CHINA

Chinas gross enrolment ratio for higher education reached 48% of the 18-year-old population in 2018. This indicates that its higher education system will soon offer near-universal access to higher education according to United States sociologist Martin Trows definition.

Also, it produced and trained more than 60,000 doctoral graduates in 2018. This number is even larger than that for US universities.

Further, the status of several Chinese universities has kept moving upwards in the major global university ranking tables since the early part of the 21st century. For example, in the Times Higher Education World University Rankings 2020, Tsinghua and Peking universities and the University of Science and Technology of China are listed among the top 100, with four other Chinese universities in the top 200.

However, little is known of what the most striking characteristics of Chinas higher education are or what higher education systems China has formed over the last 70 years.

Compared to the United States, United Kingdom, European countries and Japan or South Korea, the distinctive features of present Chinese higher education can be practically summarised as follows.

Distinctive features

First, all higher education institutions are rigidly controlled and regulated by the central government and especially by the Communist Party. This is not only evident in the relationships between the central government, local authorities and higher education institutions but is also true in governance arrangements and management within all higher education institutions.

All presidents and party secretaries in national universities are directly selected and appointed by the Ministry of Education and other ministries at a central level. The institutional leaders of the local public higher education institutions are determined by local authorities. Even in private universities the party organisations are present and party secretaries are appointed or dispatched by the local government.

At an institutional level, dual governance patterns are adopted. According to the Higher Education Law, all higher education institutions, including private ones, have to establish grassroots-based committees of the Chinese Communist Party.

The party committees are expected to exercise unified leadership over university work and support the presidents and carry out their leadership from the political and ideological perspective, while the presidents exert their influence on more academic and administrative matters. Perhaps this is the most important characteristic of the current Chinese higher education system in relation to governance and administration.

Second, the influence of political and ideological factors on teaching, research and engagement cannot be overstated. China has developed national-level compulsory programmes for all undergraduate students.

Normally all undergraduate students are required to earn about 12 academic credits from these programmes before graduation. These programmes are mainly concerned with Marxist theories, the foundation of ideologies, morals and personal cultivation and outlines of modern Chinese history.

Recently it seems that political and ideological constraints on higher education institutions have tightened, especially with regard to the teaching, learning and research activities of the humanities and social sciences.

For example, Chen Baosheng, minister of education, emphasised that education is on the frontline of ideological work. Another clear example is that in its newly launched Double World-Class Project in 2017, China placed a very strong emphasis on Chinese characteristics and the Chinese national context as well as the importance of Chinese values and ideologies.

Third, at both undergraduate and postgraduate levels, the State Council and Ministry of Education exercise control and regulation over curriculum development and teaching and research activities through various ordinances and documents, especially through the Categories of Undergraduate Specialities in Regular Higher Education Institutions and Categories of Awarding Doctoral and Master Degrees and Disciplines and Specialities of Training Postgraduate Students.

There are 12 categories in the former, including philosophy, economics, law, education, literature, history, science, engineering, agriculture, medical science, management and art. And at the postgraduate level, there are 14 categories with military science and professional studies being the additional ones. All these fields of study were further divided into different sub-fields of study and specialties or specialisations respectively.

All higher education institutions are not only asked to develop and provide specialties according to the types and contents of specialties or specifications listed in the categories, but they are also required to award only 12 and 14 types of academic degrees at the undergraduate and postgraduate studies level respectively, according to the two national categories.

Fourth, a hierarchical higher education system has taken shape in China. Roughly speaking, at the top of the system are about 10% of the countrys research-intensive universities which are mostly founded, financed and administered by the Ministry of Education and other ministries at a central level.

Approximately 40% of both local public higher education institutions and four-year private independent institutions are located in the middle level of the system.

On the bottom lie the remaining higher vocational colleges and private universities.

Further, in contrast to many other countries, although the numbers of both private independent colleges and private universities and their students account for nearly one-third of the countrys higher education institutions and students respectively, none of them is research-focused or qualified to confer doctoral degrees.

Finally, attaching great importance to the practical and utilitarian aspects of higher education is remarkable in comparison to many Western countries.

For example, national statistics show that, in 2018, the largest numbers of undergraduate students are those from engineering (33.4%), followed by those from administration and management (18.1%).

In recent years, the Chinese government has tried to further develop vocational education and applied universities. One of the important measures which has been widely taken is to ask universities to be engaged in the 1+X model. This model encourages undergraduate students to earn one more degree or certificate in technical or vocational studies in addition to their prospective academic degree prior to graduation.

By April 2019 about 2,040 universities and colleges of vocational and technical education had participated in the 1+X model. It is anticipated that more universities will adopt this model in their undergraduate studies. It is likely that practical universities will form a prominent part of Chinas higher education sector in contrast to the very few which become world-class universities.

Like many other Asian countries, China built modern higher education systems based on Western ideas and conventions as early as the late 19th century. By the time the New China was founded on 1 October 1949, the National Party (1911-49) had already established national higher education systems by essentially learning from the American universities.

However, radical reforms have been imposed on the existing systems and huge changes occurred in Chinas higher education soon after the New China was founded.

These reforms and changes have had an evident and considerable impact on shaping the current characteristics of Chinas higher education and research systems.

To illustrate, the Soviet model of higher education was introduced to China from 1949 to the late 1950s. Based on the Soviet model, China launched a national-level reform programme to restructure and readjust its higher education systems, aiming at developing a totally brand new higher education system which is different from the existing one and the American models, but is responsive and relevant to socialist construction and strengthens the Communist leadership.

Cultural revolution

In the Great Cultural Revolution period (1966-76), China tried creating its own higher education system with unique national characters and identity. Subjects about class struggle became the primary focus of its higher education institutions.

Teaching and learning activities were organised with the goal of solving particular problems in industry and agriculture. The vast majority of programmes in the humanities and social science, especially programmes concerning foreign studies and law, were dropped.

In short, university teaching stressed extreme pragmatism and curriculum development was characterised by a special emphasis on ideological issues, political studies and solving practical problems in industry and agriculture.

Since 1978 when China launched its open door policy, there is little doubt that higher education ideas, norms and standards from Western countries, especially the US, such as a general and liberal arts education, marketisation and new public management, etc, have shaped the current Chinese higher education system to a large extent.

As can be seen, China has never stopped making efforts to build up its national higher education system with distinctive Chinese features since the late 19th century. The formation of the characteristics of the contemporary Chinese higher education system is an outcome of a mixture of learning from Western countries and maintaining the national ideology and values of Chinese culture.

Professor Futao Huang is based at the Research Institute for Higher Education, Hiroshima University, Japan, and is also co-investigator on the Centre for Global Higher Educations global higher education engagement research programme.

Receive UWN's free weekly e-newsletters

See original here:

China's higher education system 70 years of evolution - University World News