Should the Stars Program Bar Students (b)

In 2007, the Joint Board of the College Recruitment Commission asked Chou Yu-wen, a professor in National Taiwan Normal University's Department of Education, to study the pros and cons of the Stars Program. Chou discovered that high schools and university recruitment officials all agreed that the program helped disadvantaged students. Chou says that many people further recommended excluding students from Taiwan's top high schools or guaranteeing places for students from disadvantaged schools. The problems arise when you try to define elite and disadvantaged. Chou explains that every policy document creates labels, and while disadvantaged schools could benefit from the designation, some students might be sufficiently put off and go elsewhere for their studies.

Prudence Chou argues that while the Stars Program deserves credit for diversifying the ways by which students are admitted to universities, departments need to expand their selection criteria beyond grades and scores. When evaluating students from rural areas, which provide students with fewer high-quality teachers and less cultural stimulation, they need a different approach.

Chu Chun-chang, a section chief in the Ministry of Education's (MOE) Department of Higher Education, says that in recent years both schools and parental organizations have recommended the creation of additional criteria barring the participation of elite high schools. Chu said, "The Stars Program isn't a preferential route into university. It therefore cannot bar the participation of students from elite high schools or make it easier for kids from rural schools."

Prudence Chou argues that universities and the MOE are being too conservative and that we should learn from the affirmative action programs the US implemented in the 1970s. She feels all of our university admissions processes should provide guaranteed places to disadvantaged students, including those from rural areas, from low-income families, from minority groups, and with physical disabilities.

台湾师范大学教育系教授周愚文曾于 2007 年接受大学招联会委托，针对繁星计划的利弊进行研究。他发现，不论是高中还是大学参与招生的主管，普遍肯定繁星对弱势学生有利。针对许多人建议将『明星学校』摒除在外，或对弱势高中提供保障名额，周愚文认为，问题在于如何界定『明星高中』及『弱势高中』。『任何政策明文的划分，都必定会出现「卷标化」的副作用，弱势高中可能因此得利，却反而吓跑学生，影响其对国中毕业生的招生。』

周祝瑛认为，繁星确实已让入学管道更多元，值得肯定，但校系选才比序标准应有更多弹性，必须跳脱以分数取才的死板方式，特别是针对师资留不住、文化刺激较不足的偏乡地区，可以有不同的录取标准。

教育部高教司朱俊彰科长强调，最近几年家长团体、学校都曾建议加设条件、限制明星高中不得参与。朱俊彰说：『繁星并不是升学优待，因此不能限制明星高中不得参加繁星，或强制帮偏乡学校加分。』

周祝瑛直指，教育部与大学目前的作法太过保守，应学习美国 1970 年代实施『平权法案』的作法，在每一个升学管道里，主动为偏乡、低收入、少数族裔、身障等弱势族群订定保障名额。