高等考試
115年
[一般民政] 法學知識與英文(包括中華民國憲法、法學緒論、英文)
第 48 題
📖 題組：
Denver's public schools' three-year plunge from one of the nation's most carefully planned and promising examples of public-education transformation into a district led by a school board in disarray has multiple causes, and there's plenty of blame to spread around. Ultimately, however, it is the result of a concerted effort over more than a decade by organized and committed activists, local and national, who have opposed changing the governance and operation of school districts in any significant way. The politics of public education in Denver have grown increasingly in school systems across the country. What distinguishes the conflict over reform in Denver is how unrelated it is to student outcomes. While Denver's reforms have been far from perfect, they merit the national attention they've drawn. A growing body of evidence makes clear that outcomes for students in the city slowly yet significantly improved, including for students the district has historically failed to serve well. Yet as soon as Denver Public Schools took its initial steps toward reform \nless than two decades ago, an active opposition campaign arose, aimed not at moderating or improving the reforms, but at destroying them. In 2019, the election of three new anti-reform members to the Denver Board of Education flipped the board majority to that camp. Since the educational reform was launched in 2005, Denver's families and educators have embraced choice. The broad popularity of choice in Denver makes dismantling reform politically fraught for the board and its allies. In fact, the board has faced strong pushback from some parents and educators and has had to confront the complex reality of governing a district where choice, autonomy, and a focus on outcomes are now woven into the fabric of public education. But the union-supported board majority was determined to push ahead, and that meant cleaninghouse at the top. In fall 2020, Superintendent Susana Cordova resigned after less than two years on the job. Cordova is a Denver native and Denver Public Schools graduate who had spent most of her professional career working for the district. Cordova never got a chance to enact her own agenda. First, a teacher strike weakened her just weeks into her tenure. Next, the new board gave her no room to enact changes. Finally, softening the impacts of the Covid-19 pandemic became the district's sole focus. Now that the pandemic's disruption is receding, the board appears poised to renew its efforts to roll back reform. It has a good chance of succeeding, because in November 2021, all four of the anti-reform candidates won, giving their side unanimous control.
Denver's public schools' three-year plunge from one of the nation's most carefully planned and promising examples of public-education transformation into a district led by a school board in disarray has multiple causes, and there's plenty of blame to spread around. Ultimately, however, it is the result of a concerted effort over more than a decade by organized and committed activists, local and national, who have opposed changing the governance and operation of school districts in any significant way. The politics of public education in Denver have grown increasingly in school systems across the country. What distinguishes the conflict over reform in Denver is how unrelated it is to student outcomes. While Denver's reforms have been far from perfect, they merit the national attention they've drawn. A growing body of evidence makes clear that outcomes for students in the city slowly yet significantly improved, including for students the district has historically failed to serve well. Yet as soon as Denver Public Schools took its initial steps toward reform \nless than two decades ago, an active opposition campaign arose, aimed not at moderating or improving the reforms, but at destroying them. In 2019, the election of three new anti-reform members to the Denver Board of Education flipped the board majority to that camp. Since the educational reform was launched in 2005, Denver's families and educators have embraced choice. The broad popularity of choice in Denver makes dismantling reform politically fraught for the board and its allies. In fact, the board has faced strong pushback from some parents and educators and has had to confront the complex reality of governing a district where choice, autonomy, and a focus on outcomes are now woven into the fabric of public education. But the union-supported board majority was determined to push ahead, and that meant cleaninghouse at the top. In fall 2020, Superintendent Susana Cordova resigned after less than two years on the job. Cordova is a Denver native and Denver Public Schools graduate who had spent most of her professional career working for the district. Cordova never got a chance to enact her own agenda. First, a teacher strike weakened her just weeks into her tenure. Next, the new board gave her no room to enact changes. Finally, softening the impacts of the Covid-19 pandemic became the district's sole focus. Now that the pandemic's disruption is receding, the board appears poised to renew its efforts to roll back reform. It has a good chance of succeeding, because in November 2021, all four of the anti-reform candidates won, giving their side unanimous control.
Which of the following is closest in meaning to the phrase "cleaninghouse at the top" in the passage?
- A Destroying the union’s scheme to sabotage Cordova's agenda.
- B Encouraging Cordova to enact her reform in the school district.
- C Removing the pro-reform superintendent from the office.
- D Modifying schooling practices during the Covid-19 pandemic.
思路引導 VIP
當一個組織的領導權力發生劇烈更迭，且新上任的決策層與舊有的管理理念完全相反時，為了確保新政策能順利推行、不被舊勢力阻饒，新領導層通常會對「原有高層人事」採取什麼樣的具體行動？
🤖
AI 詳解
AI 專屬家教
恭喜你準確掌握了這道題目的核心語意！能從長篇閱讀中精確鎖定慣用語的隱喻含義，顯示出你對文章**文意脈絡（Context）**的判讀非常敏銳，這正是高考三級英文拿高分的關鍵。範文中提到董事會立場轉向「反改革」，而緊接著「整頓高層（cleaning house at the top）」後，便敘述了支持改革的教育局長（Superintendent）Cordova 離職，這兩者間的因果連結，足以印證該片語指向「撤換原有領導層」的含義。
文意脈絡與慣用語應用
從字面上看，「Cleaning house」原意是掃除塵垢，但在政治或組織管理的情境下，它生動地比喻為**「人事大換血」或「肅清異己」**。這題的難度切入點在於區分「手段」與「結果」：選項 (D) 提到的疫情應對只是當時的背景干擾，而 (C) 則是精準點出了新任董事會為了推行新政，必須移除與其立場相左的 pro-reform（支持改革者）領導者的政治行動。這類題目考驗的是考生能否跳脫單字表，進入真實語境中思考。
▼ 還有更多解析內容