Ma Guilu (www.cnhubei.com): We should welcome the independent choice of universities to enroll candidates. RUC initiated the new policy because it has its own independent thought in solving the injustice in the allocation of educational resources in China. It's useless to blame RUC for its independent choice when enrolling candidates because it will do harm to RUC's independence.

The project of RUC aimed at people who would have a hard time being admitted by RUC without others' help and people with good academic performance at school but difficulties in life. Therefore, it's a very precious attempt for RUC to initiate a plan especially for rural students.

There's nothing wrong with the standard of "no college students for three generations in the family." We all know that there are far fewer rural students than urban students in universities nowadays. Especially in China's top universities, rural students only account for a very low proportion. It's a fact rural students struggle to get admitted by famous universities. For instance, in 2010, rural students only accounted for 17 percent of the total number of new enrolled students at Tsinghua University.

Under the current circumstance of unbalanced allocation of educational resources, giving preferential policy to rural students is adding to fairness in the area. It seems to be unfair to make "no college students for three generations in the family" a recruitment requirement but it actually is fair because it can help those families that haven't received any higher education.

All areas in society should pursue fairness, and fairness of education is the key to all justice. RUC's independent student enrolling policy is a beneficial attempt for more fairness in education. RUC has its own enrolling policy and it is free to do whatever it thinks is right. We should stop making quick judgments, but should wait and see the real effect of the policy.

Pu Jiangchao (Workers' Daily): Although somewhat new, it's ok to stipulate "no college students for three generations in the family" for students who can be recommended to be admitted by RUC. The plan is within the power of RUC's independent enrollment and RUC should have the right to initiate special rules to recruit students more in accordance to its characteristics and managing principles.

We all know that it's a great glory, hope and motivation for a rural family to have a college student in the family. On the other hand, if there aren't any college graduates for several generations in the family, it means the family's hope of going to upper society will vanish and its poverty will continue. RUC's new policy is giving this kind of families a chance to realize their dreams of changing their fate by receiving higher education. This policy shouldn't get too much questioning and blaming.

Under the current circumstances of unbalanced allocation of educational resources, top universities in China, such as Tsinghua University, Peking University and Renmin University, have all initiated preferential policies for rural students, showing their greater sense of social responsibility. It's a very comforting fact and needs our encouragement. In order to fulfill more rural students' dreams for entering universities, I think more universities should make preferential policies for them.

Bad influence

Fu Wanfu (Hefei Evening News): We can only use family background to deal with the injustice in the allocation of educational resources, which is a sad fact for Chinese society.

We should ask ourselves a question: Why are there fewer rural students in top universities? Let's take a look at the following statistics: In 2010, on average, Peking University has admitted 45.4 students out of 10,000 applicants from Beijing, about 30 times the national average admittance level, which is 1.55 students out of 10,000 students.

That's the reason for the reality that fewer rural students are in universities. Instead of studying how to add to more justice and fairness in the national college entrance examination, RUC chose to avoid the real problem and reserve some spots for students from rural and less developed areas. Isn't it sad that our education system now chooses talents not based on their academic performance?

Qi Kailin (www.pdsxww.com): The root of the injustice in China's education system lies in the unbalanced allocation of educational resources, Therefore, if the government really wants to give rural students a fair opportunity, they should increase their investment in fundamental education in the rural districts to balance the education resources of the urban and rural districts. Only in that way can all students compete in a fair way for top universities. Therefore, it's useless to establish a quota for rural students.

Yu Xinhua (Guangzhou Daily): The key problem with RUC's project is that it doesn't maximize work efficiency within the limited educational resources.

People are bound to ask why members of poor farmers' families should be enrolled but not those people with "no officials or bosses" in their families. Is it fair? Is the decision made based on careful consideration?

Taxpayers have the right to supervise public universities to ensure that every policy is in the public interest. Universities suffer from a lot of interference from officials and lack effective supervision. And even if taxpayers cannot directly manage public organizations like universities, they are alert to the use of public resources for education.

Universities are not trusted because of the scandals many of them are involved in, such as corruption and plagiarism, which reflect the problems on campus.

So the supervision of taxpayers can be a necessary mechanism for correcting universities' errors. People have the right to question RUC's decision of taking family background as a standard for recruiting students.