63

　　In recent years, we have all watched the increasing commercialization of the campus. The numerous advertising posters and the golden arches of fast food outlets may be an insult to our aesthetic sensibilities, but they are, arguably, no worse than ugly. Some of the other new features of commercialized campus life do, however, constitute a serious threat to things we rightly respect. Privatization and the business model are the potential menace.

　　What do these notions mean? To me, they involve an increased dependence on industry and charitable actions for operating the university; an increased amount of our resources being directed to applied or so-called practical Subjects, both in teaching and in research; a proprietary treatment of research results, with the commercial interest in secrecy overriding the publics interest in free, shared knowledge; and an attempt to run the university more like a business that treats industry and students as clients and ourselves as service providers with something to sell. We pay increasing attention to the immediate needs and demands of our customers and, as the old saying goes, the customer is always right.

　　Privatization is particularly frightening from the point of view of public well-being. A researcher employed by a university-affiliated hospital in Canada, working under contract with a medicine-making company, made public her findings that a particular drug was harmful. This violated the terms of her contract, and so she was fired. Her dismissal caused a scandal, and she was subsequently restored to her previous position. The university and hospital in question are now working out something similar to tenure for hospital-based researchers and guidelines for contracts, so that more public exposure of privately funded research will become possible. This is a rare victory and a small step in the right direction, but the general trend is the other way. Thanks to profit-driven private funding, researchers are not only forced to keep valuable information secret, they are often contractually obliged to keep discovered dangers to public health under wraps, too. Of course, we must not be too naive about this. Governments can unwisely insist on secrecy, too, as did the British Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries, and Food in the work they funded in connection with the bovine spongiform encephalopathy epidemic.This prevented others from reviewing the relevant, data and pointing out that problems were more serous than government was letting on.

　　57. From the first paragraph we can learn that the campus life has become

　　[A ] more convenient　　[ B ] rather ugly [ C ] somewhat harmful　 　[ D ] no more aesthetic than before

　　58. Privatization and the business model in this passage most probably mean

　　[ A ] potential menace to life　 [ B ] new features of campus life

　　[ C ] new trend on campus　 [ D] dependence on industry and charities

　　59. The author believes that we should pay

　　[ A] little attention to applied subjects　 [ B ] due attention to the public interest in free, shared knowledge

　　[ C ] more attention to the immediate needs and demands of our customers

　　[ D ] considerable attention to the commercial interest in the secrecy of research results

　　60. The researcher mentioned in the third .paragraph was fired because

　　[ A] she worked for the rival of the company [ B ] she failed to keep her research results secret

　　[ C ] she was obliged to keep her discoveries secret [ D ] she was committed to a contract with a company

　　61. It is implied in the passage that

　　[ A ] the general public is too naive to accept the privatization

　　[ B ] the notion that the customer is always right is out of date

　　[ C ] it is a general trend that there will be more public disclosure of privately funded research

　　[ D] the bovine spongiform encephalopathy epidemic in Britain was more serious than what was disclosed

　　参考答案：CBBDD

　　63

　　In recent years, we have all watched the increasing commercialization of the campus. The numerous advertising posters and the golden arches of fast food outlets may be an insult to our aesthetic sensibilities, but they are, arguably, no worse than ugly. Some of the other new features of commercialized campus life do, however, constitute a serious threat to things we rightly respect. Privatization and the business model are the potential menace.

　　What do these notions mean? To me, they involve an increased dependence on industry and charitable actions for operating the university; an increased amount of our resources being directed to applied or so-called practical Subjects, both in teaching and in research; a proprietary treatment of research results, with the commercial interest in secrecy overriding the publics interest in free, shared knowledge; and an attempt to run the university more like a business that treats industry and students as clients and ourselves as service providers with something to sell. We pay increasing attention to the immediate needs and demands of our customers and, as the old saying goes, the customer is always right.

　　Privatization is particularly frightening from the point of view of public well-being. A researcher employed by a university-affiliated hospital in Canada, working under contract with a medicine-making company, made public her findings that a particular drug was harmful. This violated the terms of her contract, and so she was fired. Her dismissal caused a scandal, and she was subsequently restored to her previous position. The university and hospital in question are now working out something similar to tenure for hospital-based researchers and guidelines for contracts, so that more public exposure of privately funded research will become possible. This is a rare victory and a small step in the right direction, but the general trend is the other way. Thanks to profit-driven private funding, researchers are not only forced to keep valuable information secret, they are often contractually obliged to keep discovered dangers to public health under wraps, too. Of course, we must not be too naive about this. Governments can unwisely insist on secrecy, too, as did the British Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries, and Food in the work they funded in connection with the bovine spongiform encephalopathy epidemic.This prevented others from reviewing the relevant, data and pointing out that problems were more serous than government was letting on.

　　57. From the first paragraph we can learn that the campus life has become

　　[A ] more convenient　　[ B ] rather ugly [ C ] somewhat harmful　 　[ D ] no more aesthetic than before

　　58. Privatization and the business model in this passage most probably mean

　　[ A ] potential menace to life　 [ B ] new features of campus life

　　[ C ] new trend on campus　 [ D] dependence on industry and charities

　　59. The author believes that we should pay

　　[ A] little attention to applied subjects　 [ B ] due attention to the public interest in free, shared knowledge

　　[ C ] more attention to the immediate needs and demands of our customers

　　[ D ] considerable attention to the commercial interest in the secrecy of research results

　　60. The researcher mentioned in the third .paragraph was fired because

　　[ A] she worked for the rival of the company [ B ] she failed to keep her research results secret

　　[ C ] she was obliged to keep her discoveries secret [ D ] she was committed to a contract with a company

　　61. It is implied in the passage that

　　[ A ] the general public is too naive to accept the privatization

　　[ B ] the notion that the customer is always right is out of date

　　[ C ] it is a general trend that there will be more public disclosure of privately funded research

　　[ D] the bovine spongiform encephalopathy epidemic in Britain was more serious than what was disclosed

　　参考答案：CBBDD