Emulating or integrating? Modern transformations of Chinese higher education

ABSTRACT

Western models of the university have fundamentally shaped Chinese universities over the twentieth century. Since the nineteenth century, bringing together aspects of the Chinese and Western philosophical heritages in higher education has turned out to be an arduous task. The striking differences between the two value systems have led to cultural tensions. Chinese universities have not figured out how to wed the standard norms of Western higher education with their traditions. The Western concept of a university has been taken only for its practicality. Chinese higher learning traditions have had strong impact on contemporary higher education development. While China’s history of the educational institutions called university today is long and their changes have been drastic, the transformation of China’s higher education has been surprisingly little documented in the English literature. Without a good grasp of the nature of Chinese traditional higher education and institutions, it is almost impossible to truly understand modern Chinese higher education. Tracing the historical roots of Chinese higher education, this article examines how traditional Chinese higher education and its institutions have been transformed under the influence of their Western counterparts. It attempts to capture the interactions between indigenous Chinese and imported Western traditions in higher education.

KEYWORDS:

• University
• higher learning traditions
• Confucianism
• Taixue
• the academies
• imperial examination

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes

1. In the literature, the name was previously Tung Chung-shu in Wade-Giles. There are also debates over his birth and death dates.

2. The Chinese original is ‘正其誼不謀其利, 明其道不計其功’.

3. The Chinese original is ‘罷黜百家, 獨尊儒術’.

4. The Chinese expression of the system Gongsun Hong suggested is 博士弟子員制度.

5. The name is often spelled Giulio Aleni. His Chinese name is 艾儒略.

6. The work was written by Giulio Aleni to systematically introduce literature, philosophy, science, medicine, law and theology in Europe into China. It was the first to introduce Aristotle and St. Thomas Aquinas into China.

7. The Chinese original is ‘特所格之物皆器數之末，而所窮之理又支離神怪而不可詰，是所以為異學耳’ (Wu, 2002, p. 126).

8. The original saying in Chinese is ‘寧可使中國無好曆法，不可使中國有西洋人’ (Zhang, 2009, p. 41).

9. The Chinese original reads ‘其實天朝德威遠被，萬國來王，種種貴重之物，梯航畢集，無所下有’.

10. Such as Ernst Friedrich Ludwig Faber (1839–1899), Timothy Richard (1845–1919), William Alexander Parsons Martin (1827–1916) and Young John Allen (1836–1907).

11. Liang’s original was ‘喚起吾國四千年之大夢，實自甲午一役始也’.

12. The original goes ‘體用者，即一物而言之也。有牛之體，則有負重之用；有馬之體，則有致遠之用。未聞以牛為體，以馬為用者也。中西學之為異也，如其種人之面目然，不可強謂似也。故中學有中學之體用，西學有西學之體用，分之則並立，合之則兩亡。’.

13. For instance, the purpose of education in the Confucian tradition was beautifully expressed by Zhang Zai (1020–1077), a Chinese Neo-Confucian moral philosopher, as ‘Make a mind for Heaven and Earth, set up the Tao for human beings, restore the lost teachings of the past sages, and build a peaceful world for all future generations’ (為天地立心，為生民立命，為往聖繼絕學，為萬世開太平).

14. In his letter, James noted: ‘China is upon the verge of a revolution…. The nation which succeeds in educating the young Chinese of the present generation will be the nation which for a given expenditure of effort will reap the largest possible returns in moral, intellectual and commercial influence’ (Timmins, 2011).

15. Relatively, Meng Xiancheng’s (孟憲承, 1933, p. 7) analysis was more accurate. He posited that American universities had successfully integrated British liberal college education with German universities.

16. When commenting on Han Fei (韓非, c. 280–233 BC), Li Zehou (1999) says: ‘這種知識在韓非子看來比知識本身更重要，也就是後人講的“世事洞明皆學問，人情練達即文章”’ (p.107).

17. For instance, Jiang (2006, p. 279) made the following comments on why China failed to develop modern science: ‘我們不像希臘人那樣肯在原理原則上探討，也不像現代歐洲人那樣設法從個別的發現中歸納出普遍的定律。中國人一旦達到一件新發明的實用目的，就會止步不前。因此中國科學的發展是孤立無援的，也沒有科學思想足以導向的明燈。科學發展在中國停滯不進，就是因為我們太重實際’.

18. Ruth Hayhoe (1989) rightfully points out that ‘For China, Soviet model of the university was as much as a “Western model” as had been the American and European patterns introduced at earlier periods’ (p. 52).

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the Research Grants Council, University Grants Committee: [Grant Number 751313].

Notes on contributors

Rui Yang

Rui Yang is Professor and Associate Dean (Cross-border and/or International Engagement) in the Faculty of Education at The University of Hong Kong. With over two and a half decades of academic career in China, Australia and Hong Kong, he has established his reputation among scholars in English and Chinese languages in the fields of comparative and international education and Chinese higher education. Bridging the theoretical thrust of comparative education and the applied nature of international education, his research interests include education policy sociology, comparative and cross-cultural studies in education, international higher education, educational development in Chinese societies, and international politics in educational research.