Zhu / Lou Development and Reform of Higher Education in China

1. Auflage 2011
ISBN: 978-1-78063-359-6
Verlag: Elsevier Science & Techn.
Format: EPUB
Kopierschutz: 6 - ePub Watermark

E-Book, Englisch, 192 Seiten

Reihe: Chandos Asian Studies Series

The Chinese higher education sector is an area subject to increasing attention from an international perspective. Written by authors centrally located within the education system in China, Development and Reform of Higher Education in China highlights not only the development of different aspects of higher education, but also the reform of the education system and its role in the educational and social development of the country. This book analyses recently collected data from the National Bureau of Statistics of China and the work of leading scholars in the field of higher education. It highlights the marketization of state-owned institutions and the increasing importance of the internationalization of higher education - two important features of education in a modern and global context. - Rich statistical data - Sound theoretical foundation - Provides a comprehensive and comparative study of national data sources and leading scholars

Professor Hong Zhu is the executive director of the Department of Foreign Language Education at Tianjin University of Commerce. She is also a member of the Teaching and Education Committee of the University and a member of the editorial board of the University journal, Study on Higher Education. As a leading researcher in her field she has contributed chapters to several books, taken part in research projects including the 'Research on UNESCO's Strategy for the Development of Education' sponsored by Tianjin Leading Group for Education Science Planning.

Autoren/Hrsg.

Zhu, Hong Zhen

Lou, Shiyan

Leseproben

2

Higher education system and its evolution

Abstract:

Since reform and opening up of China in 1978, China’s higher education system has undergone a comprehensive change. As far as ownership is concerned, public and private institutions have gradually emerged and developed to take the place of state-owned universities. The higher education funding system has developed from one solely dependent on government funding to a new one with government funding as the major source but with other sources such as tuition fees, private investment, revenue from school-run industry, social donations, fund raising and education funds as supplements. Through continuous reform and exploration, a relatively mature modern enrollment system has been established, in which the National College Entrance Examination serves as the main approach, assisted by separate examination and recommendation at the same time. The employment system of college graduates has developed from government planning and assignment into market-oriented mutual choices between graduates and employers. As for the HEIs administrative system, self-governance has been expanding, changing the unified state administration. Accordingly a new distinctive degree system, with the three-tier degree system, degree audit system and degree-granting authorization system as the main part, has been set up.

Key words

education system

ownership system

funding system

enrollment system

graduate employment system

HEIs administrative system

degree system

Although economic and social development requires corresponding development of higher education, in China, this system has enormous restraint on it. Without the systematic reform, higher education would not have undergone such great development. The higher education system is a fundamental factor shaping the direction and pace of development of higher education. All in all, the formation of higher education in China today is determined by China’s higher education system, and by the constant adaptation of the higher education system to economic and social development. In the past three decades, China’s higher education system, including the ownership system, funding system, enrollment system, graduate employment system, administrative system and degree system, underwent comprehensive reform.

The ownership system

At the foundation of the PRC in 1949, all the 60 private and 21 foreign-owned HEIs among the 205 HEIs at that time were taken over and transformed into public ones. The 124 public HEIs also undertook reforms to establish state ownership of HEIs, and the ownership was shared between the MOE and other central commissions and ministries.1 After 1963, provinces, municipalities and autonomous regions began to be included as one of the owners, but in essence HEIs were still owned by the state.

The system was fit for the highly centralized planned economic system of that time; however, with China’s reform, opening up and rapid development of the economy and education, its drawbacks became increasingly obvious. For instance, allocation of educational resources was of low efficiency. Personnel provided by education could not meet the needs of economic development. In addition, investments from various social groups and organizations in education could not be motivated.

The first private HEI of the PRC appeared in 1980.2 Since then, nongovernment entities, including non-government organizations, private businesses and individuals, have become owners of HEIs. The 1982 Constitution of the PRC stipulated that ‘the state encourages collective economic organizations, state-owned enterprises, public enterprises and social forces to participate in the education enterprise in accordance with the law,’ which provided a legal basis for the development of private higher education. In 1987, the State Education Commission (SEDC, the central administrative department of education replacing the MOE during 1985–1998) clearly stated in a relevant document that education run by social forces was an integral part of education in China and a supplement to state-owned education. Yet, during this period, the relevant national policy was not stable enough and effective co-ordination and regulation of private HEIs were in short supply. Public HEIs were still dominant, and private HEIs were not on an equal footing with public ones.3

In 1992, the SEDC stressed the need for a gradual establishment of an education mechanism with government as the core and social entities as participants. In August 1993, the SEDC listed the first group of nationally recognized private HEIs qualified to award formal degrees. Since then, private HEIs have broken the state monopoly of the higher education diploma in a real sense. The implementation of ‘Regulations on the Running of Educational Institutions with Social Resources’ in 1997 established the state principles of ‘vigorous encouragement, correct guidance, strong support and effective administration’ on the society to run schools. In December 1998, the MOE promulgated the ‘Action Plan for Vitalizing Education for the 21st Century,’ initiating a systematic transformation of public schools, a precedent violating the former system. In addition to public HEIs and private HEIs, a new form of HEIs, namely independent colleges,4 came into existence and began to develop rapidly. In September 2003, the Private Education Promotion Law came into effect, and hence Chinese private education has entered a new era of development in accordance with law. As a basic social system, the promulgation and implementation of the Law would play an important stabilizing and guiding role in the development of private higher education. In February 2004, the MOE issued ‘2003–2007 Action Plan for Invigorating Education,’ which clearly stated the supporting measures and preferential policies of the state government on private schools. A pattern has gradually been formed in which public HEIs, private HEIs and independent colleges complement each other, compete fairly and develop jointly.5

The funding system

Funds for higher education in China had been provided entirely by the state from the establishment of the PRC to the opening up. Students did not only not need to pay tuition fees and accommodation, but also had the ‘people’s grant’ as subsidy for study and living expenses. Appropriation was determined by the government authorities mainly based on school size and expenses, and increased each year on the basis of the preceding year and according to financial status (‘Base plus development’ funding approach). After the final accounts of the budget at the end of each year, the school must return the fiscal surplus to the public finance. This method of budget allocation and management is simple and easy to operate, but the main problem is that it leads to improper use of education funding, and low utilization of education resource.6

Since 1978, there has been an increasing demand for a variety of specialized talents at all levels to meet the economic development. In order that schools produce personnel in accordance with market demand, the structure of HEIs needed to be adjusted. Demand for higher education also increased with the improvement of living standards, which meant that it became necessary for the state to provide more opportunities of higher education. However, this could not be achieved if the state bore all costs. Reform of the funding system for higher education was imperative. Meanwhile, with the development of the market economy, people’s views changed dramatically. It became a popular belief that funding higher education was not solely obligation of the state and government. Moreover, growth in personal income made it possible to establish a higher education cost-sharing mechanism.

In 1980, China began to reform the traditional financial system. According to the affiliations of HEIs, funds were provided by the central and local governments by their respective share. This allowed local governments to adjust the structure of higher education according to the demand of local economic and social development, which mobilized the initiative of local governments to invest in higher education. Among the 404 HEIs that emerged during 1980–1989, more than 300, namely more than 70 percent, relied on local financial resources of the provinces/autonomous regions/municipalities.7 Since the 1990s, an increasing number of HEIs have started to rely on management and funding of local governments. Entering the 21st century, local HEIs have become the subject of higher education.

This funding–sharing method has a side-effect, which is the irrational structure of government investment in higher education. First, regional structure is irrational. Government investment is mainly concentrated on the developed eastern region, and less in central and western regions; second, the structure level is irrational. Duplication of similar HEIs and majors built by the central and local and different provincial governments reduces the overall efficiency of higher education funding.

Since 1986, the ‘comprehensive quota plus special subsidies’ funding approach has been adopted into the education funding system. ‘Comprehensive quota,’ including staff salary, wage supplements, employee...