目前，我国的高考加分政策存在的弊端成为人民群众热议的焦点，而教育行政部门的应对策略难以挽救高考加分公信力的失落。为此，本文引用了“公共治理”理念，从教育公平层次为切入点，综合运用文献分析、问卷调查、深度访谈、案例分析等方法，研究了高考加分政策历史演变、现实情况、存在的主要问题等等，在理性分析的基础上提出了相应的改进建议。 本文的研究结论如下：高考加分政策主要问题是，加分幅度过大、加分项目繁多且界定模糊、执行过程缺乏透明和监督，由此造成不少民众对于高考加分政策的持怀疑或否定态度。这些问题直接反映出高考加分政策存在以下弊端：过分倚重高考加分对于教育公平的调节作用，忽略了高考加分的程序性公平，没有正确对待舆情对于高考加分政策的公用，政策法规不完善以及有法不依、执法不严导致高考加分舞弊事件屡次发生，丧失了有效性。 所以，我们提出有必要构建高考加分决策的公共治理模式，即构建多元参与的高考加分政策制订与执行机制；有必要以不同的标准对待三类高考加分，即以其受教育的直接差距作为确定补偿性加分项目的标准；确定鼓励性加分项目原则有二：一是考生具有真实的个性与特长；二是获得这些个性与特长的成本是普通家庭能够支付的；由于政策性加分将高考加分作为社会福利，它对教育公平程度的严重损害，所以我们建议予以取缔。

Now, favorable scoring policy of university entrance examination is a subject of much debate, but coping strategies of the educational administration departments are hard to save the loss of its credibility. So the concept of “Public Governance” is introduced in the paper and makes the education equality as its point cut. With the method of references analyzing, questionnaire survey, in-depth interview, and case study, the author does a research on many aspects of the university entrance exam favorable scoring policy, such as historical development, the primal problems, and the corresponding suggestions for improvement upon rational attribution of the primal problem. The research conclusions of the article are as follows: the primal problems of the university entrance exam favorable scoring policy are those that the points range is too big, favorable scoring project definition is various and fuzzy, lack of execution supervision. Thus many people hold a skeptical or negative attitude to the university entrance exam favorable scoring policy. These problems will directly reflect the shortcomings in the process of enacting the university entrance exam favorable scoring policy. First, they rely heavily on the moderating effect that the university entrance exam favorable scoring policy exerts on educational fairness. Also, they neglect the procedural fairness of the university entrance exam favorable scoring policy. At last, they have not taken a proper attitude to the positive effect of public sentiment to the university entrance exam favorable scoring policy. The weakness of the policies, the lax execution and enforcement of law cause repeated cheating events on favorable scoring of university entrance exam and lose its efficiency. Therefore, it is essential to build the public governance mode of the university entrance exam favorable scoring policy. That is to build a multi-element involved formulation and execution mechanism of the university entrance exam favorable scoring policy. It is necessary to use different criteria to treat these three categories of university entrance exam favorable scoring. That is to set up compensatory bonus projects standards from the direct educational gap. There are two principles to determine incentive bonus projects: the first one is that the examinee has real personalities and skills and the second is the ordinary families can afford the cost to obtain these personalities and skills. Since the policy bonus will be considered as social welfare of the university entrance exam favorable scoring policy, it causes severe damage to education justice, so the suggestion is to clap down the policy.