7 Marginalised Children and Universal Basic Education
the macro level. Second is balance in investment between educational levels and
school types at the meso level. The third is the balance needed between individ-
ual interests and capabilities and collective needs for development for different
social groups at the individual and social group level (micro level). The implica-
tions at the three levels are linked with each other and mutually intertwined. The
third level depends on the first and the second. Regional and school level balances
underpin social group balances. Li ( 2002 ) has noted that balanced development
means more than one thing as conditions vary with context and the overall level of
development.
The conceptualization of equity and marginalisation in China has been influ-
enced since the late 1970s by Rawls ( 2001 ) in his Theory of Justice. Specifically
the proposition that inequality arising from social background and capability is
unfair, and that therefore this should be addressed with positive discrimination,
has had traction. It is not enough to treat everyone equally. To create real equal
opportunity society needs to pay more attention to the needs of those marginalized
by poverty, lack of capability and other disadvantages (Zhang 2009 ). Everyone
should have the same freedoms and rights. Public offices and employment should
be open to all under equal conditions, and the appointments should be made in
the best interests of all, not just the powerful. Balanced development thus requires
interventions that direct more resources to those who have least, and positive dis-
crimination is justified in order to reduce gaps in access and attainment.
Coleman, one of the most influential American educationalist in the mid-
twentieth century, has also been influential in shaping Chines views of equity and
marginalisation. In The Concept of Equality of Educational Opportunity (1986),
Coleman listed several meanings for equality of opportunity. These include pro-
viding free education that does not exclude by price; giving all children from
different social backgrounds access to core courses; providing children with dif-
ferent social backgrounds opportunities to learn matched to their capabilities; and
providing subsidies to reduce gaps in provision between rich and poor districts.
Public school systems are the best method of achieving these objectives and the
only way of reaching marginalised groups consistently. Coleman recognized that
absolute equality was unattainable and possibly undesirable since individuals dif-
fer in capability and aspiration. He preferred to promote “reduction in inequality
of educational opportunity” as a substitute for “achieving equality of educational
opportunity” (Shi 2007 ) since complete equality only happens when all the dis-
parate impacts of non school factors are addressed. This is impossible in practice
and equality can only be approached not achieved. This is consistent with current
policy in China which seeks to narrow gaps between regions, districts and schools
without necessarily eliminating the differences.
In the remainder of this chapter we consider education for marginalised and
disadvantaged children in five clusters. These are: migrant children generated by
rapid development and urbanization; left-behind children in rural areas whose par-
ents have migrated; gendered exclusion; HIV/AIDS orphans; and national minor-
ity children in remote and undeveloped regions. The analysis leads to a set of
policy suggestions to address the different issues raised.