, " say’s David Wedin, professor of ecology at the University of Nebraska. Chances are we’ll be seeing the results of this experiment before too long.