Live Chat
1-888-369-5603 44-20-7183-0318 61-28-014-8214

Education term paper

[...]
"Before the reform, financing of higher education in China was characterized by a number of features. First, institutions were almost totally supported by state appropriation. In 1978, for example, 96.4% of higher education expenditures came from public coffers. Not only were students not required paying, they were supported by the government with meal stipends and free accommodation. Second, the central government was the only controller of the education budget. Funds were channelled through the Ministry of Finance to various ministries and local governments, with the endorsement of the then Ministry of Education (MoEd). All funds were allocated for earmarked expenditures. Third, funds were calculated by 'basic number plus development'. The 'basic number' referred to the student enrolment and staff size as dictated by the national plan. Development referred to the incremental changes, again as required by the national plan. Unspent funds were all returned to the government. The reform in finance and administration takes place in one of the globe's most rigid systems of higher education. The PRC was the rare case where manpower planning in its strict sense was put into practice. Higher education was no more than an instrument to prepare manpower for the nation and hence was seen as an integral part of the state's manpower plan. There was a nationwide unified system of student admission, unified curriculum structure, unified system of programmes, syllabi and textbooks, and a unified system of job assignment for graduates. Everything that happened in an institution was but part of the national plan. The centralization was very much the consequence of Soviet influence under which higher education was seen as a governmental endeavour taken care of by the respective government departments. It was also in the Soviet tradition that academic curricula were seen as manpower training programmes and thus were highly specialized and rigid."
[...]

 

[...]
"Thus the very real advances in community development, adult education and cultural strengths are beginning to pay off. These advances are related to a feeling of success (as opposed to `failure', RCIADIC, 1991), community involvement in and control over community projects in housing and heritage, rather than significant changes to the education system. Such successes inevitably affect other aspects of community life. In Rural Town one of these has been education, particularly community based adult education. Rural Town is not a `shining example' in terms of Aboriginal educational advances. Aboriginal children in rural Australia continue to score significantly below the literacy and numeric levels of urban Aboriginal children as well as other non-Aboriginal children living in urban and rural Australia (National Review, 1995, p.90). Retention rates continue to be problematic -- indeed in Rural Town, in 1997, only three students enrolled in Year 10 (of whom one is planning to go on) and only one was in Year 11. Employment prospects have not improved significantly, although a Community Development Employment Program (CDEP) has been actively trying to break the cycle of long-term unemployment by encouraging young men to work while on unemployment benefits."
[...]

 

[...]
"That the committee took its assignment seriously is shown by its report. The committee recommended that the early introduction of the student to the fundamentals was critical to educational success in the high school. Students preparing to go to college must be introduced to the required courses early in their high school studies. These courses were Latin, social studies, modern languages, English, literature, sciences, and mathematics. High school students must be taught by the same methods so that there was consistency in how they learned. Eight years of primary schooling and four years of high school would be required to prepare students for success in college. Colleges must set admission standards consistent with their expectations of the academic work the student was capable of accomplishing. This admission criteria should be the same for all colleges. This report contained everything that Eliot wanted to see in high school. Since his appointment as president of Harvard in 1869 he was worried by what he saw as a lack of structure and uniformity in the curriculum of the high school. Now he was finally given the opportunity to design it in the way he considered necessary. From that time to 1918, high school education was based on the Eliot model"."
[...]