NotesFAQContact Us
Collection
Advanced
Search Tips
ERIC Number: ED523306
Record Type: Non-Journal
Publication Date: 2010
Pages: 285
Abstractor: As Provided
Reference Count: 0
ISBN: ISBN-978-1-1243-3086-0
ISSN: N/A
Perceptions of Effectiveness and Fairness of Chinese Higher Education Admissions Policy Reformed
Sun, Jing
ProQuest LLC, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of California, Santa Barbara
Since 1949 when the People's Republic of China was established, China adopted the single criterion higher education admissions policy. That is, admissions only looked at the Gao Kao scores. The test-score-centered admissions policy undermined students' health, distorted instructions and curricula and also resulted in corruption. As a result, China has attempted to implement the multiple criteria Gao Kao policy since 2003. Besides the Gao Kao scores, the higher education institutions started requiring recommendations and interviews. This dissertation attempted to investigate whether or not the single criterion Gao Kao policy is perceived more effective and fairer than the multiple criteria Gao Kao policy in China. This dissertation used the case study as the major research strategy. Data were collected through interviewing the four experts in the higher education admissions. The two of them were from the Ministry of Education in China and the other two were the admission administrators at Tsinghua University. The interview protocol was designed through the theory developed from the literature review in terms of the policy effectiveness and fairness. Concretely, this researcher developed a theoretical framework on the policy effectiveness and fairness through reviewing past literatures, and then compared the empirical models with the theory. The closer one policy was to the theory, the more effective and fairer that policy would be perceived. Finally, through comparisons, this dissertation drew the conclusion that the multiple criteria Gao Kao policy was perceived more effective than the single criterion Gao Kao policy in China, whereas the single criterion Gao Kao policy was perceived fairer than the multiple criteria Gao Kao policy. Further, this researcher gave recommendations on policy, practice and research. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: http://www.proquest.com/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml.]
ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway, P.O. Box 1346, Ann Arbor, MI 48106. Tel: 800-521-0600; Web site: http://www.proquest.com/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml
Publication Type: Dissertations/Theses - Doctoral Dissertations
Education Level: Higher Education; Postsecondary Education
Audience: N/A
Language: English
Sponsor: N/A
Authoring Institution: N/A