Private colleges and universities, no matter how good you say he is, give him a good name. You can't change his temper. This is the product of capital accumulation. It is difficult to define whether this thing is good or bad. But we can know that education cannot be controlled by capital. Even if he is doing well now, he cannot be allowed to exceed a certain scale. It can only be said that he can be used as an incentive factor, just like the catfish effect, which has certain persecution ability to those public colleges and universities. It is to make those public colleges have a sense of crisis and then gradually improve their teaching level, instead of making private colleges mainstream full-time.
Because private colleges and universities are the product of capital accumulation, why do you think those capital groups should establish such schools? Is it for charity? Many private schools in high school, do you think it's really because of charity? No, he spent so much money to hire so many excellent teachers, build such a big school and spend so much money on this infrastructure. Why? To make money, of course? I haven't found that the trend of private colleges and universities chain has become more and more obvious in recent years, that is, colleges and universities that used to be only in one place are now expanding to the whole country, so this trend is not good.
Private colleges and universities are not without development prospects, but should have certain control, which can play a positive role in public colleges and universities without occupying the mainstream of the market. Because the mainstream of the market should be public education that does not ask for returns. You can't say that you can receive a better education if you have money, and you can only receive a poor education if you don't have money. This is not the fairness of education, and we can't let this unfair phenomenon appear around us too much.