2015年英语专业八级考试真题听力MP3下载附试题和答案文本

SECTION B INTERVIEW

Now both the government and the opposition party agreed that state schools are not good enough.And the Opposition is coming up with some new proposals of their own to improve them. But is their approach really all that different from the government's? Today we have Theresa May, the shadow education secretary from the Opposition with us on the radio show.
 

M: Good afternoon, Theresa.
W: Good afternoon.
M: Can I remind you of what John Major said only a few years ago when he was Prime Minister? He said we should give people opportunity and choice. "We don't mean some people. I mean everyone, opportunity for all." Well, that is precisely what the present government is saying, opportunity for all.
W: The hallmark of this government is that what they say and what they actually do is always different. And that's no different in education. What we see from the present government is that they may talk about opportunity for all, they may talk about choice, but actually they are cutting opportunity and reducing choice. And what I think is most damaging is that actually they are giving a message "Don't bother. If you are from a state school, there are barriers to be put in your place." But this is far from the truth. Universities have been doing a very great deal to encourage state school pupils to apply. The point is that we still haven't got enough state school pupils applying to our leading universities.
M: But your government had 18 years to get more of them into Oxbridge.
W: And indeed we increased the number of young people in this country going to university, from one in eight to one in three. The number of state pupils being accepted by Oxford and Cambridge and other leading universities, the proportion of state pupils has actually increased. But there is a problem in many of our secondary schools - of expectations. And it is the present government that has been leveling down expectations rather than raising them.
M: But I was talking about pupils from state schools going to the so-called elite universities. That didn't go up during your time.
W: The number from the state schools who are going to leading universities has increased over the years. But there's still an issue about ensuring the pupils from our state schools apply to going to the universities. And if you look at the Oxford figures, for example, you see that the percentage of students applying to Oxford from the state schools is about one percent, whereas from the private schools it's over 4.5 percent, so that you know that's the problem. It's expectations in the state system that have been driven down by this government over the years.
M: But again you had the opportunity to do that as well. I mean to get more children from state schools into those leading universities and it didn't happen.
W: We have been getting more children from state schools into the leading universities and the universities have been working very hard at doing that. But I think there's going to be a real problem in the short term as a result of what the present government has been doing, because they have been giving a message that there are barriers there. And we've seen it today. There are reports already that Cambridge have been finding state school pupils ringing up and saying that they are not going to bother to apply now. That's the real damage the government has been doing. Far from opening opportunities, they are actually closing down opportunities.
M: Well, they'd argue with that of course. And what they would say is "one of the things we want to do is improve the standard of our schools". Now one of the ways they want to do it is to give the schools the opportunity to run themselves more completely than they are doing at the moment. To give schools more powers, exactly the same as you. You made a speech last night laying out the way you see the education system changing in this country. I see no difference here at all between you and them.
W: There's a very great deal of difference actually. The present government talks about freedom for schools. It talks about getting money into schools. But if you look in the detail of what they are proposing, the reality is very different. We genuinely want to make schools free and give them the freedom to have all of the money to spend on what is going on in their schools.
M: All of it?
W: Well, the government say in the future 85 pence in the pound will go to the schools. I want to make sure that every pound spent on schools is a pound spent in schools. I think schools should have the money and have the power to decide how to spend it because they know best what's in the interest of their pupils.
M: Right. So the answer to my question was "Yes. All of that money will go to the schools", was it?
W: I want to see every pound spent on schools.
M: Well, you say all of the money being spent in schools going into the schools. Fine. But what does it mean in practice? Does it mean, I repeat the question, that all of that money, all of it, will go to the schools?
W: What it means is that all that money at the moment that is being spent on the schools should be spent in the schools rather than, - M: And on local? -rather than money that is supposed to be spent on schools but is being held back in bureaucracy.
M: So at the moment a certain amount of money goes to schools. A certain amount of money goes to local education authorities. Are you saying that in future no money will go to local education authorities but all of the money will go to the schools. I mean that's a very straightforward question, isn't it?
W: At the moment what happens is that money goes to local education authorities and they decide how much money is then going to be spent on the schools. Money's held back at those education authorities and is held back initially at central government as well for them to decide how it should be spent. I want that money to be actually in the schools for the schools to decide how it should be spent.
M: OK. Thank you very much, Theresa, for talking to us on the program.
W: Pleasure.