(The Guardian)More UK universities should be profiting from ideas
A repeated criticism of the UK's university sector is its noticeable weakness in translating new knowledge into new products and services.
Recently, the UK National Stem Cell Network warned the UK could lose its place among the world leaders in stem cell research unless adequate funding and legislation could be assured, despite an annual £40m spent by the Department of Health on all kinds of research.
However, we do have to challenge the unthinking plaint that the sector does not do enough in taking ideas to market. The most recent parative data on the performance of universities and research institutions in Australia, Canada, USA and UK shows that, from a relatively weak starting position, the UK now leads on many indicators of mercialization activity.
When viewed at the national level, the policy interventions (interference) of the past decade have helped transformed the performances of UK universities. Evidence suggests the UK's position is much stronger than in the recent past and is still showing improvement. But national data masks the very large variation in the performance of individual universities. The evidence shows that a large number of universities have fallen off the back of the pack, a few perform strongly and the rest chase the leaders.
This type of uneven distribution is not strange to the UK and is mirrored across other economies. In the UK, research is concentrated: less than 25% of universities are receiving 75% of the research funding. These same universities are also the institutions producing the greatest share of PhD graduates, science citations, patents and license ine. The effect of policies generating long-term resource concentration has also created a distinctive set of universities which are research-led and mercially active. It seems clear that the concentration of research and mercialization work creates differences between universities.
The core objective for universities which are research-led must be to maximize the impact of their research efforts. Their purpose is not to generate funds to add to the bottom line of the university or to substitute other ine streams. Rather, these universities should be generating the widest range of social, economic and environmental benefits. In return for the scale of investment, they should share their expertise (expert knowledge or skill) in order to build greater confidence in the sector.
Part of the economic recovery of the UK will be driven by the next generation of research mercialization spilling out of our universities. On the evidence presented in my report, there are three dozen universities in the UK which are actively engaged in advanced research training and mercialization work.
If there was a greater coordination（协调）of technology transfer offices within regions and a simultaneous (happening at the same time) investment in the scale and functions of our graduate schools, universities could, and should, play a key role in positioning the UK for the next growth cycle.
【小题1】What does the author think of UK universities in terms of mercialization?A．They have lost their leading position in many ways.B．They still have a place among the world leaders.C．They do not regard it as their responsibility.D．They fail to change knowledge into money.【小题2】What does the author say about the national data on UK universities’ performance in
mercialization?A．It masks the fatal weaknesses of government policy. B．It indicates their ineffective use of government resources.C．It does not rank UK universities in a scientific way. D．It does not reflect the differences among universities.【小题3】We can infer from Paragraph 5 that “policy interventions (in Paragraph 4)” refers to .A．concentration of resources in a limited number of universitiesB．pulsory cooperation between universities and industriesC．government aid to non-research-oriented universitiesD．fair distribution of funding for universities and research institutions【小题4】What dose the author suggest research-led universities do?A．Fully use their research to benefit all sectors of society.B．Generously share their facilities with those short of funds.C．Advertise their research to win international recognition.D．Spread their influence among top research institutions.B
网友回答
(答案→)B
解析：本文介绍的是更多的英国大学应凭创意(科研成果转化成产品)获利。
【小题1】B推理判断题。该题问的是作者对英国大学在商业化方面的看法。首段提出人们对英国大学由知识向产品服务转化过程方面的批评，第二段整体用调查数据证明首段对英国的大学的负面观点，提出英国大学在干细胞研究领域将会失去世界领先地位。但这些都并非作者观点，同时在第三段短首出现转折，然后引入作者方面的观点。可知作者观点与首二段相反，他并不认为英国失去世界领先地位。第三段末句更提出英国大学在许多商业活动方面仍领先全球。可知作者认为英国大学仍大体领先世界，总体持正面肯定态度。
【小题2】D 推理判断题。该题问的是作者对英国大学商业化表现的国家统计数据的看法。由national data可定位至第四段转折后，“But national data masks the very large variation in the performance of individual universities.”提到数据掩盖了单个大学之间表现的差距。masks(掩盖)同义改写为does not reflect，variation同义改写为differences。
【小题3】A词义猜测题。仅从字面意思“政策干预”还不足以选出答案，需要结合上下文。该短语所在的第四段提到这种“政策干预”促进了英国大学整体表现的提高。但之后转折指出，英国大学个体之间存在较大差异。第五段首更是将第四段强调的现象总结为“分配不平均”(uneven distribution)。由此可知这种“政策干预”指的应是政府对一部分大学的偏向性支持，而对更多的大学则支持不够，造成资源分配不均。对应A选项“资源集中在少数大学手中”。
【小题4】A 该题问的是作者对研究先导型大学的建议。由research-led universities可定位至全文第六段。
该段中部用rather转折引出作者觉得这些大学应该(should)产生最广的社会、经济与环境等各方面效益(widest range)，应该分享他们的专业技术资源，让整个领域(build greater confidence in the sector)都构筑起信心，此即为建议。对应A选项，仅有A选项说“充分利用它们的研究成果使各行各业收益”。B项提到的与缺乏资金的学校分享设施、C项提到的扩大国际影响与D项提到的扩大在顶级研究机构中的影响范围均太窄。