更多"[单选题]The Open University,one of the"的相关试题:
[单选题]The Open University,one of the great successes of modern Britain,is facing a crisis.On the surface,this centres on the embattled vice-chancellor.Peter Horrocks,whom the staff want to resign.The UCU(University and College Union)branch at the university has passed a motion of no confidence in him.and says he no longer commands the respect of staff.The immediate cause was a remark for which he has been forced to apologise,to the effect that some academics had been allowed"to get away with not teaching for decades",but this came in a context of brutal budget cuts he has proposed.More profoundly.the crisis exposes a huge disagreement about what actually constitutes teaching,and why it is a worthwhile activity.Is it a way to produce exam resulis and certificates of employability,or is the purpose to share whaiever makes a subject worth studying for itself,and to inculcate the skills that will enable students to glimpse and pursue that vision?But the deeper crisis reaches far beyond the vice-chancellor's inadequacies.Some of the challenges facing the university are simply a result of the huge changes in society and technology since it was founded in 1969.In the early days,staff agonised over whether to include colour in their television programmes,since many viewers might still own black and white sets.In those days,too.there was a very large pool of middle-aged people who had been denied tertiary education,and for whom this really was the university of the seconcl chance.But the pool of second chancers has now largely gone the way of black and white televisions.Those are difficulties that would face the university under any administration.So would the widespread competition in the field of distance learning.But with all that said,it is central government that is largely responsible for the difficulties of the OU.The government's conception of higher education as a marketplace where students can shop for qualifications is profoundly destructive to all universities,and the OU is only the most exposed and vulnerable.The introduction,and then the tripling,of tuition fees has wrecked its financial model,so that student numbers have dropped by a third since 2010.The only thing to fall as fast has been the university's rating for student satisfaction,from lst t0 47th.So much for the conception of universities as selling to"customers",rather than teaching students.The university is an institution that enriches the lives of those who attend it.It is on that basis that the government should still recognise,and support,the ideal that everyone deserves access to the benefits of a real university,whatever their past,and whenever they decide they need it.
Peter Horrocks has come under criticism directly due to his《》（）
A.improper statement.
B.planned brutal budget cuts.
C.short-sighted teaching vision.
D.infeasible managerial practices.
[简答题]Longevity is one of humanity's great accomplishments.Yet it is seen as one of society's great headaches.As the world greys,growth,tax revenues and workforces will decline while spending on pensions and health care will increase.However,those extra years of life are predominantly healthy ones.Too many governments and firms fail to recognise this fact,instead lumping all the extra years in the damning category of 65 and over.This binary way of thinking,seeing retirement as a cliff edge over which workers and consumers suddenly tumble,bears little relation to the real world.A more radical approach would start by acknowledging that,in the rich world at least,many of the old are still young.They want to work,but more flexibly.They want to spend money,too.In western Europe the over-60s will account for 59%of consumption growth in cities between now and 2030,says McKinsey,a consultancy.
[单选题]“There is one and only one social responsibility of business,”wrote Milton Friedman,a Nobel prize-winning economist“That is,to use its resources and engage in activities designed to increase its profits.”But even if you accept Fiedman’s premise and regard corporate social responsibility（CSR）policies as a waste of shareholders money,things may not be absolutely clear-cut.New research suggests that CSR may create monetary value for companies–at least when they are prosecuted for corruption.The largest firms is America and Britain together spend more than$15 billion a year on CSR,according to an estimate by EPG,a consulting firm,This could add value to their businesses in three ways.First,consumers may take CSR spending as a“signal”that a company’s products are of high quality.Second,customers may be willing to buy a company’s products as an indirect way to donate to the good causes is helps.And third,through a more diffuse“halo effect,”whereby its good deeds earn it greater consideration from consumers and others.Previous studies on CSR have had trouble differentiating these effects because consumers can be affected by all three.A recent study attempts to separate them by looking at bribery prosecutions under America’s Foreign Corrupt Practices Act（FCP
A）.It argues that since prosecutors do not consume a company's products as part of their investigations,they could be influenced only by the halo effect.The study found that,among prosecuted firms,those with the most comprehensiveCSR programmes tendedto getmore lenient penalties.Their analysis ruled out the possibility that it was firms'political influence,rather than their CSR stand,that accounted for the leniency:Companies that contributed more to political campaigns did not receive lower fines.In all,the study concludes that whereas prosecutors should only evaluate a case based on its merits,they do seen to influenced by a company’s record in CSR."We estimate that either eliminating a substantial labour-rights concern,such as child labour,or increasing corporate giving by about 20%results in fines that generally are 40%lower than the typical punishment for bribing foreign officials,"says one researcher.Researchers admit that their study does not answer the question of how much businesses ought to spend on CSR.Nor does it reveal how much companies are banking on the halo effect,rather than the other possible benefits,when they decide their do-gooding policies.But at least have demonstrated that whencompanies get into trouble with the law,evidence of good character can win In all,the study concludes that whereas prosecutors should only evaluate a case based on its merits,they do seen to influenced by a company’s record in CSR."We estimate that either eliminating a substantial labour-rights concern,such as child labour,or increasing corporate giving by about 20%results in fines that generally are 40%lower than the typical punishment for bribing foreign officials,"says one researcher.Researchers admit that their study does not answer the question of how much businesses ought to spend on CSR.Nor does it reveal how much companies are banking on the halo effect,rather than the other possible benefits,when they decide their do-gooding policies.But at least have demonstrated that whencompanies get into trouble with the law,evidence of good character can win them a less costly punishment.
When prosecutors evaluate a case,a company's CSR record.
A.has an impact on their decision.
B.comes across as reliable evidence.
C.increases the chance of being penalized.
D.constitutes part of the investigation.
[填空题]I subscribe（ ）one daily newspaper and one weekly magazine.
to
[单选题]The university started some new language programs to cater __________the country′s Silk Road Economic Belt.
A.for
B.with
C.of
D.from
[单选题]The university regulations require that the students?at least 90%of the
lectures．
A.Attended
B.to attend
C.would attend
D.attend
[不定项选择题] “There is one and only one social responsibility of business,” wrote Milton Friedman, a Nobel prize-winning economist, “That is, to use its resources and engage in activities designed to increase its profits.” But even if you accept Friedman’s premise and regard corporate social responsibility (CSR) policies as a waste of shareholders’ money, things may not be absolutely clear-cut. New research suggests that CSR may create monetary value for companies—at least when they are prosecuted for corruption.
The largest firms in America and Britain together spend more than $15 billion a year on CSR, according to an estimate by EPG, a consulting firm. This could add value to their businesses in three ways. First, consumers may take CSR spending as a “signal” that a company’s products are of high quality. Second, customers may be willing to buy a company’s products as an indirect way to donate to the good causes it helps. And third, through a more diffuse “halo effect,” whereby its good deeds earn it greater consideration from consumers and others.
Previous studies on CSR have had trouble differentiating these effects because consumers can be affected by all three. A recent study attempts to separate them by looking at bribery prosecutions under America’s Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCP
A). It argues that since prosecutors do not consume a company’s products as part of their investigations, they could be influenced only by the halo effect.
The study found that, among prosecuted firms, those with the most comprehensive CSR programmes tended to get more lenient penalties. Their analysis ruled out the possibility that it was firms’ political influence, rather than their CSR stand, that accounted for the leniency: Companies that contributed more to political campaigns did not receive lower fines.
In all, the study concludes that whereas prosecutors should only evaluate a case based on its merits, they do seem to be influenced by a company’s record in CSR. “We estimate that either eliminating a substantial labour-rights concern, such as child labour, or increasing corporate giving by about 20% results in fines that generally are 40% lower than the typical punishment for bribing foreign officials,” says one researcher.
Researchers admit that their study does not answer the question of how much businesses ought to spend on CSR. Nor does it reveal how much companies are banking on the halo effect, rather than the other possible benefits, when they decide their do-gooding policies. But at least they have demonstrated that when companies get into trouble with the law, evidence of good character can win them a less costly punishment.
When prosecutors evaluate a case, a company’s CSR record ______.
A.comes across as reliable evidence
B.has an impact on their decision
C.increases the chance of being penalized
D.constitutes part of the investigation
