The Expansion of Higher Education and the Returns of Distance Education in China

Abstract

The returns of traditional face-to-face education are widely analyzed, but there is a need for empirical studies on the returns of distance education. Further, comparative studies on returns of both traditional and distance education using high-quality data are rare. Since 1999, continuous and rapid expansions have occurred in the whole Higher Education system in China. Given this background, what are the changes in returns of both traditional face-to-face education and distance education? This study analyzes the returns of both of these formats from 2003 to 2006 using the data from the China General Social Survey Open Database (Chinese General Social Survey [CGSS], 2018), adding educational background as a dummy variable to the Mincerian income equation. The empirical results show that Distance Higher Education can significantly increase the income of learners, the returns of distance education are lower than those of traditional face-to-face education and that from 2003 to 2006, the returns of distance education decrease dramatically.

Empirical Analysis of Return to Distance Higher Education in Different Disciplines

“…The returns to undergraduate were higher than those to junior college, which is consistent with the existing empirical findings on the return to education in China (Chen et al, 2003;Ding et al, 2012). The returns to distance education were lower than those to face-to-face education, also consistent with the empirical studies on China's labor market (Li, L, & Zhang, 2015;Li, 2018). There are many explanations for why the returns to distance education are lower than those to face-to-face education, including the (a) lower signal value of distance education, (b) lower quality of distance education, and (c) lower opportunity cost of distance education (Castaño-Muñoz et al, 2016;Hoxby, 2014;Stella & Gnanam, 2004).…”

“…Since is often used to explore the returns to education (Li, 2018;Glocker & Storck, 2014;Mincer, 1974;Siphambe, 2000) this study used Mincerian earnings function to estimate the return to distance higher education. The standard Mincerian earnings function is: An important assumption is made in calculating the Mincerian returns to education, namely that education incurs opportunity cost only.…”

“…Li, Li, and Zhang G (2015) also found that distance learners had considerable returns, which were even greater for female and rural learners. Li (2018) found that in China, with the expansion of face-to-face and distance higher education, the returns to both distance higher education and face-to-face higher education were in decline, and the returns to distance higher education were lower than those to face-to-face higher education. Even so, distance higher education could still bring considerable returns to learners, though not all empirical studies supported the notion that distance education could bring positive returns.…”

A quantitative content analysis of Turkish state universities’ official websites in terms of their preparedness and actions during emergency distance education in the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic period

“…As another example, some residential higher education institutions in China were encouraged to conduct DE programs in 1998. The number of these universities, which exceeded 30 in 2000, had reached 68 by 2008 (Li, 2018). With this reform, the number of DE students approached three million.…”

Antecedents of Student Loyalty in Open and Distance Learning Institutions: An Empirical Analysis

“…The education sector is projected to play an important role in long-term investments that highly potential lead to higher productivity (Manohar, 2018). Positive attitudes toward lifelong learning have resulted in the rapid emergence of lifelong learning providers (Li, 2018). In Malaysia, there were only six universities providing lifelong education in 2006; as of 2019, there were twenty-one public universities that offered distance education programmes in different modes.…”