During the summer of 2009 I had the pleasure of serving as a Visiting Professor at Renmin University of China in Beijing, where I taught a 6-week course focused on research trends and methodologies in the study of U.S. higher education. My visit took place thanks to an invitation from Juan Hu, Director of Renmin's Higher Education Studies Office (HESO), and was supported in part by her office, Renmin University, and Beijing's International Education Exchange program.
In addition to teaching for 6 weeks, I also conducted extensive interviews with professors as part of a research project funded by the UCLA Academic Senate Research Grants Program. My inquiry, which is in its beginning stages, seeks to better understand the complex changes taking place at Chinese universities and the impact on academic culture. In the coming years, I also hope to spend extensive time at Beijing University and Beijing Normal University, where once again I plan to conduct extensive interviews with faculty.
Renmin University of China, or Zhongguo Renmin Daxue, as it is known in Chinese Pinyin (Pinyin is the romanization of the nation's official language-Putonghua), was founded in the mid-1930s to prepare cadre for the growing Chinese Communist Party. Closed during Mao's Cultural Revolution, Renmin still today prepares many of the nation's governmental and policy leaders and enjoys excellent standing within the national Ministry of Education. Although Renmin's initial mission was fairly precisely defined, today it ranks as one of China's top research universities, specializing in the humanities and social sciences. In fact, many educators and policy makers in China consider Renmin the nation's top university for the humanities and social sciences (a recent study titled
Introduction to National Discipline Ranking in Mainland China, conducted by HESO, lists Renmin as the top university in China in the humanities and social sciences on the basis of individual disciplinary rankings).
The course I taught at Renmin was geared toward faculty, staff, and researchers working at HESO and the Office of Development and Planning, as well as graduate students interested in the study of higher education. Improved understanding of how U.S. universities are studied is part of the broader initiative by Chinese universities to achieve prominence as world-class research universities. As part of such an initiative, Chinese universities are investing in more advanced analyses of their own universities, adding layers of evaluative complexity to the internal operations of their leading universities. Accordingly, my course was specifically geared toward helping those participating in the class to better understand how U.S. colleges and universities are researched and the degree to which those studying Chinese universities might be able to learn from U.S. higher education methods and practices. Some of the research topics I addressed included the following: U.S. higher education policy research, studies of student learning and development, research on higher education management and change, studies of the U.S. professoriate and academic freedom, and research on the impact of globalization on U.S. universities. I introduced class participants to some of the best known authors and researchers working in U.S. higher education studies, including the likes of Philip Altbach, Alexander Astin, Patricia Gumport, William Tierney, and Sheila Slaughter, among many others. I also used some of my own work to highlight analyses of higher education from a critical framework, while raising questions about some common assumptions concerning U.S. higher education.
Given the high level of English ability that many university faculty, staff, and students have in China, I was able to teach in my first language, although from time to time I tried to introduce or explain ideas in my less-than-flowing Chinese. The class proved to be as much of a learning experience for me as it was for the students, as a great deal of our time was spent comparing and contrasting Chinese universities with those in the United States. Comparisons between Chinese and U.S. universities also were part of the interviews I conducted with faculty at Renmin and although my study is in its infancy, I offer some initial observations about the changes taking place in China.
A point expressed by all of my faculty interview subjects is that the top research universities in China clearly are "raising the bar" in terms of expectations for faculty research and scholarly productivity. This means that faculty at universities such as Renmin face greater pressure to publish and bring in research funds. Where they publish also is increasingly scrutinized, as faculty at Renmin are expected to publish in the top journals in their respective fields. Additionally, many faculty are expected to have international experience, whether in terms of obtaining the Ph.D. at universities outside of China or in terms of spending a semester or year abroad as a visiting professor. In fact, many schools within the university have developed elaborate international partnerships with top universities around the world, such as the one at Renmin's School of Public Administration, where faculty can spend a semester abroad teaching at the University of Michigan. The advanced English ability of most of Renmin's faculty, especially among a new generation of young scholars, makes building exchanges with countries such as the United States much easier. The primary impetus of many of these kinds of initiatives is to propel the Chinese university toward world-class standing.
A concern expressed by several professors, as well as some of the participants in the class, is that Chinese faculty tend to be evaluated through a complex administrative process, often involving administrative staff and government officials. This process lacks the strong peer-review component so common in the United States and leaves some Chinese professors hopeful that the future might lead to a faculty evaluation system more in the hands of Chinese professors. In a nation where change has become the norm, anything seems possible. In any case, I look forward to exploring these and other Chinese higher education issues in the coming years.
-Robert Rhoads
Labels: China, higher education, research
As the economy continues to go through peaks and valleys, many questions arise about the changing nature of higher education. Will mediums change, how will institutions change (or survive), and what type of learning environment will prepare students for the future? Under the topic of higher education and the recession, The Economist recently published an article with the title, "It still pays to study." The author cites the OECD's studies on the impact of learning on earning. According to the OECD: the more education, the better. After taking in to account tuition, years off for studying, and taxes, individuals still benefit in terms lifetime earnings. In terms of publicly funded education, taxpayers benefit from the subsidies based on this additional taxes paid over a lifetime of higher earnings. Given the financial crisis and the rapid rate at which universities are cutting budgets, the author speculated, "It may be worth rethinking the wisdom of ever-expanding higher education. But not this year."
