问题补充：
For many students in the UK today, deciding whether or not to go to university can be as much about affordability as it is about ambition and aspiration.
In the past, students in the UK could apply to a university or college. They were sure that even if they came from a low income family, their tuition fees and some of their living (or maintenance) costs would be covered by a local authority grant(拨款). A university education was, in a financial sense, open to all and the number of students attending university grew yearly.
Sadly, it seems, those days are long gone. The turning point came in 1998, when the Labour Government introduced tuition fees of ￡1,000 a year and, instead of giving students a maintenance grant, asked them to cover their own living expenses with a repayable student loan. Only students on the lowest incomes were entitled to a grant.
The flood gates had been opened. As time passed, the ceiling on tuition fees rose, and although applicants from Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales still qualified for varying levels of subsidy(补贴), by /10 students in England often found themselves facing tuition fees over￡3,000 a year.
In the Government announced that, from , universities could charge fees of up to ￡9,000 a year. Although the Government sweetened the pill by stating that postgraduates did not have to begin repaying their student loans until they were earning more than ￡21,000 a year, the news created over-dissatisfaction. Many students argued that it was unfair that students should have to begin their work life loaded with huge debt, while others complained that the changes would bring back a class divide to university education. These views were reflected in the number of students applying for a university place, which by January fell by more than 22,000. The Universities Minister, David Willetts, stood by the decision to increase tuition fees, saying that they would not “put universities’ finance on a bearable footing” and that they would accelerate “a stronger focus on high quality teaching.”
【小题1】From the first paragraph, we can infer that in attending university.A．affordability plays more important roles than ambition and aspirationB．ambition and aspiration are more important than affordabilityC．affordability is as important as ambition and aspiration D．ambition and aspiration make a greater difference【小题2】We can put the sentence “But the biggest change was still to come” at the beginning of Paragraph .A．2B．3C．4D．5【小题3】The underlined part “sweetened the pill” in the last paragraph possibly means.A．made a sweet pillB．made the change appear good C．increased the pillD．reduced the pill【小题4】The writer the change about university education fees.A．is in favor ofB．is opposed toC．takes no notice ofD．is neither for nor againstC
答案：
(答案→)C
解析：文章介绍英国高校学费和资助制度影响入学率。很多学校提高了学费，这让很多学生和家庭背负沉重的负担，此举也引起公众的不满。
【小题1】细节题：从文章的第一段的句子：For many students in the UK today, deciding whether or not to go to university can be as much about affordability as it is about ambition and aspiration.可知在上大学的时候，经济可承受性和抱负愿望一样重要，选C
【小题2】推理题：从第五段的句子：In the Government announced that, from , universities could charge fees of up to ￡9,000 a year.可知这段讲的是政府宣布从大学的学费可以要每年9000英镑，这也是最大的改变，选 D
【小题3】猜词题：从文章最后一段的句子：Although the Government sweetened the pill by stating that postgraduates did not have to begin repaying their student loans until they were earning more than ￡21,000 a year, the news created over-dissatisfaction.虽然政府说毕业生到每年21，000英镑的时候，才需要还贷款，但是这个改变还是引起人们的不满，可知“sweetened the pill” 是“让这个改变看起来好一些”的意思，选B
【小题4】作者态度题：从文章第三段的句子：Sadly, it seems, those days are long gone.可知作者对于大学学费的改变是反对的，选B
