Students To Learn The Rights And Interests Of Sociology

Issues on the rights and interests of undergraduates have been overt as the transformation of higher education institutions in our country. It is especially so in that students' increasingly diverse demands on study are not well satisfied. However, current research on this are deficient and have some shortcomings with singular-perspective, lack of demonstration and an incline on the position of research, etc. Therefore, the author tried to study beyond the analysis angle such as law and management that is currently used, and to examine the rights and interests of undergraduates, especially these on studying, in an angle of sociology. This research thus used demonstrating means such as questionnaires and un-structured interviews to investigate the undergraduates' demands on study and their current situation. It further probes into the reasons that harm their rights and interests of study with organizational theories as a foundation and institutional analysis to be theoretical frame and means of analysis. In the first place, students at large highly presume upon higher education to increase their attainments in general and abilities in various aspects. To be concrete, students expect to gain more advanced and practical knowledge in more areas; to have self-determined time and spaces of study and to have opportunities of research and practice; to be evaluated on performance by various and scientific methods and criterion; and to be put into a free and flexible institution with the right of self-option. However, in practical, such needs are not well satisfied: contents are obsolete and unpractical, study means are teacher-centered, evaluations focus only on memorization, and related institution of study is lack of flexibility but in excessive of limitation. Above-mentioned harm the rights of study of the students to a certain extent. Secondly, as far as the institutional aspect is concerned, the harm of the rights and interests of study of the undergraduates roots mainly in the following two aspects. The first one is that the provider of our institution of higher education is single, and the government and directing department construct, consummate, modify and explain higher education institution. In contrast with that, groups such as students that closely relate to the system have very few opportunities to take part in the design of the institutions. This results in the related institutions in higher educational institutions less focusing and representing the interests of students. The second one is that when doing institution design, higher education institutions fail to follow the principle of incentive compatibility and to keep a consistency between the interests of organization and that of its members. Last but not least, in regard to the neglect of correlative institution of higher educational institutions on students' demands on their benefits, following countermeasures can be taken. First is to have the principle of incentive compatibility as a guideline on institutional designation. Various feasible means can be taken to find out students' demands and be established as a set of routine tasks. Students should also be allowed to participate in the designation of institutions that closely relate to themselves. Meanwhile, students' organizations can be founded to facilitate a more initiative mechanism of reflection and communication.