So to answer this question in the second part of this talk, we look at student diversity at two specific universities. Peking University as I said one of the best national universities from 1950 to 1999. And Suzhou University, one of the best provincial level universities, from 1950 to 2003. These would be the years of the entering freshmen class. So the 2003 class graduated in 2007. for this part of the lecture we are looking at the results of a group project involving number of mu colleagues at Hongkong university of science and technology ,as well as other universities. specially in this case, who used to be a Post Doctoral fellow and is now an assistant professor, soon to be an associate professor of History at Nanjing University. And we have also, our colleagues for the Peking University, University Archives and the SZU University, University Archives, who are kind enough to make the Student registration cards of the entering freshman classes available to us for data entry and data analysis. Now the Peking University student registration cards. we have about 65,000 of them entered into into computer comprising our first, our first big data. sort of study for, for this lec, for this week. and as you'll see the data actually only come from three or four periods. 1952 to 1955, 1972 to 1987, and 1989 to 1999. We're missing data for a number of years. 49 to 51, 56 to 65, 1970 to 1971, and then usually, and this is worth noting given China's recent national history, we're missing also the student cards for the freshman class of 1988. Their data was removed from campus in 1989,and never returned to Peking University [INAUDIBLE]. So we'll be reporting on today is a summary of 65,000 undergraduate student registration cards for the years which we do have data from Peking University and from 86,000 student registration cards from Suzhou University. Suzhou University the data are more complete. And Suzhou University in terms of where it stands, in terms of the distribution of high school graduates about ten from 100 high school graduates in Jiangsu Province qualify for entry to Suzhou University in contrast. For Peking University nationally it's about one per 1,000 high school graduates That nationally qualified for entry to Peking university, about one per hundred in Peking City. Now the data which we're going to be accessing consists of a common kind of student registration card mandated by the Chinese Ministry of Education, and it includes only some 20 variables. Student ID, Name, Department, Major. For today's class, we'll be looking at only a few of these. We'll be looking at Sex. We'll be looking at Year. We'll be looking at Major Social Relations and Occupations of parents. We'll be looking at detailed postal address and we'll be looking at prior schooling, only five of the 20 variables. because these five at least give us information on the gender of students. The provincial and geographic origin, their parental occupation And their prior schooling. So 4 of the 8 sources of student diversity the other 4 we we ignore in today's talk. Ethnicity, family income, parental education and urban rule. because of lack of time or in the case of income and education, because lack of information on the student registration card. Now the first thing to note is that the Peking University and the Souzou University data are not evenly spread throughout China in terms of their origins. Peking University actually has a mandated quota by province, or by provincial level city, whereas you'll see for the most favored city, which is Peking of course, 147 students for every 10,000 High School graduates go to Peking University. that's at the high end, whereas, in say [FOREIGN] province or Guangdong Province, surprisingly enough, only three out of every 10,000 high school graduates gets to go to Peking University. So, provincial level quotas, which are inherently very unequal which favor the more well off cities and which favor the well off provincial seaboard populations of Xieling Liaoning province Chuciang province Fujien province and Hainan. similarly, while there is no set of quotas for Suzhou University, so Suzhou University draws over 95% of its students entirely from [UNKNOWN] province. And even though they don't have an internal quota system you can see that overwhelmingly, most of the students are local, from Suzhou itself which is the very dark shaded area on the map. if not from Suzhou itself then from Southern Jiangsu Province as opposed to Northern Jiangsu Province which is the much lighter color on the, on the map. Now, we see is that first of all we look at this data and we look at the first variable in this pseudo registration card gender. we see that actually there has been a remarkable change, in terms of the diversity of students, with many many more female students, especially in the 80's and the 90's. Such that in [UNKNOWN] University, now which is the green line, about one male student for every female students. whereas before in 1949 there were two male students for every female students in a kind of fluctuating or up and down up until 1979 and then a steady sort of equalization of the male female sex ratio. >> What you see is then Peking University, which are the red dots. You had a distribution that was originally even more unequal, over four students, male students, for every female student, declining more or less bonotonically against starting in 1979, such that now it's about 1.5 three, four males for every female student. And what you can also see, from the blue line, is that these declining proportions of inequality by gender more or less are mapped nationally, they equate nationally, with the gender ratio of universe as a whole, for China as a whole. In other words, one of the most stubborn dimensions of inequality that persisted for millenia that between the sexes in China especially in the last two decades of the 20th century suddenly became more and more equal. And so that's, that's one example, one very straightforward consistent example of diversity. With occupation it's much more complex. Now in this graph what we're looking at, is we're looking at the parental occupation of PKU university parents. In this case it's both parents... So, it's both the pa, mother and the father if they're employed. So, in other words the prop, the numbers actually map out to perhaps over 100% because if you have two parents then it'll be, it be, for every student it could be 200%. And what we've done is we've taken the sum the some 8,000 occupations, that are reported by the students filling out the card. And we've grouped them into, into, one two three four five, six, large categories. the first one is, the, the the blue. Dot is administrator and the party leadership or commercial enterprise leadership children. The second one which is the maroon sort of a diamond is the children of professionals, engineers, doctors, professors. The next, which is a very kind of consistent blue green line is the children of office workers and then equally consistent of a sort of retail retail shopkeepers. Then we have two lines which like that are of administrative children or professional children very up and down, we have the blue squares which are the children of farmers, or fisherman, or shepherds. And the the orange circles, which are the children of factory workers. Now what we see here is that the children of farmers, which during the cultural revolution was as high at one point as at 50% of the students had at least one parent who was a farmer. has declined to something like 15% now. but at the same time we see that the children of factory workers which was about 13, 14% in the mid 1980s has increased significantly to well over 20%. In the late 1990s an increase of about 70, 80% but that this increase is towards, by the increase in the children of administrators, whether they are state enterprises, party organization or commercial enterprises. And then you have the children of course professionals who do the best. Possibly these are professors kids who learn how to test at their mothers breast and therefore do especially well. Now so, so we have lot of variation in contrast to the very monotonic. Consistent of the sort of increasingly diverse student body by gender. So here we have a picture which is much more mixed, on the one hand increasing inequality with the rise of elite children and the decline of farming children, and at the same time, though, a significant increase in factory kids. Mirroring perhaps, also, the rise in factory workers in general, in China of course with China's phenomenal economic growth starting in the late seventies, early eighties. Szuzhen University we see something which is roughly similar, we see that the children of administrators which was originally well below 10% in the 1950s has become around 30% by the late 20th century, early 21st century. the children of professionals is also high, 30% though it declines steadily since the 1989. and we can, but we also see that in [FOREIGN] University, unlike Peking University, the children of farmers has stayed roughly consistent at about 25% for the last quarter century. And the children of factory workers has actually doubled from 10% in 1989 to 20%, in 2003. So in orders if you take farmers' children and factory workers' children and add them together, you get about 50%. So half the children in China Come from sort of elite families. Half the children in China come from working class families. And those elite families, tend to be the student Cadre families, tend to be not party official children but the children of commercial enterprises. So here what we've done is we've taken the children of For the Chinese, called Cadres Campbell. And the proportion here is shown by the vertical histogram. And we've then divided them into one, two, three, four four main categories. one is the blue line, which is party [UNKNOWN]. Then you have the red line, which, oh sorry, [UNKNOWN] and the state administrators. The red line, which is commercial enterprises... The green line which is other categories other cadres and then the purple line which is um, [SOUND] cadres where we're not sure how to how to assign them whether they were a commercial or state enterprise or other. And what you can see here is that starting from the early 1970s There's a gradual decline in the proportion of cadre children who come from party and political cadre families. And that's dwarfed, however, by a very steady increase, from almost zero to forty percent of all cadres Coming from commercial enterprises. So, in other words this phenomenal increase in the number of Cadre children at least in SZU University is not from a exercise of political power by party secretaries by university presidents but rather is a display of the ability of the new Chinese entrepreneurs. The new commercial class that's leading China's economic growth. Their ability to place their children into at least an elite provincial university such as [INAUDIBLE]. we don't, unfortunately know the results for Peking University. Because we were not able to do that analysis for, for [UNKNOWN] University. So what that means is, is that if we were to take teh students and look at the distribution. Of parents by employment, and we were to compare that to the distribution of employment in Jiangsu Province overall, we would see that children of cadres placed something like 10 times. They bat 10 times out of their weight class. so, for ever single cadre. There is about 10 cadre kids that are going to Suzhou University. At the same time, for factory workers, it's almost roughly equal. For very worker, there is 0.8. Almost one student for every for every factory worker. the only occupation that is highly disadvantaged is farmer where the ratio is two to one, it takes two farmers to send one student to Suzhou University. In Peking University, the proportions are roughly the same, except they're more extreme. Peking University takes. five farmers to send one student to Peking University. So, in other words, it's much harder for farming families to send kids to a one per 1,000 university as opposed to a ten per 100 university. cadres is almost 20 times their weight class in the population overall. Factory workers surprisingly it's more than one. So, for every factory worker you'll find somewhere between 1.1 and 1.4 students going to Peking University. Now, if we were to interact this with geography, what we see is that the distribution actually is quite revealing, because we can see here is that if we look at the students from cadre families by province and we compare that to the distribution of cadres by province. We see that far more cadre families are likely to have their children test into Peking University. In the less-developed frontier provinces of say, Hainan, Guangsi, Guizhou, Yunnan surprisingly Sechuan and which, where you have the very dark-shaded areas as compared to the lightest-shaded areas which are which are [UNKNOWN] is Beijing. so in Beijing being a Cadre you only get to bat seven times your weight, your weight. whereas if you're a, a Cadre in Yunan or Hinan, you would be batting at 25, 30 or 40 times your weight as opposed to seven times your weight. While the contrast with farmers is almost exactly the opposite. For farmers for, who get their kids into Peking University, remember nationally it takes almost five farmers to get one kid into Peking University. But along the very rich provinces of Shandong, Jiangsu, Zhejiang, you see that it's almost .7. That's all instead of being .2 it's almost 1. whereas in very remote areas, such as Yunnan and Guizhou, it can be as low as point O, 0.07 as opposed to 0.2. So in other words farm families in the rich, see board provinces are 10 times more likely to be able to get their children into PKU University, then farm families from remote provinces such as doing that probably. We find both are different ultra capital in educational families as long i see more important to see in the moment their access to good school Because there are far more good rural primary schools, junior high schools, even senior high schools and [UNKNOWN].