IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/injoed/v84y2021ics0738059321000560.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Social equity and equity in higher education: A comparison of the liberal Anglo-American and Chinese political cultures

Author

Listed:
  • Yang, Lili

Abstract

This study compares the ideas of social equity in the liberal Anglo-American and Chinese political cultures and seeks potential hybridisations. Through a conceptual examination of scholarly works, this study identifies differences and similarities of social equity between the two political cultures. A common conceptual bridge, deriving from the comparison and hybridisation, is further developed for the discussion of social equity and equity in higher education across the two cultures. The common bridge consists of four constitutes of social equity: political and civil equality, social and economic equality, equality of opportunity and equality of potential and freedom to achieve, the last of which is new hybridity of the two political cultures. This study argues that the hybridity – equality of potential and freedom to achieve – is enlightening to the discussion of equity in higher education as well as social equity across contexts.

Suggested Citation

  • Yang, Lili, 2021. "Social equity and equity in higher education: A comparison of the liberal Anglo-American and Chinese political cultures," International Journal of Educational Development, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:injoed:v:84:y:2021:i:c:s0738059321000560
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ijedudev.2021.102403
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0738059321000560
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2021.102403?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:injoed:v:84:y:2021:i:c:s0738059321000560. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/international-journal-of-educational-development .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.