CHINA'S university student population has been growing at an unprecedented rate. This has obviously increased the number of unemployed graduates, especially in the current circumstances, but now, there's an even newer controversy that has arisen.
Universities in this country enroll a disproportionately large number of people from urban areas, a scholar, Xue Yong, commented in a Shanghai newspaper recently. This policy does a great injustice to those with rural roots, and it affects the intellectual quality of universities, Xue claimed
He cited media reports that students from rural areas account for only 17.7 percent of the university population, while rural people account for 55 percent of the total population.
His point is that institutions of higher learning accept many students from urban areas with lesser intellectual and academic abilities, thereby "dumbing down" our schools
At the same time, many perfectly eligible students from rural areas are deprived of a chance at the most valuable and important tool in life. Xue says the government should use grants to force universities to accept a higher number of students from the countryside.
Another odd piece of news has focused attention on the plight of rural students: One sophomore from the countryside took more than five tons of oranges to his college in Zhejiang to cover tuition, because his family couldn't sell their crops and couldn't come up with the tuition.
Many commentators have echoed Xue's concerns and have criticized the raw deal that rural students are getting, but others question the truth of this. Some say that Xue's statistics are faulty or old, while others say that the problem is not with the out-of-balance university population overall, but with the top-tier schools taking a much higher proportion of urban students.
So what's your opinion? Should the State use its financial or legal muscle to redress the imbalance and help rural students?
Yes
For social justice and a more harmonious society, universities should take in more students with rural roots than they are currently taking.
1. Even if Xue Yong's statistics were inaccurate, it's fairly well known that rural people are not well represented in institutions of higher learning. This obvious injustice stokes the fires of discontent and destabilizes society.
2. Unlike young people in the city, young rural people have fewer opportunities for personal development or ways to change their lives. Higher education remains one of their few hopes. That opportunity should not be denied.
No
The current system is not perfect but it is the result of years of educational reforms and shouldn't be easily tampered with, without more research and preparation.
1. Xue's argument is based on the premise that the top 10 percent of city students and top 10 percent of rural students would do equally well at university if all were enrolled. But that may not be the case since the environments in which they grow up are quite different.
2. Universities are constantly concerned about their excellence and competitiveness, and have to maintain their own strict admission policies. They may not want to follow the government's orders quite so willingly in this case.
译文:
是否需要帮助农村的学生？
中国大学生的数量正在以前所未有的速度增长着。显然，这会让毕业生的失业率上升，尤其在当前的环境中。现在，新的矛盾又出现了。
薛勇，学者，家报纸上评论说，如今，国家在城市地区正在以一种不协调比例招收大学生。这种政策对那些农村的孩子来说是不公平的，同时，这也影响了大学的教学质量。
在大学生的比例中，农村孩子只占到17.7%，而农村人口却占到全国人口的55%。他在引用媒体的报告中提到。
他指出高等教育机构总是招收那些城市的然而智力和学习能力不怎么优越的学生，这就导致了学校教学质量的下降。
与此同时，那些完全合格的农村学生却被剥夺了在人生中最为重要和宝贵的求学机会。薛说，政府应该拨款规定大学招收更多来自农村的学子。
另一条新闻是关注农村学生的贫困问题：一个来自乡村的大二学生，从家里向学校运来了5吨多的橘子当学费，因为庄稼卖不出去。
许多评论员与薛的观点产生共鸣，他们批判对农村学生的不公平待遇，然而有些人对事实的真相表示怀疑。有人说薛的数据有偏差或一过时，也有人说，问题不在于大学生数量的不平衡，而是一些著名学府招生过高比例的城市学生。
那么你的观点是什么呢？国家应该利用其财政或法律力量来缩小不平衡以帮助农村学生吗？
赞成
从社会公正性和和谐社会角度来说，大学比现在招收更多的农村学生。
第一 尽管薛勇的数据不是那么准确，但农村的学生不能很好的代笔高等教育是众所周之的。显然，这种不公正会燃起不满之火从而导致社会的不稳定。
第二 和城里人不同，农村的年轻人相比之下少了很多个人发展的机会，这样他们就无法改变自己的生活。接受高等教育就成为了他们唯一的希望。因而这个机会不应该被剥夺。
反对
现行的教育制度虽不完善，可它是多年的教育改革的成果，没有足够的调查和准备不应该被轻易地修改。
第一 薛的观点是基于10%的城市学生和10%的农村学生如果都被平等招收的前提下。但是，如果他们成长的环境不同的话，这种说法就不能成立。
第二 大学总是会关注其知名度和竞争力，他们必须遵循各自严格的招收政策。因此，他们不会愿意听从城府的指挥。