I work with international and private schools in China. The forces of equality, trade, and idealism have had huge impacts on education, and are rooted in Chinese government and society.
Equality, a fundamental force in the ideals of communism, in education has pushed the Chinese government to eliminate testing as an admissions step for private schools in compulsory grade levels. Instead, students are put into an electronic lottery and selected at random (Lin Shujuan and He Qi, 2020). This aligns private schools with public schools. Some parents have been disappointed by this ruling, as the previous admissions testing was seen as a way to surround high-quality students with peers.
Honestly, I agree with this edict, philosophically. In practice, I will observe the results of this policy, and am eager to discuss the impacts with schools and parents. I believe the greater effect is to set the tone of education, and expect to hear words like “equality” spoken and referenced with greater confidence in educational forums and news cycles. I believe this “consumer confidence”, to borrow an American term, in equality is more important than the lottery itself.
Trade is a huge force, and has massively influenced education in China. The presence of international schools in China is directly due to Deng Xiaoping policy that trade and industrialization was more important than military investments, setting a political and social agenda that focused on international trade (Vogel, 2011). Deng’s Open Door Policy went further in explicitly stating that China would encourage international investors to come into China (Naughton, 1993), which necessitated international schools to open in order to teach the children of foreign investors.
Personally, I would like to call out a specific detail in regards to trade and foreign investment driving international schools. Due to the difference in languages and cultures, written contracts and instructions are massively important in determining if a project was performed successfully. In contrast, local trade between Chinese partners relies more on relationships and spoken generalizations. We can see this in international schools, which are managed by Chinese but consumed by foreigners. Systems like International Baccalaureate are successful in part because of deep and detailed documentation. Compare this to Project Based Learning, which has documentation with less specificity and more generalizations. I.B. is scaling more rapidly compared to PBL, and I believe a big reason is the documentation.
Thirdly, idealism as a philosophy has led to teachers needing to be experts. Idealism is pushed by political and social parties, and has deep roots in Chinese culture. The Chinese university admissions test, the Gaokao is in place as a method of achieving equality in education and society (Wang, 2013). I refer to this as “idealism” because equality is an idea that is pursued strongly in China, even in this case where methods might be unreasonable in achieving equality but do accurately represent equality. The promotion and propaganda around communism as a state philosophy rely upon idealism, as the people struggle to achieve a state of communism despite facing many hurdles.
In my views, this is similar to the promotion and propaganda around Democracy in my home country. I feel that idealism is a tool used by both countries to manage and direct the sentiments of society towards systems that each country’s founders desired. It appears to be quite effective, and I would further conclude that it has been beneficial.
Equality, Trade, and Idealism are political and social forces which have influenced international schools in China, and it’s important to understand their origins in order to best arrange new policy with the buy-in of parents and administrators.
References
LIN Shujuan and HE Qi. (2020, March 11). Shanghai regulates private school enrollment - Chinadaily.com.cn. China Daily Newspaper. Retrieved June 29, 2020, from www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202003/11/WS5e68e80da31012821727e45b.html
WANG, Y. (2013). National Higher Education Entrance Examination. In Hayhoe R. & Ross H. (Authors) & ZHA Q. (Ed.), Education in China: Educational History, Models, and Initiatives(pp. 350-353). Great Barrington, Massachusetts: Berkshire. Retrieved June 29, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1j0pszw.82
VOGEL, E. (2011). From Revolutionary to Builder to Reformer,: 1904–1969. In Deng Xiaoping and the Transformation of China(pp. 15-46). Cambridge, Massachusetts; London, England: Harvard University Press. Retrieved June 29, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt2jbw2f.6
NAUGHTON, B. (1993). Deng Xiaoping: The Economist. The China Quarterly, (135), 491-514. Retrieved June 29, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/654099