China's national university entrance examination system has long
been hailed as an effective mechanism to ensure equal education
opportunities for all students, but a recent admissions scandal has
exposed many flaws as well as laying bare its vulnerability to
power abuse and corruption.
The widely publicized scandal has also triggered serious doubts
about the government's call for higher education institutions to
become profit-oriented businesses.
China Central Television (CCTV) reported last Friday that three
employees of the Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics
(Beihang) had extorted at least 550,000 yuan (US$67,000) from seven
students in south China's Guangxi
Zhuang Autonomous Region.
Pang Hongbing, Gao Feng and Liu Fangping allegedly threatened to
deprive the students of their admissions to the university, even
though they had earlier enrolled. In a recorded phone conversation
with CCTV reporters, Pang said other students were waiting to fill
their places.
Pang and Gao are the general manager and deputy
manager?respectively
of Tianhong Electronic Science and Technology Co. Ltd, a company
affiliated with the university. Liu is an employee of the
company.
The case was reported to local police when the three attempted
to extort 100,000 yuan (US$12,000) from the parents of a female
student named Li, of Nanning, the capital city of Guangxi.
Pang and Gao have been released after questioning by police and
Liu remains in custody in Nanning.
Pledging a full investigation, Beihang President Li Wei also
made a public apology, saying he was deeply ashamed and that the
scandal had damaged the reputation of the country's university
admission procedures. He said the money had been refunded to the
students.
Meanwhile, the university officials in charge of admissions have
been suspended pending further investigation.
"I hope the scandal in Guangxi is an isolated incident in
nationwide university student admissions," Li told the media.
It was not.
The People’s Daily reported on August 17 that the Xi'an
Conservatory of Music in northwest China's Shaanxi
Province had asked for 30,000 yuan (US$3,620) from each
enrolled student. The students who refused to pay were also
threatened with the withdrawal of their admission notices,
according to the newspaper.
Some critics claim these incidents merely expose the tip of the
iceberg of malpractice and corruption affecting university
admission procedures.
The scandals have indicated a number of loopholes in the
university admission system, including lack of transparency and
supervision, lax management and poor quality of personnel.
Insiders say that many irregular practices have long existed in
the national university admission procedure.
Some admissions personnel have profited from selling to
disqualified recruits enrollment quotas reserved for students of
minority groups and those with selected specialties.
Media reports said last year the top two students admitted by
the Department of Arts in Hainan University in 2002 knew little or
nothing about drawing. Admissions personnel of the university were
suspected of taking bribes from the two students.
An Yang, who once worked in national university admissions, told
the China Youth Daily that the system has been suffering
widely from corruption.
"Accepting a bribe has been a very common phenomenon in
university admissions, but the bribe might not always involve
cash," An wrote in a commentary. "It has been an open secret in all
universities that an admissions job is a lucrative post."
He revealed that some admissions workers have their dining and
travel expenses paid by the parents of enrolled students and
sometimes openly demand expensive gifts from them.
An indicated that corruption has rapidly evolved into the open
extortion of money, in part because education authorities have
failed to give proper attention to standards in admissions
work.
"The absence of effective supervision and restriction over their
power seems to breed corruption," said An.
Although Beihang described the scandal as an isolated act by the
three employees members, critics say that does not mean the
university administration office can shirk its responsibility for
the misconduct.
The Ministry of Education requires all universities to send
admission notices directly to enrolled students through the post,
but the admissions office at Beihang agreed to let Pang deliver the
notices to six students in Guangxi by hand. It provided him ample
opportunities to blackmail them.
Following the revelation of the Beihang scandal, the Ministry of
Education issued an urgent notice forbidding any extra fees to be
charged on enrolled students during the process of admission.
Any unit in violation of the order will be severely punished,
the notice warned.
As a major effort to stem the "back door" practice of securing
advantages through connections, the ministry began to phase out
online admission as early as the late 1990s.
Meanwhile, it also ordered the publication of the details
concerning outstanding students who are permitted to go to
university without taking the national entrance exam.
Media commentator Jiang Xin asserts that still more work has to
be done.
He believes that the main reason for the scandal still lies in
the lack of openness and transparency. With little information open
to the public, the national university entrance examination system
has been shrouded in mystery. Most people lack legal channels to
learn more about the admissions procedure and can do nothing but
wait for notification from admissions officers.
"Given the lack of information, some national university
admissions procedures have become an 'information black hole,' in
which some information that should be made available to the public
has been blacked out," Jiang said.
He suggested that more information about examination scores,
admissions procedures and personnel should be subject to public
supervision.
"Internal supervision within the education system itself is too
weak to ensure equity in university admission," Jiang stated.
Despite its shortcomings, the national university entrance
examination system is considered the last line of defense for
education equality in China.
"But the line of defense is sadly being eaten into by corruption
in admissions," said an editorial of the China Youth Daily.
It went on to warn that admissions corruption will undermine
educational equality, which is the basis for social equality.
Those born in rich and powerful families will unjustly enjoy
more opportunities than their counterparts from poor families
unless admission corruption can be checked, it said.
"What's more worrying is that admissions corruption presents the
dark side of society to high school graduates, and this will have a
negative impact on their concept of a fair and just society as well
affecting their early life," the editorial said.
Professor Lao Kaisheng of Beijing Normal
University blamed admission corruption on the marketization of
education.
"Scores used to be the only decisive factor in university
admissions, which was completely free from the influence of market
factors," said Lao, director of the Institute of Education Policy
and Legal Studies. "But now some market practices have been eating
into admissions."
The government has been bent on establishing the education
market, but its efforts to regulate it have been left wanting,
according to Lao.
He suggested the practice of selling educational opportunities
for money should be eradicated through sound regulation and
management.
"We can prevent such admission corruption if we can actively
respond to the rapid changes in the education sector and set up an
effective mechanism," he said.
(
China Daily August 19, 2004)