Do Not Divorce Equity from Excellence: a Commentary on Chinese Higher Education

by Cai Lun Jia
Department of Educational Leadership & Policy at the University of Utah


            Prior to the mid-1980s, Chinese higher education was governed under the mechanism of a centrally planned system. The central government was solely responsible for funding higher education. Higher education was considered, accordingly, to be a public good and equity was not necessarily an debatable issue. Since the early 1990s, the landscape of Chinese higher education has changed dramatically; the Chinese government reformed its financing practice for higher education and colleges and universities are required to partially generate their own operating funds. For most higher education institutions, student tuition became a major source of revenue. Given the reality of the poverty of rural areas and their share of over 60% of the entire Chinese population, the essential nature of considering equity in higher education is obvious.

            Unfortunately, efforts of the last decade by the government and policymakers in higher education have been primarily focused on increasing the competitiveness of a select group of  elite universities, rather than on improving accessibility, affordability, and equity of the system in general. Consequently, the rapid increases in college tuition have enlarged the financial gap between rich and poor and made higher education a luxury for many. I argue that equity in higher education should be one of the first priorities of the current administration because enhancing equity will result in long-term benefits to the country as well as the well-being of the society.

            To accomplish equity, the following strategies should be considered: (1) decentralize the governing structure of higher education and professionalize the body of educational leaders. Educational leaders, presidents of higher education institutions in particular, should no longer be governmentally appointed; rather, individual institution should select leaders based on their knowledge of education and leadership capability. Toward this end, Boards of Trustees should be the governing mechanism of higher education institutions; (2) needs-based financial aid programs should be established at the national, provincial, and institutional level; (3) the government should provide more financial leverage to those who are willing to provide educational funds aimed at improving equity in higher education; (4) colleges and universities may collaborate with the business community in various formats to financially and clinically support needy students; (5) colleges and universities should reform their tuition-charge practice/criterion. For instance, rather than charging semester-based tuition, the credit-hour system should be adopted; and (6) even though I have mainly addressed the financial aspect of equity, equity is a broader concept than that. Colleges and universities should provide a wide variety of services that cope with the developmental needs of every student, especially underrepresented and marginalized ones.

          Accomplishing equity in higher education requires efforts from all stakeholders, including the government, the Ministry of Education, higher education institutions, community, and the public in general. Strategies such as above should be adopted and implemented.