What's the matter with 646 scores in the exam being ranked three? Why are the scores of some three colleges and universities in Zhejiang even higher than one? What are the reasons behind the appearance of these deformities? Recently, the first parallel professional scores of general college entrance examination in Zhejiang Province were announced, which was quite surprising. Five or six independent colleges that were originally admitted in the third batch of independent colleges entered the lowest score of 100 Strong.
It's caused by being too homesick. It's not true. There are several other colleges and universities with surprisingly high scores, such as Jincheng College of Sichuan University (637 points), science and Technology College of North China Electric Power University (614 points), Zhongbei College of Nanjing Normal University (631 points), Tianjin College of Beijing University of science and technology (609 points), etc. The scores of Jincheng College of Sichuan University and Zhongbei College of Nanjing Normal University are even higher than those of Sichuan University and Nanjing Normal University. 600 points up to three, isn't it a change of time? (this article is compiled exclusively by WYH, editor of sihai.com. If you need to reprint, please indicate the source and source. Related article link: http://www.4hw.com.cn/life/zone.html)
In fact, there is only one answer. This year's college entrance examination enrollment in Zhejiang Province has undergone major reform. The way of voluntary filling in and reporting has changed from the familiar "batch reporting" to "no batch, professional parallel filing". In other words, the first, second and third groups of undergraduate students are no longer registered separately, but mixed together, and each school is no longer enrolled in batches. The original three universities and key universities can recruit students at the same time. In addition, the original application was to determine the school and then determine the major. Now each application is a combination of "University + major", and it can be disrupted. For example, the first application can be made to Peking University economics, the second application can be made to Tsinghua computer, and the third application can be made to Peking University Law. Therefore, Zhejiang candidates can fill in up to 80 applications. In the case of three 600 points, there is a high probability of making a low-level mistake when filling in the volunteer list -- these candidates with 600 points of strength have filled in three schools in the volunteer list, and they may not fill in the very low ranking too seriously. However, due to the lack of experience in the first year of reform, unfortunately they were admitted by three schools. (this article is exclusively compiled by WYH, editor of sihai.com. If you need to reprint it, please indicate the source and source. Related article link: http://www.4hw.com.cn/life/zone.html)
The score line released by Zhejiang examination institute also includes the planned enrollment number. Zhejiang College of Tongji University plans to recruit 80 students in Zhejiang. Many people are very frightened -- does this mean that the three schools have admitted 80 candidates with a score of more than 646? Because according to the previous admission experience, the so-called filing line is the lowest score of admission. Since 80 people are to be recruited, it means that the scores of these 80 people are higher than 646. If so, then this Zhejiang high-tech move is a mess in the world. Are there so many examinees who made low-level mistakes when filling in their wishes?
This fear is unnecessary. In order to make the transition smooth, a system of "filling in and reporting by sections" has been set up for the reform of Zhejiang high school entrance examination. The first section is the top 20% of the candidates, the second section is the 20% - 60% of the candidates, and the third section is the 60% - 90% of the candidates. The first paragraph is the one that has been completed and published. Therefore, the real situation is that only a few of the top 20% candidates with good scores fill in three schools and are admitted, and their scores naturally become the so-called filing score line. In fact, these three schools are among the students in the later stages. (this article is exclusively compiled by WYH, editor of sihai.com. If you need to reprint it, please indicate the source and source. Related article link: http://www.4hw.com.cn/life/zone.html)
It's not natural for colleges and universities to batch
After reading the news, in fact, some examinees make a scene of Wulong, which is very sympathetic. But what we should say here is that Zhejiang's high-level reform without batch is actually a good thing with more advantages than disadvantages.
Since the resumption of the college entrance examination, the college entrance examination is based on the admission batch. That is, to approve in advance, one, two, three, one, two and so on, in order. Most people never think it's wrong, or even natural -- to select special talents from special types of schools in advance. One school recruits first because the good schools like 985 and 211 want talents with high scores. The other two schools enroll ordinary talents. The third and junior colleges enroll mediocre talents who don't work well. The order is divided and each performs its own duties. It's not quite right Is that right?
Wrong, it's not natural. As a examinee, why should I be defined as "three schools" if I fail in the college entrance examination? This title will even last forever. As a college, some of them have low starting points and poor resources. It's inevitable to pick up the remaining students from other schools, but why should they always be locked behind others? (this article is exclusively compiled by WYH, editor of sihai.com. If you need to reprint it, please mark it Source and source. Related article link: http://www.4hw.com.cn/life/zone.html)
On the spot of Beijing high school enrollment, different schools have been admitted in batches before
In fact, the reason why people thought that there was nothing wrong with batch admission was largely because of the habit. In the view of CAI Dafeng, former vice president of Fudan University and Tongji University, the unified examination and admission by batches are the products of the distribution system in the planned economy era, which is no longer suitable for the needs of the times.
Canceling the batch admission is conducive to breaking the barriers of one, two, three batches, promoting the quality of running a school and stimulating the enthusiasm of competition. Take three colleges and universities for example. They also have performance needs. Even if the starting point is low, the teachers are poor, and the resources are few, they cannot compete with first-class universities in all aspects. However, if they concentrate resources on a few majors, they may not achieve some achievements. Moreover, they must be allowed to take this path at least. So of course, they can also recruit excellent students by giving them opportunities. Otherwise, these schools may have to rely on cheating to improve their performance.
For students, canceling the admission in batches is conducive to giving candidates more choices. Even though the competition is not good, there is a chance to try. The government limits the selection range of candidates by setting admission batch, which not only lacks basis, but also affects the judgment of candidates. In CAI Dafeng's view, it is an important principle of public education management as well as an important thought of social management that his own affairs are decided by his own decisions and his own abilities. The policy and procedure of college entrance examination must be equal to all examinees.
At present, the education sector has realized the significance of canceling the batch. In addition to Zhejiang, many provinces have started to merge the batch this year. This is a good phenomenon. However, there is still a lot of work to be done to realize the two-way choice between students and schools and to de administrate higher education. For example, when can the titles of 985 and 211, which have seized excessive resources, be cancelled? Only when can they be cancelled can they claim to really promote education equity in the field of higher education.