论文部分内容阅读
（武漢市育才高中高二（6）班 湖北武汉 430000）
Abstract：Since “Project 985” and “Project 211” were launched in 1990s， educational experts and the public have constant arguments and debates about its value， implications and significance. Through investigation and analysis， the author figures out that profound reasons such as colleges and universities requiring high-quality students， lack of educational expenditure and the conflicts between social efficiency and social equality are main causes of educational inequity in “Project 985 and 211”. This study aims at making contributions to relevant studies about structural reform and development of higher education in China as well as facilitating educational equity among universities.
Key words： “Project 985”； “Project 211”； educational inequity
Introduction
With the popularity of higher education in China， the public pay increasing attention to educational equity in higher education， especially to “Project 985 and 211”. To support “Project 985 and 211”， state and local governments have invested plenty of materials， human resources and money in dozens universities， which adversely affect the resource allocation in higher education （Martin， 1974）. Many non-985 universities complain that “985 and 211” universities have preempted too many resources. To explore educational inequity problem in “Project 985 and 211”， this paper will firstly give a brief introduction to educational equality and “Project 985 and 211”. Then the author will deliberately analyze current situation of educational inequity in “Project 985 and 211” as well as its profound reasons. Based on the problems， the author endeavors to figure out several solutions to improve equity in higher education.
1.Brief introduction to relevant concepts
1.1Educational Equity
Educational equity is a kind of measurement of achievement， equality and opportunity in education field. Educational equity mainly depends on two elements： fairness and inclusion （OECD， 2008）. According to American scholar Coleman （1966）， there are four criteria for education equity： equal access to education system， equal educational channels， equal educational achievements and equal influence on future life. It is believed that education level of an individual is positively related with his future quality of life.
1.2“Project 985 and 211”
“Project 985” refers to a constructive plan for establishing world-class universities in 21st century （Li， 2004）. It is conducted and supported by central government of China. There are totally 39 universities selected into “Project 985” which gains more financial and technological support from the government than ordinary universities. “Project 211” refers to the plan of establishing national key universities in 1995. This project is launched and supported by the Ministry of Education in China and is aimed at improving academic abilities and research standards of national key universities （Liu， 2004）. “Project 211” universities are responsible for training 1/3 undergraduates， 1/2 abroad students， 2/3 post-graduates and 4/5 PHD students in the whole country. In addition， these universities take control of 85% state key projects， 96% national key laboratories and account for over 70% of total scientific researching funding （Zhang， 2008）. 2.Educational Inequity in “Project 985 and 211”
2.1 Present status of education inequity in “Project 985 and 211”
2.1.1 Inequity in educational starting point
Equal starting point refers to equal education opportunity to everyone regardless of his gender， race， economical income and living environment （Jia， 2006）. However， “Project 985 and 211” universities give preference to local candidates or students from certain provinces such as Beijing， Shanghai and Guangdong. For enrollment planning， they usually have quota limitation among several provinces such as Henan and Xinjiang， which severely affects equal access to higher education. According to official statistics in 2012， some provinces such as Beijing， Shanghai and Tibet have higher chance to “Project 985 and 211” universities while some provinces like Henan and Gansu have fewer opportunities to get into top universities （Chen & Xu， 2014）. For example， “Project 211” has planned to recruit 13.66% candidates in Beijing while only 2.99% in Guangdong province.
2.1.2 Inequity in educational process
Equal education process means that each individual has equal access to educational resources. However， central and local governments give special preference to “Project 985 and 211” universities and offer them abundant research funding. For “Project 985 and 211” universities， due to financial support， they have better infrastructure， experiment equipments and excellent teachers. According to the statistics， 29 so-called “985 and 211” universities get scientific funding of 52.7 billion RMB from central government in 2013 （Chen & Xu， 2014）. According to Xinhua News， Tsinghua University gains the largest scientific funding in 2013 with nearly 4 billion RMB. It gets fiscal appropriation of 2.8 billion RMB， accounting for 70% of its total scientific funding （Ouyang， 2016）. However， non-985 and non-211 universities get relatively fewer government fiscal appropriations. Southwest Petroleum University which gains the most financial support among non-985 and non-211 universities， gets only 0.12 billion RMB from fiscal appropriation. This is 23 times less than Tsinghua Univerisity （Ouyang， 2016）.
2.1.3 Inequity in educational results
Equal results refer to equity in education achievement which is the ultimate objective of educational equity （Xin & Huang， 2009）. When analyzing recruiting information， the author finds that most enterprises have preference to students from “Project 985 and 211” universities. Some prominent enterprises even merely recruit “Project 985 and 211” graduates. For instance， when recruiting purchasing specialists， Sino-ocean estate affirmatively expresses that they only recruit fresh graduates from “Project 985 and 211”. This precondition narrows down the scope of applicants and eliminates graduates of non-985 and non-211 universities. In fact， some excellent graduates from ordinary universities prove to be more capable than some students from “Project 985 and 211”. For state enterprises， public institutions and prominent companies， they give priority to graduates from “Project 985 and 211”， which severely affects fair competition in job market. 2.2 Profound reasons for its educational inequity
Based on relevant data and materials， the author endeavors to figure out profound reasons behind education inequity in “Project 985 and 211”.
Firstly， enrollment localization and high requirements for candidates leads to unbalanced quota allocation. In China， universities have relatively autonomous rights to determine the quota allocation in each province. To guarantee candidate quality and obtain larger financial support， many “Project 985 and 211” universities give enrollment quota to locals and developed cities such as Beijing and Shanghai. Secondly， insufficient education funding plays an important part in educational inequity. For fiscal investment on education， the world average level is 7% while developed countries reach nearly 9% and less developed countries account for 4%. In 2012， China invested about 4.3% fiscal resources into education filed which is relatively lower than world average level （Ouyang， 2016）. The inappropriate allocation of fiscal capital further aggravates the insufficiency of education funding. With the limited education funding， central and local government have to give priority to “Project 985 and 211” universities in order to facilitate scientific research and economic development. Thirdly， the conflict between social efficiency and social equity to some degree aggravates educational inequity in “Project 985 and 211”. In the 21st century， China has accelerated the pace of popularizing higher education among the public. However， on account of low productivity and economic development level， the government mainly adopts efficiency first principle and recognizes the rationality of discriminate education （王，2010）. To optimize educational resources， the government launches “Project 985 and 211” with the aim of establishing several world-level universities.
3. Conclusion and recommendations
Based on the above analysis， it is obvious that there is severe educational inequity in “Project 985 and 211”. With larger financial and policy support from central and local government， “Project 985 and 211” universities have access to high quality resources， better infrastructure， experiment resources as well as high-level teachers. Students in “Project 985 and 211” have larger opportunity to enter into state enterprises， public institutions and promising companies. To mitigating educational inequity in “Project 985 and 211”， the author works out several recommendations with hope of facilitating equity in higher education. Firstly， universities are supposed to reform enrollment policy and try to reduce localization in quota allocation. “Project 985 and 211” universities should adjust its enrollment policy and give more enrollment quotas to populous provinces and minority nations such as Henan， Shandong and Yunnan province. In addition， the central government and Ministry of Education should strengthen its macro-control and urge “Project 985 and 211” to reduce localization rate to guarantee quotas from students from other provinces. Secondly， the central government should strengthen macro-control to distribute resources appropriately. The central government should continue to increase fiscal investment in education filed. When allocating educational fund， central government is supposed to adjust the proportion between ordinary universities and “Project 985 and 211” （刘，2010）. In addition， relevant incentive system should be improved to encourage social donation and sponsorship since many organizations suspect the actual use of education endowment. Thirdly， central and local government should give consideration to both efficiency and fairness. In fact， educational efficiency and fairness is not totally controversial but complementary to some extent （袁， 2002）. On the basis of current economical and social level， governments should endeavor to keep balance between educational efficiency and fairness （袁， 2002）. When supporting “Project 985 and 211” to establish world-class universities， government should also pay attention to the development of ordinary universities to improve its scientific abilities.
Bibliography：
[1]Chen， N.S. & Xu， Y.Y. （2014）. “Regional disparities in the distribution of the opportunities for enrollment in ‘Project 211’ universities”. Journal of Higher Education Management. Vol. 8.
[2]Coleman，J.S.，Campbell，E.，Hobson，C.F.，et al. （1966）. Equality of Educational opportunity[R].U.S. Government Printing Office，1966：1-35，575-587.
[3]Jia， C.X. （2006）. “A research on higher education equity”. Fu Zhou University.
[4]Li， L.X. （2004）. “China's Higher Education Reform 1998-2003： A Summary”. Asia Pacific Education Review. V （1）： 14–22.
[5]Martin Trow. （1974）. Problems in the transition from elite to mass higher education. Paris， OECD.
[6]OECD. （2008）. Ten Steps to Equity in Education.
[7]Ouyang， Y.Y. （2016）. “Research on the relationship between fiscal expenditure and educational equity”. Academics. No.7.
[8]Xin， T. & Huang， N. （2009）. “Ultimate objective of educational equity： equity of education outcome”. Educational Research， No.8
[9]Zhang， X. （2008）. “ Over 10 billion yuan to be invested in ‘Project 211’”. People’s Daily Online.
[10]劉希伟. 2006—2009年“985工程”高校招生区域公平问题的研究[J].中国高教研究. 2010 （3）.
[11]袁新文. 高等教育的公平与效率---公平与效率：二十一世纪高等教育国际学术研讨会综述[J]. 光明日报， 2002.
[12]王共明.从“211”工程视角探析高等教育的公平问题[J]. 科协论坛，2011（2）：155-157.
Abstract：Since “Project 985” and “Project 211” were launched in 1990s， educational experts and the public have constant arguments and debates about its value， implications and significance. Through investigation and analysis， the author figures out that profound reasons such as colleges and universities requiring high-quality students， lack of educational expenditure and the conflicts between social efficiency and social equality are main causes of educational inequity in “Project 985 and 211”. This study aims at making contributions to relevant studies about structural reform and development of higher education in China as well as facilitating educational equity among universities.
Key words： “Project 985”； “Project 211”； educational inequity
Introduction
With the popularity of higher education in China， the public pay increasing attention to educational equity in higher education， especially to “Project 985 and 211”. To support “Project 985 and 211”， state and local governments have invested plenty of materials， human resources and money in dozens universities， which adversely affect the resource allocation in higher education （Martin， 1974）. Many non-985 universities complain that “985 and 211” universities have preempted too many resources. To explore educational inequity problem in “Project 985 and 211”， this paper will firstly give a brief introduction to educational equality and “Project 985 and 211”. Then the author will deliberately analyze current situation of educational inequity in “Project 985 and 211” as well as its profound reasons. Based on the problems， the author endeavors to figure out several solutions to improve equity in higher education.
1.Brief introduction to relevant concepts
1.1Educational Equity
Educational equity is a kind of measurement of achievement， equality and opportunity in education field. Educational equity mainly depends on two elements： fairness and inclusion （OECD， 2008）. According to American scholar Coleman （1966）， there are four criteria for education equity： equal access to education system， equal educational channels， equal educational achievements and equal influence on future life. It is believed that education level of an individual is positively related with his future quality of life.
1.2“Project 985 and 211”
“Project 985” refers to a constructive plan for establishing world-class universities in 21st century （Li， 2004）. It is conducted and supported by central government of China. There are totally 39 universities selected into “Project 985” which gains more financial and technological support from the government than ordinary universities. “Project 211” refers to the plan of establishing national key universities in 1995. This project is launched and supported by the Ministry of Education in China and is aimed at improving academic abilities and research standards of national key universities （Liu， 2004）. “Project 211” universities are responsible for training 1/3 undergraduates， 1/2 abroad students， 2/3 post-graduates and 4/5 PHD students in the whole country. In addition， these universities take control of 85% state key projects， 96% national key laboratories and account for over 70% of total scientific researching funding （Zhang， 2008）. 2.Educational Inequity in “Project 985 and 211”
2.1 Present status of education inequity in “Project 985 and 211”
2.1.1 Inequity in educational starting point
Equal starting point refers to equal education opportunity to everyone regardless of his gender， race， economical income and living environment （Jia， 2006）. However， “Project 985 and 211” universities give preference to local candidates or students from certain provinces such as Beijing， Shanghai and Guangdong. For enrollment planning， they usually have quota limitation among several provinces such as Henan and Xinjiang， which severely affects equal access to higher education. According to official statistics in 2012， some provinces such as Beijing， Shanghai and Tibet have higher chance to “Project 985 and 211” universities while some provinces like Henan and Gansu have fewer opportunities to get into top universities （Chen & Xu， 2014）. For example， “Project 211” has planned to recruit 13.66% candidates in Beijing while only 2.99% in Guangdong province.
2.1.2 Inequity in educational process
Equal education process means that each individual has equal access to educational resources. However， central and local governments give special preference to “Project 985 and 211” universities and offer them abundant research funding. For “Project 985 and 211” universities， due to financial support， they have better infrastructure， experiment equipments and excellent teachers. According to the statistics， 29 so-called “985 and 211” universities get scientific funding of 52.7 billion RMB from central government in 2013 （Chen & Xu， 2014）. According to Xinhua News， Tsinghua University gains the largest scientific funding in 2013 with nearly 4 billion RMB. It gets fiscal appropriation of 2.8 billion RMB， accounting for 70% of its total scientific funding （Ouyang， 2016）. However， non-985 and non-211 universities get relatively fewer government fiscal appropriations. Southwest Petroleum University which gains the most financial support among non-985 and non-211 universities， gets only 0.12 billion RMB from fiscal appropriation. This is 23 times less than Tsinghua Univerisity （Ouyang， 2016）.
2.1.3 Inequity in educational results
Equal results refer to equity in education achievement which is the ultimate objective of educational equity （Xin & Huang， 2009）. When analyzing recruiting information， the author finds that most enterprises have preference to students from “Project 985 and 211” universities. Some prominent enterprises even merely recruit “Project 985 and 211” graduates. For instance， when recruiting purchasing specialists， Sino-ocean estate affirmatively expresses that they only recruit fresh graduates from “Project 985 and 211”. This precondition narrows down the scope of applicants and eliminates graduates of non-985 and non-211 universities. In fact， some excellent graduates from ordinary universities prove to be more capable than some students from “Project 985 and 211”. For state enterprises， public institutions and prominent companies， they give priority to graduates from “Project 985 and 211”， which severely affects fair competition in job market. 2.2 Profound reasons for its educational inequity
Based on relevant data and materials， the author endeavors to figure out profound reasons behind education inequity in “Project 985 and 211”.
Firstly， enrollment localization and high requirements for candidates leads to unbalanced quota allocation. In China， universities have relatively autonomous rights to determine the quota allocation in each province. To guarantee candidate quality and obtain larger financial support， many “Project 985 and 211” universities give enrollment quota to locals and developed cities such as Beijing and Shanghai. Secondly， insufficient education funding plays an important part in educational inequity. For fiscal investment on education， the world average level is 7% while developed countries reach nearly 9% and less developed countries account for 4%. In 2012， China invested about 4.3% fiscal resources into education filed which is relatively lower than world average level （Ouyang， 2016）. The inappropriate allocation of fiscal capital further aggravates the insufficiency of education funding. With the limited education funding， central and local government have to give priority to “Project 985 and 211” universities in order to facilitate scientific research and economic development. Thirdly， the conflict between social efficiency and social equity to some degree aggravates educational inequity in “Project 985 and 211”. In the 21st century， China has accelerated the pace of popularizing higher education among the public. However， on account of low productivity and economic development level， the government mainly adopts efficiency first principle and recognizes the rationality of discriminate education （王，2010）. To optimize educational resources， the government launches “Project 985 and 211” with the aim of establishing several world-level universities.
3. Conclusion and recommendations
Based on the above analysis， it is obvious that there is severe educational inequity in “Project 985 and 211”. With larger financial and policy support from central and local government， “Project 985 and 211” universities have access to high quality resources， better infrastructure， experiment resources as well as high-level teachers. Students in “Project 985 and 211” have larger opportunity to enter into state enterprises， public institutions and promising companies. To mitigating educational inequity in “Project 985 and 211”， the author works out several recommendations with hope of facilitating equity in higher education. Firstly， universities are supposed to reform enrollment policy and try to reduce localization in quota allocation. “Project 985 and 211” universities should adjust its enrollment policy and give more enrollment quotas to populous provinces and minority nations such as Henan， Shandong and Yunnan province. In addition， the central government and Ministry of Education should strengthen its macro-control and urge “Project 985 and 211” to reduce localization rate to guarantee quotas from students from other provinces. Secondly， the central government should strengthen macro-control to distribute resources appropriately. The central government should continue to increase fiscal investment in education filed. When allocating educational fund， central government is supposed to adjust the proportion between ordinary universities and “Project 985 and 211” （刘，2010）. In addition， relevant incentive system should be improved to encourage social donation and sponsorship since many organizations suspect the actual use of education endowment. Thirdly， central and local government should give consideration to both efficiency and fairness. In fact， educational efficiency and fairness is not totally controversial but complementary to some extent （袁， 2002）. On the basis of current economical and social level， governments should endeavor to keep balance between educational efficiency and fairness （袁， 2002）. When supporting “Project 985 and 211” to establish world-class universities， government should also pay attention to the development of ordinary universities to improve its scientific abilities.
Bibliography：
[1]Chen， N.S. & Xu， Y.Y. （2014）. “Regional disparities in the distribution of the opportunities for enrollment in ‘Project 211’ universities”. Journal of Higher Education Management. Vol. 8.
[2]Coleman，J.S.，Campbell，E.，Hobson，C.F.，et al. （1966）. Equality of Educational opportunity[R].U.S. Government Printing Office，1966：1-35，575-587.
[3]Jia， C.X. （2006）. “A research on higher education equity”. Fu Zhou University.
[4]Li， L.X. （2004）. “China's Higher Education Reform 1998-2003： A Summary”. Asia Pacific Education Review. V （1）： 14–22.
[5]Martin Trow. （1974）. Problems in the transition from elite to mass higher education. Paris， OECD.
[6]OECD. （2008）. Ten Steps to Equity in Education.
[7]Ouyang， Y.Y. （2016）. “Research on the relationship between fiscal expenditure and educational equity”. Academics. No.7.
[8]Xin， T. & Huang， N. （2009）. “Ultimate objective of educational equity： equity of education outcome”. Educational Research， No.8
[9]Zhang， X. （2008）. “ Over 10 billion yuan to be invested in ‘Project 211’”. People’s Daily Online.
[10]劉希伟. 2006—2009年“985工程”高校招生区域公平问题的研究[J].中国高教研究. 2010 （3）.
[11]袁新文. 高等教育的公平与效率---公平与效率：二十一世纪高等教育国际学术研讨会综述[J]. 光明日报， 2002.
[12]王共明.从“211”工程视角探析高等教育的公平问题[J]. 科协论坛，2011（2）：155-157.