• <nav id="c8c2c"></nav>
      • <tfoot id="c8c2c"><noscript id="c8c2c"></noscript></tfoot>
      • <tfoot id="c8c2c"><noscript id="c8c2c"></noscript></tfoot>
      • <nav id="c8c2c"><sup id="c8c2c"></sup></nav>
        <tr id="c8c2c"></tr>
      • a级毛片av无码,久久精品人人爽人人爽,国产r级在线播放,国产在线高清一区二区

           
          home feedback about us  
           
        CHINAGATE.OPINION.Education&HR    
        Agriculture  
        Education&HR  
        Energy  
        Environment  
        Finance  
        Legislation  
        Macro economy  
        Population  
        Private economy  
        SOEs  
        Sci-Tech  
        Social security  
        Telecom  
        Trade  
        Transportation  
        Rural development  
        Urban development  
             
             
         
         
        Education not a cheap suit


        2006-03-14
        China Daily

        Education is a public good, not a business, says a commentary on thewww.rednet.com.cn. An excerpt follows:

        When asked by a member of the 10th National Committee of the CPPCC why more and more students from poverty-stricken families cannot afford college education, the spokesperson of the Ministry of Education answered that non-compulsory education has become a market product, and students and their families should buy what they can afford.

        The spokesperson even drew an analogy to explain that rich people may buy a 10,000 yuan (US$1,200) suit while some people cannot afford to buy one valued at 100 yuan.

        Buying a suit is market behaviour regulated according to our capability. Yet according to his statement, schools are like shops selling educational resources. Such an explanation is truly depressing.

        It is a gloomy fact that high fees for non-compulsory education are a burden for many families. Though it has been made clear that compulsory education is a public product that should be provided by the government, the above statement by the spokesperson shows that our educational authorities are treating non-compulsory education as a sheer market product.

        Making education a business is actually a denial of their mission. A clothes shop has no responsibility to dress the whole population well, but educational institutions should shoulder the responsibility of cultivating talent for our nation.

        Parents are trying their hardest to see that their children achieve good education, so that the children can enjoy higher living standards. This is the social value of education. If the spokesperson says people should treat education just like a suit, does that mean they should accept poverty as something hereditary that they cannot take off?

        The use of the "education as clothing" analogy is the acknowledgment of educational industrialization. This goes against the goal of education reform, which seeks to reverse business and restore education as a public good.

         
         
             
          print  
             
          go to forum  
             
             
         
        home feedback about us  
          Produced by vshangxuetang.com. All Rights Reserved
        E-mail: webmaster@chinagate.com.cn
        a级毛片av无码
        • <nav id="c8c2c"></nav>
          • <tfoot id="c8c2c"><noscript id="c8c2c"></noscript></tfoot>
          • <tfoot id="c8c2c"><noscript id="c8c2c"></noscript></tfoot>
          • <nav id="c8c2c"><sup id="c8c2c"></sup></nav>
            <tr id="c8c2c"></tr>