2003年，教育部办公厅出台了《关于做好高等学校自主选拔录取改革试点工作的通知》，高校自主招生政策正式实行。高校自主招生以选拔创新人才进行专业培养为目标，是“以统一考试录取为主、与多元化考试评价和多样化选拔录取相结合”的一次尝试。在十多年的发展期间，越来越多的高校和考生参与其中。2020年1月15日，《关于在部分高校开展基础学科招生改革试点工作的意见》宣布从2020年起取消高校自主招生。相对于统一高考的“一考定终身”，高校自主招生多元考核的模式并不是我国惯有的招生形式，它受到了国外高校选拔模式的极大影响，是政策借鉴下我国高校招生选拔的发展和创新。那么，高校自主招生政策是因何而起，又为何在2020年宣布停止？该政策实施期间究竟产生了哪些结果和问题？

本研究采用文本分析法和访谈法，对教育部文件和高校自主招生简章进行文本分析以获取官方的规定和要求，对高校教师、高中教师以及考生进行访谈以了解高校自主招生政策的执行结果。研究结果表明，高校自主招生政策并未脱离高考，造成了政策优惠利用效率并不高；学生在参与时功利性尝试多所不同的高校和专业，增加了高校选拔的成本和各专业招收合适人才的难度；高校难以完全满足院系专业的招生要求，招生要求上同质化严重，难以筛选“偏才”“怪才”；未能实施配套培养措施影响了自主招生培养的有效性。此外，高校选拔考核的形式和内容还难以兼顾公平要求。借助教育政策借鉴视角，本研究分析了造成上述问题的原因。在政策设计环节，路径依赖及缺少本土化措施导致未能保障自主招生的公平与效率，以及招生要求不断调整使得自主招生政策逐渐偏离借鉴初衷影响了高校自主招生政策本身的质量。在该政策执行时，高校出于政策创新成本的考虑，容易互相模仿选拔要求和形式，且未能实现后续培养；地区、城乡差异影响了学生参与自主招生的公平性；政府仍主导高校自主招生，高校和院系无法真正满足自己的招生需求；公众对重点大学的普遍追求影响着高校自主招生的招生效率，人情文化可能带来自主招生的程序腐败。

基于此，本研究认为通过对高校自主招生政策的反思，后续招生改革在政策制定阶段应该明确改革理念，厘清高校的自主权力，在执行政策时推动诚信监督机制及考试机制建设，并通过评估推动招生改革的持续进行。

In 2003, university autonomous recruitment policy in China was officially implemented.The goal of the policy is to select innovative talents for professional training, which is an attempt to combine unified examination with multiple examination evaluation and multiple selection.During the development of more than ten years, more and more universities and students have participated. On January 15,2020, the Ministry of Education announced the abolition of university autonomous recruitment from 2020. Compared with the unified college entrance examination of "one test determines one's life", the multi-assessment mode of university autonomous recruitment is not the traditional enrollment form in China, and it is greatly influenced by the selection mode of foreign colleges and universities. It is an innovation in the selection of college admissions in China based on educational policy borrowing. Why did the policy come into being, why did it stop in 2020, and what impact did it have during its implementation?

In this study, text analysis and interview are adopted. The documents of the Ministry of Education and the prospectus of autonomous enrollment in universities are analyzed to obtain the official regulations and requirements of university autonomous recruitment policy. College teachers, university teachers and students  are interviewed to explore their cognition and attitude towards the policy and its influence on them. The results show that, there are some problems in the implementation, such as the unclear goal of the students, the homogenization of the requirements, the problem of fairness, the low efficiency of the waste of extra points, and the lack of supporting training programs and measures.

From the perspective of education policy borrowing, this study analyzes the reasons for the above-mentioned problems: the low efficiency of policy results from the fact that it is difficult to carry out thorough policy innovation by means of path-dependence, and the universities and departments can not really meet their enrollment needs because of the incomplete decentralization of government autonomy. During the implementation of the policy, the common pursuit of examination fairness and key universities, as well as the cost-benefit analysis of universities, make it difficult to meet the requirements of selection, form and content of individualization and specialization, which affects the efficiency of autonomous enrollment. In addition, due to the consideration of the training cost, the university has failed to implement the supporting talent training program, which has affected the effectiveness of the policy. The fairness of the independent enrollment of college students lies in the difference of the level of economic development and the corruption of the procedure brought by the human culture.

Based on the above analysis, this study argues that the follow-up university enrollment reform should clearly define the concept of reform, clarify the autonomous power of universities. In the implementation of policies, the government and the society should enhance the integrity of the supervision mechanism and examination mechanism and promote the continuous reform of enrollment through evaluation.