at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Teaching and Teacher Education 32 (2013) 66e74

Contents lists available

Teaching and Teacher Education

journal homepage: www.elsevier .com/locate/ tate

Educational equality or social mobility: The value conflict between preserviceteachers and the Free Teacher Education Program in China

Dan Wang a,*, Manman Gao b

a Faculty of Education, Room 415, Runme Shaw Building, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam Road, Hong Kongb School of Foreign Studies, Anhui University, Hefei, Anhui Province, China

h i g h l i g h t s

< Unequal distribution of quality teachers influences educational equity.< The FTE Program in China aims to channel quality teachers to poor schools.< The FTE students are driven by the incentive for upward social mobility.< FTE students are resistant to long-term service in rural schools.< Teacher education programs should emphasize social commitment in curriculum.

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history:Received 10 May 2012Received in revised form20 January 2013Accepted 22 January 2013

Keywords:Educational equityTeacher distributionTeacher educationSocial mobilityChinese education

* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ852 2859 1904.E-mail addresses: danwang@hku.hk (D. Wang), ga

0742-051X/$ e see front matter � 2013 Elsevier Ltd.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2013.01.008

a b s t r a c t

In 2007, the Chinese government piloted the Free Teacher Education (FTE) program in the top normaluniversities with the aim to enlist high-quality young graduates to join the teaching profession and toimprove education in underdeveloped rural regions. However, a conflict has arisen as FTE studentsenrolled in the program are reluctant to work in rural schools. Drawing on in-depth interviews with 19FTE students, this study argues that the curriculum of the FTE program needs to be reformed to combatthe social mobility discourse and to include social equity and justice as essential components.

� 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

Education is supposed to provide all children with equal op-portunities for learning. In reality, however, the quality of schools istremendously disparate due to the uneven distribution of fundsand, more importantly, of capable teaching staff (Rowan, Correnti, &Miller, 2002; Sanders, 1998). High-quality teachers tend to con-centrate in high-performing schools with more advanced studentsand better working conditions (Akiba, LeTendre, & Scribner, 2007;Hanushek, Kain, & Rivkin, 2001). Capable teaching staff is less likelyto flow into low-performing schools, which perpetuates low ach-ievement in these schools.

How to address the unequal distribution of teachers is a chal-lenge facing many governments in the world. One approach is toprovide financial incentives to attract qualified teachers to work in

omm03@gmail.com (M. Gao).

All rights reserved.

“hard-to-staff” schools. But this approach may not always workwell because teachers’ predilections regarding where and whom toteach depend more on the intrinsic rewards they receive fromteaching than on extrinsic incentives such as a financial stimulus(Liu, Johnson, & Peske, 2004). Another approach to improve teachersupply in disadvantaged schools is through creation and promotionof alternative pathways to teaching. Programs such as Teach forAmerica in the United States and Teach First in Great Britainendeavor to recruit talented graduates from top universities toteach in poverty-stricken communities. These programs placeemphasis on the values of equality and justice and call for social andpolitical idealism to inspire participants. However, because theparticipants receive little professional training in teaching andmostly teach for only a short period of time (usually two years),their effectiveness in raising student achievement is limited,despite their dedication and enthusiasm (Darling-Hammond,Holtzman, Gatlin, & Heilig, 2005). These international experiencesshow that addressing the issue of educational inequality in teacher

D. Wang, M. Gao / Teaching and Teacher Education 32 (2013) 66e74 67

distribution may require multiple conditions, including financialsupport, professional training, and a belief in the value of socialequity among the teachers.

The problem of unequal distribution of teachers exists also inChina. There is alarming inequality in the Chinese educational sys-tem between schools in rural settings and those in urban ones due tothe imbalanced distribution of quality teachers and funds (Chu,2009; Hannum, 1999). Capable teachers prefer to work in eliteschools in urban areas and stay away from poorly funded and poorlystaffed rural schools (Wu, 2008; Yang &Wang, 2007). To reverse thetrend, in 2007 the Chinese government piloted the Free TeacherEducation (FTE) program in the country’s six most selective normaluniversities. The major goal of the program is to attract outstandingstudents into the teaching profession and to channel quality teachersinto schools located in underdeveloped rural areas. The FTE programprovides a strong economic incentive, namely, free tuition, tomotivate candidates. By selecting the most prestigious normal uni-versities in the country for the pilot, the program seeks to emphasizethe professional training of teachers. However, if the values of thestudents conflict with those of the program, the program will likelyencounter difficulties in realizing its goal of educational equality. Atpresent it is not clear whether the preservice teachers in the pro-gramhave a commitment to the social transformationpurpose of theprogram. This study is a modest attempt to fill in this gap in researchby investigating the FTE students’ motivations for joining the pro-gram, their attitudes toward working in rural schools, and theirevaluation of the program’s transformative goal.

Drawing on in-depth interviews with 19 FTE students studyingin one of the six pilot universities, the study finds a significant valueconflict between the students and the FTE program. Instead ofbeing motivated by a strong belief in social equality, most of thestudents joined the program due to extrinsic motives, driven by thegoal of upward social mobility. Therefore, they expect to work inurban key schools and are resistant to serving in rural schools,which they considered to offer inferior working conditions, formore than a short term. While the discourse of social mobility hasa strong influence on these students, a more nuanced analysis findssome of them struggling with ambivalence between their passionfor social transformation and the reality of socioeconomic con-straints, such as the low salary and poor working conditions in ruralschools. Their moral struggles reflect insufficient guidance from theuniversity regarding issues of social equity and justice, which par-tially explains the existence of the value conflict between the stu-dents and the FTE program. Our research suggests that a moreimportant battle needs to be won on the cultural front to redefinethe values of teacher education and to incorporate social justice asan essential component in the process of teacher preparation.

2. Literature review

2.1. Teacher quality and educational equity

Unequal distribution of high-quality teachers is intimatelyassociated with educational inequity (Akiba et al., 2007). A study ofteacher quality in 46 countries by Akiba et al. (2007) indicates thatalthough many countries have achieved an overall high-qualityteaching workforce, students of higher socioeconomic status(SES) have a much better chance of accessing high-quality teachersthan do their peers from low SES families. Research has found thatteachers prefer to teach in schools whose students are relativelyadvantaged in terms of family background and academic achieve-ment, and that they try to avoid schools in poverty-stricken areas(Hanushek et al., 2001; Little & Bartlett, 2010). Capable teachersalso tend to transfer or quit when teaching in low-performingschools. The variance in teacher quality is considered the single

largest factor creating gaps in student educational achievement(Rowan et al., 2002; Sanders, 1998). Therefore, recruitment andretention of quality teachers in hard-to-staff schools has beena perennial problem for educational equity.

One common strategy employed by policymakers in variouscountries, including the US, UK, Israel, and Kenya, is to providefinancial incentives to attract high-quality individuals to dis-advantaged schools (Lavy, 2007; Liu et al., 2004). For instance,Massachusetts instituted a $20,000 “signing bonus” to encouragehigh-achieving candidates to work in hard-to-staff schools (An ActMaking Certain Appropriations and Transfers for Fiscal Year 1998,1998). However, interviews with bonus recipients revealed that thepecuniary incentive played virtually no role in participants’ decisionsabout whether to stay in those disadvantaged schools. Instead,teachers’ decisions were primarily determined by the working con-ditions in the school, that is, bywhether the school environmentwasconducive to the realization of the intrinsic rewards of teaching (Liuet al., 2004). This case casts doubts on the incentive theory under-pinning the policymaking. Scholars worry that utilitarian incentivesmay even compromise the aim of social equality and justice soughtby such programs (Lavy, 2007; Little & Bartlett, 2010). Despite thesecriticisms, the guarantee of reasonable economic conditions cannotbe completely excluded from policy considerations.

In addition to financial incentives, the alternative pathway toteaching is a widely known approach to helping disadvantagedschools acquire quality teachers. Exemplary programs includeTeach for America (TFA) in the United States, Teach First in GreatBritain, and Teach for Australia, which purport to combat educa-tional inequality by placing top college graduates in challengedschools. In contrast to financial incentives, these programs appealto high-quality university graduates with strong political and socialidealism. For instance, TFA’s participants have been found to behigh academic achievers and more willing to teach low-achievingstudents (Gitomer, Latham, & Ziomek, 1999; Zeichner & Conklin,2005). However, despite their passion and idealism, these non-certified teachers (program participants) lack professional skillsin teaching and thus were consistently found less effective inimproving student achievement (Darling-Hammond et al., 2005).Moreover, the TFA program also faces the problem of a low reten-tion rate, and its attrition rate after two years of service is muchhigher than the rate of conventional teacher education programs(Boyd, Lankford, Loeb, & Wyckoff, 2005). The research on the TFAprogram highlights the significance of teachers’ social commitmentand professional training.

These international experiences attest to the dire need fora comprehensive model of teacher education that preparesteachers both in social orientation and in practical skills. Theexisting studies suggest that three main factorsdeconomic in-centives, professional capacity, and teachers’ commitment to socialjusticedplay essential roles in addressing the entrenched problemof educational inequality.

2.2. The Free Teacher Education Program in China

The problem of uneven distribution of quality teachers alsoplagues education in China. The school system in China is highlyimbalanced between urban and rural schools (Wang, 2011a, 2011b;Chu, 2009; Hannum, 1999; Li, Huang, & Li, 2010). Urban schools ingeneral possess more advanced technology, facilities, and instruc-tional materials, and most importantly better teachers, than doschools in rural areas (Li et al., 2010; Zhang, 2004). Approximatelyone-third of teachers in rural schools are substitute teachers (dai kejiao shi) due to the severe shortage of professionally trained staff(Yang & Wang, 2007). As for teacher qualifications, rural primaryschool teachers were 28% less likely to possesss tertiary education

Table 1Summary of background information of participants.

Gender Family origin Major

M F Urban Rural Education Sciences Arts

Number 7 12 7 12 6 7 6Percentage 37% 63% 36% 63% 31.5% 37% 31.5%

D. Wang, M. Gao / Teaching and Teacher Education 32 (2013) 66e7468

than their urban counterparts; for rural secondary school teachers,the figure was 38% (Peoples Net, 2007). Capable teachers usuallywork for a short time in rural schools and then move on to urbanschools (Wu, 2008). Thus, better teachers increasingly concentratein better-resourced urban schools. Consequently, there is a wideachievement gap between rural and urban children (Wang, 2011b;Wang & Li, 2008). The poor working conditions and the low-performing students put rural schools at a disadvantage inrecruiting talented teaching staff.

The Chinese government is under great pressure to promoteequality between rural and urban regions (Guo & Liu, 1990). Toachieve this goal, the government has implemented the FreeTeacher Education (FTE) program in the top six normal universitiesin the country since 2007. The government’s primary aims are toimprove teacher quality and to channel more talented teachers intounderdeveloped rural schools. The FTE program is seen as a politi-cal means to coordinate the redistribution of educational resources,which has the potential to diminish the regional disparity in theteaching force, enhance the quality and quantity of teachers in ruralareas, and promote educational equity in China (Hu, 2007; Sun,2007; Yang & Wang, 2007).

The fact that the FTE program was pioneered in the mostrenowned normal universities in the country manifests a policyemphasis on the professional training of teachers. The programthus differs from the alternative pathway approach in the US orother countries. On the other hand, the program has similaritieswith some international efforts to utilize economic incentives torecruit capable teachers for disadvantaged schools.

The FTE program offers enrolled students an attractive package offinancial benefits, which include tuition exemption, free accommo-dation, and a monthly stipend (Ministry of Education, 2007). Alongwith the economic benefits come obligations. After graduation, theFTE students are required to serve for a period of ten years in primaryor secondary schools in their home provinces, and these teachingpositions are guaranteed by the government. Those FTE teacherswho find employment in urban schools are obliged to teach in ruralschools for two years first. Should they break the contract, FTEcandidates must bear the consequences of refunding all educationalcosts, paying a certain amount as a penalty, and being blacklisted inCredit Record Archives that are to be established by the educationalauthorities (Ministry of Education, 2007, 2010).

The FTE program thus relies heavily on utilitarian, particularlyfinancial, incentives to attract candidates. Recent research showsthat the financial incentives of the FTE program have been effectiveinmotivating applicants (Fang & Qi, 2011; Li, 2010; Li & Xu, 2011; Ye,Sun, Liu, Zhu, & Xiao, 2010; Zhou, 2010). For example, according toa survey of more than 1800 FTE students from the six normaluniversities participating in the program, 64% of students identified“the financial difficulties of my family” as their motivation forentering the FTE program, whereas only 10% of students appliedbecause of their “passion for the teaching profession” (Zhou, 2010).Of the 2007 cohort (10,737 students in total), more than 90% werestudents from the central and western regions of China; in partic-ular, 58% came from the western regions. This indicates that FTEstudents originated mainly from less-developed or poverty-stricken areas (Peoples Net, 2007). The economic incentives thusseem to be particularly effective in attracting students from lessadvantaged backgrounds.

However, excessive reliance on utilitarian incentives is likely totrigger a conflict between students’ educational aims and the goalsof the FTE program. As already demonstrated by international ex-periences, extrinsic motives alone are insufficient to recruit andretain high-quality teachers in hard-to-staff schools (Liu et al.,2004). Studies of FTE students’ attitudes toward their obligationshave portrayed a frustrating scenario. In Zhou’s (2010) study of the

employment plans of 1800 FTE students, more than 80% of thestudents showed a strong willingness to break the contract andmove to other occupations. Another survey at Central China NormalUniversity has found that only 5.2% of 400 FTE students in the studywere willing to work in underdeveloped rural areas, while 78% ofthe surveyed students aspired to obtain positions in urban eliteschools, which offer excellent work conditions and premium pay(Li, Ren, Zhang, & Wang, 2011). A conflict between students’ jobpreferences and the FTE program’s goals has thus already emergedfrom the existing studies. The lack of commitment to social equalityon the part of preservice teachers will represent a major obstacle toreducing the disparity in educational quality.

Unfortunately, little is known about the rationale and valuesheld by FTE students behind these survey statistics. Before drawingconclusions or proposing solutions to the conflict, the students’voices need to be heard in order to help teacher educators to un-derstand the students’ seeming lack of social commitment. Ourresearch sets out to achieve this goal. It inquires into the values heldby FTE students by answering the following research questions: (1)What are the motivations of students in joining the program? (2)What are their attitudes toward working in rural schools? (3) Howdoes the professional training process influence their socialcommitment?

3. Methods

This study is based on in-depth interviews with 19 studentsenrolled in the FTE program. All 19 respondents attended one of thesix universities piloting the program. The university is located inwestern China, where economic and educational development isless advanced than in Beijing, Shanghai, and other coastal cities. Thestudy was carried out at this particular university mainly due toease of access. However, this university also offers an advantage forthis research in that it is one of the major normal universitiesserving the less-developed western region of the country. If stu-dents at this university demonstrate strong resistance to serving inrural schools, then students at other normal universities located inmore developed cities may be even less likely to commit to ruraleducation.

We relied on a contact person from the university to recruit thefirst six participants from different academic fields. Then we usedsnowball sampling by asking the interviewed participants tointroduce their fellow students for interviews. The first six partic-ipants recommended twelve further students, of whom we wereable to reach seven. The second group of students recommendedten potential interviewees, but of these we successfully reachedonly four because of the approaching end of semester exams.Through these four, we were introduced to and interviewedanother two students before the summer break, when almost allstudents returned to their hometowns.

By the fall of 2010, the university had enrolled in the FTE pro-gram a total of approximately 11,000 students, who were dis-tributed between the university’s 15 colleges. The 19 students inthis study attended 12 different colleges, including those for edu-cation, English language, art, physics, and psychology (see Table 1for a summary of students’ backgrounds). The diversity of the

D. Wang, M. Gao / Teaching and Teacher Education 32 (2013) 66e74 69

participants’ academic fields allowed us to discover similarities anddifferences in student attitudes and learning experiences acrossmultiple departments within the same institution. At this univer-sity, the FTE attracted more female students than males. The year2007 witnessed the enrollment of 2900 or so FTE students, andfemales represented 60% of the cohort. Also among our interviewsubjects, women were the majority, with twelve female and sevenmale participants. Another notable feature of the FTE studentpopulation was the high percentage of students from rural areas.Rural students made up nearly 70% of the entire FTE student body.In our sample, the majority of participants (twelve out of nineteen)were from rural areas, with the remaining seven having an urbanbackground. In addition, we tried to cover students at all stages ofstudy. At the time of interview, eleven students had completedtheir third year of study, seven were sophomores, and one had justfinished his freshman year (the junior students were the firstcohort of FTE participants).

The interviews took place in June and early July 2010. Eachparticipant was interviewed for approximately one hour. The con-versations started with a brief introduction of the purpose of theresearch and procedures to obtain the students’ consent. Partici-pants were assured of the confidentiality of their information andidentities and were clearly informed of their rights. (In the sectionsbelow, pseudonyms are used to protect the participants’ privacyand confidentiality.)The interviews were voice-recorded with thestudents’ permission. As we were outsiders to the university, sev-eral respondents said that they felt freer to express their truethoughts.

The interviews were semi-structured around three themes: (a)students’ motivations for enrolling in the FTE program (samplequestions: What made you choose the FTE program? How did youmake the decision at the time?); (b) students’ willingness to servein rural schools (sample questions:What kind of schools would youlike to work in after graduation? Are you willing to teach in ruralschools? For how long? Would you like to stay longer than twoyears? Why or why not?); and (c) curriculum and pedagogy in theFTE program (sample questions:What are themajor components oflearning in your curriculum? Is there any course focusing specifi-cally on rural education or rural problems? Do any of the coursesyou have taken prepare you to meet the learning needs of ruralstudents?). The last set of questions sought to explore how theprofessional training process might influence preservice teachers’social commitment.

The interview data were coded in line with this thematicstructure. Analysis was conducted with particular attention to thestudents’ professional commitment and career planning in relationto their motivations, gender, residential origins (rural or urban),learning experiences in the FTE program, and attitudes towardsocial inequality.

4. Findings

4.1. Motives for selecting the FTE program

Corresponding to the findings in the relevant literature (Fang &Qi, 2011; Li, 2010), our study shows that students selected the FTEprogram mostly for extrinsic rather than intrinsic reasons. The FTEprogram appeared to be attractive to them because, as one femalestudent (Lin, an education major) put it:

I wasn’t familiar with the [FTE] policy. I considered it becausethere would be a guaranteed job, free tuition, and priority inadmission (ti qian pi) that would not affect my chance of beingadmitted by other tier one universities [even if I fail the FTEapplication].

These motives were echoed to varying degrees by other re-spondents. In effect, future job prospects, family financial status,and the ranking of universities were the three primary concerns ofstudents when selecting universities and programs, as alreadynoted by previous studies (Fang & Qi, 2011; Li, 2010). However,unlike the existing survey research (Li, 2010; Li et al., 2011; Zhou,2010) that juxtaposes these motives in parallel, our interviewsrevealed that these factors had different weights in students’ de-cision making regarding the FTE program.

4.1.1. University prestigeContrary to the common assumption that free tuition would be

the strongest attraction, university ranking turned out, in thisstudy, to be the most important incentive for students to enroll inthe FTE program. Almost all the respondents mentioned theadmission priority (ti qian pi) granted to FTE students as a decisivefactor in their consideration. The admission priority is closelyrelated to the hierarchy within the higher education system inChina.

China has 1112 degree-awarding four-year universities (Ministryof Education, 2011), whose academic quality, resources, and repu-tations vary dramatically. These universities are roughly classifedinto three tiers, tier one comprising the best universities and tierthree indicating the poorest quality and resource supply. In addi-tion, among the several hundred tier one universities, the centralgovernment has certified 39 universities as the most prestigious“Project 985” institutions to be developed into “world-class” uni-versities (China Education Online, 2011), as well as 112 institutionsdesignated as “100 key universities in the 21st century” (oftencalled “Project 211”) (Ministry of Education, n.d.). The six normaluniversities hosting the FTE programs are all listed among the“Project 211” universities and two are even branded “Project 985”universities. They are all premium insititutions among the hun-dreds of tier one universities.

The hierarchy among the universities translates into significantdisparities in funding, staffing, and student recruitment. Usually,after the countrywide college entrance examinations each year, thebest universities enjoy priority in recruiting the highest examscorers, hence the designation “tier one” (yi ben); tier two in-stitutions (er ben) are next in line, followed finally by tier three (sanben) universities. Each student can apply to multiple universities ineach tier. An applicant is first considered by the tier one universitiesof his or her choice. If these decline to admit the applicant, thecase moves to the targeted tier two universities for consideration,and if unsuccessful again, then to the selected tier threeinstitutions.

However, to promote the FTE program, the government grantedthe six normal universities piloting the program the privilege torecruit students even before other tier one institutions. If an FTEapplicant fails to be admitted into the normal university of his/herchoice, he or she can still be considered by other tier one univer-sities, including “985” and “211” institutions, that the student mayhave applied to. Therefore, the FTE universities’ priority in admis-sions gives FTE applicants an extra chance to enter the best uni-versities in the country. This double opportunity to enter an elite“211” university appeared to be a decisive motive for almost all therespondents in this study. One student admitted: “I chose thisuniversity not because I wanted to be a teacher, nor because of thefree tuition. I just wanted to get into a good university. It was thatsimple. So here I am.”

The tendency of university prestige or ranking outweighingfinancial concerns was also manifested in a few cases where stu-dents regretted joining the FTE program. The university understudy is a “211” university, but it is not in the league of the mostelite “985” universities. Three male students greatly regretted

D. Wang, M. Gao / Teaching and Teacher Education 32 (2013) 66e7470

applying to the FTE program because their exam scores turned outto be much higher than the admission requirements of some “985”universities in the country. All three said that given the opportunityto make the choice again, they would apply to those fee-chargingbut more prestigious universities.

4.1.2. Job guaranteeThe financial consideration was not even the second-ranked

concern for most respondents. The second major incentive of theFTE program was its promise of a guaranteed teaching job. Due tothe expansion of higher education in China in the late 1990s,employment for university graduates had become a significantchallenge for both the government and college students e abouthalf of graduates could not land a job after completing their uni-versity education (Li, Morgan, & Ding, 2008; Ministry of Education,1998e2007). With such dismal job prospects, the guarantee ofa teaching post offered by the FTE program was particularlyenticing, especially for female students. All female respondentsappreciated the job security provided by the FTE program. Two ofthem mentioned that their non-FTE peers envied them for theirsecure job prospects. Another female student said that almost allher FTE classmates were looking forward to guaranteed employ-ment immediately after graduation.

The female students’ satisfaction with the FTE program’s jobprospects largely grew out of their greater identification with theteaching profession. Most female students had selected the FTEprogram because they believed, or their families believed, thatteaching was an appropriate occupation for women; alternatively,some simply “wanted to be a teacher.”Many female students talkedabout teachers’ work as “relatively easy and relaxed” and men-tioned the usual attraction of two vacation periods each year. Thewomen interviewed seldom mentioned the social function orintrinsic rewards of teaching work. Rather, their motivation forchoosing the FTE was rooted in a gendered stereotype of theteaching profession as a woman’s occupation.

The job security hadmuch less appeal among themale students.Only one male student expressed appreciation for the guaranteedjob offered by the program. Unlike the female students, six out ofthe seven male students had no interest in being a teacher whenthey were choosing university programs. Two had been admon-ished by their families or former teachers to become “anything butteachers.” They nonetheless ended up in the FTE program, attractedin most cases by the reputation of the university, in some cases bythe offer of a fallback career, and in one case by financial consid-erations. Only onemale student in biology expressed enthusiasm tobe “an educator” (jiao yu jia), which the policy document intendsthe FTE students to be. Unfortunately, the three years of profes-sional training he had received at the university had dampened hispassion and made him change his mind.

In short, the incentive of job security seemed to have differenteffects depending on the FTE candidates’ level of acceptance ofa teaching career. The women in the study cherished the assuredemployment more than the men did, because they in generalidentified more closely with the teaching profession, albeit mainlyout of extrinsic motives.

4.1.3. Financial incentivesFinancially, as promised by FTE policy, these students enjoyed

a preferential economic package. They were exempt from theannual tuition fee of 4000 yuan and the accommodation fee of 1000yuan. Even better, they received a monthly 400-yuan allowancefrom the government to cover living expenses. As mentioned ear-lier, contrary to the common assumption, the respondents in thisstudy did not put as much stress on the benefit of free tuition asthey did on university prestige and job prospects. The free tuition

benefit was confirmed by 14 students as having been helpful butnot a decisive factor when they applied to college programs. Noneof the students interviewed came frommajor cities such as Beijing,Shanghai, or provincial capitals. The students with urban back-grounds came from middle-income families in smaller cities ortowns. Yet most students, both rural and urban, said their familieswould have had no problem affording the tuition, about 4000 yuanannually. Nevertheless, these students welcomed the free tuitionpolicy as an extra bonus, since this could help defray the expensesof their families. Only twomale students in the biology departmentreported that they had chosen the FTE program primarily for thefinancial benefits. One of these came from a rural single-parentfamily and would otherwise have had great difficulty in meetingtuition and living expenses at the university.

Nevertheless, this observation may not represent a generaltrend in the larger student body because of the small sample size ofthe study. When asked whether they felt that free tuition was thedecisive factor for their classmates in choosing the FTE program,the respondents reported different impressions. Some said no andothers were not sure. One urban female student from the mathe-matics department suspected that financial concerns were a criticalmotivation for many of her classmates because, she observed, mostof her peers came from rural families with multiple siblings in thehousehold. However, rural students in our interviews reported thatthey did not perceive a dramatic economic difference betweenthemselves and their urban peers at the university. One possibleexplanation could be that while the urban students attracted by theFTE program came largely from the middle and lower middle class,those rural students who successfully made it into such a presti-gious university were likely to come from relatively better-offfamilies in rural communities. In any case, this finding needs fur-ther investigation and should be treated with caution.

In sum, the FTE program has succeeded in attracting high aca-demic performers. However, the findings from the study are wor-risome because they show that the majority of students chose theFTE program mainly out of utilitarian motives. Our research alsosuggests that students placed a greater emphasis on the long-termutility of higher education e such as the symbolic value of cre-dentials from a prestigious university and job security e than onthe immediate economic gains, although financial concerns stillplayed a significant role in students’ selection of programs. Theseutilitarian incentives affect negatively students’ willingness toserve in less-developed rural schools, as will be demonstratedbelow.

4.2. Attitudes toward teaching in rural schools

Most informants expressed resistance to teaching in ruralschools. All but three informants wanted to enter an urban schoolor, even better, a key school, in their home provinces. As one psy-chology major, Feng, said:

I feel it is okay to be a teacher. All occupations have ranks orhierarchies (san liu jiu deng). I can be a good teacher. A goodteacher also has pretty good economic rewards. I study hard so Ican get a teaching post in a good school.

Feng was already in contact with the best high school in hishometown in an attempt to secure a premium job within theeducational system. However, good schools are predominantlyconcentrated in urban areas. Therefore, rural schools would bemost undesirable to students seeking to work in the best possibleschools, as these schools are usually at the bottom of the hierarchyof the school system in terms of working conditions and teacherremuneration. The interviewed students often talked about ruralareas as “isolated,” “backward in ideas,” and “inconvenient for daily

D. Wang, M. Gao / Teaching and Teacher Education 32 (2013) 66e74 71

shopping,” and about rural schools as “poorly equipped,” with“little space for self-fulfillment,” “no environment for professionalgrowth,” and “brain drain.” Except for three female students whowere willing to return to their rural townships for long-term ser-vice, all students in the interviews considered two years to be themaximum time period they would work in rural schools, if at all.

The two-year service in rural schools was obligatory by contract.Students’ attitudes toward this two-year obligation were dividedalong the lines of their family origins. Students with urban back-grounds often perceived the two-year rural work requirement as anopportunity to accumulate teaching and life experience, whichcould be helpful in the competition for positions in the renownedurban schools. One urban male student even described these twoyears as “countryside tourism” (nong jia le). Except for one femalestudent, who firmly rejected teaching in rural areas on the groundsthat she “cannot get used to the living conditions,” the majority ofthe urban students accepted the two-year obligation but did notgive much thought to the social meanings of the service.

Students with rural backgrounds displayed more ambivalenceregarding teaching in rural schools. On the one hand, they wereeager to go back and teach in rural schools as a way to “pay backtheir hometowns” before their “permanent departure.” A malestudent said:

We came out of rural areas. We don’t want to go back any more.However, we have a natural feeling of indebtedness and areeager to help the rural folks. The two-year service allows me topay this debt of gratitude.

On the other hand, they had reservations due to worries thatthey would be stranded in rural schools after the two-year serviceperiod, because they lacked sufficient urban connections to bringthem back to the cities. In short, they still expected their long-termcareers to be in urban areas.

When pressed for reasons, the students attributed their resist-ance to rural positions to various factors, in particular economicconstraints, opportunity for further professional development, anda sense of superiority.

4.2.1. Economic constraintsMale students emphasized economic factors as the main reason

for notwanting long-term employment in underdeveloped regions.All male respondents in the interviews came from a rural back-ground. They had taken on the responsibility to provide for theirparents and siblings as well as their own future families, and theythus expressed great dissatisfactionwith their future incomes. Twomale students considered a monthly salary of 2000e3000 yuan(equal to US$320e470) “definitely inadequate.” Yet in many ruralschools, teachers’ salaries were only half of that, if not less. Onemale respondent clearly stated:

3000 yuan [per month] should be the starting point. With that Ican stay in a rural school for three years, and other qualifiedpeople would likely replace me once I leave. For only 1000 yuan,I wouldn’t even consider going there. Nobody would. The statehas to double its efforts in raising rural teachers’ salaries.

Another rural male student (in biology) echoed this view:

Education can change people’s lives. I’d like to go to a mountainarea and open a window for those children, but my family sit-uation does not allow that. I have to provide for my parents.Emotionally, I am eager to teach in rural areas. I was once sotouched by a documentary on rural education, I really wanted togo, but once I think of my parents, my mother, who works fora small supermarket for 400 yuan per month, I cannot do that.

I have responsibilities. I will feel guilty if I fail them. This is thereality. I have to find another way out.

4.2.2. Future professional developmentIn contrast, female students tended to approach the question

from the perspective of personal fulfillment and professionaldevelopment. They often envisioned teaching in rural schools to bea low-technology, low-skill job, with little space or need for pro-fessional development. For long-term career planning, they feltthat they deserved a workplace better than the unchallenging ruralschools. “It is not worth spending my entire life in rural areas,”stated one female education student from a rural background. Shecontinued:

I feel that the countryside is still quite isolated. For example,school X [in the city] has regular professional exchangesthroughout the year with both overseas and domestic organi-zations. It has teacher exchange programs, collaborative pro-fessional development programs with universities, or visits toother schools. In contrast, the rural schools are still in need ofbasic teaching equipment. And the culture in the ruralcommunities. One senior student shared with us her experi-ence that rural parents don’t pay attention to their children’seducation. She told us that one parent said that he had a hill oforange trees and plenty of grain. Their family goal was to builda house for their son and to help him get a wife. That’s theproblem of rural culture. They have no contact with the betterurban life, so they are satisfied with their lives. They have lowexpectations for education. If you are serious and work hard onsomething, but other people don’t care, you would naturally feelbad.

An urban female student in politics expressed this view evenmore directly:

It is a waste of talent [to send us to rural schools]. According tothe principle of social mobility, high-quality human resourcesshould be employed in better places to realize their value. I don’tthink rural areas are the places for us to realize our value.Honestly, you don’t need many skills to teach in rural schools.Students there won’t appreciate them, either. Our skills, likeusing PowerPoint slides, can’t be put into use. There will be nochance for us to improve ourselves.

The pitiful conditions of rural education did not invoke thesestudents’ sense of justice or make them wish to rectify theinequality. Rather, rural schools became something for urban stu-dents to despise or for rural students to escape from. Such culturaldiscrimination against rural society was deeply seated even in themind of the rural students. Evenwhen some of them became awareof their erroneous prejudice, they still found it hard to let go of it.Two rural female students, recalling their own schooling experi-ences, expressed a clear understanding of the desperate need forquality teachers in rural education. However, when it came to theirown choice of career paths, they were caught in a conflict betweenindividual interest and the wellbeing of the rural communities towhich they used to belong. One of the students, who majored ineducation, confessed:

We identify less and less with rural culture. When I was inschool, what my teacher taught us was that education was theway for us to leave this remote, poor place. They did not teach usto identify with or to improve the place we were in; rather, theytaught us to despise the place and to escape from it. Now I amgoing to be a teacher too. I know this evaluation is problematic.Emotionally, I understand the problem, but rationally, it is hard

D. Wang, M. Gao / Teaching and Teacher Education 32 (2013) 66e7472

to change the deeply rooted values in me. The social envi-ronment puts pressure on you too. Lots of people think thatcapable persons should go to good places. Incompetent peopleget stuck where they are. Even now we sometimes still castdoubt on the capabilities of rural teachers because they cannotget themselves into the city. I know it is bad to think that way.But that’s the reality.

Indeed, the concepts of “competence,” “personal development,”and “self-fulfillment” often emerged in both male and female stu-dents’ statements about rural teaching posts. That the studentsheld high expectations for themselves in terms of career develop-ment should be applauded. However, their entrenched cultural biasagainst rural education prevented them from conceiving of teach-ing in rural schools as meaningful, worthwhile, and conducive toself-realization. Also conspicuous in their statements were thediscourses of social mobility and meritocracy. Capable individualswere believed to deserve better jobs and a life in the cities. Thesediscourses offered the students a lofty-sounding justification fortheir individualistic career choices and in the meantime recon-firmed the ruraleurban inequality and social hierarchies.

4.2.3. Sense of superiorityPart of this social hierarchywas inherent in the higher education

system, and the FTE programwas embedded in it. In addition to thematerial drawbacks and worries about professional development,the students were resistant to teaching in rural areas because ofa sense of superiority arising out of the prestigious standing of theiruniversity. As the FTE program was hosted by the most prestigiousnormal universities in China, the respondents clearly distinguishedthemselves from students in lower-tier institutions. In their minds,higher status within the university hierarchy should correspond tobetter positions in the school system, and vice versa. When askedwho should be teaching in rural schools, students answered:

I feel that solving the problems in rural education cannot be theresponsibility of the universities under the Ministry of Education[i.e., elite universities]. The local institutions should play a moreimportant role. Our universities are better, so we position our-selves higher. If the FTE program were instituted in tier two, tierthree universities, or even in two-year teachers’ colleges, thosestudents might want to stay in those [rural] positions for the restof their lives. They can cover the basics of rural education. Wewon’t bewilling to do that, or at least wewill be less likely to thanthose students. (male geography student, urban background)

We are the lucky ones who managed to get into the best normaluniversities in the country. If we are all assigned to poor schools,it is unfair that the graduates from less qualified institutionstake all the good urban jobs. (female sports student, ruralbackground)

The students’ attitudes toward rural service were again backedup by the discourse of social mobility. For them, the different tiers ofhigher learning institutions were naturally matched with occupa-tional positions of different socioeconomic status. To enter an elite“211” university meant access to higher positions in the stratifiedsociety, not downward movement in occupation or geographiclocation. The hierarchy in the educational system mirrors the eco-nomic stratification between rural and urban areas in the largersociety: the winners in the educational system are supposed to takethe best prizes, and the losers deserve the worst. The FTE programwas intended to close the gap between rural and urban schools, butits transformative purpose might be defeated by the dominantindividualistic values held by the students, namely, the belief thateducation is for social mobility rather than social equality.

4.3. Learning experience and moral guidance

If the students from the top normal universities were unwillingto serve rural children, and if, as the respondents suggested shouldbe the case, rural schools were to be staffed by graduates fromlower-tier teachers’ colleges, the gap in teacher quality betweenrural and urban education would likely be maintained, if not wid-ened. When confronted with this stark situation, most of the stu-dents immediately associated the plight of rural educationwith thelarger structural inequality. They blamed the government for notmaking genuine efforts to improve the work conditions, such asteachers’ salaries, in rural education.

Without sufficient state support, the students often expresseda feeling of helplessness in our interviews. Feng said: “I do want todevote myself to improving the countryside, but that needsstronger support from state policy. It cannot be accomplished byindividual teachers only.” Others also mentioned that they did notlack passion for this noble cause, but the harsh reality did not allowthem to be romantic. Jiang, a rural student majored in biology,summarized his feelings with a sigh: “Society forces us to be real-istic (she hui tai xian shi le). Our worldviews are distorted by thereality. Our ideals, our affections, and our value system are alldistorted!” Such frustration and ambivalencewere common amongthe rural students we interviewed.

Among the interviewees, one female student, Guna, held a dif-ferent attitude toward the hardship in rural education. She was oneof the three girls who had decided to return to rural schools per-manently. Guna was incredulous about the other students’ expec-tations: “Good salary, good work conditions, didn’t they have anymental preparation for the program that they got into?” She andanother female student, Maya, who was also one of the minoritythree, expressed concern about the future of rural children: “Ifeveryone chooses good places, what about children in the ruralareas? They will lag further behind the urban children.” Thesestudents, unlike other participants, seemed to put social justicebefore their individual interest, and they thus showed greaterrecognition of the transformative purpose of the FTE program.

Witnessing the ambivalence of her fellow students, Guna vol-unteered a suggestion:

The university should take some measures to help these sway-ing, undecided students strengthen their beliefs. I feel that theuniversity should have offered some courses to guide students’thoughts. When people take these courses, they may changetheir minds and become willing to go to those [rural] places.[The university] should let students know that one reason toteach [in less-developed areas] is that many children want toreceive an education but still cannot get one.

Instead of placing the blame on state policy, Guna’s suggestionactually made a request on the FTE curriculum. She made theobservation that students’ attitudes could changeunder appropriateguidance. Unfortunately, the guidance provided by the university onissues of rural educationwas sporadic. The respondents reported norequired course of any sort specifically dealingwith the features andchallenges of education in rural areas. The education majorsreported taking one elective course on rural education. Feng, thepsychology major, had attended some lectures on rural education,but attendancewas optional for students. The curricula of the rest ofthe respondents had virtually no content addressing the specificneeds of rural education. In short, although rural education was animportant agenda for the FTE program, its position in the teachereducation curriculumwas marginal, at least at this university.

The students from rural backgrounds mostly drew on theirown personal experiences to form views and understandings ofrural problems, whereas the students from urban backgrounds

D. Wang, M. Gao / Teaching and Teacher Education 32 (2013) 66e74 73

confirmed many of their prejudices and imaginings about ruralschools in some of the lectures and the elective courses. Never-theless, for issues of paramount significance, such as values,worldviews, and attitudes toward social justice, the students rarelyhad a mentor to turn to. Guna said:

We have very little opportunity to communicate with pro-fessors. I’ve been here for two years but only met our mentortwice. Howmuch can you communicate in two meetings? Morecommunications between professors and students might behelpful to pull the hesitating students to our side.

Absent conscious efforts from the university to foster values ofjustice and equality, the precious flames of idealism in the studentswere left to grow or die by chance in the strong winds of indi-vidualism, social mobility, and meritocracy. Some students, aftervolunteer teaching in rural schools as their teaching practicum,rekindled their passion for social change. For instance, Feng told ofa student one year senior to himself:

Last year a student in our department went to Xin Jiang provincefor volunteer teaching. The conditions were terrible. He oftensuffered from sandstorms. He toldme that hewas deeplymoved.He didn’t expect that there could be a place in China whose ed-ucation had never received sunshine! He was suddenly over-whelmedbypatriotismand idealism.Hewanted todo somethingfor them [i.e., the local children] and dedicate his youth to them.

Feng, who was very pragmatic about his own career, wasenormously inspired by his fellow student and hoped to beassigned to a remote area for his teaching practicum instead ofgoing to an elite school in the city. However, as demonstrated bya previous case (on page 23), the experience during the teachingpracticum could also lead to the reconfirmation of rural “back-wardness,” “isolation,” and “helplessness,” thus pushing the stu-dents further away from rural education.

At other times, students came to see with their own eyes theavalanche of utilitarian logic in schools and became completelydisillusioned about social justice. One male student made the fol-lowing observation during his teaching practicum:

Through the teaching practicum, we sawmany things.What doeseducation look like today? No one cares about “quality educa-tion.” For instance, the principal of a primary school does notthink of improving teaching and instruction. Instead, his heart isdevoted to making money. Teachers also put more energy intomaking money than into teaching. We are the minority. Even ifwe can do our jobs well, the leaders won’t evaluate us based onour work performance. I think that justice has never existed!

As with this student, our interviews often led to larger societalissues of justice and equality that the students were keenly con-cerned and struggling with. Nevertheless, these fundamental moralissues were rarely brought up in the classroom. It was a great pitythat the FTE curriculum at the university ignored these criticalstruggles in students’ minds and left the formation of students’values to chance. The FTE program was designed with a trans-formative agenda, but genuine social transformation starts with thetransformation of people’s minds. The FTE curriculum at this uni-versity fell short of achieving the program’s purpose.

5. Discussion and conclusions

The present study obtained unsettling findings about the FTEstudents’motivations, career predilections, and learning experiencesin the program. Regarding motivations, counter to the usualassumption that financial incentives play the decisive role, our

interviews show that university prestige and rank were the topconcern in these students’ choice of programs, followed by theadvantage of guaranteed employment offered by FTE policy. In termsof attitudes toward rural positions, the respondents were mostlyresistant to long-term service in rural schools. The FTE programmaythus face severe challenges in retaining these teachers in rural areas.These findings exhibit a value conflict between the students’ educa-tional purposes and the goals of the FTE program.While the programaims at educational equality, the majority of the respondents aredriven to join the programand tomake their career choices primarilyby the goal of upward social mobility. Finally, our inquiry into stu-dents’ learning experiences exposes the lack of proper guidance onvalues in the FTE program,which leaves the value conflict unresolvedin the professional training process. This research echoes the inter-national literature (Lavy, 2007; Little & Bartlett, 2010) in concludingthat although economic incentives may be helpful in attracting tal-ented teachers to needy schools, professional training and teachers’social commitment to the cause of social justice are much moreimportant for programs aimed at educational equality.

The discourse of social mobility internalized bymost students inthe study inherently confirms the social inequality and educationalhierarchy. The “211” or “985” branding of universities easily pro-duces a sense of superiority among the FTE students, which partlycontributes to the students’ rejection of long-term service in theusually low-status, underdeveloped rural schools. The respondentsassociated themselves with the elite and the privileged. Such self-perception is vividly displayed in their articulated distinctions be-tween themselves and students from lower-tier institutions. Ina way, the hierarchy in the higher education system, such as thedifferent tiers and the “211” and “985” projects, thus contributes toreinforcing, reproducing, and legitimizing social inequalities. In thissense, the FTE program is embedded in the unequal social andeducational systems and has a contradiction of values built into thedesign of the program.

To overcome this contradiction, the FTE program could borrowfrom the experience of Teach For America (TFA) in recruitingstrategy. Thanks to its pronounced promotion of social justicevalues when recruiting participants, the TFA program has attractedcandidates who genuinely hold these values (Zeichner, 2003). TheFTE program in China could similarly highlight its purpose of socialchange and educational equality and carry out a stricter screeningprocess to evaluate incoming students’ social commitment.

This research makes a special contribution by revealing theambivalence and moral struggles experienced by the students.Despite the predominant influence of the social mobility discourse,the students are not completely captured by utilitarian and indi-vidualistic goals. The rural students in particular, because of theirown experiences in disadvantaged rural areas, were naturallysympathetic to the social transformational purpose of the FTEprogram. Some had their passion ignited by patriotism, ideals ofsocial equity, or the deep feeling of indebtedness to the folks backhome. Yet such passion failed to be converted into sustainable so-cial commitment because of the students’ concerns regarding ruralteachers’ remuneration and future professional development.These concerns should not be dismissed as merely “utilitarian.” Onthe contrary, these genuine voices from the students should remindpolicymakers that, in the context of rural education in China, workconditions, in both economic and professional senses, play anessential role in the recruiting and retention of quality teachers.Also, these voices should serve as a wake-up call for the govern-ment that the issue of educational equity requiresmore efforts thancurrently evident on the part of the state to close the social, eco-nomic, and cultural gaps between rural and urban regions.

Our findings concerning students’ motivations, sense of supe-riority, and moral ambivalence all suggest the imperative need for

D. Wang, M. Gao / Teaching and Teacher Education 32 (2013) 66e7474

guidance on values, worldviews, and social commitment, which theFTE curriculum at the university seems to have neglected, to greatmisfortune. Little was said of rural education in the curricularcontent, and social justice and equity were seldom a topic ofclassroom discussion. In fact, some of our respondents called formore communication with teachers on these aspects. It thus seemsthat the current professional training model at the sample uni-versity fails to meet the needs of the students. Much effort needs tobe invested to reform the existing FTE curriculum so that it is morein tune with the program’s purpose, to raise awareness of socialinequality and foster social commitment among preserviceteachers, and to equip these teachers with more teaching capabil-ities targeted specifically at rural education.

Echoing international experiences (Darling-Hammond et al.,2005), this research draws our attention again to the importanceof the professional training of teachers. It further suggests that, ifthe goal of reducing educational inequality is to bemet, the value ofsocial justice has to be an integral component of the professionaltraining program in order to combat the individualistic socialmobility discourse. What we need, as Little and Bartlett (2010, p.295) advocate, is to “make the pursuit of social justice a morecompelling value in teacher preparation and a more central aspectof teachers’ professional capacity, identity, and commitments.”

Weare aware that the present study is basedon a small sample of19 students at one Chinese university. The conclusions drawn fromthis research should be treated as tentative. Nonetheless, we believethat these students’ voices have enabled us to generate valuableinsights about the merits and pitfalls of the FTE program thatdeserve more public attention. Further research should be carriedout to examine whether the findings from this university apply alsoto other normal universities featuring the FTE program. Moreover,in-depth studies on the FTE curricula and students’ learning expe-riences are urgently needed to explore the ways in which teachereducation programs can engage more closely with preserviceteachers’ moral struggles and provide them with better guidance.

Acknowledgments

This research is supported by the Seed Funding Program forBasic Research from the University of Hong Kong (project code:201011159015) and by the Ministry of Education Research Fund inPhilosophy and Social Sciences from China (project code:10JZD0041). The authors are deeply grateful to Yang Rui, FangYanping, Deng Zongyi, and the three anonymous reviewers for theircritical comments and suggestions.

References

Akiba, M., LeTendre, G., & Scribner, J. P. (2007). Teacher quality, opportunity gap, andnational achievement in 46 countries. Educational Researcher, 36(7), 369e387.

An Act making certain appropriations and transfers for fiscal year 1998. 1998 Mass.Acts ch. 260, x 4, http://www.state.ma.us/legis/laws/seslaw98/sl980260.htm.Accessed 01.08.11.

Boyd, D., Lankford, H., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2005). Explaining the short careers ofhigh-achieving teachers in schools with low-performing students. AmericanEconomic Review, 95(2), 166e171.

China Education Online. (2011). List of “Project 985” universities (in Chinese).Retrieved from. http://gaokao.eol.cn/gxmd_2920/20080630/t20080630_305646.shtml Accessed 29.08.12.

Chu, H. (2009). Integrating urban and rural education: system reconstruction andinstitutional innovationdthe dualistic educational structure in China and itsdeclassification. Educational Research, 11, 3e10, (in Chinese).

Darling-Hammond, L., Holtzman, D. J., Gatlin, S. J., & Heilig, J. V. (2005). Does teacherpreparation matter? Evidence about teacher certification, teach for America,and teacher effectiveness. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 13(42), 1e48.

Fang, Z., & Qi, J. (2011). Promotion and perfection of the tuition-free normal edu-cation system. Teacher Education Research, 23(1), 63e68, (in Chinese).

Gitomer, D., Latham, A. S., & Ziomek, R. (1999). The academic quality of prospectiveteachers: The impact of admissions and licensure testing. Princeton, NJ: Educa-tional Testing Service.

Guo, S., & Liu, C. (1990). Unbalanced China: The past, present, and future of urbani-zation. Shijiazhuang, China: Hebei People’s Press (in Chinese).

Hannum, E. (1999). Political change and the urbanerural gap in basic education inChina, 1949e1990. Comparative Education Review, 43(2), 193e211.

Hanushek, E. A., Kain, J. F., & Rivkin, S. G. (2001). Why public schools lose teachers.Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Educational Research.

Hu, Y. (2007). A consideration on implementing the system of free normal educa-tion. Journal of Shaanxi Normal University, 36(6), 100e104, (in Chinese).

Lavy, V. (2007). Using performance-based pay to improve the quality of teachers.Future of Children, 17(1), 87e109.

Li, G. (2010). A survey study of free teacher education students’ entry motivation.Heilongjiang Research on Higher Education, 6, 1e4, (in Chinese).

Li, Q., Huang, W., & Li, B. (2010). Empirical study of the balanced development ofrural and urban compulsory education: a case in Guangzhou. Shanghai Researchon Education, 10, 29e31, (in Chinese).

Li, F., Morgan, J., & Ding, X. (2008). The expansion of higher education, employmentand over-education in China. International Journal of Educational Development,28(6), 687e697.

Li, X., Ren, X., Zhang, S., & Wang, X. (2011). A survey study of the first free teachereducation graduates’ employment in Central China Normal University. CapitalEducation Journal, 4, 18e21, (in Chinese).

Li, L., & Xu, X. (2011). A study on the relationship between entry motivation andprofessional satisfaction of no-fee teacher education candidates. Unpublishedmanuscript.

Little, J. W., & Bartlett, L. (2010). The teacher workforce and problems of educationalequity. Review of Research in Education, 34(1), 285e328.

Liu, E., Johnson, S. M., & Peske, H. G. (2004). New teachers and the Massachusettssigning bonus: the limits of inducements. Educational Evaluation and PolicyAnalysis, 26(3), 217e236.

Ministry of Education. (1998). Statistical bulletin for Chinese educational develop-ment: 1998e2007 (in Chinese). Retrieved from. http://www.moe.edu.cn/edoas/website18/level2.jsp?tablename¼1068 Accessed 29.08.12.

Ministry of Education. (2007). Implementation measures of Free Teacher EducationPolicy enforced in normal universities under supervision of the Ministry of Edu-cation (in Chinese). Retrieved from. http://news.xinhuanet.com/edu/2007-05/14/content_6098291.htm Accessed 21.05.11.

Ministry of Education. (2010). Policies concerning Free Teacher Education graduates’employment at the normal universities under supervision of the Ministry of Edu-cation (in Chinese). Retrieved from. http://www.chinanews.com/edu/edu-zcdt/news/2010/05-27/2306824.shtml Accessed 22.05.11.

Ministry of Education. (2011). Statistics of educational development in China 2011 (inChinese). Retrieved from. http://www.moe.edu.cn/publicfiles/business/htmlfiles/moe/moe_633/201203/132634.html Accessed 29.08.12.

Ministry of Education. (n.d.). List of “Project 211” universities (in Chinese). Retrievedfrom http://www.moe.gov.cn/publicfiles/business/htmlfiles/moe/moe_94/201002/82762.html. Accessed 29.08.12.

Peoples Net. (2007). The recruitment progress of the Free Teacher Education program:An interview with the director of the department of teacher education in theMinistry of Education (in Chinese). Retrieved from. http://www.people.com.cn/GB/32306/54155/57487/6243800.html Accessed 12.08.11.

Rowan, B., Correnti, R., & Miller, R. (2002). What large-scale survey researchtells us about teacher effects on student achievement: insights from theprospects study of elementary schools. Teachers College Record, 104(8),1525e1567.

Sanders, W. L. (1998). Value-added assessment. School Administrator, 55(11), 24e27.Sun, J. (2007). Suggestions on policy design of free education for students in normal

universities. Educational Development Research, 6, 21e26, (in Chinese).Wang, J., & Li, Y. (2008). Research on the quality of compulsory education teaching

in western rural schools. Educational Research, 2, 21e31, (in Chinese).Wang, D. (2011a). The dilemma of time: student-centered teacing in the rural

classroom in China. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(1), 157e164.Wang, D. (2011b). The new curriculum and the rural-urban literacy gap: the case of

one county in Western China. Chinese Education & Society, 44(6), 91e105.Wu, S. (2008). Rational thoughts on the establishment of a mobility system for

primary and middle school teachers. Teacher Education Research, 20(4), 35e39,(in Chinese).

Yang, Y., & Wang, Z. (2007). Free normal education: policy ideals, real-world con-flicts, and their solutions. Tsinghua Journal of Education, 28(3), 49e53, (inChinese).

Ye, X., Sun, M., Liu, Y., Zhu, S., & Xiao, X. (2010). Investigation of studying status of freenormal university students majoring in biology under the policy of free normaleducation. Journal of Southwest China Normal University, 35(2), 234e237, (inChinese).

Zeichner, K. M. (2003). The adequancies and inadequacies of three current strat-egies to recruit, prepare, and retain the best teachers for all students. TeachersCollege Record, 105(3), 490e519.

Zeichner, K. M., & Conklin, H. G. (2005). Teacher education programs. In M. Cochran-Smith, & K. M. Zeichner (Eds.), Studying teacher education: The report of the AERAPanel on Research and Teacher Education (pp. 645e735). Mahwah, NJ: LawrenceErlbaum.

Zhang, Y. (2004). Statistics on educational inequality. China Reform, 12, 22e24, (inChinese).

Zhou, H. (2010). Analysis and policy adjustment on the contradiction of free ofcharge in normal education in practice. Educational Research, 8, 58e61, (inChinese).