The idea of "double first-class" of the Ministry of Education is clearer. This ranking is not for ranking, not to distinguish who is strong and who is weak in colleges and universities, nor is it a list of specific guidance for employment and selection. On the contrary, it is to tell everyone that the overall goal of "double first-class" is to really want to build disciplines, that is, to allocate land for resources.
Choose a group of strong people and fight for money; I chose a group of subjects with strong cultural and educational disadvantages (note that the region is not a province) and warned me not to work hard.
Double first-class is construction rather than evaluation, not completely according to the logic of who is strong and who is weak, but depends on who is very worthy of support (selecting the best at a certain level), who must support (balanced distribution, not letting the powerful 985 swallow, leaving some for professional colleges) and who must support (that is, there are many border colleges).
The ultimate goal is to correctly guide colleges and universities to engage in differentiated development trends. Comprehensive schools outside 985 (even including 985) were frustrated and supported by strong schools in other places. This is also the correct way to guide China universities from the first link to the second link (attaching importance to modern education and vigorously promoting comprehensive strong schools) and gradually to the third stage, that is, a few comprehensive strong schools are closely integrated with a large number of vocational ability disciplines.
There is also a hidden logic that everyone wants to go to hot industries, everyone wants to go, and there are many colleges and universities. Ministries and agencies and urban areas attach great importance to it, so the Ministry of Education only needs the strongest. No one wants to go to the unpopular major, nor do ordinary colleges and universities want to open it, nor are they valued by superior leaders. However, the Ministry of Education will still spend money to ensure the diversity of disciplines and serve social development, so it is certain that unpopular majors will dominate.
We can't look at this list from the perspective of students or enterprises. The underlying logic is wrong. The key goal of the Ministry of Education is to engage in macroeconomic policies and resource allocation, rather than giving specific guidance to technical majors.