Abstract:Project 211 is one of the most important educational policies in China, which aims at selecting a small number of “key universities” for sustainable development in the 21st century. These selected “key universities” have received substantial funding from the government so they can recruit outstanding faculty and be equipped with high quality facilities. Although this national policy has come into being for more than a decade, limited empirical studies have been conducted to examine how the policy influences students’ performance as well as whether the policy is perceived to interfere with test fairness. Using differential item analysis (DIF) and content analysis, this study examined the effect of group membership (key vs. non-key universities) on one of the large-scale high-stakes language tests–the Graduate School Entrance English Examination (GSEEE). The results identified a number of DIF/DBF, all favoring test takers from key universities. A review of the flagged items by three test reviewers found a myriad of potential factors including unbalanced learning opportunities, which may contribute to performance differences between two groups. However, none of the reviewers deemed that unbalanced educational opportunities brought bias and presented a threat to fairness. Fairness in this context is conceptualized to require individuals or groups who are less well-off to sacrifice social benefits and resources to those who are better off to achieve the overarching aim of maximizing economic benefit to the society.

The Medium-Run Efficiency Consequences of Unfair School Matching: Evidence from Chinese College Admissions

The Long-Run Efficiency Consequence of Unfair School Matching: Evidence from China College Student Survey

Fairness of the Boston Matching Mechanism in China's College Admissions

Matching inequality and strategic behavior under the Boston mechanism: Evidence from China's college admissions

An empirical evaluation of Chinese college admissions reforms through a natural experiment

Matching Mechanisms and Matching Quality: Evidence from a Top University in China.

Matching Mechanisms and Matching Quality: Evidence from a Top School in China

Ex-Ante Fairness under Constrained School Choice: an Experimental Approach

The heterogeneous effects of ability grouping on national college entrance exam performance – evidence from a large city in China

The Effect of a National Education Policy on Language Test Performance: a Fairness Perspective

The Institution of Merit: A Study of Chinese College Admissions

The Health Benefits of College Education in Urban China: Selection Bias and Heterogeneity

Reforms meet fairness concerns in school and college admissions

Timing is Everything ? An Experimental Investigation of Incomplete Information in Centralized Matching Mechanisms

Misalignment between Test Scores and Colleges' Preferences: Chinese College Admission Reconsidered

Access to college and heterogeneous returns to education in China

Are Opportunities to Equalize Elite High Schools Discriminatory? Evidence from a Quasi-Experimental Design

English Language Requirement and Educational Inequality: Evidence from 16 Million College Applicants in China

Could Job Match Lead to Better Labor Market Performance?——An Empirical Study on College Graduates' Employment

Economic Consequences of Horizontal Stratification in Postsecondary Education: Evidence from Urban China

Sex Imbalance, Marital Matching and Intra-Household Bargaining: Evidence from China