Almost 12 years after the landmark federal study “A Nation at Risk: Th

Almost 12 years after the landmark federal study “A Nation at Risk: The Imperative for Educational Reform” warned darkly of the “rising tide of mediocrity that threatens our very future,” we remain a nation at risk. We are a nation whose 13-year-olds have average math skills that rank below those in 14 other developed countries, according to one 1991 study. We are a nation whose college professors complain that before they can teach the classics, they must teach the basics. And while nearly all American adults can read and write at a basic level, according to a 1993 Educational Testing Service study fewer than half can use a bus schedule or accurately record car-maintenance information.

All this is despite the fact that education is the biggest line item in most state budgets. Indeed, the total US spending on education in 1994 was estimated at $484 billion, almost double the $250 billion spent on defense. But of the average $5,300 spent per pupil each year, some experts estimate that less than half goes into the classroom. The rest goes to such important auxiliary services as athletic coaching and lunch programs – but also to the bureaucracy that both supports and entangles the nation’s school system.

Today, the proposals for reforming education are nearly as diverse as the members of America’s 64.5 million strong student body – privatization, home-schooling and video instruction. While education remains largely a local matter, with only 7% of funding coming from the Federal Government, a debate is raging over the need to impose national standards, whereby every pupil at a given level must master the same body of knowledge and pass the same set of tests. The education act, signed by President Clinton last March, offers incentives to the states to develop uniform standards for students; it also promotes teacher training and parental involvement. But if there are to be national standards, then whose? And what about those schools that must first cope with gunfights in the hallways before teaching the import of the Emancipation Proclamation? Diane Ravitch, the author of the forthcoming book National Standards in American Education, points to the growing successes of such community-based programs as charter schools. “We have had a one-size-fits-all system, and it doesn’t work,” she says. “The move toward tailoring schools for different students is a good way to go.”

1. On the basis of the passage, what can be safely inferred about the state of education in America?

A. Education is not on the priority list of the government.
B. Nearly all Americans are at least literate.
C. All Americans are very poor in mathematical skills.
D. Using a bus schedule or recording car-maintenance information is not on the American school curriculum.
E. Parents bear most of the expenses of education, with the government bearing only seven percent of the total cost.


2. The author of the passage is most likely to agree with which of the following?

A. Implementation of the Education Act signed by Clinton should be given priority.
B. The American government is not spending enough on education.
C. It is not advisable to set national standards on pupils everywhere.
D. Privatization, home schooling and video instruction are good options for improving education standards.
E. American education is not in as bad a state as it is made out to be as its 13-year-olds rank below only 14 other developed nations in average math skills.


3. The primary purpose of the author in writing the passage is which of the following?

A. Presenting certain facts about a situation, talking about reasons for the situation being as it is, and presenting a possible way to change it.
B. Criticizing the government for the apathy it shows towards education.
C. Presenting facts about spending on education by the government and how the money is actually used.
D. Emphasize the need for new education reforms.
E. Emphasize how bureaucracy helps as well as harms the nation’s school system and to present a way to deal with it.


4. What is the purpose of the third paragraph?

A. Suggest ways to promote teacher training and parental involvement.
B. Present arguments and counter-arguments for the education act signed by Clinton.
C. Emphasize the need to impose national standards for all the pupils.
D. Justify why schools must be tailored according to the students’ needs.
E. Argue that, just to fund seven percent of the total cost of educating the 64.5 m strong student body is not enough on the part of the federal government.


5. From the passage, we can conclude that the federal study mentioned had

A. been ineffective, as even after many years the risk mentioned in it has not been overcome.
B. helped to highlight the problems facing the educational system of the country.
C. highlighted how most of the money meant for students was being spent on athlete coaching, lunch programs and on bureaucracy.
D. brought the spotlight on the problems faced by teachers all over the world.
E. brought out in the open the fact that the Education Act signed by Clinton had not been properly implemented.


6. The passage suggests that instead of imposing national standards on students, schools should be tailor-made for students. Which of the following reasons does the passage give for this suggestion?

A. Education levels are falling all over the country, and they can be improved only by bringing down the basic requirements for each level.
B. Education is a local matter, so the schools of a particular area should follow the standards set by the local people.
C. As the federal government spends only seven percent of the total amount needed for funding education, it cannot be given too much say in deciding the national standards.
D. It is difficult to arrive at a consensus for national standards as too many people are involved in the decision.
E. Having same standards for all students without paying attention to local needs has not succeeded. So community based programs tailoring schools according to students’ needs should be tried now.