Relative deprivation and social justice: awarded extra points policy in college entrance examination for ethnic minority candidates in Guangxi, China

• In Event: Redefining Diversity and Inclusion: Global Perspectives on Multicultural Education, Social Justice, and Language Policy

Proposal

In the era of industrialization and globalization, multiethnicity has been a common trend in most countries. Therefore, most countries are confronted with the issue of how to deal with interethnic relations. However, the unequal distribution of resources is predetermined and inevitable in human society, which contributes to the stratification of society (Davis & Moore,1945; Tumin, 1953), as well as the stratification of different ethnic groups, which could be roughly divided as majority ethnicity and minority ethnicities. A so-called majority group possesses a disproportionally higher share of advantage and predominance of political power and cultural influence (Marger, 2014). In contrast, ethnic minorities are groups who “receive differential treatment because of physical or social and cultural differences and regard themselves as a people apart” (Wirth, 1941, p.415).

Many efforts have been made to promote interethnic equality and bridge the interethnic gap—for example, anti-discrimination laws or policies, affirmative action, and equal opportunity initiatives. Among them, giving preferential treatment to ethnic minorities in college admissions and job promotion is the most popular discussed and criticized. Preferential treatment in college admissions for ethnic minority groups could insert dual influence: some of the majority groups feel unfairly treated, which is so-called “reversed discrimination” (Goldman, 2015, p. 4). This feeling may not be suitable for intergroup relations, whereas supporters of this policy argue that this would enhance campus diversity, and a well-educated multi-ethnic society would benefit economic globalization (Chang, 2002). Despite such controversies, the trend of withdrawal is gathering momentum. The U.S. Supreme Court has decided to terminate nationwide race-conscious university admissions (Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, 600 U.S. forthcoming, 2023). Although this is a judicial judgment, a glimpse of this receding trend can be obtained. On the west coast of the Pacific Ocean, many provinces in China pronounced its finale in college admission, such as Anhui, Jiangxi, Fujian, etc. However, it remains unknown how this trend will influence ethnic minority groups and the relationship between different ethnic groups.

Despite a large amount of existing research focused on affirmative action and educational preferential policies, the lack of foreign scholars gives a focus on China’s granting extra points to candidates of ethnic minorities in the national college entrance examination policy, which is also a practice to promote students of ethnic minority groups to enter college. On the other hand, Chinese scholars pay more attention to its history, implementation status, and definition, and there is a lack of empirical research on the beneficiaries themselves and their neighbors. Hence, this research interviewed several candidates from different ethnic groups and investigated how they perceive this policy to determine whether its implementation impacts interethnic relations.

This research focuses on China’s policy of awarding extra points in the college entrance examination (gaokao) for ethnic minority candidates. It selects the Guangxi Autonomous Region of China as a case and conducts several semi-structured interviews with candidates from Guangxi; half of them are from the ethnic majority (Han), and the rest of them are from ethnic minorities. The reasons why this study selected candidates of Guangxi as samples are: first, Guangxi is an administratively provincial area in the southern part of China; more than thirty percent of citizens there are of Zhuang ethnic groups, which is the largest ethnic minority group in China, and almost sixty percent of citizens in Guangxi are of Han, the remaining are of other ethnic minorities. This proposition of ethnicities is distinctive from that of the whole country, providing valid insight to this study. Secondly, Guangxi is an autonomous region governed by Zhuang people instead of the Han majority. In short, the policy of interest is legislated by its legislature, mostly of Zhuang. To conclude, Guangxi has its characteristics in interethnic relations, which are worth in-depth empirical research.

This research analyses those interview texts by employing relative deprivation theory and Rawl’s social justice theory. As relative deprivation theory contains the thought of comparison, which is the individual subjective comparison with individuals from other groups, the comparison method between different ethnic groups is introduced in the analysis of interviews. The analysis is divided into two levels: regional and national. The former compares Han candidates and non-Han candidates at the regional level, and the latter compares candidates from Guangxi and candidates outside Guangxi at the national level.

Every point is crucial in China's gaokao, and this policy offers candidates of different ethnic minorities different extra points; the only criterion is their ethnicity, which could mean that candidates who get extra points have a higher possibility of getting into better universities and majors. This research mainly focuses on the perception of candidates towards the policy of interest, whether the feeling of relative deprivation exists and how they react to it, and the influence of relative deprivation on interethnic relations at the regional and national levels.

Almost every candidate of ethnic majority perceives the policy of interest as unfair to some extent, which is a kind of relative deprivation, and some group actions have been taken, but this feeling does not influence interethnic relations in Guangxi. Some candidates of ethnic minorities want more granted points compared with their peers from another ethnic minority group. All interviewers expressed feelings of relative deprivation while comparing themselves with their peers at the national level, in terms of socioeconomic status and academic achievement, primarily after they had enrolled in colleges. Considering the development of the economy and education of Guangxi, which is below the average in China, the policy of interest has its rationale for existence. However, it needs refinement, suggesting that the criteria for awarding extra points should expand.

However, this paper is limited in its small sample and focus on Guangxi, which may need to be more generalizable to other regions. However, this research provides unique insight into the beneficiaries and their neighbors of the educational preferential policy. Future research is recommended to explore the policy’s impact in a broader context, including a larger number of interviewees from different contexts.

Author

• Jie ZHANG, Law College, Beijing Normal University