Social Transformation and Private Education in China

Social Transformation and Private Education in China

Social Transformation and Private Education in China

JING LIN

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Lin, Jing. Social transformation and private education in China / by Jing Lin. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0–275–95590–7 (alk. paper) 1. Private schools—China. 2. Education and state—China. 3. Education—Social aspects—China. 4. China—Social conditions. I. Title. LC54.C6L56 1999 371.02'0951—dc21 98–56632 British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data is available. Copyright 䉷 1999 by Jing Lin All rights reserved. No portion of this book may be reproduced, by any process or technique, without the express written consent of the publisher. Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 98–56632 ISBN: 0–275–95590–7 First published in 1999 Praeger Publishers, 88 Post Road West, Westport, CT 06881 An imprint of Greenwood Publishing Group, Inc. www.praeger.com Printed in the United States of America TM

The paper used in this book complies with the Permanent Paper Standard issued by the National Information Standards Organization (Z39.48–1984). 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

This book is dedicated to my parents and my grandmother, whose love for me is profound and unconditional.

And to my two lovely children, Erica and Eirene Wang, who fill my heart with joy and love every day.

Contents Acknowledgments

ix

Terms and Measures

xi

Introduction PART 1

xiii

OVERVIEW AND CONTEXT OF PRIVATE EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT

1

Private Education Development: An Overview

2

Economic Reform and Social Transformation since 1978

17

3

Chinese Culture and Society and Dilemmas in the Public School System

33

PART 2

3

PROFILES AND CHARACTERISTICS OF PRIVATE SCHOOLS AND UNIVERSITIES

4

Elite Private Schools

51

5

Ordinary Private Schools

69

6

Private Universities

87

PART 3 CULTURAL CHARACTERISTICS AND MORAL AND DEMOCRATIC EDUCATION IN PRIVATE SCHOOLS 7

Characteristics and Culture of Private Schools

107

viii

8

Contents

Moral and Democratic Education in Private Schools

PART 4 9

125

PRIVATE EDUCATION: RESPONSES, ISSUES, PROBLEMS, AND THEORETICAL REFLECTION

Response from the Public, Scholars, and the Government

141

10

Issues and Problems

157

11

Equality and Choice: Theoretical and Practical Concerns

169

12

Significance and Future Prospects

181

Appendix: Regulation on Education Run by Social Forces

187

Bibliography

197

Index

209 Photo essay follows page 124.

Acknowledgments This book was made possible by three research grants which supported my trips to China and allowed for the hiring of research assistants. The research grants are from the Spencer Foundation Small Research Program, the Spencer Foundation Major Research Program, and the Social Science and Humanities Research Council in Canada. This book, however, does not represent the opinions of the funding organizations. Many thanks to Yanyu Zhou, Chao Pei, Stephen Scarff, Steve Bossy, James Que, and Fang Wang. They have helped a great deal in the process of data collection and translation and literature search and review. Thanks to Dr. Terrence Tice, who spent valuable time in reading and making comments on the manuscript. Thanks to many of my local guides: Su Cai, Deng Lihua, Zhou Manshen, Wang Jianchao, Lin Qing, Pang Xiaojun, and Lin Pin. Without their crucial help in setting up connections and accompanying me to schools, I would not have been able to collect so much firsthand data. I also want to thank the principals, teachers, and students I interviewed in private schools in China. Their willingness to share information has made this project possible. Thanks also to my parents-in-law, who helped take care of my two children and allowed me to be away doing fieldwork for months. Finally, heartfelt thanks to my husband, Wuyi Wang, who is always supportive of me in my professional pursuits.

Terms and Measures Yuan: The Chinese unit of currency, also called ‘‘renminbi.’’ The official rate of exchange in 1970 was $1 ⫽ 1 yuan; in 1980, $1 ⫽ 1.5 yuan; in 1985; $1 ⫽ 2.4 yuan; in 1987, $1 ⫽ 3.73 yuan; and in 1990–1995, $1 ⫽ 5.4 yuan. As of 1998, the exchange rate is US$1 ⫽ 8.3 yuan. Mou: Measurement of land. 1 acre is about 6.07 mou. Xiang: Formerly called ‘‘communes,’’ xiangs consist of 5–8 brigades, each of which will contain 3–8 villages. A xiang can have a population of from 10,000 to 100,000 people. In some densely populated regions, a xiang can contain over 150,000 people. Teachers’ grades: Chinese teachers have these ranks: primary grade, middle grade, senior grade, and special category (superior) grade, which is given to only a very few exceptional teachers. Salaries are not necessarily commensuate with the grades. Seniority and achievement are the two most important criteria in evaluation. Schools: China’s public schools are divided into key schools and ordinary schools at the senior high level. In the 1980s, primary schools and junior high schools were also categorized as key or ordinary schools; although today they may not be so called, conditions in these schools basically remain unchanged. China’s formal higherlearning institutions are also divided into key universities and ordinary universities.

Introduction Until the early 20th century, virtually all schooling in China was private. However, since 1949, when the Chinese Communist Party took power, up to the early 1980s, private schools disappeared throughout the country. Under the communist government, educational policy-making, curriculum design and teaching, school finance, and personnel management were all centrally controlled. While the state provided over 85 percent of funding for urban schools, the rural schools, called ‘‘minban’’ schools or ‘‘people-run’’ schools, received little to no financial support from the state and had to rely on local governments and fees charged to students. Private schools resurfaced in China after 1978, when the Chinese government led by Deng Xiaoping embarked on economic reform for modernization. Reform has thrust private ownership and competition into the state-planned economy, and consequently profound changes have taken place in culture and values in the society. Private education has developed in the changing social, cultural, and economic context of the reform era, catching national and international attention and raising hopes but also many new questions. RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND FIELDWORK My interest in doing research on private education in China was aroused during the summer of 1993, when I met a former university president from a province in northern China. He and a few other former university administrators had just set up a private university in the northeastern city of Shengyang. He and his co-founders were planning to enroll more than 700 students during the

xiv

Introduction

first term, offering courses in accounting, international trade, foreign languages, hotel management, and so on. According to him, applications to the school were three times greater than the number of students they could admit. Then, during June and July of 1993, I made a trip to the southern province of Guangxi, where I learned that more than half of the kindergartens in the city of Guilin were privately owned and also that a number of private vocational schools and regular secondary schools were being set up each year. In a local county of the same province, I learned to my surprise that four private secondary schools had sprung up. Colleagues and friends informed me that in provinces like Sichuan, Guangdong, and Hunan and in municipalities such as Beijing and Shanghai, private schools were developing at a fast pace. This rapid change prompted me to want to know more about private school development in China. Sponsored by three research grants—a Spencer Foundation Small Research Program grant, a three-year grant from the Social Science and Humanities Research Council in Canada, and later a portion of the Spencer Foundation Major Research Program grant that Professor Heidi Ross at Colgate University and I received in 1996—I visited schools in China in four years— 1995, 1996, 1997, and 1999. The nearly 40 schools I visited were located in cities such as Beijing, Shengyang, Dalian, Shanghai, Guangzhou, and Guilin and a local county in Guangxi province. The schools included elite private schools, ordinary urban/township private schools, rural private schools, and private universities. I also visited some elite public schools (called ‘‘key schools’’ hereafter) and ordinary public schools for the sake of comparison. To obtain as much information as possible, I constructed the following list of questions as a guide for interviews, which were to be conducted in an informal manner: 1. What type of private school is this? Is it a general or vocational school? Is it a boarding school? Is it a single-sex school or a co-ed school? 2. What purposes does the school serve? Who are the clientele: the rich, the salaried class, or rural peasants? 3. Who set up the school? What are their visions of education? What tuition and fees are charged? What standards are adopted for student admission and teacher hiring? 4. How is the school administered? What are the roles and responsibilities of the principals and teachers? What are the teachers’ training and qualifications? What kind of expectations do they have of students? What is their relationship with students? 5. What are the learning and living conditions for students? What are their motivations and future aspirations? How is the school equipped? More specifically, are there computers, televisions, and pianos in the classrooms? Is there audio/video equipment to assist foreign language learning? 6. What kinds of curricula does the private school teach? What new teaching approaches are adopted by teachers? Are there any teaching innovations going on? Does the core requirement for students entail English and computer science?

Introduction

xv

7. To what extent do parents participate in school activities and administration? 8. What are the differences and similarities between private schools and local public schools? What are the special problems facing private schools? 9. At the present fast rate of development, what roles will private schools play in Chinese education? Will they facilitate inequality in the society? Will they help with economic development?

To gain access to schools, I relied on connections set up by friends and colleagues in China. On most occasions, they also accompanied me to schools. The friendly introductions they made before questions were asked reduced uneasiness on both sides and broke down reluctance to share information with a stranger. I usually stayed in a school for half a day or sometimes for a whole day. Activities included talking with principals and founders for a couple of hours, interviewing teachers and students, and touring the schools’ teaching facilities and student dormitories. Afterwards, there was usually a lunch meeting or dinner together with school founders, administrators, and some teachers. These occasions provided opportunities to ask further questions about the school. Several times, I also participated in activities organized by the schools, such as celebrating Children’s Day (June 1) or attending an arts festival. Because I am of Chinese origin and because I had been referred to the schools by friends and colleagues, the principals and teachers were quite open and frank with me. They sometimes discussed extensively their philosophy of education and described their teaching experience in private and public schools. In exchange, I was often asked to make comparisons of Western and Eastern education since I have lived and taught in both China and North America. I returned to revisit some of the schools afterward in order to update myself on their new development. I also maintained contact with some of the founders and principals who continued to supply me with new information. On all occasions, I tried faithfully to record conversations, interviews, and my own observations of events. I took numerous pictures and collected dozens of school brochures and advertising materials, school newsletters, and other publications. Whenever it was convenient, I would also visit government offices and exchange ideas with officials in charge of private education. Daily encounters with ordinary citizens also provided invaluable information about the public’s attitudes toward the development of private education. These visits produced hundreds of photos, eight notebooks and boxes of Chinese scholarly articles, school brochures, and publications. With the help of several research assistants, the notes were reorganized and translated into English according to the following categories: school purpose, clientele, admission criteria, tuition and fees, curriculum, living and learning environment, teacher qualifications, teaching approaches, teachers’ responsibilities, student motivation, principals’ responsibilities, school administrative structure, teacher hiring and salary, special problems facing the school, and so forth. While these notes

xvi

Introduction

form the foundation for the book, I also draw from articles written by Chinese scholars. OUTLINE OF THIS BOOK As a comprehensive study of development, context, characteristics, problems, issues, and future prospects of private schools in China, this book attempts to provide rich contextualized information on several types of private schools, accompanied by varied analyses. I intend this book, largely based on my fieldwork, to be a systematic, comprehensive study of the rise and development of private schools in modern China. The book contains four parts. Part 1 (Chapters 1–3) contains an overview and explains the context of private education development. Part 2 (Chapters 4–6) profiles the characteristics of three major forms of private education. Part 3 (Chapters 7–8) reports on distinctive features of private schools, notably elite private schools, and examines moral and democratic education in these schools. Part 4 (Chapters 9–12) considers social and government reactions to private schools and discusses issues and problems facing private schools, equality issues arising from private education development, and the significance and future prospects of private education development in China. Specifically, Part 1 provides an overall picture of private schools at the primary, secondary, and university level; it then examines the economic, social, and educational context of private school development. Part 2 describes the characteristics of different types of private schools, ranging from elite private schools (called ‘‘elite schools’’ hereafter) for children of very wealthy families to ordinary private schools of all kinds and private universities. In Part 3, Chapter 7 attempts to identify distinct characteristics and an organizational culture of private schools; Chapter 8 adds a glimpse of moral and democratic education in the schools. In Part 4, Chapter 9 reviews the social response and government reactions to private education development, Chapter 10 discusses issues and problems facing private schools, and Chapter 11 reflects on the issue of equality and choice. Finally, the significance and future prospects of private education development are focused upon in Chapter 12. PRIVATE EDUCATION: DEBATES AND ARGUMENTS The 20th century has been marked by a great expansion of public school systems throughout the world, based on the belief that private schools had served mainly the rich and powerful and that education is a fundamental right for all children. However, private schools continue to operate in many countries. In the United States, private education has been argued to be a fundamental right of choice for parents, who should be able to send their children to private schools if the public school system does not provide what they want (Ravitch, 1992; Levy, 1986). Private education has been closely related to the issue of social equality.

Introduction

xvii

Research reveals that many private schools feature exclusivity and elitism, serving only, or largely, the children of economically advantaged families. Because children’s access to private schools has been closely connected to parents’ political and economic power, private schools have been criticized for helping to reproduce social hierarchies (Kane, 1992; Griggs, 1985; Cookson and Persell, 1985; Baird, 1977). Private schools tend to provide decentralization and competition. They have been found to produce higher achievement by children of comparable ability to students in public schools, partly because they possess a different organizational culture (Kane, 1992; James and Levin, 1988; Powell et al., 1985; Coleman et al., 1982). On the other hand, private schools may also be underfunded, serving a rural clientele in remote areas and with a quality of teaching and learning much worse than that found in public schools (Kwari, 1991). In general terms, private schools can be boarding schools, single-sex schools, or co-ed schools. Distinguishing features of private schools include selfgovernance, self-support, self-defined curriculum, self-selected students and faculty, and small size (Kane, 1992, 1). Richard Barbieri (1992) notes that private schools have the freedom not to follow state mandates and that they can have their own distinct missions. However, the freedom and autonomy private schools possess are conditioned by the marketplace. What they offer is closely connected to needs within the economic system. In developing countries, the rationale for the existence of private education tends to be very different from that in more developed countries. Carnoy and Samoff (1990) see private education in developing countries as an inescapable solution to the demand for education, particularly at the secondary level. Parents who send their children to private schools are not necessarily exercising a constitutional right of choice but rather solving personal problems or using a system that increases their children’s chance for social mobility. Thus, the major issues and concerns centering on private and public education have been those pertaining to school autonomy, choice for parents, access to quality education, and the democratic ideal of equal opportunity for all, which is supposed to be fulfilled by public education. In China, these issues are more acute than in any other country, perhaps save India. First of all, China has a huge population. In 1988, within a total population of 1.1 billion persons, a total of 200 million students were studying in schools, 125 million of them in primary school, 40 million in junior secondary school, and 13 million in senior secondary school; about 2 million students were enrolled in universities (Cheng, 1992, 14– 15). This enormous student population has engendered a mammoth school system. In 1988, China had 800,000 primary schools, 180,000 secondary schools, and 1,075 universities. The number of teachers totaled 10 million, of whom 5.5 million were primary school teachers, 2.4 million were junior secondary school teachers, and 1.1 million were senior high school teachers; about 390,000 were university teachers (Cheng, 1992, 15). In 1996, there were 960,653 schools across the country. The extensive demand for education has led to a great shortage in funding,

xviii

Introduction

and public schools in China have not been able to meet all the demands for kindergartens, elementary schools, secondary schools, and higher education. We will detail this aspect later in the book. Meanwhile, under the economic reform, the Chinese people have had more autonomy in private entrepreneurship, such as running one’s own school, which has become possible. A new class of people has arisen from the new market economy. These people want better education for their children and are willing to pay high tuition. As the demand is so great, running a private school can become a profitable business. Finally, especially in the rural and township areas, students who fail to pass the highly selective admission exam to secondary schools but who still want a chance to obtain a higher education (as the university is still the main avenue of social mobility in most rural areas) also yearn for an alternative form of school in which to continue their education. Private schools in China have come to life again in the era of economic reform and opening to meet new social demands. The diversity and plurality in their orientation and organizational features have markedly altered the overall picture of China’s educational system. The facts that elite private schools charge very high fees and offer a superior learning environment have occasioned concerns over equality of education, especially regarding students’ access to quality education. In time, private schools will also present a challenge to the public school system, in that they have a different organizational culture and greater decisionmaking power. Private schools and universities might have a positive impact on the country’s economic development, as they try to respond to needs in the economic system and as they enlarge access to primary, secondary, and postsecondary education. Private education has caused heated debates in North America and has been a congruent part of many educational systems. At present, it is too early to draw firm conclusions about the impact of private education in China, though there is a firm base for some pointed diagnosis and prognosis, the latter depending on what circumstances prevail. This book is an attempt, then, not only to record this significant change in patterns of education but also to explore important issues relating to social equality, public school efficiency, and plurality in Chinese education. The reappearance and rapid development of private schools open a new stage in Chinese education. Questions they raise touch on equality of educational opportunities, public school reform, and diversity in the education system. Private schools provide an alternative to public education, give parents more choices, and may provide stimuli to public schools, in effect linking schools more closely with society. It would seem that, as a developing country, China needs the supplement of private education to solve the great societal demand for education.

PART 1

OVERVIEW AND CONTEXT OF PRIVATE EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT

1

Private Education Development: An Overview This chapter first reviews the history of private education in China and then presents an overview of private education development since 1980, summarizing the features of several types of schools that have appeared in large numbers in the 1990s.

ORIGINS AND HISTORY OF PRIVATE SCHOOLS IN CHINA China has a long history of private education. The first private school was founded 2,500 years ago by the great philosopher Confucius (551–479 B.C.). In his lifetime, Confucius taught over 3,000 students and developed rich educational thoughts that still influence educational practice in China today. Other famous philosophers of Confucius’s time were Mencius and Sun Zi, both of whom had hundreds of students and spread their intellectual thoughts through private teaching. During the Warring Period (475–221 B.C.), private education became a major form of education. Scholars representing different strands of thoughts used private schools to criticize and influence each other. During the Han Dynasty (206 B.C.–220 A.D.) private education entered a prosperous stage, with individual scholars teaching Confucian classical cannons and some scholars having thousands of students in their schools. During the Sui Dynasty (581–618), the imperial civil service examination was adopted to select talents from all sectors of the society to assist the emperors in governing the country. Those who passed the examination were richly awarded

4

Overview and Context

with power, personal wealth, and high social status. Private education was always the main vehicle preparing individuals for the imperial examination. During the Tang dynasty (618–907), both government schools (guan xue) and private schools entered a new stage of development, existing side by side to provide both vocational and academic learning. During this period, Buddhism was being actively integrated into the Chinese way of life. Thousands of temples that had been erected as a result of the popularity of the religion also became private teaching places for literacy. The Wudai Shiguo (907–979) and Song dynasties (960–1279) saw the academies (shuyuan) becoming the most significant form of private higher learning. Of the 714 known shuyuan in the Song dynasty, the most famous were the Yuelu, Zuiyang, Haoyang, and Bailudong shuyuan. Scholars gathered in the academies to review lessons for the imperial examination and to listen to known scholars discussing intellectual and political issues. According to Borthwick (1983), these schools had not only an established teaching program but also a good administration system. Shuyuan were utilized by an erudite scholar, Zhu Xi (1130–1200), to ponder on philosophical issues, leading to the formation of neo-Confucianism, which later dominated the functioning of the Chinese society. During the Ming dynasty (1368–1644), Shuyuan were placed under the control of the government, which exercised rigorous political control over shuyuan scholars, turning these academies into places devoted only to preparing scholars for the imperial examination. While higher learning in Chinese history always involved the government, primary education at all times took a private form. Sishu, a type of one-teacher private school, was the primary form for teaching literacy and preparing scholars for the imperial examination. Students were taught individually or in groups, with the teacher being hired by individual families or a village or operating the school himself. Teachers relied on fees and tuition for survival, and some simply ate or lived in a student’s home. Textbooks were classical canons that embodied moral teachings and scientific and commonsense knowledge. Rote learning was universally adopted, and corporal punishment was not only accepted but encouraged. Sishu continued to operate in China’s vast rural areas until 1949, when the People’s Republic of China was established. After the Opium War in the 1840s, national defeat and humiliation caused reformers in China to call for educational development, which was deemed to be vital for the survival and strengthening of the country. Conscientious intellectuals and citizens demanded the abolition of the imperial examination system and the popularization of education. ‘‘New learning’’ was prescribed as the panacea to cure the ills of the traditional teaching of classical canons, which turned out ‘‘bookworms’’ good only at taking examinations. Many schools were set up, including general primary and secondary schools for boys and girls, vocational technical schools, military and marine training schools, commerce schools, and liberal arts schools. They appeared to spread literacy and teach Western science and technology. In higher education, Fudan University and China University were established in 1905. A famous entrepreneur, Chen Jia-

Private Education Development

5

geng, founded Xiamen University in 1919 in Fujian province. That same year, Zhang Boling set up Nankai University in Tianjin. Both Xiamen University and Nankai University became well-known institutions, turning out thousands of students, some of whom played important roles in China’s contemporary history. For example, the late premier Zhou Enlai was a graduate of Nankai University. By 1931, there were 47 private universities in China, while state-funded universities totaled 56. In 1947, of the 207 universities in the country, 79 were private institutions of higher learning. Private primary and secondary schools also occupied an important place in contemporary China. In 1906, one year after the imperial examination was abolished, the country had 59 private secondary and primary schools, with a teaching staff of 606 and a student body of 3,855. The private schools carried out 79 percent of the teaching. In 1928 only in the city of Beijing, the total number of secondary and private primary schools reached 317, forming a 5:1 ratio with the number of government schools. By 1947, statistics collected in just five cities (Beijing, Tianjin, Nanjing, Shanghai, and Wuhan) revealed the significant number of private schools in the country: The five cities alone had a total of 1,452 private primary schools, comprising 56 percent of all primary schools teaching 307,400 students; a total of 439 secondary schools, which comprised 84 percent of all secondary schools teaching a total of 136,200 students in these cities (Mei Ruli, 1994, 20–22). Overall, private schools comprised 40 percent of all schools in the country by 1949 (Zhang Zhiyi, 1995). Although private schools had played a key role in China’s contemporary education, they disappeared altogether after the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) seized power in 1949. Transforming China into a state-ownership system, the government devoted the first part of the 1950s to eliminating private businesses and institutions in the country. By 1956, nearly all private schools had been closed down, combined, and turned into public schools. In the rural area, a form of schools called minban, or people-run schools, were developed to provide basic education to the peasants. Although they relied on collecting fees from peasants to survive, they were not private schools in that they had neither administrative autonomy nor academic freedom (Deng, 1997, 107). In the centralized system, all schools in the country were to adopt the uniform curriculum compiled by the Ministry of Education, and educators had to follow a highly political agenda for training students into socialist new persons. Development in education was centrally planned to serve the state-controlled economy. Neither urban nor rural schools had any autonomy in curriculum and administration. By 1976, when the Cultural Revolution (1966–1976) came to an end, there were literally no private schools in China. THE RISE AND RAPID DEVELOPMENT OF PRIVATE SCHOOLS Private schools reappeared shortly after the CCP’s control on the national economy and political system was relaxed. At the beginning, that is, in the early

6

Overview and Context

1980s, private schools consisted mainly of short-term, remedial classes offered to prepare students to pass the national university entrance exam (the ‘‘University Entrance Exam’’ hereafter). In the middle and late 1980s, however, the number of private schools and universities grew significantly. They operated as evening classes or weekend schools, offering learning opportunities to those who sought to improve their educational credentials or to learn specialized vocational/cultural skills. A small number of schools eventually became established, formal institutions of learning. Private education development went into a phase of explosive growth in 1992, after the late paramount leader Deng Xiaoping toured south China and reaffirmed China’s staunch stand for economic reform and opening, dispersing much of the doubt about where China was to go after the crackdown on the student movement in 1989. The first private school to thrust private education into the spotlight was the Guangya Primary School, set up in August 1992 in the city of Chengdu in Sichuan province. Dubbed the ‘‘first school for [training] aristocrats in China,’’ it caught national and international attention for its high tuition and fees, promise of high teaching quality, and superior learning conditions (such as computers, color TVs, and pianos installed in air-conditioned classrooms). Other features of the school, such as small class size, comfortable living conditions, foreign teachers teaching all subjects in English, and standard running tracks, also aroused much curiosity. Following Guangya, private schools of similar types sprang up throughout the country, especially during the period of 1992–1995, when the country’s economic development was heated up to an unprecedented degree. By 1997, Guangdong province alone had over 70 private schools, which charge high tuition with fees and feature excellent learning conditions. Thirty of these schools have over 100 million yuan invested in them. Beijing city had more than 40 elite private schools by 1999 (Zhang Kuan and Wang Wenyuan, 1998). Private schools charging moderate fees have also appeared in earnest. In Zhejiang province alone more than 40 private schools were opened in 1993, doubling in one year the total number of private schools that had existed in the province over the previous decade. In the underdeveloped province of Guangxi, an astonishing 400 private schools were reported in 1993. Nationally, by 1993 the development of private education had reached an impressive scale. Over 20,000 private schools of different types were operating in the country (including kindergartens). Some 700 were middle schools enrolling a total of 130,000 students, nearly 900 were elementary schools with 50,000 students, and 13,800 were kindergartens taking care of 530,000 children. Ten institutions of higher learning were accredited to award degrees approved by the State Education Commission. Forty-odd degree institutions of higher learning were set up by social organizations in conjunction with government agencies or enterprises, as well as more than 500 non-degree institutions of higher learning that provided training, counseling, or scholastic assistance, which were examined and approved by provincial education administrations. Over 10,000 non-degree schools

Private Education Development

7

Table 1.1

Province Jiangsu

No. of Schools

Students in School

800

400,000

Henan

2,023

200,800

Hunan

678

126,000

Liaoning

1,627

320,000

Xinjiang

338

44,000

provided vocational/technical training, education in social and cultural life, remedial education, and continuing education (Zhu Kaixuan, 1994). By 1994, according to statistics collected by the State Education Commission, the country had over 60,000 private, nongovernmental schools and other types of unofficial educational institutions. Among them, 16,800 were kindergartens, 4,030 were primary schools, 851 were secondary schools, and more than 800 were institutions of higher learning. In Beijing city alone, the number of these schools and institutions totaled more than 2,000, including 85 institutions of higher learning and 32 formal primary and secondary schools. The variety of new schools brings to mind an old Chinese saying: ‘‘Like the Eight Immortals crossing the sea, each one showing his or her special prowess’’ (Ba xian guo hai, ge xian shen tong). A table (Table 1.1) constructed from a report (Zhe Wen, 1993) shows the impressive number of schools existing in five provinces in 1993. Major cities were at the forefront of private education development. Guangzhou, a city situated in the well-developed province of Guangdong, had 360 private schools and 4,700 training classes enrolling a total of 150,000 students in 1992. These schools were set up for residents who longed to learn new skills in order to seize opportunities in the new market economy. Connecting themselves with the needs of the market, the schools operated in a highly efficient manner. To set up a program, they did not have to wait for instructions from many levels of the government and waste a large amount of time passing papers up and down the bureaucratic system, as did public schools and universities. They simply splashed their ads across the streets of the city or set up a booth at a heavy traffic intersection announcing their programs. Adopting a ‘‘guerrilla’’ strategy, they offered whatever was in hot demand, such as classes on foreign languages, accounting, fashion design, interior decoration, computer science, driving, and secretarial skills, to name just a few. The duration of their programs could be short or long, and classes could be taken during the day or night, all depending on the needs of the clientele. To attract enrollment, they even promised to refund fees if the students were not satisfied. This promise of quality helped some schools gradually to accumulate enough savings to con-

8

Overview and Context

struct their own school buildings (‘‘Guangzhou Private Schools Filled with Students,’’ 1993). By the end of 1995 the country had a total of 20,780 kindergartens, 3,159 primary and secondary schools, 672 vocational schools, and 1,209 universities, with 21 of the universities qualified to issue degrees recognized by the state. Short-term training schools and other schools for the cultural and social life of citizens reached 35,000. Altogether, these schools enrolled about 6.5 million people (Wang Minda, 1996). Meanwhile, a new trend is emerging whereby public schools are quickly turning themselves into privately run schools. Today, this trend of development in private education remains unabated. In all, the number of private primary and secondary schools, according to my own observation, may well be much higher than official figures indicate. For example, county townships and rural villages may have dozens of private schools that are not reported to higher-level government. Hundreds of vocational and technical schools may operate in franchise style but remain uncounted. In 1997, an acquaintance widely connected with private school founders estimated to me that the number of private schools and institutions has reached 70,000. As private schools are still being set up, their exact number will be difficult to determine for some time to come. In spite of their significant increase in numbers, we have to note that private schools still comprise a small portion of China’s schools. According to Kwong (1996), in 1996 only about 4 percent of the schools in China were private; however, local situations may vary greatly. For example, in 1995 Shengyang city had approximately 15,000–16,000 students, or about 1.5 percent of the primary and secondary school population studying in private schools (Guo Ge, 1996). In comparison, in some regions, the development has been really impressive: In Wenzhou city of Anhui province, for example, in 1996 private secondary schools made up 51 percent of all secondary schools, thus exceeding the number of public secondary schools in the city (Zhang Zhiyi, 1996). In short, this incredible rise of private education represented a historical necessity to transfer the power in education from government to private ownership and control at the local level (Liu Peizhi, 1993). DEFINITION OF PRIVATE PRIMARY AND SECONDARY SCHOOLS Many terms have been used to define the new schools. For example, they are called ‘‘private schools,’’ ‘‘nongovernment schools,’’ ‘‘schools run by social force,’’ ‘‘people-run schools,’’ ‘‘community schools,’’ and so on. Officially, the law regarding private schools, Regulation on Education Run by Social Forces (see Appendix), instituted since July 31, 1997, stipulates that the regulation applies to schools run by ‘‘businesses and governmental organizations, social groups and other social organizations and individuals, using nongovernment educational financial resources, to provide schooling and other forms of edu-

Private Education Development

9

cation to the society.’’ This has led some people to define the new schools as ‘‘nongovernment schools’’ or ‘‘schools run by social forces,’’ to separate them from government-run schools. However, an opinion that differs from the official definition notes that the two terms, ‘‘nongovernment schools’’ and ‘‘schools run by social forces,’’ do not reveal the fundamental nature of the new schools; that is, the schools’ financial sources tend to be largely independent from the state and thus the greater autonomy the schools enjoy is overlooked. People of this opinion suggest naming the new schools ‘‘private schools,’’ holding that ‘‘the ultimate feature of private schools is that they possess a high degree of autonomy while education is provided as a public undertaking’’ (Lin Rongri and Du Zuorun, 1996b, 8). This autonomy means that private schools have the right and power to determine, among other things, their educational goals, curricula, teaching approaches, program development, internal management, school developmental plan, and administrative structure. They also argue that these schools share much similarity with private schools in other countries as well as those existing in China up to the year 1949. Naming them ‘‘private schools’’ links these schools with their international counterparts and continues China’s history of private education, which was cut short for three decades. Qiu Chen argues: The use of ‘‘private school’’ continues a long history of private education in China and indicates a common practice in the world. ‘‘Private school’’ means an educational organization operated by organizations or citizens who raise their own funds; the schools are not included in those funded by governmental organizations, state-run enterprises and local governmental organizations. (Qiu Chen, 1996, 12–13)

Qiu Chen insists that the widely used term ‘‘school run by social forces’’ may be confusing. The term was first mentioned in Article 19 of the Constitution of 1982, which states that ‘‘social forces such as collective economic organizations, business enterprises and other institutions could run their own schools.’’ However, using this term reveals neither the source of funding nor the patterns of financial allocation and administration of the school. Qiu Chen thus suggests that the terms ‘‘private education’’ and ‘‘private school’’ serve to emphasize the distinction of the new schools in China from those government-funded schools. The difficulty in achieving a consensus definition stems from the fact that private education development in modern China is still at an embryonic and exploratory stage, and its ownership and management are of a quite diverse nature. The people who set up and operate such schools include democratic parties, collectively owned organizations, social and academic organizations, and individual citizens. The schools appear in different forms: those set up privately with public assistance, those set up jointly by citizens, and those set up by individuals. In finance, there are schools with self-financing, others that absorb foreign capital in a cooperative effort, public community schools with private

10

Overview and Context

assistance, and public schools in the process of changing over to nongovernmental schools. In management, some schools adopt the system of placing responsibility on the principals; others place the responsibility on the principals under the leadership of a board of trustees (Zhu Kaixuan, 1994). In the face of the diverse nature and management mode of private schools, policy makers in China tend to prefer the terms ‘‘nongovernmental schools’’ and ‘‘schools run by social forces.’’ This usage, however, does not reflect the fact that persons setting up a private school are legally responsible for the school (just as a private business is responsible for its assets and liabilities). Scholar Li Shoufu (1993) believes that the term ‘‘private school’’ itself indicates the legal qualifications and responsibilities of the founder as a private owner. In contrast, he reasons, the term ‘‘schools run by social forces’’ does not in the least reflect the legal qualification and status of the founder in establishing the school. ‘‘Schools run by social forces’’ suggests only that the schools are run by such nongovernmental organizations as civilian social groups and individual persons, without indicating the legal status of the founding persons. I tend to agree with the argument in favor of using the terms ‘‘private education’’ and ‘‘private school.’’ My belief is that these new schools appeared only after new demands arose from the country’s economic reform and opening and that they differ from the public, state-owned schools not only in their form of ownership but also in school administration and social responsibility. They are the outgrowth of the blossoming of China’s private economy. In this book, therefore, I generally employ the terms ‘‘private schools’’ and ‘‘private education.’’ I retain the use of terms ‘‘schools run by social forces’’ or ‘‘nongovernmental schools’’ in quotations from secondary sources. Similar to private primary and secondary schools, many private universities are not completely private in nature. Some are affiliated with state-owned colleges and institutes, contracted to be self-sufficient while having to pay an annual fee to the sponsoring organization. Some are de facto state institutions that have changed their names for the sake of generating profit for the organization. Others are subsidiaries spun off from state organizations. Nevertheless, the large majority of private higher-learning institutions are founded and funded by private citizens and business companies. I call such universities ‘‘private universities’’ despite their complexities in terms of ownership and formation, while retaining terms such as ‘‘nongovernmental organization–sponsored institutions’’ (NGOsponsored) [as an antonym of ‘‘government-sponsored’’ (guanban)] in secondary sources cited. My definition of private education, then, includes all educational institutions that are mainly or largely privately founded and wherein considerable decisionmaking power rests in private hands, even though the state may be involved through the provision of some resources and the exercise of some control.

Private Education Development

11

DIVERSITY IN OWNERSHIP Great diversity has characterized the array of private schools. Founders of private schools come from many social groups, which leads to multiple forms of ownership. Private schools are of these types: schools funded entirely by private funds, private schools with public assistance, government-run schools with private assistance, state-owned but privately operated schools, community schools, and foreign-Chinese cooperative schools. Founders of private schools include private citizens, business entrepreneurs, democratic parties, retired teachers, retired government officials, foreign citizens and corporations, Hong Kong and Taiwan business people, and public institutions of all kinds. One noted group of founders are the ‘‘democratic parties.’’ Such parties exist in China to provide ‘‘consultation’’ to the communist government. These parties serve mainly decorative functions and possess little power in terms of policy making in the political structure. However, they do provide a space for likeminded individuals in pursuing cultural and social interests within the framework of a party. Intellectuals and social elites are the main members of these parties. The membership in 1997 stood at 356,200 (China Facts and Figures, 1997, 1997, 26–27). Since 1980, these parties have been among the most active in setting up private schools and universities. Some orient toward the rural poor and minorities living in remote areas. By 1994, they had set up over 1,700 schools of all kinds, enrolling over 700,000 students (Zhang Zhiyi, 1996, 8). The following data provide a glimpse of the diversity among founders of private schools. Take Shandong province, for example: In 1994, of the 1,636 private schools of all kinds in the province, 712 or 43.6% were established by private citizens, 217 or 13.3% by social organizations, 179 or 11% by governmental agencies and military organizations, 68 or 4.2% by democratic parties, 456 or 27.9% by businesses or collectively owned businesses, and 4 by foreign and Chinese corporations (Liu Fengshan, 1995, 6–7). The schools have these forms of ownership: (1) privately owned schools; (2) those established by government with private support and those state-owned but run by private parties; (3) shared-ownership by individuals; and (4) foreign-Chinese collaborative ownership (Liu Fengshan, 1995). A national study revealed: In respect of the principals who established these schools: Part of the schools were established by democratic parties; in both Beijing and Tianjin, for instance, democratic parties concerned are the Revolutionary Committee of the Kuomintang, the China Democratic National Construction Association and the China Association for Promoting Democracy. Beijing’s Private Shuren Elementary Schools is chiefly run by the central committee of the Revolutionary Committee of the Kuomintang (Republic Party) and its chairman Li Peiyao is the school’s honorary principal. A part of the schools were established by private entrepreneurs from Beijing’s Xihua Electronics, Shenyang’s Bowang Group, Dalien’s Baolu Corp., and Chengdu’s Jiahao Corp. Most schools, however, were established by private citizens who are dedicated to education, and this includes, for

12

Overview and Context

instance, Jia Weiyin of Zhengze Middle School and Duan Junyi of the Private Junyi Middle School, both in Beijing. (Zhang Zhiyi, 1994, 151)

MAIN TYPES OF SCHOOLS Private schools have had these main types: ‘‘elite’’ schools charging high tuition and fees, urban/township ordinary schools, rural schools, vocational technical schools, all-girl schools, schools run by key public schools, and private universities. They serve different clienteles, and each possesses unique characteristics. Elite Private Primary and Secondary Schools These schools have received the most publicity nationally and internationally. They respond to the demand for high-quality education by a wealthy group in the country, namely, the newly rich private business entrepreneurs, hundreds of thousands of foreigners and overseas Chinese doing business in the country, white-collar workers working in foreign-owned corporations, and some government officials. The schools operate a boarding system with excellent learning and living conditions and a low teacher-student ratio. They charge fees that are affordable only by a small number of people. Experienced teachers are hired, and there is much emphasis on learning English and computer science and much attention is paid to extracurricular activities. Urban/Township Ordinary Private Secondary Schools These schools locate in cities and townships and are mainly for students who fail to pass the entrance exam into senior high schools. Students enrolling in these schools hope either to have a second chance to pass the University Entrance Exam or to learn some vocational skills before they join the workforce. The ordinary private schools do not have the superior learning and living conditions that characterize the elite schools, but compared with public schools they have more autonomy in hiring, admission, curriculum arrangement, teaching methods, and school administration. For example, in Tienjin, six of the thirteen private schools, besides finishing the curriculum requirement by the government, added courses in foreign languages, minority language, music, painting, dancing, and so on. They also have the liberty to hire the teachers they want. However, most of them have disadvantages: They are short in funding, teachers are generally over-aged, and there is a lack of standards in school administration. Small size also hampers their efficiency and effectiveness (Zhang Fengmin, 1994, 10). Vocational Technical Schools and Single-Sex Schools These schools provide training in vocational skills, and their programs can last two to three years. They teach practical but often narrow skills to students

Private Education Development

13

who wish to find employment right after graduation. The subjects of study include hotel service and management, tourism, accounting, secretarial work, commercial English, driving, cooking, international trade, and so on. The schools are usually linked with certain government organizations or businesses that guarantee student employment. The fees they charge range from moderate to high. In 1995, there were 78 private vocational schools in Shengyang (Guo Ge, 1996). Some schools operate in franchise style. Rural Private Schools Rural private schools are mostly primary schools, with some secondary schools. Located in villages and rural townships, they charge very low fees and have little teaching equipment. They play an important role in providing basic education in rural areas, filling up gaps in the funding for local public schools. Mostly set up by villagers, they open doors to children whose parents can not afford the various kinds of fees charged by public schools. One problem facing these schools is that the central and local governments are still unwilling to recognize the role these schools play in providing basic education. Private Schools Set Up by Public Schools Public key schools have been involved in setting up ‘‘private schools’’ within their schools, using their fame and good facilities to attract students. In Hangzhou city, eight such schools were set up in 1995. These ‘‘private schools’’ follow the same curriculum and pace as the key public schools and participate in the same examinations. Parents were attracted to this kind of school in hordes, as they know that having a place in a key school, public or ‘‘private,’’ will improve their child’s chance for university admission (Xue Jianguo, 1995, 8). In 1996, twelve such schools existed in Hangzhou, causing over 20,000 students to participate in the selection examinations, from which only one out of 21 was accepted into the school. Private Schools Set Up by Government In the mid-1990s the Chinese government allowed some public schools to be contracted to private citizens for management. The schools have free use of school buildings, yet rely on tuition fees to survive. Some local governments have even put in huge sums to construct such schools. In Beijing, for example, there were thirty-four such schools in 1999. The schools have to abide by the tuition standard set by the government. The schools can charge from 4,000 to 15,000 yuan a year, depending on the policies of local governments. Some schools have living and learning conditions that can exceed those of the most elite private schools, while most others look like any other ordinary public school.

14

Overview and Context

Private Universities The first private university established after the economic reform started was the Zhonghua Open University, which was set up in 1982. By 1994, Beijing alone had 30 private universities. In the economically advanced Guangdong province, fifteen universities were awaiting permission to open in 1994. By 1997, there were over 1,200 private universities in the country. Private universities are small compared with public universities, but they all try to offer programs closely connected with needs in the economy. They draw students through adopting a policy of ‘‘easy admission and strict graduation.’’ At the beginning, because of a lack of funding, they met with difficulties of various kinds. For example, the China Scientific Management and Administration University in Beijing did not own a single car, and university officials rode their bikes to work, going back and forth to 21 teaching places where students were studying. The staff-to-student ratio was as high as 1:28, while that of a government-funded university was 1:4. The office of university administration occupied a room of 25 square meters, which was also used as both a bedroom for the president and a storage room for the university. Another university, Jing Hua Medical University, had an annual per-student budget of ¥275.5, much lower than the 2,000 yuan per student of state-operated universities. The university lost 40,510 yuan in one year and needed donations to cover the deficit (Qin Guozho, 1991, 33–42). Another type of private university is adult higher-learning institutions that offer diploma and certificate studies. They are built for people who want to change jobs or to learn new skills and knowledge that fit into needs of the economy. A well-known one is Shanghai Qianjin Spare-Time Training Institute. Cai Guangtien, the founder, started the institute with ¥100 in 1983, with 300 students studying four subject areas. By 1987, this institution had trained a total of 16,000 students. The founder owed his success to valuing the use of information, careful planning, quick decision making, strict rules, a proper rewardand-punishment mechanism, and efficiency and effectiveness in business handling. LEVELS AND TYPES OF EDUCATION A number of levels of education are provided. Take Shengyang city of Liaoning province in northeast China, for example. By the end of 1995, the city had 66 private schools. Of them, fourteen were primary schools; five ran from primary to ninth grade; 36 were junior high schools (grades 6–9); two were ‘‘complete’’ high schools (meaning six years of junior and senior high schools). There were also three ‘‘wushu’’ (martial arts) schools, one arts school, and five senior high schools for secondary students (Guo Ge, 1996). In Shandong province in 1994, there were 218 (13.3%) preschools, 159 (9.6%) ordinary primary and secondary schools, 1,143 (69.8%) two- or three-year vocational and technical schools

Private Education Development

15

and adult education schools, 56 (3.4%) non-degree-offering higher-learning institutions, and 57 (3.4%) preparatory schools for the state-administered examination for higher learning (Liu Fengshan, 1995, 6–7). FEES Fees charged by private schools vary immensely. Elite private schools generally charge 10,000–30,000 yuan annually in tuition and fees, plus a one-time school construction fee of 20,000 to 50,000 yuan. An elite public secondary school I visited in Shanghai had a private section that charged students 80,000 yuan in construction fees. Some schools in Guangdong province charge a sum called an ‘‘education savings fund’’ in the amount of 150,000 to 300,000 yuan. As for ordinary vocational and regular private schools, the fees and tuition usually range from 1,500 to 4,000 yuan a year. There are also schools charging medium-high tuition from students, which is about 8,000 to 9,000 yuan a year. Rural private schools, catering to peasants with little cash, charge 200 to 1,000 yuan a year. MEASUREMENT OF ACHIEVEMENT How are the schools measured in terms of their achievements? At the primary level, they usually participate in mid-term and final exams organized by counties, school districts, cities, and provinces. Many private schools have been reported to be on a par with the public schools (Tian Zanzhu, 1995). Some schools I visited have even better results. For secondary schools, besides the above-mentioned exams, scores in all kinds of examinations held to prepare students for the University Entrance Exam and, eventually, the scores in the University Entrance Exam are considered the measure of a school’s quality. For technical and vocational schools and universities, one measure of quality is the rate of employment among graduates; another is the ratio of students passing the state-administered examination for self-studying students. In recent decades, more and more Chinese people are taking the state self-study exam to obtain their higher-learning degrees. For example, in 1996, a total of 4.35 million students took this exam, a 12.7 percent increase over 1995 (Cai Min, 1996, 13). A great number of private universities cater to these people. Most private schools in China were set up after 1992, following Deng Xiaoping’s speech during his South China tour. Into the 1990s, new schools are still being opened. As their numbers grow, schools face stiff competition from each other. Private schools charging fees at the high end of the spectrum are starting to see signs of saturation in the market. While the good schools can meet their enrollment targets, some are operating with fewer students than they had anticipated. Private schools also face competition from public schools, especially public key secondary schools. Eventually, then, the quality of private

16

Overview and Context

schools will determine their survival. The measures we have mentioned are the yardsticks used by the public to judge the quality of private schools. SUMMARY The development of private schools has featured diversity and plurality. They attempt to satisfy various social demands. The appearance of schools charging high fees has caused hot debates as to whether social inequality is being reinforced by these ‘‘elite’’ private schools. Views are divided as to the role of private education in China’s education system, whether it should be supplementary or an integral and important part of the educational system that receives equal recognition and treatment with public schools. Despite the questions and different opinions, there is no doubt that private education has achieved phenomenal growth in a short period of time and will have an important role to play in China’s economic and educational reform.

2

Economic Reform and Social Transformation since 1978 Private schools have reappeared in China in the context of dramatic socioeconomic changes since 1978. In the countryside, the household responsibility system (baochan daohu) unleashed an enthusiasm among Chinese farmers that had not been seen since the land reform of the early 1950s. While leading to the demise of the people’s commune, the policy revitalized the agricultural sector and gave the Deng Xiaoping administration great leverage for further reform. In the cities, reformers of the post-Mao era tried to diversify the economy by allowing the private sector to grow and by attracting foreign investment. Reform measures such as the contract responsibility system (chengbao jingying zhi), leasing management system (zulin jingying zhi), and joint-stock system (gufen zhi) were experimented with throughout the 1980s and 1990s with a view to rejuvenating state-owned enterprises. At the same time, the new leadership cautiously recognized market mechanisms and attempted to free China’s industry from an obsolete model of central planning. (Deng, 1997, 118)

In the 1990s, the economic reform expanded into the areas of education, research and development, culture, health care, and social insurance. As the market-oriented economy flourishes, the egalitarianism that underpinned the planned economy from 1950 through the 1970s is gradually declining. The rapid economic growth resulting from the reform stunned the world, while high inflation and government corruption also caused profound social discontent. The new economy has triggered a massive redistribution of wealth, and while individual intelligence and diligence matter in who gets what, a person’s possession of political and economic power is even more fundamental. New social

18

Overview and Context

groups have sprung up in the social and economic restructuring, which in turn exerts a major influence on the demand for education. Chapters 2 and 3 focus on the context of private education development in China. Chapter 2 examines opportunities and crises as a result of the economic reform, which has led to significant class transformation and diverse demands for education. Chapter 3 looks at the Chinese cultural tradition and its impact on education; further examined are the effects of the government’s policy of one child per family on child-rearing practices. The latter part of the chapter systematically discusses problems in China’s public school system. ECONOMIC REFORM AND THE GROWTH OF THE MARKET ECONOMY Talking about economic reform in China, one has to mention the third plenary session of the Communist Party’s Eleventh Central Committee in 1978. As the watershed of significant changes in modern China, the conference adopted Deng Xiaoping’s blueprint for modernizing China by discarding Marxist-Leninist dogmatism and taking a pragmatic approach to China’s development. National economic development became the new priority of the government, and citizens were encouraged to establish private enterprises and improve their living conditions through accomplishments gained through diligent effort. The ultimate goal of the reform is modernization of the country’s agriculture, industry, national defense, and science and technology. According to modernization theorists, a modernized society features an open attitude, adoption of new ideas, great development of science and technology, alternatives and choices available to citizens, and urbanization and industrialization. People in a modernized society enjoy multiple sources of information, have more independence from authority, and enjoy greater mobility in terms of occupation and locations. Participation in civil politics increases, as the number of voluntary associations grows and better-educated citizens push for a say in government (So, 1990). The modernization drive in China has brought about many of the social and cultural changes mentioned by modernization theorists. In the reform era, new ideas have flourished, and popular cultures of all kinds, once banished, have come back and grow rapidly, creating space for individuals to be themselves; many more channels of communication are opened, while the CCP’s control over people’s daily life has been significantly reduced. All these have sparked talk about the rise of a civil society in China (Lin, 1994b; Whyte, 1992). The economic reform has opened up opportunities for millions of Chinese citizens to be entrepreneurial. People have rushed to open up businesses of all kinds to get out of poverty. They set up stands on the street selling clothes or groceries, transporting goods from one place to another, raising chickens or growing mushrooms, and the like. They have stood under the scorching sun and battled in wind and rain to accumulate their starting capital. By the early 1990s,

Economic Reform and Social Transformation

19

a sector of the Chinese society had become much better off than the rest of the country, owning booming businesses and large savings accounts. Called names like ‘‘king of fertilizers,’’ ‘‘king of chickens,’’ ‘‘king of pearls,’’ ‘‘queen of fashions,’’ and ‘‘big boy in transportation,’’ they convey the impression of people rising from rags to riches overnight. China’s private economy went into explosive growth after Deng Xiaoping gave his famous south China tour speech in 1992. Disillusioned with China’s prospects for ever becoming a democracy, the Chinese people displayed a heretofore-unseen enthusiasm for making money. Middle-aged teachers, engineers, and young university graduates poured into southern cities such as Guangzhou, Shenzhen, and Hainan in search of higher-paying jobs and opportunities to own their own businesses. Leaving jobs in government agencies and state factories, millions of intellectuals and government officials joined foreign or Chinese-foreign collaborative companies or private companies. In the lower level of the society, semiskilled or unskilled people improved their living conditions dramatically by driving a taxi, opening a small restaurant, transporting goods from one region to another, growing fruit, contracting for the management of small businesses and construction of building projects, and selling computers and photocopying machines, to name just a few enterprises. Some have earned enough to purchase their own apartments or private cars in a few short years. CHANGE IN VALUES During the masses’ rush to set up businesses, to speculate on stocks and stamps, to build real estate empires, and to chase whatever is in fashion, the society has experienced a sharp decline in moral beliefs such as those associated with collectivism, altruism, patriotism, and an emphasis on spiritual reward rather than material gratification. Lei Feng, the soldier once established as the national role model and glorified for his selflessness and loyalty to the party, has lost public appeal. The desire to be more individualistic and independent in thinking supersedes the government’s appeal to maintain Lei Feng’s role-model status (Schmetzer, 1993). Zeng Hangshen and Feng Dayong (1996) described this as a ‘‘separation of the state and society in the multiplicity of social values’’ (p. 62). In the decades of economic reform and opening since 1978, there have been far-reaching value changes in Chinese society, especially with regard to moneymaking. Traditionally, the Chinese people have despised businessmen, who ranked below government officials, scholar-intellectuals, and peasants in social status. The commonly held bias is that all businessmen are sleazy and selfish, making money through cheating and ripping off the poor. This notion was further reinforced during Mao’s regime, when material motivation was denounced and spiritual reward was glorified by the mass media. Changes in social and economic reality, however, have turned traditional values upside down. As stories of individuals getting rich quickly were talked about across the country—

20

Overview and Context

on the farms, in the factories, and even in political study meetings in universities and government offices—Chinese people began to become highly enthusiastic about money-making. Criteria for spouse selection and judgment of a person’s worth, once based on political criteria, now increasingly incline toward wealth and money. In this atmosphere, people tend more and more in choosing occupations to emphasize self-actualization and economic interest (Zeng Hangshen and Feng Dayong, 1996, 63). New standards in job seeking are ‘‘to be able to utilize one’s potentials’’ and ‘‘to have high income.’’ Money has become fundamental in the acquisition of social prestige. Wealthy people show off their wealth by wearing expensive designer clothes, which may cost many times an ordinary person’s monthly income. ‘‘Jing pindian,’’ or ‘‘fine goods stores,’’ have cropped up throughout the country, with some charging 15,000 yuan for a belt and 20,000 yuan for a lipstick. A mink coat from Russia could cost as much as 100,000 yuan. Such astonishing prices have forced the society to quickly adjust its standards and its expectations of personal wealth upward. The new notion today is: One is not rich with just 10,000 yuan; one just starts to appear rich with one million yuan; a really rich person is worth 10 million. Traveling in China one gets the inescapable impression that everyone there is searching for ways to make money and that risk-taking has become the norm. People, old and young, have rushed to be part of the stock fads, real estate fads, stamp collection fads, commodity trading fads, and lottery fads, to name just a few. In this speculative atmosphere, the word ‘‘chao,’’ meaning stir-fry, or speculation, has become one of the most popular words, revealing a mentality that one is not only to become rich but to become very rich in a very fast and easy way. Some people sell fake medicine to patients, or serve dirty food, or mix water into a no-name wine and put labels from a famous wine on the bottle; some go as far as robbing cargo trains or kidnapping women and selling them for a high price; a few daredevils risk the death penalty smuggling cocaine from other countries into China. Families break up as husbands gamble until they lose everything. It is in this context that private schools, using Chairman Mao’s famous saying, have spread from ‘‘sparkles’’ into ‘‘a prairie of fire.’’ Private schools represented one of the fads sweeping through the country in the 1990s. One main attraction is the potential for making big money. For example, if a person opens a private school enrolling 100 students and charges them each 10,000 yuan a year, this person becomes a millionaire overnight. Private education has ridden this tide to enjoy a wave of growth unprecedented in China’s modern history. GOVERNMENT CORRUPTION Rapid economic development has been accompanied by rampant government corruption, which essentially led to the Student Movement in 1989, with students calling for democratic changes in the political system (Lin, 1994b). Government

Economic Reform and Social Transformation

21

officials, the biggest beneficiaries of the economic reform and opening, in fact comprise a main part of the well-to-do people in China today. As I discussed in my book The Opening of the Chinese Mind (1994b), the model followed by the communist government to reorganize the economic and political systems has been called a ‘‘Market-Leninism’’ model. In this model, free trade and private entrepreneurship are encouraged, on one hand; on the other, there is strict insistence on highly disciplined one-party rule with centralized decision making (Kristof, 1993). In all, this is ‘‘a nepotistic and corrupt dictatorship that presides over a booming market economy with both state and private sectors’’ (p. 1). This dictatorial power has allowed government officials to extend their political power into the economic sphere to rake in huge profits. The examples are numerous: State banks charge 20 percent service fees on personal loans and distribute them as bonuses among the employees; business companies and state banks use public funds to drive up stock prices and real estate prices to reap huge gains; state-owned insurance companies impose quotas on businesses and schools to buy their policies; police departments open up bars and restaurants, which are used as cover-ups for deeds of prostitution; government bureaus force peasants to sell their land at a low price and resell it at an incredible profit; state-owned businesses on the verge of bankruptcy still purchase luxurious cars for the head of the company; banks shift state money to do real estate business; highway or local traffic police flag down cars and trucks one by one to collect illegal fees; and the list goes on and on. The situation was described by a famous talk-show actor in the country, Hou Baolin, before his death, who said that China has become a place that ‘‘fattens the bold and daring and starves the cautious and the law abiding.’’ Government corruption means that the rules of the game are based not on an individual’s talent or efforts but on one’s political connections. The Communist Party’s dictatorial control has allowed officials to manipulate policies and regulations in their favor. Even in small towns and cities, officials embezzling millions are caught every year. Not having a badly needed system of checks and balances in the government, laws and regulations have proved highly ineffective. Citizens do not have the power to replace corrupt officials, and the media have been highly ineffective, given the restrictions on freedom of expression. Corruption has penetrated all levels of the government to an astonishing degree. At the highest level, Chen Xitong, former mayor of Beijing, is reported to have spent lavishly on a long-term mistress and to have helped other officials, his son among them, amass funds totaling more than $30 million (Mickleburge, 1997). Wang Baosheng, the vice mayor of Beijing city, committed suicide after being found to have embezzled hundreds of millions of yuan during his term (400 million yuan or $50 million). He was reported to have 100 houses and a huge, luxurious villa and had lived the life of a king. At the provincial level, in Anhui province in 1993 more than 300,000 officials were caught siphoning off

22

Overview and Context

or misusing public funds. In this province, bribes, embezzlement, and kickbacks are a way of life for officials who abuse their positions to live luxurious lives, pay for prostitutes, and coddle their children. The count of 300,000 officials was about one-fifth of all Anhui public servants (‘‘300,000 Chinese Officials Snared in Corruption Net,’’ 1994). Throughout the country, corruption is endemic; officials deny citizens services unless they receive ‘‘gifts’’ in the form of cash, goods, or big items such as cars, apartments or prostitutes. In return, they offer state loans at low interest rates and cut the price of goods that belong to the state. Government officials also find all kinds of excuses to attend banquets and get ‘‘serviced’’ by ‘‘three accompanying ladies,’’ who serve them meals, sing with them, and go to bed with them. Even small counties have dozens of hotels to house prostitutes who sleep during the day and ‘‘work’’ during the night. Families break up as prostitutes flood into the cities and towns. One saying reveals it all: that government officials use money that they do not earn, sleep with women who are not their wives, and have children who are ‘‘not theirs’’ (namely, outside of marriage). In some local areas, officials are called ‘‘human waste’’ or ‘‘bandits.’’ This is not amazing, considering that in one county the county head’s son collected nearly a million yuan as ‘‘gift money’’ during the Chinese New Year in 1997, while people in the county were forced to pay all kinds of fees and taxes to the county government, so much that some residents’ whole month’s salary was deducted from their paychecks and some even owed the county government money after all deductions. In this same county, a whole street of people behind the courtyard of the county government were ordered to move away after the county head was told by a fortuneteller that this very street blocked his path in moving up to a higher rank in the government. Although over the years of economic reform and opening the central government has waged one anticorruption campaign after another and has set up all kinds of agencies to fight corruption, corruption remains rampant. In the same county just mentioned, the anticorruption committee in fact demanded that businesses and individuals pay them money or they would ‘‘crack down on their ‘corruption.’ ’’ Even very harsh punishment such as the death penalty did not deter the trend of corruption. This lends proof to the proposition that ‘‘absolute power corrupts absolutely.’’ ECONOMIC GROWTH AND CLASS TRANSFORMATION Throughout the 1980s, China registered a double-digit growth rate in the GNP. Into the 1990s, the rate of growth has been consistent at around 10 percent. For the late 1990s, the rate set by the government projects a continuous growth of 8 percent in GDP into the first ten years of the 21st century. The opening of the huge Chinese market has attracted foreign countries to rush to do business with China. Foreign investment has grown very impressively. From 1978 to 1996, the Chinese government has approved 281,000 over-

Economic Reform and Social Transformation

23

seas-funded projects worth $172 billion U.S. According to the U.S. Ministry of Foreign Trade and Economic Cooperation, in 1996, commercial investment in China was about $40 billion U.S., an increase of 16 percent from the 1995 level. In the first ten months of 1996, an average of 25 projects funded solely by overseas companies were approved each day (Bangsberg, 1996). In 1994, the Canadian prime minister Jean Chre´ tien headed a ‘‘Team Canada’’ taking nearly all his provincial premiers to China to talk about trade and to close deals; and the American president Bill Clinton had to yield on his stand of connecting Sino-American trade to human right issues under pressure from business groups who have big stakes in China. That China is going to dominate the 21st century in economic development is not a subject for debate. As Evelyn Iritani writes: Wake up, world. From cotton to copper to credit cards, the Chinese are consuming and selling in such huge quantities that they are moving markets, cowing the competition and inspiring a rush of foreign suitors. In numerous arenas China has already emerged as the world’s No. 1 player. . . . China’s economic ascendancy is already affecting financial markets, trading patterns and worldwide wages and living standards. . . . The flow of Chinese products into the world market also is accelerating, as modernization of state factories accelerates and more joint ventures are financed by the world’s largest stream of foreign investment. (Iritani, 1996, D2)

Iritani states that sometime early in the 21st century, China is expected to become the world’s largest economy, eclipsing the United States and Japan. Iritani’s article was written in response to the fact that in June 1996 China registered the largest trade surplus with the United States, bypassing Japan. In the process of rapid economic growth, living conditions have generally improved. During the decade and a half of 1978–1993, rural peasants’ average annual income increased from 133.57 yuan to 921.62 yuan, an increase of 5.9 times; urban residents’ income increased from 500 to 2,583 yuan, an increase of 6.16 times (Li Qiang et al., 1995, 61). By 1997, the per capita income was close to $3,000 U.S., and Chinese citizens had saved an estimated 3.8 trillion yuan in the Chinese bank (about $450 billion U.S.). The country, meanwhile, had staggering foreign exchange reserves, over $146 billion U.S., by 1998. In this impressive change, social classes have undergone significant transformation. Social-class structure has gone from rigidly defined to elastic, and there is a gradual trend in the society of changing from ‘‘political stratification’’ to ‘‘economic stratification’’ (Li Qiang, 1997, 32). From the 1950s to the 1970s, social classes in China were defined and ranked by political criteria based on the theories of class and class struggle (Lin, 1991, 1994b; Li Qiang, 1993). Under the dictatorship of the proletariat, social groups were categorized into five major classes, namely, the ‘‘revolutionary cadres,’’ ‘‘the working class,’’ ‘‘the peasant class,’’ ‘‘intellectuals,’’ and ‘‘class enemies.’’ The first three categories comprised the ‘‘proletariat,’’ who were to receive favorable treatment in political and social life, as well as in employment

24

Overview and Context

and educational opportunities. The fifth category, ‘‘the class enemies,’’ included landlords, rich farmers, capitalists, Guomindang (the communist rival Republic Party) soldiers, counterrevolutionaries, bad elements, rightist intellectuals, traitors, and spies, all of whom together comprised approximately 10 percent of the population. Property ownership and political affiliation before 1949 and political beliefs over time were the criteria used for that classification. These people were persecuted and millions died during various political campaigns, especially during the Cultural Revolution. The fourth category, the intellectuals, seen as in between the proletariat and the ‘‘class enemies,’’ were constantly subject to suspicious and persecutions. Social classes were reclassified after Deng Xiaoping came back to power. Reorienting the CCP government’s priorities, class struggle was dropped and economic development became the new national goal. In this context, intellectuals and ‘‘class enemies’’ were regrouped and deemed to be a part of the ‘‘working class,’’ under the rationale that these people had been ‘‘reformed.’’ The reclassification resulted in the rehabilitation of the social status of millions of Chinese people. During the decades of economic reform and opening, along with the rapid growth of the private economy and the increase in personal wealth, the criteria for defining an individual’s class status have shifted: While political factors such as party membership remain a part of the criteria, possession of economic and intellectual power has gained more and more weight. In this new context, the urban workers have been demoted from being the indisputable upper class, and many former ‘‘class enemies’’ have moved up to the top, given their political rectification and great business success. The former class pattern of ‘‘cadres, workers, and peasants’’ has been replaced, along with the appearance of ‘‘marginal class’’ and ‘‘indistinguishable groups’’ such as rural industrial workers and business bureaucrats (Zhang Jijiao, 1997, 9). Specifically, intellectuals as a class have disintegrated into a variety of social groups. By definition, intellectuals are those who have completed three or four years of post-secondary learning or higher education. They work as doctors, engineers, technicians, teachers, professors, researchers, writers, artists, reporters, and so on. As a social group, they were marginalized from 1949 to 1978, during which period they were condemned and suspected of being disloyal to the communist government. Under Deng Xiaoping’s leadership, they were declared to be the major force for building China into a modernized economy by developing the country’s science and technology. Their social status improved significantly, as well as their living and working conditions. In the 1980s, it was not rare to see intellectuals making much less than workers and private entrepreneurs, since economic reform had barely touched research, education, health care, and social insurance and the intellectuals working in these fields. In the 1990s, the economic reform and opening have started to connect these fields with the market economy, pushing a large number of intellectuals into the market and giving intellectuals in professions such as engi-

Economic Reform and Social Transformation

25

neering, practical technology, management, and accounting decisive advantages (Li Qiang, 1998, 5). Some have started their own companies to translate research into market products. Those who have specialized skills badly needed in the market economy are hotly sought after by private individual enterprises, foreign corporations, international trade companies, high-tech venture companies, and the like. Intellectuals trained in foreign languages, international trade, marketing and accounting, computer science, law, or civil engineering find jobs that pay several times more than their fellow citizens make. The intellectual class has thus experienced a major transformation, with a part separating out to become intellectual businessmen and women and a few even becoming billionaire tycoons. Today, free job seeking is transforming this class at an even more rapid pace. Young university graduates find jobs that can pay as much as 50,000 yuan a month, more than their professors make in five years. Many set up their own high-tech companies immediately after they leave the university. As we have mentioned, urban workers have experienced a great decline in their class status. Urban workers used to be the envy of the society for holding an ‘‘iron rice bowl,’’ having permanent employment and good social benefits. In the reform era, as 80 percent of state enterprises have lost money and face major restructuring, urban workers’ income has dropped and millions have lost their jobs. Women have been particularly badly hit, as they are among the first asked to leave their jobs. Much has been reported about their tremendous sense of loss and their very difficult lives. ‘‘I always thought I would continue to have a job, but now I am retired at 38’’ is a comment typical among these women. Those who stay on also feel a deep sense of crisis, fighting daily to make ends meet. Meanwhile, hundreds of millions of peasants have left agriculture to become rural-industrial workers or contract workers in urban areas. They poured into cities to work in restaurants, construction sites, and urban residents’ houses; young women have taken jobs as waitresses in restaurants and bars. Some of these people have eventually settled down and come to own their own businesses. In Guangdong province alone, more than 5 million peasants are working in various industrial enterprises while retaining their rural resident status. While a small number of peasants have made themselves rich, most others remain poor, especially those who stay in the rural areas and rely on raising a few pigs and chickens to get the money for salt and oil. Of the 80 million people still living in poverty as defined by the government, earning less than 200 yuan a year per capita, the majority are peasants (one has to note here that 200 yuan a year allows one only to barely survive). Government bureaucrats, as I have mentioned, are deeply entangled in the business world, reaping tremendous gains through wielding their political power; many live in expensive villas that cost them little or nothing. They have large savings in the bank and own personal properties and businesses that are not known to the public. With these changes, the social structure established since 1949 under the

26

Overview and Context

dictatorship of the proletariat has largely crumbled. No single criterion can define a social group, and more and more layers of classes can be identified. Some scholars classify China’s relatively independent groups as the following: government administrators, intellectuals, corporate administrators, workers in stateowned enterprises, workers in rural and township industrial enterprises, employees hired by private or foreign or Chinese-foreign collaborative companies, private entrepreneurs, rural government officials, rural laborers, rural migrant workers, unemployed and semi-employed people, retired people, and students (Project Team, 1998). In all, the old class system is replaced by a much more complex social structure in which political power and economic power are inextricably intertwined. THE NEW MIDDLE CLASS The sociological literature generally defines the middle class as one formed of professionals who do not have much property but who possess special skills and earn an income decent enough to have a house and raise a couple of children. They are often white-collar employees doing nonmanual work. The middle class also includes middle-level or upper-level management people, as well as small business owners. The middle class has been described as a stabilizing force in a capitalist society, functioning as a buffer between the rich and the poor. Scholars have also argued that it is a fundamental force in the formation of the civil society, essential to the building of a democracy. Often mentioned as accompaniments to middle-class socioeconomic status is a range of values such as appear in a varied amalgam of enterprising competitiveness, cooperation, and public spiritedness, plus a strong desire to have more, to be upwardly mobile. Is there a middle class in China? If there is one, who are they? The appearance of millionaires and the significant improvement in most people’s living conditions have stirred up much discussion about the existence of a middle class in China. Bi Cheng states: Because of China’s economic policy of opening to the world, joint Chinese-foreign ventures, foreign ventures and all types of trading companies have thrived in recent years. A high-salaried stratum is rising and continuously being replenished. At the same time, large numbers of private entrepreneurs and intellectuals who have discarded their ‘‘iron bowls’’ in favor of ‘‘jumping into the water’’ are now forming new strata of incalculable strength. In short, while the national income is rising, new strata of people who have gotten ‘‘rich first’’ have fast appeared and are still growing. (Bi Cheng, 1994, 230–231)

Bi Cheng estimates that by 1994 there were 50,000 millionaires in the country, and the number has been rising quickly (Bi Cheng, 1994, 230). The wealthy group in China may bear some resemblance to parts of the middle class in the West. They have their own cars and apartments or houses.

Economic Reform and Social Transformation

27

They own a business or are working for others, earning a rather high income. They can afford to buy jewelry, cellular phones, brand-name clothes, and meals in good restaurants. Some can afford to pay for expensive club memberships. In my trip in China in 1996, I went to see a seaside golf course near a city in northeastern China. This self-proclaimed best golf course in Asia had more service personnel than golfers, and the club membership cost more than 300,000 yuan a year. While there is no denying that a new stratum of people has become much wealthier than ordinary Chinese, there is yet no consensus as to whether a middle class has appeared. A Chinese scholar, Ji Yueshu, wondered if these people comprise the so-called middle class: Due to the rapid increase of wealth for some people, in recent years social modes of extravagant consumption have been in vogue among these rich men so that most Chinese people who have always scrupulously abided by the principles of hard work and thrift are perplexed. One after another building has been built as golf courses, holiday villages, aristocratic clubs, auto mobile race grounds, and places of recreation, etc. People can’t penetrate unless they have money to throw away like dirt. Since 1993 China has actually become the number one market of French top grade brandy (XO). Because of their wealth and their luxurious lifestyle, these rich men and women give rise to a class of hangers on which produce an image of ‘‘middle classes’’ in China. (Ji Yueshu, 1996, 5)

Ji Yueshu notes that in 1996, less than 3 percent of the high-income households within the total population in China deposited more than 290 billion yuan in the banks, accounting for over 80% of total bank savings of residents in cities and the countryside in this country. Nevertheless, whether or not this group of people has become a distinct social class remains to be considered. His argument is that although the wealthy group possesses high income and a large accumulation of wealth, they lack appropriate social status (including political power) and do not enjoy the social popularity that a ‘‘middle class’’ would ordinarily have. There were over 20 private entrepreneurs among the committee members of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference in 1996, but generally speaking, this number is still a small proportion of the wealthy people who participate in government and political affairs (Ji Yueshu, 1996). Further, members of the newly wealthy social groups also tend to lack a sense of security. Many hire bodyguards and defend their houses against intruders with iron fences. Some even try to hide their identity so as not to attract attention. Some attempt to reduce others’ envy and spite by building schools or roads for the local community. As many of them are at a low educational level, they are still looked down upon by the society at large. With reason, Je Yueshu worries that broad use of the term ‘‘middle class’’ might stir up social instability. The comparatively extreme wealth of but a very small group has already brought about significant socio-psychological imbalance. A survey conducted by the Department of Chinese People’s University

28

Overview and Context

shows that when people were asked, ‘‘How many wealthy people in our society today make their money through lawful channels?’’ their answers were: 48.5% for ‘‘Few’’; 10.7% for ‘‘None’’; and the other 20.8% said, ‘‘I don’t know.’’ Due to the concern for social stability, the government has also played down the notion of a middle class in China (Ji Yueshu, 1996). Is there a middle class in China, then? To find out if there is a market for high-fee schools, several principals and founders in Beijing and Guangdong province surveyed the market before they set up their schools. They found that about 10 percent of families in Beijing with a population of over 12 million could afford a tuition of over 10,000 yuan a year in the early 1990s. A similar conclusion was reached in Guangdong. The finding shows that the number of people who can afford high tuition and fees is not small. In my opinion, there is indeed a new middle class in China, comprised mostly of persons whose behavior is very different from that of the people depicted in the mass media as living an astonishingly luxurious lifestyle. My research reveals that, in fact, these people are mostly government officials, professionals such as lawyers and doctors, rural peasants, urban private entrepreneurs, real estate agents, consultants, movie stars, and intellectuals possessing modern scientific-technological skills. As of 1997, they comprised 5–10 percent of the 1.2 billion population. To be accurate, the middle class in China should be defined relative to the income and wealth of ordinary lower-class Chinese people, not in terms of a Western standard. THE LATENT MIDDLE CLASS The rank of ‘‘middle class’’ can be much enlarged if we take in what Heidi Ross and I (Lin and Ross, 1998) have called a ‘‘latent middle class’’ in China. This class includes the millions of state employees who live in the housing provided by the government or their employers but who earn a medium to low income (if you just look at their paychecks). These people can afford to buy imported goods, travel to Southeast Asian countries, and to renovate their homes to be very comfortable. Others in this class include salaried workers, journalists, central and local government officials, office clerks, employees of utility companies, bank staffs, and university teachers. Virtually all obtain income much higher than what is on their salary slips, through bonuses, fees, kickbacks, moonlighting, and so on. Often, this extra income can be several times higher than their salaries. For example, a state factory whose product sells very well in the market can give a large bonus to its employees every year; a journalist can write a few articles in favor of certain business companies and receive thousands or tens of thousands of yuan as a token of appreciation; a worker in a power plant can demand fees of all kinds to companies and households or cut their electricity, using all kinds of excuses. Other examples: A clerk in an airline ticket office or a train station can withhold tickets and sell them at high price; government officials can transfer state money into small banks for higher interest and split

Economic Reform and Social Transformation

29

the earnings among themselves. These people do not appear to be very rich or super-rich, but they have five- or six-digit savings accounts in the bank, or even more. They can afford an expensive trip once in a while and can pay for some big-ticket items easily. When necessary, they can kick in many thousands in tuition for their children’s education. EXPLOITATION, UNEMPLOYMENT, AND POVERTY Accompanying the increasing wealth and opportunities are overt exploitation and the ever-widening gaps in income among different social groups. In factories and restaurants, rural migrant workers making minimal salaries have been forced to work fifteen hours a day with no medical benefits or safety guarantees. Many reports tell of female workers being body-searched or beaten up. Among signs of prosperity, in Guangzhou city, the fastest-growing city in the country, 10 percent of residents are living on less than 200 yuan a month, an amount that is barely enough for survival in a big urban city. In the 1990s, state enterprises have been undergoing profound restructuring. With 80 percent of them losing money and the government no longer able to subsidize them unconditionally, urban workers are being laid off by the millions. In Shanghai alone, in 1996, 200,000 textile workers, most of whom were women, were laid off in the name of xia-gang, meaning getting off their post. In Chongqing city, 400,000 people lost their jobs in 1997. These unemployed people were given only a couple of hundred yuan a month to survive. Even in the capital city, Beijing, in 1997 over 130,000 xia-gang workers remained unemployed. The city’s re-employment centers are always crowded with workers over age 40 looking for jobs. Concurrent with the disappearance of permanent employment for a large part of the society, benefits such as health care and pensions are being eroded for elderly people. Retired workers find themselves having no means to live on, after having spent their lives following the CCP in pursuit of ‘‘common happiness.’’ They are faced with stacks of medical bills and have to rely on their children for support. Throughout the country, 80 million people still live in poverty, making less than 200 yuan per capita per year. In today’s China, it can easily cost over one hundred yuan to buy a handbag or a blouse, and the price for daily necessities has jumped tenfold since the early 1980s. The severe hardship placed upon poor people cannot easily be imagined. The rapidly moving socioeconomic reform in China, meanwhile, has left behind workers and peasants and that part of the intellectuals who have neither the capital to start up a business nor any political and economic power to wield. According to statistics from the State Bureau of Statistics, the difference between the 20 percent of high-income households in cities and towns and the 20 percent of low-income households in the countryside is a factor of 13 times (Tong Xing, 1996). In another report, in 1996 the top 20 percent of the urban families took in 44.46 percent of the total income, while the bottom 20 percent took in only

30

Overview and Context

6.04%. Regionally, income levels in eastern China are much higher than in middle and western China. In 1994, the annual incomes for urban families in eastern, middle, and western China were 4,294, 2,883, and 3,045 yuan respectively; the annual incomes for rural families were 1,285, 916, and 789 yuan respectively (Ge Zi, 1996, 40). ‘‘The proposals’’ at the Fifth Meeting of the Fourteenth Central Committee of the Communist Party of China therefore pointed out that ‘‘resolving problems as a result of unequal development between regions and unfair distribution in the society is crucial for maintaining social stability and demonstrating the true nature of socialism.’’ In his closing speech, Party Secretary Jiang Zemin pointed out that there would be many serious consequences if the gap between the rich and the poor were allowed to expand without any intervention (Tong Xing, 1996). Despite government rhetoric about improving the situation of poor people, rural poverty in particular is still widespread, as peasants rely on a tiny plot of land to cultivate their food and to pay for all other necessities by raising pigs and chickens. Escalating inflation has also driven once well-off residents into poverty. For example, ‘‘Li Xiu cadres,’’ made up of government officials who retired with favorable treatment due to their ranking in the government, are also finding themselves losing medical benefits and having their salaries withheld. CONCLUSION: CLASS TRANSFORMATION AND ITS IMPACT ON EDUCATION China in the era of economic reform has experienced dramatic transformation in the socioeconomic system. Social classes have become fluid, and increased wealth has prompted discussion about the existence of a middle class. Overall, the shift of the government’s priorities toward economic development and the forming of a market economy has significantly changed the social demand for education. From a positive perspective, the opening of Chinese culture to the world and the application and spread of Western science and technology have given the Chinese people a clearer picture of the future trends of culture and education. Parents have become increasingly aware of the role culture and education play in molding the quality of people and the demands of future society for certain qualities in people, such as having a good grasp of modern science and technology, wide cultural knowledge, computer skills and the ability to communicate in different languages. They have thus become dissatisfied with the monotonous traditional education, which relies on exams alone, and they are voicing their hope and demand for education of a new type, which focuses on improving human quality. Conventional homogeneous education in school, that employs existing equipment and management modes, can no longer satisfy this demand. (Bi Cheng, 1994, 229)

The rise of a middle class and a latent middle class makes it possible for some schools to charge high tuition and fees and to provide a good learning

Economic Reform and Social Transformation

31

environment. Among the first group of people who have become rich, the demand for high-quality education is especially strong. Because of the cultural tradition of despising businessmen and merchants, these people, despite their high living standards and wealth, have been contemptuously regarded as ‘‘heroes of the bushes.’’ They are eager, therefore, to help their offspring win a legal and respected status in society, for which reason they want the best educational environment and conditions for them. These people can afford and are willing to pay high tuition fees so that their children can receive a high-level education (Bi Cheng, 1994, 230). In contrast, poor people are finding themselves unable to afford even public education anymore, because the schools are charging various fees that make the nine-year compulsory education not free at all. Thus, they too yearn for a new type of school that would charge lower fees so that their children would not be pushed out of the educational stream. In all, the demands on and needs for education have changed profoundly with social and economic changes, forcing private education into a new historical stage of development.

3

Chinese Culture and Society and Dilemmas in the Public School System The preceding chapter focused on the political and economic conditions underlying private education development. This chapter examines the social and educational conditions that influence the demand for private education. The chapter contains three parts: The first part briefly reviews the Chinese cultural tradition regarding education; the second part examines China’s changing family structure and its impacts on child rearing practice and parental expectation; the third part highlights features of the Chinese public schools and discusses factors that hinder their ability to meet the needs of a transitional economy and social system. THE CHINESE CULTURAL TRADITION The Chinese people have long prided themselves on a tradition of honoring education. The tradition can be traced to their ancestor Confucius, who advocated two thousand years ago that ‘‘all those who can learn should be taught to learn’’ and ‘‘those who are learned should be promoted to positions governing the country.’’ The imperial examination system established during the Sui Dynasty (581–618) connected educational attainment with power, wealth, and social prestige. Rich and poor people alike invested in their sons’ education in the hope that they would pass the examination and bring the family fame and prosperity. This system, which lasted nearly 1,400 years, has created what John Ogbu (1994) termed ‘‘educational optimism’’ in the minds of the Chinese people. In this cultural context, Chinese parents harbor very high aspirations for their children. They are willing to do anything to ensure their children’s educational

34

Overview and Context

success, including investing a tremendous amount of time and savings on food and clothing to buy rather expensive learning materials and equipment. Like the Japanese ‘‘education mom,’’ Chinese parents spend hours coaching their children’s homework every day, and some even teach themselves the school textbooks so that they can coach their children better. It is not rare to find parents giving their children the biggest room in the apartment to study in or parents taking on all the household chores so that their children can concentrate fully on their studies. Furthermore, parents spend a good portion of their income on hiring tutors or send their children to extra classes after the normal school day and during the weekend. The mountain of pressure leads children to cry, ‘‘Give me my childhood’’ (Lin and Chen, 1995). Generally, Chinese parents see education as fundamental to their children’s social and economic well-being, and they feel a strong sense of obligation to provide their children with the best education possible. FAMILY AND SOCIETY The Delayed Generation Social and political circumstances can intensify parents’ expectations for their children even further, as is true for the generation of parents who grew up during the tumultuous years of the Cultural Revolution (1966–1976). Participating in revolutionary movements such as the ‘‘Red Guards’’ of the Great Helmsman Chairman Mao, some parents spent the best part of their lives shouting slogans and charging wherever their god-like leader directed them. When they were no longer useful for Mao’s political power struggle, they were dispatched to the countryside in the name of ‘‘receiving education from the poor and lowermiddle-class peasants.’’ Consequently, most missed a good part of their secondary education and lost the chance for higher education. Only a very small number were ‘‘recommended’’ to receive higher education by peasants and workers, who evaluated the candidates based on political criteria set by that time (such as loyalty to the party or active participation in political movements). Even these people learned little, as they spent most of their time participating in political activities rather than learning academic knowledge and skills. In 1977, the National University Entrance Exam was restored. The exam brought several generations of young people who had graduated between the early 1960s and the end of the 1970s into examination centers to fight for a last chance for higher education. Throughout the 1980s, just half a million students were accepted each year from among 20 million applicants. As a result, tens of millions of young people missed higher education. Those who wanted to try again soon passed the age limit, which was decreased from 35 to 30 to 25 in a few years. A great number of them, further, had families to support and therefore could not afford to study for four years without pay in a university. In the reform era, which stresses degree attainment and knowledge, these

Chinese Culture and Society

35

people have to resign themselves to working in low-paying jobs with almost no chance for upward social mobility. Not wanting their children to repeat their fate, they pin all their hope on their children’s education. As much as they are willing to invest in their children’s education, some are also ready to employ corporal punishment to ensure that their children do well in school (Lin and Chen, 1995). People who have ‘‘made it’’ in the new economy are very willing to compensate for their own loss of education by spending money on a good school for their children. The Increased Importance of Education in the New Economy Meanwhile, the job market has undergone significant changes. With the breakdown of the egalitarian system and with the market-driven economy burgeoning, finding a job has increasingly become a personal responsibility. High school graduates in the 1980s and university graduates in the 1990s found it less and less likely that they could rely on the government for lifelong employment. In recent years, as state workers are being laid off in the millions and even government officials are joining the ranks of the unemployed, the job market has become more competitive than ever. In the new competitive economy, business companies find themselves having to employ highly qualified people to survive. Not only foreign-Chinese collaborating companies but also private domestic companies are requiring a university degree from their employees. Individuals with practical skills and abilities have a wide choice of employment opportunities, with some landing jobs that pay a salary higher than most ordinary Chinese can dream of. University students thus have flocked to postsecondary institutions to learn computer science, commerce, international trade, business management, law, civil engineering, and so on. High school graduates are also eager to arm themselves with some practical skills. For ordinary Chinese people who have no capital and no connection to government power, receiving a university education or vocational training is the only route that can lead them to high social status and employment opportunity. Having a higher-education credential has become vital in the government sector, too. Since the 1980s a higher-education degree has become a prerequisite for the promotion of officials. During the three decades under Mao, from the 1950s to the 1970s, government officials could be illiterate or have received only a few years of primary education. Today, it is not rare to see that the highest-ranking officials in central government churn out a few English words in public receptions for foreign guests. Further, the masses have been bombarded by the media with messages that in the new era knowledge means power and that the new century will find countries competing on the high ground of science and technology. All these factors propel a tremendous demand for higher education, for high-quality primary and secondary education, and for vocational and professional education.

36

Overview and Context

The Single Child in the Family Adding even greater weight to the importance of education is the changing family structure in modern China. Since the late 1970s, the Chinese government has made it a national policy to restrict population growth so that a couple is allowed only one child. Violation can incur severe penalties, such as forced abortion, a heavy fine, confiscation of valuable goods, forced sterilization, the loss of official titles and jobs, and so on. These measures have not been very effective in rural areas. First, the losses suffered by rural peasants for having a second or a third child are limited. They are not state employees who have a salaried job to lose. Second, they have no access to government-sponsored pensions and other social benefits; they still need to rely on having male children to take care of them in old age. Third, the strenuous physical labor required for working in the fields also means that to have more children, especially male children, makes economic sense. Hence, the government’s strict measures have had little success, and on average rural families have three or more children. In contrast, the single-child policy has been very effective in major cities, where violation can result in loss of a permanent job, a consequence leading to the loss of the means of survival. Government officials can have their titles and rankings stripped away, ending their political future and many privileges. Similarly, the policy has been quite effective in small cities and county townships, where local governments still exert tight control on salaried workers and government employees. The change in family structure has drastically changed childrearing practices. Traditionally, children were at the bottom of large extended families. Parents possessed absolute authority over their children, who were expected to oblige adults without question. However, in a nuclear family today, the single child has become the center of attention, surrounded by grandparents, parents, aunts, and uncles. The parents, having suffered much poverty and hardship, tend to go all the way to satisfy the demands of the child, so much so that many children become very spoiled and self-centered. Reports of primary school students not knowing how to peel an egg or of children ten or twelve years old having no idea of how to make a bed or cook a simple meal are heard quite often. Parents tend to treat their children as easy-to-break porcelain and often act in an overly protective manner. For example, a ten-year-old girl I knew and her classmates went to a one-night camp in a nearby school in the same city. Before bedtime, parents and grandparents sneaked under the window to hear if their children were all right, even though the children were closely supervised by their teachers. Most of the children got very little sleep that night because they were not used to sleeping outside their comfortable homes, and most suffered from diarrhea or constipation. Although life has been easier for the single children, they also experience more loneliness; they are surrounded by toys but have no brothers and sisters to play with. To kill time, they sit in front of TV all day, watching anything

Chinese Culture and Society

37

from soap operas to cartoons to murder stories. I was stunned by how much some children knew about violence and societal corruption. Some pick up messages that are not so amusing. For example, a nine-year-old girl sang me an advertisement song that goes like this: If after drinking this wine you and your wife still fight, your wife can come to sue us—hinting that the wine will boost the sexual power of the men. Worried parents try to divert the children’s attention, but they can do little as a large majority of urban families live in apartments and along busy, heavy-traffic streets. To keep a child safe, parents have to shut the child inside and clench their teeth whenever the child has to cross busy streets alone. Some children, after coming home from school, spend most of their time playing video games unsupervised. Parents today are also busier than ever. Money having become the mark of success, millions of the Chinese people have plunged into doing business. Struggling to stay afloat, they have little time and energy for their children. During dinnertime they might be in a restaurant cutting business deals or singing karaoke with their clients; during weekends they might be away transporting goods from one city to another. Their children rarely get to see them in a year. Guilty feelings lead parents to shower their children with gifts and pocket money or to dress them up in expensive clothes and take them to extravagant places. Since things come easy, wasteful habits have developed among some children, who scream and kick for expensive toys only to throw them away a short while later. Parents have found it difficult to satisfy the appetites of their children regardless of how much they spend. Some children even pick up gambling habits. Worried parents therefore wish for a school environment in which their child can be kept out of negative social influences and learn to live with others (Wu Tangqing and Wang Fang, 1995). Broken Families The changing social environments have also altered family relations. The reform era has seen a resurgence of prostitution and extramarital affairs. Visiting cities in southern China, one can easily spot prostitutes, who roam the entrances of hotels or canvas streets to pick up customers. It is not unusual to see hotels advertising an hourly rate for occupancy or a special weekend rate for those who want to have some quick sex. Bars and restaurants use waitresses in disguise to do business in prostitution; dubbed ‘‘three accompanying ladies,’’ these women provide ‘‘multidimensional services’’ to their customers, that is, they sing, eat, and sleep with their customers for high fees. A great number of beauty salons are simply disguises for prostitution. Extramarital affairs have become prevalent over the past two decades. Young and beautiful women seeking a quick improvement in their lives plunge into affairs with rich married men. They allow themselves to be ‘‘bao’’ or, in English, ‘‘be owned’’ by men who provide them a luxurious life; in return, they serve the men’s sexual needs exclusively. Men with a deep pocket can use

38

Overview and Context

ownership of an apartment or a large sum of money to break down even the most resistant women, who cave in knowing that they would not be able to make the same amount of money otherwise in a lifetime. These women, called ‘‘ernai’’ or ‘‘second wives,’’ live in villas the men secretly purchase for them; some even move into the men’s houses to live under the same roof with the first wife. Disputes constantly break out that result in murder or bodily harm. Numerous children are born out of wedlock because of the rise in extramarital affairs. Furthermore, among university-educated women a new fad is that it is justifiable to love a married man, as long as the love is sincere. For these women, love enriches their ‘‘life experience’’ while they do not have to make commitments and meet obligations. They thus jump into extramarital affairs without feeling any sense of shame or guilt. Similarly, wives desert their husbands for richer or more powerful men. Among businessmen and government officials, demanding sexual services has become a widely accepted prerequisite for finalizing or hammering out business deals. Often, business talks start with meals, proceed to singing karaoke in a hotel or a restaurant, and eventually end up in bed with prostitutes. Important customers are supplied with young and beautiful women called ‘‘secretaries’’ or ‘‘assistants’’ with whom the customers can do whatever they like. In this atmosphere, even very small towns have built dozens of bars and hotels to provide such services. The rapid increase in prostitution and extramarital affairs has caused an increasing number of marriages to break up. For example, in 1979, the number of divorce cases in the country was 210,000; in 1982, it increased to 370,000; and in 1986, the total was 894,000 (Yan Lankun, 1992, 457). The country’s divorce rate climbed from 5.9 per 1,000 in 1990 to 7.1 per 1,000 in 1995. Divorce is especially high in urban area (‘‘China’s Crackdown on Extramarital Sex under Fire,’’ 1998, c16). Another report indicates that of the 270 million families in the country, 400,000 families disintegrate each year. In the city of Guangzhou, the divorce rate from the early 1980s to 1996 increased by 185 percent (Xiao Yonggu, 1996, 4). Marriage breakup caused fighting for properties and heavy psychological damage to the children involved. Sometimes, children are thrown back and forth between the parents like a burden. Elite private schools, most of which are boarding schools, take the burden off the parents’ shoulders and care for the children full time. PUBLIC EDUCATION: ITS ROLES AND FUNCTIONS While Chinese society and families have undergone fundamental changes, public schools have been slow in making adjustments to accommodate the needs of the society. Under the government’s centralized control, they continue to be administered by a huge bureaucratic system. Further, shortages in funding have led to low admissions in higher education and poor quality in public schools.

Chinese Culture and Society

39

The government’s attempt to shift funding responsibilities to local schools has added to their financial problems. A Huge Education System To gain insight into the context of public education in China, first of all one must realize that China has the world’s largest educational system. To get a sense of the scale, the following figures are revealing: In 1996, 136.15 million pupils were studying in primary schools (an enrollment of 98.8%), and 50.48 million students were in junior secondary schools (an enrollment ratio of 82%). There were 10.1 million students studying in various types of secondary vocational or technical schools (including 1.92 million students in technical workers’ training schools), accounting for 56.8 percent of the total enrollment of 17.8 million students at the senior secondary school level. Further, there were 3.1 million students in adult secondary specialized schools, and 83.37 million students in adult technical training schools (China Facts and Figures, 1997, 1997, 80). In higher education, by the end of 1996 there were 1,032 general universities, which took in 966,000 new undergraduate students that year, or 40,000 more than in the previous year, and the total number of enrolled undergraduate students nationally was 3.02 million. In 1996, institutions of adult higher education, numbering over 1,000, took in 945,000 new students (including 80,000 enrolled in TV courses) (China Facts and Figures, 1997, 1997, 79). Education toward Modernization In the country’s drive toward modernization, public education has been entrusted with the task of training millions of skilled laborers and qualified professionals for the country’s economic development. On October 1, 1983, Deng Xiaoping visited the Ginshan school in Beijing and wrote down these words: ‘‘[Our] education should orient toward modernization, toward the world, and toward the future.’’ Deng’s words have since been acclaimed as the guiding light for China’s educational reform. In the document entitled ‘‘Decision on Structural Reform of the Education System,’’ issued on May 27, 1985, education was given strategic importance in China’s new stage of economic development. In this document, the first step of reform was to allocate greater decision-making power as well as responsibilities to local governments and schools. Universities would be given greater control over student admission, job assignment, school finance, and personnel management. In 1986, the Law of Compulsory Education was enacted, setting an ambitious goal for all school-age children in China to receive nine years of compulsory education free of charge, regardless of their sex, class, ethnicity, and race, by the year 2000. The law also reaffirmed that instead of the central government financing all levels of education, providing for education should be the responsibility of all levels of government and that the compulsory nine years of basic

40

Overview and Context

education should be mainly financed by local governments and schools. The law legally shifted the burden of financing basic education from the central government to local governments, which has proved to have a tremendous impact on education across the country. The law further stipulates that social forces should be encouraged to set up schools for the public good. Another major law, the Law of Teachers, was issued in 1994 to protect teachers’ rights and improve their social status. In 1995, the Law of Education, dubbed the ‘‘mother of all laws,’’ summarized the existing laws and regulations passed since 1980 and affirmed education as a priority in the government’s funding and in local governments’ policy making. In all, education has shouldered the task of training a skilled labor force toward great economic development and preparing the country for the 21st century. These documents shifted the focus of Chinese education from serving as a political tool to imparting knowledge and skills to hundreds of millions of young people for the country’s modernization (Lin, 1993a, 1994b). Preparing young people for the workforce and providing continuing education to the masses became education’s major responsibility. Overall, by the 1990s the importance of education in national economic development was more widely emphasized than ever. Centralized Curriculum However, changes since the middle of the 1980s have been slow to come and limited in scope. With the world’s biggest public education system serving nearly 200 million students and with 10 million teachers teaching at all levels (Cheng, 1992), public schools still follow a centralized curriculum designed by the State Education Commission. Schools throughout the country use the same set of textbooks and teaching guidelines, and the curriculum serves mainly to prepare students for the National University Entrance Exam, which includes little practical content. Learning is textbook centered and school activities are geared toward sending a high ratio of students into colleges and universities. This ratio, as the single most important criterion by which to judge the quality of a school, has guided principals and teachers in all of their activities. Class size is large in most urban and rural schools, usually with 45 to 70 students in a class. The highly centralized control over education has produced numerous problems. First, curriculum content has lagged behind the needs of the changing economy. According to Bai Yueqiao (1994), the curriculum has these weaknesses: First, it requires students to study too many subjects: For example, primary schools have to offer nine subjects of study, including moral and ethical education, Chinese language, math, and social science; and secondary schools have to offer thirteen subjects of study. Second, the schedules are too tight: For example, primary one is required to teach for 31 hours a week, while grades 3 and 4 teach for 36 hours, and senior high for 37 hours, which has come to be

Chinese Culture and Society

41

five or six classes a day in academic subjects. Third, in terms of time allocation, too much emphasis has been placed on learning the ‘‘main’’ (academic) subjects such as language, math, and science, and too little attention has been given to ‘‘minor’’ subjects such as extracurricular activities, which are often replaced by the academic. Finally, the curriculum gives too little flexibility to local schools. According to the ‘‘Compulsory Education Curriculum Plan’’ issued by the State Education Commission in 1992, local schools (usually rural schools) that adopt a 5–4 system (five years primary school and four years secondary school) can plan their own classes for 966 hours, or 9.6 percent of the 10,366 total hours required; schools (usually urban schools) adopting a 6–3–3 system can plan their own classes for 704 hours, which comprises 6.9 percent of the 10,162 total hours required by the plan. In all, the national curriculum is very detached from local needs and is unfit for the development of talents of individual students (Bai Yueqiao, 1994). In recent years, calls to pay attention to the all-round development of children and to allow adjustment for regional and local variations are frequently being heard. ‘‘One general outline and multiple sets of textbooks’’ is a suggestion that allows the government to maintain macro control but also takes into consideration the needs of local economic and social development, as well as the educational level of local students. Municipalities and provinces have been given some leeway to take into consideration the level of their students, allowing some variation in content and pace of teaching. However, from our analysis of textbooks adopted in Shanghai and in Guangxi, a less-developed region, it is clear that the contents remain little changed in the two sets of textbooks, and significant differences occur only in terms of the year of introduction of certain content. Shanghai tends to introduce more difficult materials earlier and to contain more in its textbooks. Local subject matter is not evident in these textbooks. Shortage in Funding Perhaps the most serious problem for China’s public education is the tremendous shortage in funding. Although the Chinese government has pledged to put 4 percent of the GDP into educational development and to funnel more funding into education each year, educational spending made up only 2.85, 2.73, 2.52, 2.63, and 2.45 percent in the years 1991–1995, respectively (Mei Ruli, 1998, 6). In 1997, educational expenditure made up only 2.4 percent of the GDP, way behind many developing countries—not to say developed countries, which average around 6 percent of GDP. Under the previous planned economy, public schools usually received 80 percent of their funding from the state government and the rest from miscellaneous fees. During the reform era, the picture has changed drastically. With state funding for education declining steadily, providing for education has become more and more a local responsibility. Local governments, in turn, have shuffled much of the burden onto schools to generate their own funding (Lin

42

Overview and Context

and Zhao, 1995; Cheng, 1992; Delany and Paine, 1991). According to a research report, in the middle of the 1990s government funding has dropped to less than 60 percent of the funds needed for schools to operate normally. For example, in 1994, government expenditure on education covered only 59.38 percent of the funds needed in schools nationally, dropping 1.4 percent from the previous year, which had already suffered a drop from the year before (Shanghai Research Institute of Intelligence Development, 1996). This decline took place against the background of rising costs for education due to inflation. In 1998, ordinary schools in Beijing have had to find 30 to 50 percent of their own funding (Mei Ruli, 1998, 6). In 1999 on my field trip to China, some public schools reported that only 20 to 30 percent of their budget came from government funding. The public school system thus encounters tremendous difficulties in meeting the population’s needs for kindergartens, secondary schools, and higher education (primary education is compulsory). In recent years, the average annual education investment has been 50 billion, averaging 40 yuan or $8.00 U.S. per capita (at the exchange rate of $1 ⫽ 5 yuan in 1993) (Li Yixian, 1993, 6). Because of the lack of funding, more than 30 percent of eligible rural students cannot go on to secondary schools, which in turn shuts the door to higher education. Lack of funding also renders schools poorly equipped, teachers underpaid, and school administrators short of funds to organize educational activities. Every year, several to tens of millions of elementary or middle school students still have no opportunity to advance to the next level of school. Although the state has made efforts, no effective ways have been found to give further education to a considerably large number of students who are eligible. In the more than three decades after the founding of the People’s Republic, the state’s sole charge of education has led to the monolithic sourcing of educational funds. The more education expands, the greater the shortfall. (He Qizong and Zhang Yizhong, 1994, 28)

That the government cannot meet all the demands for education raises an urgent need for all sectors of the society to participate in setting up schools: The tradition of the state regulating educational development purely through state plans must be changed and the role of the market as a mechanism to regulate the deployment of educational resources must be fully brought into play; a system must be established whereby the government exercises macromanagement, society actively participates, and schools are run with autonomy. (Jiangsu Provincial Education Commission’s Policy Research Office, 1995, 30)

To make up for the funding shortages, schools resort to many ways to generate income. Currently, school funds come mainly from four sources: (1) state funds; (2) fees charged to parents; (3) income from operating school businesses;

Chinese Culture and Society

43

and (4) income from offering extra classes. Schools now charge students all kinds of fees, which have been rising steadily and forming approximately 10 percent of the school budget. The amount charged varies from school to school, ranging from tens to hundreds of yuans and even to over a thousand yuan a year. In Xiangtan city in Hunan province in 1993, the primary students were charged 49–55 yuan for miscellaneous fees per term, secondary school students 114–120 yuan, and senior high school students 286–311 yuan. On top of these miscellaneous fees, students were charged a multitude of other fees, exceeding 20 kinds in some schools. These include fees for textbooks, uniforms, school renovation, examination papers, student life insurance, mandatory purchase of extra exam preparation materials, and so on. Local governments are also imposing all kinds of fees on students, such as fees for life insurance and environmental protection, and some schools even have to pay a family-planning propaganda campaign fee. In some schools, the number of fees imposed by local governments can reach as high as 30 (Lai Qunyang, 1994, 24). Despite complaints from parents, and while schools have been under fire from public opinion, the practice of collecting multiple fees goes on unabated. Some schools simply have no choice. In order to survive, they rely more and more on collecting fees and doing business to generate their own funding. The government has allowed schools to be exempted from paying taxes on profits from school-run businesses, which is meant to be an incentive as well as a necessity for school businesses to survive. The business activities schools engage in range from operating printing or brewing factories to renting sports grounds for private parking and from knocking down school walls to build stores along crowded streets to renting out classrooms for all types of evening schools. Rural schools rely on raising pigs or growing fruits and vegetables, among other things, to generate income. A small number of school businesses have become very successful. For example, in Dalian, a rural school has turned its one-room workshop into a business worth hundreds of millions by manufacturing plastic materials for building greenhouses. Schools also collaborate with business companies for mutual benefit: The companies avoid paying heavy taxes and the schools obtain help in the production, management, and sale of their products. According to the statistics published in Beijing Review in 1982, ‘‘Across China there were over 40,000 school-run factories and 240,000 hectares of school farms and three nurseries with a net return of 577 million yuan that year’’ (Cleverly, 1985, 111). By 1989, more than 72 percent of Chinese primary and secondary schools had started school-run enterprises (Delany and Paine, 1991, 34). In 1992, nearly 680,000 school-run businesses across the nation, from textile factories and television manufacturers to book shops and fish farms, brought in a total income of about $850 million; in 1993 the figure was said to soar much higher (WuDunn, 1992). For the majority of Chinese schools, however, garnering enough funding is a recurring headache, as they are forced to

44

Overview and Context

become business organizations subject to the rises and falls of economic markets. Many principals I met on my trips dubbed themselves ‘‘money finders’’ rather than school administrators. A Dual-Track System: Key and Ordinary Schools Public education in China operates under a dual-track system. Schools are divided into ‘‘key’’ and ‘‘ordinary’’ schools. The original intention was to quicken the training of highly needed talents for China’s modernization. Another purpose was to set up exemplary schools to improve teaching in all schools. This stratified structure has given key schools numerous privileges. They can select the best students through city-wide or region-wide examination and transfer the best teachers in the area to teach in their school. They receive much more funding from the government, and in getting funds for upgrading equipment or the purchase of expensive items such as computers, they always receive priority. With great advantage in teacher quality, financial resources, equipment, and learning environment, key schools often boast 90–99 percent admission rates to universities. In comparison, ordinary schools fare very poorly in student admission to universities, a direct result of their non-elite status. Poor equipment, mixed quality in the teaching force, large class size, and lack of educational funding characterize most ordinary schools. Yet as key schools accept only 4 percent of all high school students, possession of political, economic, and intellectual power is fundamental in obtaining access to these schools. According to my knowledge and data collected from visiting key schools, the students of key schools are predominantly from families of government officials and intellectuals. Rich people can also buy into these schools by paying hefty fees. Since nearly all key schools are built in urban areas, few rural children have access to key schools. Lack of access to quality education has forced many parents to seek alternatives. Private education signifies a response to this need in society for high-quality schools. In recent years, the central government has adopted a policy that in the nineyear compulsory education stage, students would enter schools according to their residential district, thus eliminating the practice of running key primary and junior high schools. Primary and junior high schools have been banned from calling themselves key schools to avoid the criticism that the education system favors only a small minority of students. However, a name change does not hide the fact that these schools remain superior to other schools in terms of teaching quality and equipment. In treatment, these schools still have the privilege (given by upper-level government) of transferring good teachers from other schools to their own. Usually located in residential districts where high-ranking government officials reside, these schools enjoy much greater benefits than other schools, because of the official power the parents possess. Access to these schools is very restricted; one often needs to have a ‘‘note’’ from high-ranking

Chinese Culture and Society

45

officials to get into them. These schools are also linked with good secondary schools, and thus access to these primary schools means having one foot in a good secondary school, which in turn leads on to universities. Key schools take advantage of their name, admitting students with grades lower than required for admission if the parents can bring in business to the school. Government officials who can give the school favorable treatment also have their children squeezed into good schools at lower scores. In some schools, 2–4 percent of students got in because their parents could bring in business for the school or pay high fees. The fees they pay range from 8,000 to 20,000 yuan a year. Parents also use donations to get favorable treatment for their children (Wu Jiqing, 1994). Good schools thus collect huge amounts of money, causing scholars to complain that justice has failed as money and power provide choices for a small percentage of people, which causes widespread dissatisfaction among parents (Yang Minqing, 1996). Rural-Urban Disparity Inequality between key and ordinary schools represents vertical inequality; disparity among urban and rural schools signifies horizontal inequality. A rural kindergarten I visited in 1995 had nothing in the classroom but tables for the children, and the students had to stand listening to the teacher, who held the only textbook for the class; there were no toys and no play facilities for the children. In the local primary and secondary school the running track was not completed two years after construction started because money ran out, because of escalating inflation in the early 1990s. In the country, a huge number of rural schools lack tables and chairs, and many students still study in run-down, dangerous buildings. In 1992, more than 1,000 counties, or 33 percent of the national total, have not generalized six years of primary education (Wu Degang, 1992, 96). The Compulsory Education Law passed in 1986 states that the first nine years of schooling constitutes compulsory education and thus should be provided free for all children. In reality, parents have to pay all kinds of fees, such as examination paper fees, school construction fees, water fees, and after-school coaching fees. Sometimes the fees asked by schools exceed the annual earning of rural parents, who are forced to pull their children out of school. In poor areas, families may send only one child to school while the other children work in the field or outside the home to support this child. In 1988 alone 7.15 million primary and secondary students dropped out in China (Wu Degang, 1992, 102). In 1997, the dropout rate in junior secondary schools and in primary schools was 3.5 percent and 1.5 percent, respectively, amounting to 1.77 million junior high students and 2.04 million primary students (China Facts and Figures, 1997, 1997, 80). Another report reveals that by 1996 China had a total of 41 million dropouts and pushouts (Feng Jianjun, 1996, 39). One can imagine how many students have fallen through the crack after nine years of education.

46

Overview and Context

Although all children are required by law to complete nine years of education, the majority of rural children have left school after six years. The number of schools at the secondary level has decreased considerably since the middle of the 1980s, and a great number of rural students are literally shut out of school after six years (Lin, 1993a). While enrollment of school-age children is nearly universal, only 40 to 60 percent finish grade nine, and many fewer complete grade twelve. In Sichuan province, there was only one junior and senior high school per 160,000 rural population, and the cost of living, transportation, and books amounted to 1,000 yuan a year; finishing three years of senior high education can cost 4,000 to 5,000 yuan, whereas the annual income per capita of the local peasants is around 500 yuan (Li Yuantian and Qiu Jiangling, 1995, 17). This demonstrates how limited educational opportunities are for rural children. Rural peasants comprise 70 to 80 percent of China’s population today, yet the government’s investment on education for this huge population has always been meager. Rural schools have traditionally been underfunded, relying on funds from local governments and villages. That great disparities exist between urban and rural schools can be seen in the following figures. In 1991, the average national educational funding was 114.9 yuan per primary school child and 254.63 yuan per secondary school student. However, if we look at regional differences, Shanghai has the highest investment at 367.37 yuan per primary student, and Henan province has the lowest with 59.66 yuan per primary student, a sevenfold difference. For secondary school students, Beijing ranks the highest at 760.10 yuan, and Jiangxi the lowest at 166.47 yuan, again a sevenfold difference (Dang Songhua, 1994). In terms of learning science, 91 percent of the secondary schools in Shanghai have reached the criteria for equipment and facilities set by the State Education Commission, while less than 10 percent of the schools in the five provinces of Guangxi, Hainan, Tibet, Ningxia, and Qinghai were able to do so. At the primary level, 62 percent of schools in Shanghai have reached the standard, yet less than 1 percent of the primary schools in the provinces of Guangxi, Hainan, Tibet, Ningxia, and Xinjiang have reached the standard. The reality is that inequality in education is much more serious in the treatment of students than in the enrollment of school-age children in grade one, about which the government touted its achievement of 98 percent enrollment (Dang Songhua, 1994). It is clear that relying on the government has not solved the problem of funding, and schools in the less-developed regions cannot improve without additional inputs. School Teachers While Chinese teachers have seen improvements in their social status during the reform era, as compared with the constant harassment and fear they experienced during the Cultural Revolution, many of the improvements have been symbolic rather than real. The economic reform in general improved teachers’ living conditions, but escalating inflation in the 1980s put teachers in financial

Chinese Culture and Society

47

difficulty: Their fixed salaries are low compared to those of government officials and people in many other economic sectors. In the political hierarchy, mobility is extremely limited for teachers. Professionally, they have large classes to teach and work long hours. All these factors make teaching a low-status profession; excellent students refuse to attend teachers’ colleges or universities. Parents want good teachers to teach their children but refuse to allow their children to become teachers. In the 1990s, the prospect for Chinese teachers has been twofold: In their personal lives, they are worse off, with the rising cost of living and increased gaps in earnings compared to some other social groups; in their professional lives, the lack of opportunities for training and upward mobility continues to dampen their enthusiasm for teaching. The single-minded drive for a high rate of university admission continues to force teachers to shoulder an excessive workload. Since only 4 percent of the students will be admitted, they have to be in a combative mode all the time. Teachers have to correct mountains of assignments, yet their incomes hardly cover the needs of daily living. In contrast, if they were to work in foreign corporations and private enterprises, they could make much more. The contrast is so great that there has been an exodus of teachers into other fields. According to a report, in 1992 in Shanghai 2,292 teachers quit. In Zejiang province, in just one term in 1993, 1,687 teachers left, which was equivalent to a quarter of the education students graduated in the province that year. Young teachers especially are leaving in large numbers, many without notice. In the nation, in 1991–1992, 1.17 million teachers left the teaching profession, comprising 13.7 percent of the total (Hu Junjuan, 1994, 20). In fact, the greatest loss of teachers occurs within schools for many teachers who remain in the schools have suffered a loss of spirit and energy for teaching; some conduct other business even during classes, often rushing outside to respond to business calls. In 1994, the Law of Teachers was passed, which demands that local governments give teachers 10 percent higher pay in the event of salary increases among public service workers and favorable consideration in the allocation of government-subsidized housing. Yet, in reality, many teachers are not even paid on time, and some receive no payment for a whole year. Even economically developed regions delay paying teachers. One reason is that educational funding has often been diverted to other uses, such as building luxurious villas for government officials. This problem has reached such a serious state that before the Spring Festival in 1996, the State Education Commission issued an urgent order to all provinces and municipalities to abide by the Law of Teachers and to punish those who violate the law. As schools are responsible for generating a major portion of their own funding, a pattern has developed in which ‘‘a school’s survival depends on the government, and a school’s development depends on the school itself.’’ Chinese teachers’ salaries comprise two parts: base salary and bonus. Base salary usually comes from government funding, and the bonus comes from the earnings of

48

Overview and Context

school-run businesses and other activities, such as offering extra classes to students. The amount of bonus teachers receive is usually based on their quality of teaching, teaching load, teaching of extra classes, and administrative responsibilities (such as being the class director). Teachers rely on the combination of these two kinds of income to survive. Schools that have leftover funds build new housing for teachers. The housing shortage is acute for most Chinese households, and school administrators are under heavy pressure to improve housing conditions for teachers. Most of the funds generated by schools are spent on bonuses and housing, while some schools also invest in a better library and teaching facilities, if they can afford them. Therefore, some public school teachers are willing to forego their job security for higher pay or to moonlight in other schools in order to increase their income. In fact, public school teachers make up the backbone of the private school teaching force, a situation that will be dealt with in subsequent chapters. CONCLUSION China has a rich tradition of placing a high value on education, and parents of today are more eager than ever to have their children receive good education in view of the social and economic changes. Single children especially are in need of friends, a safe environment, and care. Parents too busy with making money and families breaking up need full-time care for their children, hence the demand for boarding schools. Meanwhile, the highly selective public education system has restricted opportunities to acquire high-quality education, and fees charged by schools are exceeding parents’ ability to pay them, a situation that is extremely serious in rural areas. Within the larger social context, the stress on modernization shifts education from serving politics to serving economic development, and the new market economy calls for the all-round development of children and for people with specialized skills. These changes have laid the foundation for the reappearance of private schools at all levels and propel their rapid development.

PART 2

PROFILES AND CHARACTERISTICS OF PRIVATE SCHOOLS AND UNIVERSITIES

4

Elite Private Schools Part 2 describes three major types of private schools: elite private schools (elite schools), ordinary private schools, and private universities. Characteristics of these schools are outlined. DEFINITION By definition, elite schools are those that charge fees over 10,000 yuan a year per student. Today, the average annual income for a Chinese family runs from 4,000 to 10,000 yuan a year. Elite schools, by virtue of the fee they charge, exclude most ordinary Chinese and are accessible only to a small number of people. In 1994, over 100 such schools existed throughout the country. In 1997, Guangdong province alone had over 70 elite schools, enrolling over 110,000 students, and Beijing city and Shengyang city each had over 40 such schools (Zhang Kuan and Wang Wenyuan, 1998). No official data is available to date on this type of school. My estimation is that by 1998 there were about 500 to 800 such schools in the whole country. Overall, elite schools constitute about 10 percent of all private primary and secondary schools. In this book, the term ‘‘elite’’ is used without any negative connotation. The purpose is to distinguish elite schools from schools charging low to moderate fees. Issues surrounding elite schools have been complex, as we will discuss in detail in subsequent chapters. SCHOOL FOUNDERS Establishing an elite school costs an investor a huge sum of money, which can range from several million yuan to hundreds of millions, in order to acquire

52

Profiles and Characteristics

land, construct buildings, purchase equipment, place advertisements, and pay the salaries of the staff. One wonders who has such money and for what purpose people would invest in an elite school. ‘‘They are in it for big money’’ has been the popular guess. However, my encounter with founders and principals reveals that no single statement can exhaust the diverse intentions and purposes of the founders. Individuals Who Are Dissatisfied with the Current Education System Elite school founders, first of all, include individuals who have worked in public schools and observed various problems prevailing there. They believe that education should be for the well-rounded development of children and disapprove of public schools’ becoming a place solely for preparing students for the University Entrance Exam. They have been frustrated by the rigidity of the school curriculum and the inefficiency of the government’s bureaucratic machine. Lacking autonomy in their work, they have found their hands tied when it comes to implementing new ideas. Several founders I met cited the difficulty of making changes in the curriculum as a source of frustration. They noted that teachers are required to adhere to the state-designed curriculum so strictly that no changes can be made before permission is obtained from several levels of government offices. These educators therefore do not feel they can teach according to the needs of the students and thereby fulfill their vision of education. When it became clear that rapid social transformation had created a demand in the society for a new form of education, these educators started to advocate their ideas and eventually won support from like-minded investors. A school I visited was founded with the support of a Taiwanese businessman. In another example, the founder, a former public school principal, started up a school with 20,000 yuan from her life’s savings. She advocated teaching students multiple skills and instilling in students long-forgotten cultural values such as filial piety and frugality. The school won tremendous support from parents, who donated tables, chairs, and television sets so that the school could begin to operate on a good footing. Business Groups, Individual Entrepreneurs, Real Estate Companies, or Family Conglomerates Some high-profile elite schools have involved business companies and private entrepreneurs who sense opportunities to make big money from the rapid increase in personal wealth. Apparently, the mathematics for them is simple: If they can collect 20,000 yuan from 1,000 students each year, they can take in 20 million yuan from the school each year. Even if they just let the money sit in a bank, the interest paid by the bank (during the years 1992–1995, the interest rate was 13–25 percent) would return them millions within a year. Furthermore,

Elite Private Schools

53

investing in a school would enable them to take advantage of the state regulation that allows new schools to acquire up to 500 mou of land at a discounted price, usually at only 40 percent of the market cost for building construction. These founders, then, aim for the large profit and go for the low price. They can acquire land on which they usually build not only a school but also side projects for lucrative profit. They also use the cover of running school businesses to shield their profit from state taxation. Although the stake is high, the potential for high profit attracted droves of business companies and individual entrepreneurs into investing in elite schools. Yinghao Middle School, an elite school in Guangdong province, is known to charge students a one-time fee of 300,000 yuan in the name of ‘‘educational savings.’’ The scheme works like this: During the students’ stay in the school, the interest accrued from this amount would be used to pay tuition and fees, and the principal amount would be returned to the students upon graduation. By this measure, the company constructing the Yinghao School (the school now has over 1,800 students) amassed several hundred million yuan in one year and reinvested the money in real estate ventures at the height of the 1992–1996 real estate speculation. In the booming years for real estate development (1992–1996), real estate companies were active players in investing in elite schools. One of their main intentions was to attract buyers for their housing development projects, which were usually built in the suburbs. However, China’s suburban areas have not reached the stage of mature development; that is, transportation is still inconvenient, and living facilities are scarce or distant. Potential buyers with schoolage children would not consider buying into these areas if they could not send their children to a good school. Developers therefore build elite schools as an added attraction to the buyers; some, especially at the beginning stage of a school, subsidize the school’s operation for a number of years. One school I visited in Beijing, one in Shanghai, and another in Shengyang city belonged to this category. The one in Shengyang was open to children whose parents were the owners of the nearby expensive, well-fenced executive suites and villas that cost from 800,000 yuan to 2 million yuan to buy. The school was colorfully decorated, and the classrooms were furnished in Western style with tables and chairs arranged in a circle, instead of in a row as is the case in most Chinese schools. I was in the school on a Friday afternoon when the parents came to pick up their children. It was easy to identify their upper-class status: The mothers were dressed in expensive and fashionable clothes while the fathers carried cellular phones (a symbol of status in China then) and wore gold on their necks and hands, revealing their great wealth. Some business companies and private entrepreneurs also involve themselves in elite schools in an attempt to boost their personal fame or advertise their products or to use the school to build connections with local political and economic elites.

54

Profiles and Characteristics

China-Trained Scholars, Returned Overseas Chinese, and Businessmen from Hong Kong and Taiwan One school I visited was founded by two scholars with doctoral degrees in education. Trained in China, they wish to translate their knowledge into practice and explore new ways to achieve China’s educational reform. I also heard of Chinese scholars who studied abroad and returned to open elite schools successfully. Their Western training attracted parents who believe that these people have been trained in the most advanced educational science and that their connections with the West will allow the children to be sent abroad after graduation (most elite schools make such claims). One such school was founded in Dalian city by a Chinese scholar returned from Canada. The school was so successful that in three years it moved from a rented building in a downtown area into a beautiful new building in the suburbs facing the sea. Businessmen from Hong Kong and Taiwan have also been drawn to the potential of high profit and have collaborated with local residents in building up elite schools. Some invested by donation and others by means of Chineseforeign collaboration. Taiwanese or Hong Kong residents who had left their motherland decades ago also returned to contribute to local economic and cultural development by opening up new schools. Key Schools Key schools have been another player in establishing elite schools. In China’s dual-track public school system, as described in Chapter 3, key schools have a decisive advantage over ordinary schools in receiving funding from the government as well as in generating revenues on their own. The fact that they accept only the best students who are taught by the most qualified teachers selected from the whole city or region gives them enormous clout among the parents. As enrolling in a key school means getting a foot into a university, competition to enter a key school is so strong that a student has to score 98 out of 100 percent on four or five subjects tested in order to be admitted (Lin and Chen, 1995). Key schools have taken advantage of this strong social demand and admitted additional students whose scores are below its admission line. Students who are just one or two points short of the admission line are charged from 8,000 to 20,000 yuan a year, an amount matching the cost of elite private schools. The students, usually called ‘‘extra students,’’ are integrated into the regular classes. However, many of them cannot catch up with the highly selected group and drag down the average scores of the key schools in interschool, city-wide or province-wide competitions, thus damaging the reputation of such key schools. Further, key schools have always been under tremendous pressure to take in children of high-ranking government officials. Every year, principals of key schools receive dozens of notes from officials demanding special treatment for

Elite Private Schools

55

their children or grandchildren. One school I visited was filled with students from such families. The local guide who used to serve in several important positions in the government pointed out the students to me: ‘‘These are all grandchildren of my old friends. Their grandpas got them into this best school of the city by using their power and connections.’’ The school was the best among 200 schools in the city and has a spacious teaching building and a huge open courtyard. The principal of this school received dozens of notes each year from officials demanding special treatment. As a measure to ‘‘balance demand and supply,’’ the school decided to set up a separate school and assigned its teachers to teach there. The new school was registered as a private school that was responsible for its own finance and teaching. In fact, the key school charged fees to the ‘‘private school’’ for using its building and employing its teachers. This new school pleased the government officials, who were happy to have their children taught by good teachers, and the key school is relieved of the constant pressure to receive low-score students. Teachers and staff in the key schools also benefited by receiving a substantial bonus in their monthly pay. Throughout the country, ‘‘private schools’’ of this type are not few in number. In Hangzhou city, for example, eight such schools were set up in 1995. The schools differed only in name, financial management, and the legal person owning the school. Other than that, the teachers, teaching plans, pace of teaching, examinations, and academic affair management were all the same. They are called ‘‘school in school,’’ ‘‘brother-sister school’’ or ‘‘mother-child school.’’ In Hangzhou city, parents reportedly waited for days to get their children’s names on the waiting list for a ‘‘private school’’ of this kind, as only one out of ten students was admitted (Xue Jianguo, 1995, 8). In a southern city, a key school I visited several times charges 20,000 yuan annually for each student admitted below its admission line and in this way rakes in millions a year. In 1997 the school constructed a five-storey library and several staff buildings. The unfair competition caused a strong reaction from both ordinary schools and private schools. Low-income parents abhor this breach of fairness in the public school system, which is supposed to uphold the principle of meritocracy. Despite protests and an order by the central government banning such schools, they continue to be set up. To date, their number may be in the thousands, but no official statistics are available. Another type of school, called ‘‘publicly owned but privately run,’’ as mentioned in Chapter 1, is gaining prominence in some cities. By 1999, Beijing had over thirty such schools that use government buildings for free but charge tuition and fees. These schools are in direct competition with privately funded elite schools. TUITION, FEES, AND ADVERTISEMENT When elite schools first appeared, much doubt was expressed as to whether there were enough people who could afford such high tuition. Some founders therefore carried out surveys on the clientele market before jumping into action.

56

Profiles and Characteristics

As already mentioned, a school in Beijing found in 1991 that about 10 percent of the parents in the capital city could afford to pay over 10,000 yuan a year in fees and tuition. A school in Guangdong province commissioned a private research company to find out the feasibility of a high-fee school in the local region before the founder plunged millions into such a school. Zhang Zhiyi, head of the Office of Schools Run by Social Forces in the State Education Commission, stated: We predict private schools have, in Beijing or the country as a whole, a student market of up to 10 percent of the population. This will be concentrated in areas where residents are relatively well-off or where there is a lot of mobility among the population. Considering the current number and scale of private schools, however, the market cannot be considered small. (Zhang Zhiyi, 1994, 165)

The amount of tuition elite schools collect varies across the country. In general, schools in northern and central China charge from 10,000 to 20,000 yuan a year, whereas schools in the south, mainly in Guangdong province, charge from 20,000 to 50,000 yuan a year. The cost of attending an elite school may be made up of several of the following items: 1. Tuition. This can range from 8,000 yuan to 20,000 yuan per year, depending on the condition of the school. Some schools collect this amount term by term; others collect the whole sum all at once. Some schools break the cost into specific items such as uniforms, food, and lodging, while others include all these items in the tuition category. 2. School construction fee. Most elite schools charge this fee, which may range from 10,000 yuan to 100,000 yuan. This money is designated for paying the cost of constructing school buildings, purchasing equipment and facilities, and maintenance. It is also used to pay down bank loans or to purchase the land on which school buildings are to be built. Many elite schools started out by renting buildings or classrooms from government agencies or public schools, and the rental cost accounted for the largest part of their expenditure. The school construction fee ultimately allows most elite schools to have their own campus with an assortment of facilities. 3. Education savings fund. Schools in Guangdong province initiated charging this fund, with the aim being to accumulate a large amount of capital in a short period of time. They usually require from 100,000 to 300,000 yuan upon a student’s admission. The interest accrued from this amount is to be used by the school in daily operation. If the interest does not cover the cost of the school’s operation, parents would be asked to pay an additional amount. Parents are promised that upon their children’s graduation they will receive the principal amount back without interest. Founders have used the ‘‘education savings fund’’ to accumulate a huge sum of cash, which was then invested in real estate and other ventures. In the early 1990s, when real estate was booming, the prospect of a high return was quite sure; however, with the government’s retrenchment policy after 1995, thousands of real estate companies are getting stuck in nonperforming businesses and have had difficulties repaying their debt. It has thus become likely that schools cannot repay the principal amounts to the parents and are forced to close their doors.

Elite Private Schools

57

Table 4.1 Standard Fee (Yuan) for Each Semester (Half Year)*

Grade

Preschool

Tuition Board Room AdminiFee Fee Fee stration Fee 3,000

1,500

500

300

Primary school 4,500

1,500

500

300

Junior high

5,000

1,600

6,000

Senior high (I, II)

6,000

1,500

**

Senior high (Ill, etc.) 4,500

Uniform MiscelFee laneous Fee

Medical Fee

500

150

300

500

150

1,500

500

300

400

5,500

**

**

**

**

**

**

**

500

150

*The fees are paid by students who live in residence. The students who stay in school over holidays have to pay extra fees. Fees are reduced if a student does not board in school. **Managed by themselves or proceeded from their actual expenses.

4. Miscellaneous fees. These cover items such as uniforms, transportation, or extracurricular activities. 5. Food and lodging. Some schools charge for tuition and the cost of living separately.

Table 4.1 shows an example of the amount and types of fees charged by a school. ADMISSION STANDARDS Because only a very small number of students can afford to attend elite schools, nearly all the students who apply are accepted. However, elite schools quickly find out that they pay a heavy price for some of the students they admit. These may be students of low ability who require a tremendous amount of teacher time and yet improve very little. Or the students have low motivation to learn and come with delinquency problems. Principals noted to me that although delinquent students were a small number, they spread a very bad influence on other students. Elite schools attempt to adjust their admission policy by accepting students only after academic tests and interviews have been conducted. Students’ health and ability to take care of themselves are also checked upon. To attract students of high academic ability to achieve a balanced mix of stu-

58

Profiles and Characteristics

dents in the school, tuition and fees are lowered for those who rank 90 percent and above on primary and junior secondary school graduation exams; scholarship funds are also set up to admit students of excellent academic ability from poor families. This measure was intended both to display the generosity of the school (as an answer to the criticism that they care only for the rich) and to establish role models for the school’s privileged students. To recruit students, elite schools advertise in local, regional, and national newspapers and on TV networks. They also rely on word of mouth to attract students. Some schools install big billboards around the city, highlighting their special features and characteristics. Many call themselves ‘‘English’’ schools to appeal to parents who want their children to be connected with well-developed countries. In Shengyang city, a poster at an important traffic intersection announces: ‘‘If you want your child to become a dragon, please send your child to our school.’’ In Beijing, there is a ‘‘consultation fair’’ each year at which parents and students learn about the choices for general and vocational secondary schools. Hundreds of schools participate in the event, which lasts two days. Nearly three dozen private schools set up their booths in the 1996 and 1999 ‘‘consultation fair.’’ They gave out brochures and provided on-the-spot consultation with interested parents. I was informed that quite a few parents signed up their children on the spot. Despite efforts made by the elite schools to recruit top-notch students, the best students usually take key schools as their first choice, leaving chiefly students of mid-level and lower-level ability for the elite schools. A very small number of the best students choose to pay the hefty fee to attend an elite school mainly because the boarding system suits parents who have to travel all the time or who live abroad. The competition for students caused some elite schools to fall short of their enrollment goals. While an effective recruitment network is crucial, even more important is a reputation for high quality; schools with both have no problems in filling their seats, while schools with neither see their enrollment dwindle to the point of unsustainability. In Chengdu city of Sichuan province, five schools closed down in 1995 because of a lack of students. In recent years, elite schools have taken measures to screen out especially poor students in order to maintain greater uniformity in students’ academic preparation. I was told that sometimes, even though parents begged for their children to be accepted, the school would not yield for fear the students might drag down the average scores of the class or even the whole school in competitive examinations. They fear that a reputation for failing students may scare other parents away. They also find that if they were to admit an especially ill-prepared student, teachers would be preoccupied with this student and the school would lose money. For a large number of elite schools that opened their doors in 1992–1995 the end of the 20th century marks the time when their students will take the University Entrance Exam. Much attention will be directed to the students’ scores, and comparisons will be made with key schools, to determine whether it is worthwhile for parents to spend a huge sum to send a child to an elite school. To ensure that they are on a par with key schools, some elite schools resort

Elite Private Schools

59

to weeding out poor students at the high school level by transferring them to vocational schools. Most elite schools I visited see the ultimate solution as setting up their own private universities or connecting with one or several universities that would agree to accept their students. Some schools adopt stern measures to maintain control of their quality. The following are standards for promotion to the next grade adopted by one school: 1. Students who pass the examinations or qualify by make-up examinations each year can go up to the next grade. 2. Students who still fail to pass one basic course or two main courses (including required courses) or one basic course and one main course (including required courses) after make-up examinations each year will be admitted to go up to the next grade as trial students. These students will repeat the year’s work if they fail to pass two examinations even by make-up examination. 3. Students who fail to pass two or more basic courses or three or more main courses (including required courses) after make-up examinations will repeat the year’s work. 4. Repeating students will be persuaded to leave school if they fail to pass more than two courses by make-up examinations. The school will give them only a certificate of study in the school, not a diploma. Students will only be allowed to repeat their study in the same grade for one year. 5. Under all circumstances, students who are absent from school for one quarter of the total class hours in a year will be disqualified from taking examinations and will not go up to the next grade. If the same thing happens the next year, the students will automatically be asked to leave the school. The school will give them only a certificate of study, not a diploma.

PARENTS’ SOCIAL BACKGROUND AND PARTICIPATION Liu Yufeng (1995), in his case study of an elite school in Beijing, the Jinghua Private School, found it difficult to obtain accurate information about the parents. Many parents do not want to reveal their occupations. For example, if a parent works for the government for a comparatively low wage, he will not be willing to reveal his true identity for fear of causing speculation and charges of corruption. Liu, however, was able to obtain data showing that at Jinghua, 28 percent of the parents were executives of nongovernmental capital enterprises; 20 percent of them were lawyers, contractors, or parents who work overseas; 14 percent of them were managers in state-run factories or businesses; and 11 percent of them were owners of small businesses, including taxi drivers (p. 57). Liu also notes that it is very difficult to report the parents’ income range, because the income tax system in China has not been appropriately set up, and a certain amount of income is earned ‘‘unofficially’’ and is never reported. Most of the parents’ over-the-table income is in fact very limited. Based on their official earnings, few government officials should be able to send their children to an elite private school. According to Liu, only those private business owners who work abroad should have enough to keep one child in Jinghua from grade

60

Profiles and Characteristics

one to grade five, for which the fee is close to 100,000 yuan. It is reasonable to conclude that most of the income that funds Jinghua is of the unofficial type (p. 57). Other studies list parents as private entrepreneurs, high-ranking executives of joint, cooperative, or foreign-owned business ventures, personnel working abroad, residents of Hong Kong, Macao, or Taiwan, and intellectuals or government functionaries. A private school in Yunnan province had these statistics: 10 percent of the parents were business entrepreneurs, 50 percent were owners of small or mid-sized businesses, and the rest were well-known professionals from the legal, medical, or cultural fields. According to Zhang Zhiyi, the common characteristics of these parents were as follows. First, the parents were well-to-do, or well-to-do grandparents assisted in paying for sending their grandchild to a good school. Second, the parents had extremely busy work lives: Some made frequent trips away from home and had no time to educate their children; some had their children staying with them in hotels throughout the year. Third, a fairly large proportion of the parents were divorced parents (in some schools, 50 percent of the students were from divorced parents) who had no time to care for their children but were concerned about the trauma they might be experiencing. Fourth, for various reasons, the children of some families had become special children who could no longer study in public schools. Fifth, some parents who were sent to the countryside during the Cultural Revolution and had missed the opportunity to study hoped to compensate for their loss through investing in their children (Zhang Zhiyi, 1994, 153). The schools I visited confirm the findings of these studies. Parents are private entrepreneurs, small business owners, managers or top executives in foreignowned or joint-venture corporations, government officials, Hong Kong and Taiwan business people, and returned overseas Chinese. Several reasons were given to me as to why these people decide to send their children to elite private schools: Busy entrepreneurs seldom have time to look after their children and worry about their children spending all the after-school hours playing video games or watching TV; students live in crowded districts but have to go to school or come home alone. The parents thus feel it better to have their children studying in a boarding school. Some parents have had only limited formal education, because of the disruption of schools during the Cultural Revolution. Having suffered from the lack of a higher education, they want their children to receive the best education possible. The business owners, although rich, are still looked down upon by the society because of their low educational level. They do not want their children to meet the same fate. Above all, these parents want to give their children the best education possible with the money they have earned. Parents are attracted by the elite schools’ good facilities, small class size, new curriculum, collective environment, and quality of the teaching force. The boarding school system draws parents who worry that their only child may never

Elite Private Schools

61

learn to be an independent and responsible human being. They see the boarding school as a way to force their children to become independent. They also want their children to make friends and learn to live in a collective environment. Not all parents who enroll children in private schools are wealthy. For their only child to receive a good education, some working-class parents and intellectual parents borrow funds from relatives and friends. They believe that the best thing they can do for their children is to invest in their education. They want the child to have a good learning environment and eventually go on to higher education. Divorced parents constitute about a quarter or even more of the parents in some schools. As recounted in the first two chapters, social change and moral corruption under the reform have caused a great many families to dissolve. The boarding system of elite schools assumes responsibility from the parents who have custody of the child. Some private school principals called their school ‘‘a dumping ground’’ for unwanted children of divorced parents. Overall, parents realize that having a good education will be more and more crucial in the market economy. They view the money they spend not as a cost or expenditure, but as a valuable investment. The following is an example: A Guangdong entrepreneur possessing millions has only one boy. The man himself is illiterate, but wants his son to get a university degree. He hired a private tutor to teach the kid when he barely started talking. Despite many attempts, his wish did not materialize. Then he heard about private school, which he believes will make his dream come true. He gladly paid 60,000 yuan to send the kid to a private school (Xi Ling, 1994a, 17).

I have met some parents on several occasions. They attend school activities carrying video cameras (still too expensive for the great majority of Chinese families) and dressed in brand-name or designer clothes. Some are in their thirties and some in their forties. Their dress and appearance easily identify them as a special social group who are well-to-do, much richer than ordinary Chinese. PRINCIPALS: THEIR RESPONSIBILITIES AND RELATIONSHIP WITH OWNERS Principals of elite schools are mostly experienced educators. A few have obtained a Ph.D. or a master’s degree in China or abroad. One principal I met also had a teaching job in a college in the United States. He was hired to administer an elite school and stay in China about four months a year. The majority of elite school principals have been administrators of well-known public schools; they usually have achieved high professional recognition in their careers. Some were businessmen and women who have been teachers. While most principals are hired by the school owners to run the school, some owners name themselves the school principal as well.

62

Profiles and Characteristics

The principals may work in teams or independently. Their salaries range from 1,000 to 3,000 yuan a month, a high salary by Chinese standards in the early 1990s. But they are also dubbed ‘‘high-level dagongzhai,’’ or ‘‘expensive hired hands,’’ who perform intellectual work for owners who maintain tight control of school affairs, particularly in school finance, leaving the hired principals little say as to how tuition money should be spent. The principals’ chief responsibility entails overseeing teaching activities and motivating teachers to fulfill goals set by the owners. A school I visited had a central monitoring system through which the principal can selectively watch the teaching activities in each and every classroom. The top task for him and for other staff members was to ensure students’ academic progress and parents’ satisfaction, on which they rely to attract students and keep the school going. In this kind of arrangement, the principals work for the owners, with the strict understanding that the principals are not to interfere with anything outside their job. The owner is in charge of building construction, personnel, budgeting, and all accounting matters. Thus, some principals go into conflict with the founders. For example, in a highly publicized case, when the principal of one elite school did not allow the owner to move tuition funds into non-school-related projects, the owner hired someone to attack the principal, who suffered a broken nose. The case, which caused a public uproar, was eventually settled out of court. Some schools hire vice principals just in name so as to increase the school’s credibility and ensure the backing of the government. These people usually have held senior positions in the government or at a university. They provide clout and connections for the school. They have no obligation for the day-to-day administration of the school but are paid to occasionally attend meetings. As we have mentioned, sometimes principals are also school owners. Some have no experience in education. I was told that one high-profile principal seldom went into a classroom, yet frequently instructed teachers without knowing what he was saying. Hiring half of his teachers from other countries, he openly claimed that his school adopted an ‘‘elitist’’ approach with a ‘‘Westernized’’ mode of teaching. I was told that the Chinese teachers in this school were treated very poorly while Western teachers were regarded highly. Even the foreign teachers did not feel this was fair treatment. TEACHERS The teaching force in elite schools is usually made up of retired teachers, teachers on unpaid leave from public schools, young teachers who have just graduated from teacher education colleges, teachers who have resigned from jobs in public schools, or part-time teachers who moonlight for extra income. Their salaries range from 600 to 1,800 yuan a month, an amount that is higher than salaries in most public schools. At first, elite schools, like ordinary private schools, rely largely on retired teachers. As they develop, however, they gradually acquire a teaching force of young, middle-aged, and older teachers. The young teachers usually come fresh

Elite Private Schools

63

from teacher education colleges, or they have been assigned to work for a few years in remote cities and small towns. They give up the job security and benefits of public schools for work in big cities or the more developed southern provinces. Some leave their secure job for an apartment (to get which would take them years of working in a public school); some move to join a spouse who works in a different place. In recent years, so many young people wanted to change jobs that an elite school in Beijing advertising a position received thousands of applications. ‘‘We truly choose the best one out of a hundred applicants,’’ the school principal was proud to say. The young people have time on their side. If working in a private school does not work out, they can always find jobs in other economic sectors or go back to the public school system. Some teachers who have done very well in public schools and who are called ‘‘core’’ teachers there have also joined elite schools. Financial concerns dominate their decision. Typically, they earn only 400 to 800 yuan a month in a public school, barely enough to support a family. The higher income in a private school improves their financial situation. These teachers again form the ‘‘core’’ of the teaching force in the elite schools; they lend credibility to the school and act as mentors to younger teachers. It is reported that 65 percent of faculty members in private schools in a major city, Nanjing, have senior-rank titles. In some schools, the proportion is as high as 80 percent. It is precisely these high-quality teachers that attract parents and students to elite schools (Jiangsu Provincial Education Commission’s Policy Research Office, 1995). Several schools I visited prided themselves on having a ‘‘balanced structure’’ in their teaching force, that is, they have a balanced ratio of senior, middle-aged, and young teachers. They distinguish themselves from ordinary private schools, which rely mainly on retired teachers to teach. To attract teachers and maintain stability in the teaching force, housing is provided for faculty members. These are usually two- or three-bedroom apartments with a living room, a kitchen, and a bathroom. Teachers who do not live on campus or who are contracted to teach just one or two courses are paid for their transportation. Some schools even fully furnish the apartments in return for teacher commitment; after all, should the teachers choose to leave the schools, they too have much to lose. At the beginning elite schools did not provide medical benefits and pensions for teachers. As they evolved, they realized that without paying benefits they cannot keep teachers for the long term. Today, most elite schools provide a full range of benefits. Some schools arrange for the staff to pay part of the cost while others set specific conditions of eligibility that bind the school and its employees. STUDENTS: LIVING AND LEARNING IN ELITE PRIVATE SCHOOLS Nearly all of the elite schools are boarding schools. Students usually go home once a week or once every two weeks. Some schools allow students to go home

64

Profiles and Characteristics

only once a month. Students from out of the province generally stay in school until the end of the term. Student dormitories on average house four to six students in a room, depending on the fees charged. The best arrangement is a room shared by two students with a shower facility installed. In some schools, many students share a big room. For example, a school I visited in Beijing has as many as 20 students sharing a big room, to save space and to make management easier. The idea is also to foster a collective consciousness among the students. Despite the large number, the dorms look very orderly and clean. Most school corridors have a strong odor of bleach, from the attempt to keep the environment clean. Elite schools maintain strict supervision of students’ daily life. For example, in some schools students are allowed fifteen minutes to get up, make their beds, brush their teeth and wash before they line up to head to the student canteen for breakfast. Some schools also line up students to move from one classroom to another, to go to the dining hall, and to return to the dormitory. However, students can also be boisterous and lively during break time, especially in the afternoon during extracurricular activities. In the afternoon, they usually have from 45 minutes to two hours of extracurricular activities. In the evening, the students are allowed half an hour to an hour to watch national and international news. When it is bedtime, at 9:30 or 10:00 P.M., everyone has to be in bed; dorm supervisors or teachers check to make sure that all students are asleep and covered warmly. One school I visited follows this schedule: Students rise from bed at 7:00 A.M., take part in the national flag-raising ceremony at 7:30 A.M., take six classes during the day, and take part in the flag-lowering ceremony at 7:30 P.M. At 9:00 P.M., lights are out and all students are to be asleep. The following timetable is followed by students in another elite school: 6:25–6:45 A.M.

Get up, wash, and make bed

6:50–7:10

Morning exercises

7:10–7:30

Breakfast

7:40–8:20

First class

8:30–9:10

Second class

9:20–10:00

Third class

10:00–10:20

Eye exercises, snack

10:20–11:00

Fourth class

11:10–11:50

Fifth class

12:00–12:30 P.M.

Lunch

12:40–1:45

Nap

2:00–2:40

Sixth class

2:50–3:30

Seventh class

3:30–3:45

Eye exercises, snack

3:50–4:30

Activity 1

Elite Private Schools

65

4:40–5:20

Activity 2

6:00–6:30

Supper

7:00–7:30

News on TV

7:30–8:10

Individual study 1

8:20–9:00

Individual study 2 (for junior high grades I and II and senior high grade I till 9:20)

9:00–9:50

Wash and bed

10:00

Lights out

Upon entering an elite school, the first thing the students have to learn is to be independent. Students are taught to care for themselves by making their own beds, washing their own underwear and handkerchieves, cleaning their rooms, and sweeping the corridors of school buildings or the campus. Meanwhile, every detail in the students’ lives is carefully supervised; for example, student rooms are recleaned by cleaning workers and all bedding is washed and beds are remade. Teachers and principals told me that in order to train students to take care of themselves, they have to provide a lot of examples and try hard to get students to form good habits. Usually, it takes the staff one term (four months) for grade one and grade two students to form the habit of dressing themselves and making their own beds. When I was touring student dormitories, on several occasions I witnessed young children (six to eight years old) doing these things by themselves. Some schools do not allow children to have personal items in their beds, fearing that the students would compete in showing off their families’ wealth; some schools do allow the children to have favorite toys in bed, especially in the case of girls who may be afraid during the night. Full-time dormitory supervisors (usually two or three for 50 to 100 students) work to make sure the students’ daily life goes smoothly. Children have to learn to conform to discipline, which is lacking in many families. For example, students tend to compare goods their parents have bought them. A principal told me that once a student came to the school with a pair of leather boots that reached above the knee, with dozens of glittering buttons; in one week, all the boys in the school were wearing the same type of boots. The school decided this was not conducive to a child’s growth and since then has required all children to wear the school uniform. Parents were also discouraged from driving expensive cars to school when picking up their children. Sometimes the children are dropped off at points in the city where the parents can pick them up separately, to avoid show of wealth by the parents. GENDER Most elite schools have a ratio of 45 percent girls and 55 percent boys, especially at the primary level. However, some of the most expensive elite schools

66

Profiles and Characteristics

have many more boys than girls. In one school I visited, girls comprised only one-third of the student body; when I inquired, the reason given was that the Chinese cultural tradition still holds in many families that boys are more important than girls, and so the parents are still more willing to invest in boys than in girls. CURRICULUM, TEACHING, AND FACILITIES Private schools, like public schools, are supposed to comply with the requirements set by the State Education Commission and thereby to offer the national standardized curriculum, following the guidelines on course offerings and the pace of progress. All the elite schools I visited mentioned that they go beyond what is required by the state government. They proudly informed me that English and computer science are core courses in their school, taught to students from an early age. A kindergarten I visited starts to immerse three-year-old children in an English-speaking environment. By all measures, English and computer science are treated with as much emphasis, if not more, as are Chinese and math. Extracurricular activities comprise a major part of the curriculum in elite schools. One school I visited urged students to develop ‘‘twelve abilities,’’ including abilities in aerobics, fast calculation, dancing and singing, photography, calligraphy, and socializing. Many elite schools have their own library, theater, piano practice room, dancing room, audiovisual lab, multimedia classrooms, and so on. They install TV sets in the classroom and have an arsenal of musical instruments and sports equipment. Some schools have tennis courts and indoor or outdoor swimming pools. They also have standardized professional running tracks. A school in the south had a huge theater for gatherings and all kinds of events. Another school, also in the south, has a huge open court surrounded by the school building, with pavilions and bridges above small ponds. Many schools I visited boasted of having been equipped with updated computers. Some are connected to the World Wide Web and by e-mail. Students take turns to use the lab; when not in use, the computers are carefully covered and the doors tightly shut. Few schools allow students to use computers at all times. Several schools I visited did allow students to have free access any time. To improve the teaching of English, which elite schools pitch as the working language of the 21st century, some schools spend a huge sum of money hiring foreign teachers to teach full time. These teachers are paid much higher salaries than the Chinese teachers (2,000 to 5,000 yuan a month) and provided with much better living conditions. The teaching of English starts early in all the elite private schools; while public schools start it in grade four, elites schools start from grade one, or even earlier. The teachers use movies, records, and reading materials to teach. Students often listen to tapes and even put on a performance to practice spoken English. In school events, some shows are put on in English only. Much emphasis is placed on mastering standard pronunci-

Elite Private Schools

67

ation so that no Chinese accent is detected—a watermark of high quality in learning a foreign language according to the Chinese standard. CONCLUSION In view of the income of the ordinary Chinese family, elite schools in China charge an extraordinary amount in tuition and fees. This effectively excludes the majority of Chinese families. Regardless of the fees and conditions, these schools have tried to do interesting and thought-provoking work, which cannot be ignored. We discuss the various issues and concerns associated with elite schools in detail in later chapters.

5

Ordinary Private Schools Despite the fanfare surrounding elite schools, more than 80 percent of private schools in China are ordinary schools serving the needs of the general public. In Zhejiang province, in the nearly 100 private schools that existed in 1993, about 60 percent of the students come from salary-class families. In a county in Guangxi, more than ten private schools were set up to serve the needs of peasant children (Wu Zongkui, 1996). Ordinary private schools (hereafter called ordinary schools) can be urban/township schools, rural schools, single-sex vocational schools, vocational technical schools, arts schools, and other type of schools. They offer general primary, secondary, postsecondary, or vocational/technical education. In some regions, ordinary private schools have become the main provider of education, existing side by side with public schools. While elite schools charge fees accessible only to the rich and the powerful, ordinary schools cater to salaried workers, officials, and rural peasants. They charge moderate fees and operate under vastly different conditions. Along with elite schools, they have appeared in large numbers. In Tienjin city, from the fall of 1993 to early 1994, seventeen schools offering different levels of education were established (Zhang Fengmin, 1994, 10–11). In Guangxi, the number was said to have reached 400 by 1994, housing more than 70,000 students. Wenzhou city of Zhejiang province had more than ten private schools serving urban residents in 1994 (Xi Ling, 1994a). The county I visited in 1993 had four ordinary secondary private schools, which took in rural students who had failed to enter local senior high schools but who remained hopeful of receiving a secondary and higher education. Teach-

70

Profiles and Characteristics

ers working in these schools were retired or had been fired from public schools for violating the state’s family planning policy by having more than one child. The schools were small and relied on fees to survive. One school was started by a ‘‘people’s representative’’ to the Provincial People’s Congress. It was said that he was so deeply concerned about the lack of educational opportunities in the rural areas that he set up the school to give the students a second chance. When I returned in 1995, I found that in just one xiang (which was formerly a commune) there were four private primary schools. In 1999 I returned to hear that there were even more private schools in the county; several offer education from Grade 1 to Grade 12. Ordinary private schools have a crucial role to play in some provinces. Leqing county in Zhejiang province, for example, since 1982 has set up 419 private daycare and kindergartens, six private secondary schools, and eighteen private vocational schools. Another five boarding schools provided general education from grade one to grade nine. In 1996, 1,950 students were studying in the private secondary schools, comprising 31 percent of all high schools students in the county; and 3,332 students were studying in private vocational schools, comprising 60 percent of all vocational education students. What underlies this impressive development is that Leqing county was economically developed ahead of many other counties in Zhejiang province, but up to the early 1990s only 80 percent of the primary school graduates could enter local public junior high schools, and fewer than 30 percent of the junior high students could get into public senior high schools. Residents had to send their children to an adjacent county to continue their secondary education, inflating the size of classes to as many as 80 children, and the teachers of those classes took in as many as 30 students for room and board in their apartments. It cost thousands for parents to pay for room, board, tuition, and fees. To stop funds flowing to other counties, the county government adopted a policy of ‘‘opening multiple channels to provide education of many forms’’ to its residents, encouraging private education by giving preferential treatment in land approval and providing loans to owners who had difficulty amassing enough funds. With this encouragement, peasants, business owners, retired teachers, government officials, and democratic parties together invested over 100 million yuan in less than four years setting up private schools that employed over 100 teachers from around the country. The problem of school shortage was solved for thousands of children there (Jin Wenbin, 1996). What happened in this particular county is not unique: In the county I visited, township residents and peasants build private schools to provide their children an opportunity for secondary education. Secondary schools in rural and township areas have declined in number since the 1980s, when high schools were closed or merged; in a dramatic reversal of the universal admission of the pre-reform era, students now have to pass vigorous examinations in order to attend secondary schools. The change to fewer schools, usually concentrated in county or

Ordinary Private Schools

71

rural townships, also forced rural children to travel long distances and pay for room and board, which the peasants could not afford. Similarly, private primary schools are in demand, as peasants could not afford the fees charged by local public schools. The following detailed account of ordinary schools reveals the features and characteristics of these ordinary private schools. URBAN/TOWNSHIP ORDINARY PRIVATE SCHOOLS These schools are located in urban cities, counties, or rural townships. Generally, they offer senior high school education, while some also operate a junior high school section. They fill a big gap in the provision of secondary education in China. Founders Founders are a diverse group, which includes: Alumni Associations, Democratic Parties, and Conscientious Citizens. One group of founders were alumni of private schools they had attended at a young age. Deeply influenced by the organizational culture of their private school, they continue to feel a strong respect for the teachers and principals who taught them long ago. When China became more open, alumni from all over the world came back for reunions. They shared their memories of school and eventually came to the decision that to open a school similar to the one they attended would be the best way to memorialize their past teachers and principals. Democratic parties have been among the most active in setting up ordinary schools. China has nine democratic parties, which are usually formed of intellectuals sharing similar interests and backgrounds. Although they have limited political power under the communist dictatorship and are used mostly as decorative objects, they see running schools as a positive way to contribute to the society. Conscientious citizens have also pooled funds to set up private schools for students who are institutional pushouts (Lin, 1993a). As previously mentioned, in the early 1980s there was a consolidation of senior higher schools. The number of schools in rural areas decreased from one for every commune (now called xiang, usually with 10,000 to 100,000 in population) to three to five schools for a county of six to eight xiangs. As a result, only 60 percent to 80 percent of rural and township primary-school graduates can continue on to junior high school and even fewer can go on to senior high school. Even in well-developed cities, about 10 to 20 percent of junior high school graduates cannot go on to senior high schools. Yet at fifteen or sixteen, they are still too young to join the work force. Idling on the street, some join street gangs and get into trouble. Rural children of high academic achievement also find

72

Profiles and Characteristics

themselves unable to attend secondary schools because of the high cost and distance. As a response to this situation, democratic parties and conscientious citizens joined forces to set up low-fee secondary schools for these children. Retired Teachers and Administrators. In China the retirement age for teachers and school administrators is set at 50–55 for women and 60 for men. At this age, they are still energetic or even at the peak of their careers. Experienced and accomplished, they enjoy enormous respect from the society. Personally, many suffered during the Cultural Revolution and spent the best years of their lives participating in one mass political campaign after another (Lin, 1991, 1993). Only during the reform era were they able to concentrate on their career and be recognized for their professional achievement. Thus, life after retirement gave rise to a sense of loss and worthlessness. To enrich their lives and also to supplement their retirement income, which was being quickly eaten away by inflation, they gathered their life savings and set up their own schools. Such schools are usually started with the rental of a few classrooms and the purchase of some necessary equipment in advance. Old friends are invited to sit on the board of directors or hired as consultants to give advice. Catering to the salaried class, tuition ranges from 500 to 1500 yuan a year. The retired teachers also make use of the relationship network they have built over the years to recruit students and hire teachers. Teachers’ pay is hourly or by the course. Lacking the support of large corporations and relying solely on tuition and fees, these schools constantly struggle for survival, some owing heavy debts. Ordinary Public Schools and Social Organizations. Ordinary public schools, aiming to generate revenue, have also opened their own ‘‘private’’ affiliated schools and admit fee-paying students to study side by side with the nonpaying students. Government departments, Communist cadre training schools, colleges, and universities also participate in the trend to generate income. Many of these schools are set up in the form of buxiban, namely, as remedial or cram classes for those who could not pass the University Entrance Exam or who want to be better prepared than others in the next competition. Some of these schools are open only in the evenings or during the weekends. Business Entrepreneurs. These people invest in education out of diverse motivations. Some donate money with the desire to contribute to the educational undertaking; some want to use the school to boost personal reputation, or to advertise their products, or to get close to local political and economic elites. I visited a secondary school founded by an entrepreneur in a county township. The businessman put up 6 million yuan to build the school and handed it to the government for management. As a return, he received a title as the ‘‘county head’s assistant’’ and was privileged to sit and travel with the county head. The visibility gave him a boost in credibility, and taking advantage of this, he set up an investment trust to pool money for risky investment. He succeeded in attracting a huge crowd but failed eventually to pay out the high interest he promised. This caused an intense conflict involving hundreds of people, and as

Ordinary Private Schools

73

a result the county government adopted a retrenchment policy that placed restrictions on private citizens opening new private schools in the county. Vocational and technical schools are also set up by entrepreneurs for the booming urban and rural industrial enterprises. Some draw urban and township students in crowds, expand quickly, and eventually become franchises, renting classrooms from local schools and contracting the schools out to individuals while the owner collects commissions. Tuition and Fees Fees charged by urban/township ordinary schools range from 500 to 2,000 yuan a year. Some charge as much as 4,000 yuan a term and 8,000 yuan a year, depending on where the school is located and whether or not room and board are provided. In general, schools in major cities charge higher fees, which decrease in smaller cities and go down even further in county townships. The fees charged closely correlate with the ability of the local residents to afford them. Some cities and counties have imposed limits on the fees that ordinary private schools can charge. Shanghai in 1994 set a fee standard at 600, 800, and 1,000 yuan per term (there are two terms a year), respectively, for private primary, junior high, and senior high schools. This limit was intended to ensure that working-class families would have access to private schools in the city. The policy seems to have served its purpose: In a private high school in Shanghai, parents were mostly salaried class: 37% were workers, 31% intellectuals, 6.5% senior-level intellectuals, and 25.5% business and government officials (Zhu Shifeng, 1994, 24). The research revealed that 10% of the parents felt this range of fees was not expensive, 60% felt it bearable, and the other 30% considered it a bit expensive, but expressed a willingness to save on their food and clothing in order to give their children a better education. Despite the imposed limit on tuition, the six elite schools I visited in Shanghai charge far more than the set limits, and in fact the fees they charge are similar to those charged by elite schools in other regions. Ordinary schools have complained that fee standards set by some local governments are so low that the schools are allowed only to survive but not to expand and develop. They call for the right to decide themselves what to charge, according to the needs of the school. It has to be pointed out that not all cities and county townships have imposed a limit on tuition and fees. Most leave the parents to decide whether they can afford a particular school or want to make the investment. Curriculum Curricula offered by ordinary urban/township private schools usually contain the following:

74

Profiles and Characteristics

1. Core subjects: Chinese, math, and English. 2. Subjects according to the tracks students are in. For example, social science track students will study history, geography, and political science; and science track students will take chemistry, physics, and biology. 3. Specialized vocational skills, which vary according to schools. The most popular are hotel service, driving, cooking, computer typing, and secretarial skills. 4. Moral and political education, physical labor, physical education, and extracurricular activities. 5. Personal skills, such as speech and public mannerisms, conflict resolution skills, skills to maintain self-confidence, and the like. Depending on the nature of the school, the proportions of these subjects in the curriculum vary.

Extracurricular activities are organized mainly to enrich student life. Athletic teams and hobby groups are organized, but these activities do not comprise the main part of the school’s curriculum. In fact, they are often replaced to make room for academic subject learning. Most of the urban township private schools cannot afford to teach piano or other musical courses. The students have fewer opportunities to learn computer science, as some schools have few or no computers. Some schools have only a blackboard, tables, and chairs in the classrooms to provide the minimum requirement for teaching. Teaching and Learning Lecturing is the dominant teaching method, and learning centers around the standard textbooks. The traditional mode of learning is adopted: Students are required to review lessons before class, take notes and answer questions from teachers during the class, and review the notes and do homework in the evenings. There are usually seven classes during the day, and two hours in the evening are reserved for self-study and the completion of homework assignments. Principals I interviewed also stressed that they taught students to study independently and solve problems creatively. The schools follow the government’s requirements closely by teaching the designated curriculum and adopting the content, pace, schedule, and evaluation methods suggested in the teaching guidelines. If the curriculum is ever changed, it is usually altered by adding supplementary materials to enhance the understanding of the state curriculum. Sometimes, non-core subjects are replaced by subjects tested in the University Entrance Exam. For example, a school I visited often canceled physical education and political study classes to make room for Chinese and history classes. In the half a dozen schools I visited, principals noted that students are generally well-motivated; also, the poorer the students’ families are, the harder the students work. They know how difficult it is for their parents to pay the

Ordinary Private Schools

75

tuition, and they treasure the second opportunity they have to learn. Yet, the principals also experience great difficulty in handling adolescents with poor habits and low motivation to learn. Some students had been forced to enroll in the private schools by their parents and had no motivation to learn. Some were distracted from their studies and broke school rules by dating inside and outside the campus. Principals noted to me that they find it very difficult to transform students who are already strongly influenced by negative forces in the society. Class size averages 40 to 70 students, and attention to individual students is limited, while the learning process itself depends largely on the students themselves. The teachers, most of whom work part-time, usually leave school right after they finish their classes. They are paid for each class period they teach and have rather limited supervision responsibilities. Ordinary schools also hire a number of full-time teachers whose main responsibility is to supervise the students’ daily life and provide coaching in the evenings. Discipline and moral behavior also fall within the realm of their responsibility. Part-time teachers from public schools are given a transportation allowance if the school does not have a van transporting them. Compared with elite schools, the ordinary schools are not able to build a ‘‘balanced’’ teaching force. Most of the teachers are part-time middle-aged teachers or retired teachers who take up teaching in these schools chiefly to earn extra income. The schools have great difficulty attracting young and capable teachers, as they cannot afford to provide them such benefits as pensions, medical care, or housing. Thus, teacher turnover is frequent, and the ages of teachers tend to be high.

Equipment and Facilities Most of these schools have only basic equipment for operation, such as tables, chairs, chalk, and a blackboard. The great majority rent from public schools or government organizations while only a small number of schools have their own buildings after years of development. The schools have difficulty offering science laboratory lessons since they lack the required facilities; they sometimes use offices and sparsely furnished residential housing for laboratories, and the students take turns using the equipment. Physical education classes and extracurricular athletic activities are held on public school sports grounds if possible. Some schools have only a basketball rack and a couple of table-tennis tables made of brick for physical education classes. Dormitories are usually crowded with seven to eight students sharing a small room. The students cook for themselves or eat in a student canteen. Some schools have no reading materials except standardized textbooks. The schools, however, do endure pressures similar to those of the elite private schools as they also are held directly accountable by the parents.

76

Profiles and Characteristics

RURAL PRIVATE SCHOOLS Rural private schools (called rural schools hereafter) have seldom been mentioned in the media and are paid scant attention in scholars’ research papers. So far there is no official report on the number of such schools in the country. Chinese researchers have traditionally shown much less interest in rural education than in urban and higher education, as the former is deemed less important and less prestigious than the latter. In my own estimation, the number of rural schools may be in the thousands or even tens of thousands, and it is highly likely that they are not even reported to the higher levels of government departments. Problems with Rural Public Schools Rural public schools have been treated as second-class schools under the CCP government (Lin, 1991). Called minban schools or people-run schools, they receive minimal financial support from the central government and have to rely on local governments and fees collected from parents to survive. Teachers are usually local high school graduates who have received little or no teacher training. They earn a meager salary of 100–200 yuan a month, while about half of the teachers, called ‘‘daike teachers,’’ are substitute teachers who earn as little as 60 yuan a month. This amount, though low, helps rural families who are often cash-strapped, having to rely on raising pigs or growing vegetables to raise the money to buy daily necessities. Teaching is therefore seen as a desirable job, and local officials have been known to use their power to place family members and relatives in teaching positions regardless of their lack of educational credentials. Some teachers cannot even read the textbooks, let alone teach them. There were reports of teachers who have read a whole textbook to the students in one day and did not know what else to do afterwards. Rural public schools feature poor learning conditions: Schools are housed in run-down buildings; sports grounds and equipment are lacking, and lab facilities for scientific experiments and audiovisual equipment for learning foreign languages are out of the question. In finance, schools have to pinch pennies when purchasing papers, pencils, and chalk. Most classrooms are dimly lit, and in winter, cold wind gushes in while students shiver in thin clothes. Some schools are so poor they cannot even afford to buy a standard flagpole for raising the national flag. A standard pole five meters high could cost 95 yuan, and some schools simply do not have the money (Li Zhaoyang, 1994). In some schools, when chalk runs out the teachers have to use water to write on the blackboard. To increase revenue, schools have to resort to charging parents all kinds of fees, such as fees for examination papers, additional reading materials, school uniforms, building maintenance, electricity, school renovation, life insurance, textbooks, assignment books, and so on. Parents are often given no choice but to pay, since the fees are included in the tuition. Some schools would bar chil-

Ordinary Private Schools

77

dren from school or humiliate them publicly if the parents should fail to come up with the money. Throughout the term, a stream of fees may be demanded, and parents have to pay them without question. In one village I visited, the local public school even demanded that the students hand in rice as a fee for certain activities. The children, not daring to ask their parents, stole the rice and got caught by the parents. The villagers were tremendously upset. To put this in context, a large number of rural families are still in deep poverty: They have only a small plot of land to cultivate, and the whole family relies on this plot as a source of food. To them, the school was not only dipping into their pockets but digging into their cooking pots. No wonder the peasants were infuriated. Furthermore, although the government’s birth-control policy is very effective in large cities, where most families have only one child, in rural areas it is common for families to have three or four children. Peasant women hide in the mountains or stay with a relative before a second or a third child is born, or they pay a hefty fine even if it costs their life’s savings. The fees demanded by public schools sometime even surpass such a family’s annual income. China’s long tradition of valuing education has deep roots in rural areas, where parents are willing to sacrifice to give their children an opportunity to learn. Further, for millions of Chinese peasants, opportunities for social mobility remain very restricted and admission to a university represents the most important channel by which they can gain upward mobility. Despite the difficulties they face in making a living, parents still harbor a strong desire for their children to go on to higher education. Minimally, the parents wish their children to become literate so that they will not be cheated when making deals in the open market. On the walls of many village houses, I saw words such as ‘‘If we do not learn, we will not be able to root out poverty; if we do not learn, we will not be able to maintain our prosperity.’’ Peasants are also dissatisfied with the quality of local public schools. In one village, I was told that a teacher was the wife of a government official. The teacher goes to school only after the school bell rings, and by the time she has fed all her pigs and closed the doors of her house to arrive at the school, half the class time is over. This teacher was put into the school because of her husband’s position. In fact, she cannot even write her own name properly. The villagers were proud of their long history of having talented people passing the imperial exam and serving in high government positions. However, with the decline of teaching quality in public schools, they have not had students passing the University Entrance Exam since the 1980s. School Founders Rural private schools are founded mainly by villagers. In the county I visited in 1993, there were four private secondary schools and no private primary schools because the county officials refused to approve them for fear they could

78

Profiles and Characteristics

be blamed for having failed to implement the Law of Nine-Year Compulsory Education. However, the villagers were determined, and by 1995 when I visited the county again, in just one xiang there were four private primary schools, and another six were to be opened that same year. In one school, the village head Chen had around ten grandchildren and was desperate to find the money to pay the fees demanded by the public school. Knowing that many fellow villagers were in the same boat, he called on several village heads in the adjacent area, and they decided to pool their money to build a low-fee school. The village heads agreed to contribute a sum from the ‘‘social welfare fund’’ that villagers put together to help the poor and the sick, and each household had to donate 10 yuan per head. Village head Chen directly oversaw all the affairs of school construction and made sure each household sent in its share. Within weeks, a school was built. Later on, when more classrooms were needed, a whole-village meeting was called and the villagers set out the next day to make their own bricks and purchased the necessary materials for construction. ‘‘We do not have to write reports and wait for the government’s approval, which could take years,’’ Chen said. Chen had been a salesman before he retired to his village. Having traveled all over the country he knew too well that without education a person has no future in today’s society. In his late sixties, he is still attending to the daily administrative affairs in the school, with no pay. He called on a childhood friend who had worked for decades as a principal in a remote province to come back and take charge of the school’s academic affair. The principal was in his seventies and had heart problems. He planned to work until he was no longer able, and they worried over who would be able to succeed them. The school was very successful, for within two years nearly all the students in the nearby public school had transferred to this school, which has had to keep on adding new buildings. Another school was set up in a village by all the 400 villagers working together overnight before local government officials came to pull it down the next day (because the school was being built without permission). ‘‘Adults and children, young and old, as long as they can carry a brick, all came to help,’’ the villagers said, describing the villagers’ determination to have their own schools. The school was funded by a local businessman who himself also felt the extreme difficulty of paying fees to public schools. He had five children and knew how difficult it was for other villagers. He and his village pinned their hope on this school for enabling their children to continue their education. The school eventually survived and had about 200 students when I visited in 1996 and 1997. Private entrepreneurs also played a part. In a village in Guangdong province, a man amassed a small fortune from investing in mining. In 1984 he opened a school to 32 children, charging no fees. Today, all the children in his village go to his school free of charge for the first two years and they pay only minimal fees after that. The school has become the largest one in the local area, enrolling 500 students, surpassing the number in the local public schools. Quick expansion

Ordinary Private Schools

79

brought a shortage of rooms, and so the founder moved out of his own threestorey building to make room for teachers to live there. The school also admits handicapped children and ‘‘bad’’ students expelled by public schools. By 1996, the school had graduated 283 students, all of whom continued on to secondary school (Yun Xun, 1996, 27). There have also been reports that some owners set their eyes only on making money out of private schools. They are more concerned with collecting and transferring the tuition and fees into their own savings accounts than with spending any on school improvement. Schools have been closed down because of low quality and because of funds drying up after a few years. Tuition and Fees The tuition and fees charged by rural private schools tend to be low and affordable for most peasant families. The Guomin Middle School in Nanle county, Henan province, charged each boarding student 200 yuan a term; the private Kuang Liangzhi Junior High School in Bazhong county, Sichuan province, charged only 70 yuan per student (Zhu Yimin, 1994, 39–42). The Shangshu Township Private Senior High Schools in Anji county, Zhejiang province, charged the following amount per year: in 1984, 60 yuan; in 1985, 150 yuan; in the second half of 1989, 200 yuan; in the second half of 1992, 300 yuan; and in the second half of 1993, 500 yuan. Schools I visited charge from 100 to 150 yuan per term for primary students and 300 to 500 yuan for secondary students. Scale and Scope of Development The province in which I visited rural private schools, Guangxi, was reported to have a total of 225 private primary and secondary schools enrolling 49,300 students in 1996. According to Peng Guangrong, in the academic year of 1994– 1995, the province had 8,537,216 students (aged 7–15), while only 7,060,845 or 82.7 percent were in schools. Private schools filled in the gap and prevented young people from becoming illiterates. In the province’s Bobai county, which has a long tradition of private education, 58 private schools enrolled a total of 8,144 students, or 13.5 percent of all primary school students and 3 percent of all junior high school students. The author maintained that although private schools were not a major provider of education, without them thousands of students would have no schools to go (Peng Guangrong, 1996, 14). Rural private schools take the students’ condition into consideration; for example, they allow students short of cash to use rice or wheat, vegetables, or fruits as a substitute for tuition payment. Some schools reduce their fees for especially poor students. Located where the students live, they make school convenient for students who otherwise would have to cross rivers on foot or

80

Profiles and Characteristics

walk for kilometers. Girls have been kept at home because of the distance, I was told. The rural private schools I visited, in fact, took in more girls than boys, an interesting phenomenon worth looking into.

Teaching and Learning Salaries for teachers are rather low. As two teachers remarked to me, they make enough to buy rice, but not enough to buy vegetables and meat. The teachers are mostly high school graduates, who in the local region are considered the best educated people. Students, I was told, tend to study very hard, for they know how difficult it is for their parents to gather the money to send them to schools. The classrooms I observed were furnished with only tables and chairs, which were squeezed together so that 50 to 70 students can crowd into a 40-square-meter room. But the tables were all piled up with textbooks on various subjects. I saw students who stayed in school to study after the school day was over. In one school I visited, the students’ average scores in a countywide midterm exam surpassed those of a local public school, averaging 89 percent out of 100 for the two main subjects—Chinese and math—while the adjacent public school averaged 60 percent. Discipline is another special feature of rural private schools. On my trip, villagers remarked to me that private school students behaved much better than local public school students. They were polite to teachers and villagers, worked much harder, and had much better exam results. I was told about one local private school that had a very good reputation and had just constructed a new campus with 600 students in 1997. Unfortunately, I tried twice to visit the school, but twice it was closed for a holiday. In curriculum, rural private schools adhere to the national curriculum and teach according to the guidelines compiled by the State Education Commission. Teaching methods are comprised of traditional lecturing and rote learning. But the schools add vocational contents to their curriculum, for example, courses on agricultural planting, domestic animal care, sewing, repair of electronic machines, and so on. The schools also operate workshops and vegetable gardens to generate revenue. Teachers in general have received no professional training. In Liyun county in Guangxi province, 57 teachers or 85 percent of the teachers teaching in the 34 private schools were only junior high school graduates; none had received any kind of teacher training. In some schools poor quality had led to students dropping out. A junior school in Chongzuo county, for example, had 113 students in 1992; three years later, all of them had left (Peng Guangrong, 1996, 15).

Ordinary Private Schools

81

Equipment and Facilities Typically, rural private schools were set up with very limited funds. While some have their own buildings, others rent or hold classes in run-down buildings. Some also have to rent tables and chairs, while in others students have been asked to carry their own tables and chairs to school. Most schools do not have any teaching equipment and facilities for scientific experiments and learning foreign languages. Sports facilities are rare. Since the schools rely on tuition to survive, they seldom have any extra money to improve their teaching conditions. SINGLE-SEX SCHOOLS Single-sex schools comprise another type of ordinary private school. Their number was reported to reach nearly 100 throughout the country in 1993 (Yian Jie, 1993). The number must be much higher today, as new all-girl schools continue to be opened. In 1996, the first private all-girl school in Beijing was opened by a famous scholar. The school attempted to restore the tradition of single-sex education in Beijing, which in the early part of the 20th century was the main type of school for girls. That year the school had fewer than 200 students. In 1999, the school had expanded to have 800 students, and when I visited, an arts building was under construction. In all, the country had five allgirl regular high schools in 1999, four of them private. Many dozens are applying for approval. The number of vocational schools, however, is in the hundreds. Single-sex schools include comprehensive regular all-girl high schools, allgirl vocational high schools, and postsecondary vocational training colleges for young women. Some are founded by private citizens or social organizations; others are set up by the government. In 1993, 1995, and 1996 I visited seven of these schools, two of which were public schools, three were private general and vocational schools, and two were colleges operated by women’s organizations. They all posted in prominent places mottoes such as educating girls to be ‘‘independent, confident, with self-strength and self-respect.’’ These schools claim to defy the cultural tradition of ‘‘male superiority and female inferiority’’ and aim at raising the consciousness and improving the personal and intellectual qualities of girls. Their teaching and learning cater to female students’ characteristics, and they train students to grasp opportunities in the booming market economy in China. Single-sex education reappeared in China after the economic reform started. Single-sex schools teach skills and knowledge needed in the new market economy; they focus on building women’s strength and improving their qualities; They probe for ways that teach to the girls’ characteristics. Parents’ acceptance of all-girl schools has increased. In urban China today, with only one child per

82

Profiles and Characteristics

family, parents are worried about the new openness in sex culture; they are eager for their daughters to learn skills that will make them more employable. Meanwhile, feminist scholars argue actively for a different type of thinking and methods for girls’ learning. In fact, a very famous feminist scholar in China, Li Xiao-jiang, set up her own international women’s college in Jinan city. Private business entrepreneurs, sensing the need in the society and a potential profit, are also setting up all-girl schools and recruit well-known local educators and administrators to work in them. The first all-girl school in post–Mao China is the Shanghai No. 3 All Girl School, which is a public school with a long history. Before 1949, it was an all-girl school attended by well-known figures such as Song Qingling, the wife of Sun Yet-sun. During the 1960s, it was turned into a co-ed school. After China reopened its door to foreign visitors, alumni came back to visit the school and strongly urged the government to restore the school from a co-ed school into an all-girls school. The school became an all-girl school again in 1983. Private all-girl education appeared mainly after 1992, along with other types of private schools. The reappearance had four reasons: (1) parents’ wish to have a safe environment for their daughters; (2) the need for continuing education for young girls who are not accepted by senior high schools due to the girls’ low exam scores; (3) a great increase in jobs in China’s service sector; and (4) difficulty for all students, especially girls, in passing the National University Entrance Exam. Single-sex schools for girls have appeared in cities as well as in the countryside, in developed as well as in underdeveloped areas of the country. In Ningxia province, all-girl schools were opened for Hui minority students (Muslims in China) whose parents refused to let them go to co-ed schools. The schools taught not only literacy and arithmetic but also skills that helped them to make money. The schools were so effective (many women make more money than men after mastering skills needed by the local economy) that parents rushed to send their daughters into the all-girl schools. An all-girl vocational and regular school I visited was set up by a businessman in international trade. In order to draw students for the school, he tried to recruit a retired principal from a public school. The offer was 50,000 yuan in annual salary, a spacious apartment, and a car for her use. Under the leadership of this principal, the school was very successful. The school charged students 8,000 yuan a year in tuition and fees and in 1996 had an enrollment of 400 students. Parents, belonging mostly to the latent middle class, were teachers, government officials, taxi drivers, small business owners, and so on. A conversation with a school principal in a private all-girl vocational high school revealed her profound philosophical thinking and her skillful management of the school. Instead of teaching students the ‘‘girls’ stuff,’’ as some schools do, they taught students to wrestle, to drive, to use computers skillfully, and to speak English fluently. They arranged the curriculum in a way that allows the girls to be confident about their abilities and be more employable in the very competitive job market, while also giving them the option of heading toward higher education.

Ordinary Private Schools

83

Co-education has been argued to promote positive social development for students. Co-ed high schools are generally believed to provide a more natural social environment to prepare adolescents to take their place in a society of men and women than do single-sex schools (Marsh, 1989). Co-education, however, has not proved to be a panacea for overcoming gender differences. Because of ideology that operates outside the educational system and manifests itself within the social structure, gender and class differentiation is maintained (Marsh, 1989). In mixed classrooms, girls also risk being put down by boys. In fact, many studies confirmed that co-ed schools transmit and reinforce societal biases against women (Sadker and Sadker, 1994; Biklen and Pollard, 1993; Delamont, 1990; Klein, 1988; LaFrance, 1985; Lever, 1976). In China in a school, the principal remarked to me that ‘‘girls are naturally poor in science and math’’ and therefore he streamed the girls into the social science track and boys into the science track. His view is widely held among principals and teachers, who give little thought to the fact that girls may be shortchanged in public school by gender discrimination. In all-girl schools, in contrast, girls are found to have higher academic achievement, develop more leadership skills and be more self-confident, because they are away from societal pressure on girls to conform to male-oriented interaction patterns, have positive role models for their development, and are given opportunities to make decisions and be self-assertive (Bauch, 1988). International studies begun in the 1960s across a variety of cultures, including the United States, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and Thailand, confirmed that students in single-sex schools consistently outperform students in co-ed schools in mathematics, science, and reading ability (Bauch, 1988; Jimenez and Lockheed, 1989; Heyward, 1995). My visit to three private all-girl schools and four public all-girl schools largely confirmed the findings in the international studies. I was informed that the girls, while studying in public co-ed schools, would not kneel and lie on the floor for shooting lessons in physical training classes, for fear of being scorned by the boys and looking unfeminine. In the single-sex school, they shed the pressures and are willing to take part in all kinds of activities. The schools encourage cooperative learning among girls and also arrange for girls to take turns in assuming leadership roles. They are urged to divert their attention from chasing fashion and focusing too much on their looks. A school in the northeastern Dalian City, for example, invited accomplished females to tell their stories to the students, and the principal herself has taught several courses on how to build confidence and set goals in life. All the schools claim to develop in students ‘‘four selves’’: self-confidence, self-respect, self-strength, and self-independence. These are words said by the wife of former premier Zhou Enlai, Deng Yingchao. She urged Chinese women to shed the feudal influence and become new women under socialism. The allgirl schools spend a significant amount of time on educating the girls to have ‘‘four selves.’’

84

Profiles and Characteristics

The students come mainly from middle-class families or a ‘‘latent middle class’’ background. The parents earn high salaries or one parent is doing business. The fees charged are in the middle level. Some parents are intellectuals who wish their daughters to focus on learning, not having to compete with boys or be bothered by adolescent love affairs. Some mothers had attended all-girl schools before and enjoyed the experience; when the choice came up, they opted for the same experience for their daughters. Vocational all-girl schools focus on practical skills such as fashion design, international trade, restaurant work, computer skills, and accounting. The school environs tend to be neat and clean, as the students have been trained to take good care of themselves. Many girls relied on their parents to do chores for them before they entered the school; in the school environment, the collective expectation helps many to change their habits. They are given the responsibility of organizing extracurricular activities. Teachers work mostly part time, hired from adjacent public schools and universities. Some full-time staff are hired to oversee students’ daily life and learning in the evenings. The students stay in school during the week and go home during the weekend. The principals are paid much more than the teachers, and the bonus at year’s end can exceed a whole year’s salary. The reappearance of all-girl schools may have an impact on gender equality in school and implications for co-education. Research on all-girl schools may lead to new teaching approaches and alternative modes of school organization. To take a closer look into these schools would require a researcher to look further into the dynamics of the schools, such as teacher-student relationships, gender identity formation, and students’ socialization experience. ARTS SCHOOLS AND OTHER SCHOOLS There arose in recent years many private arts schools. The founders include retired artists, famous directors, movie stars, poets, businessmen, and private citizens. Li Liping, a movie star, set up her own acting school in 1995. Ballet stars who tend to retire at a young age open schools to continue the career they love. Famous movie directors such as Xue Jin also set up their own training schools. Performers of all types, such as those specialized in Peking opera, ballet, and film directing, open their own schools. A school I visited planned to place their students in bars and restaurants during the course of the program so that students could practice their skills as well as make some money for themselves and for the school. Others invite famous actors or actresses to the school to show students how to perform. There are also people who look at the needs of the market and set up schools for people to learn such things as photography. As living conditions improve, there is a great demand for professional photographic services. Not only do brides and grooms today pay thousands for a memorable set of photos, but those who have been married for years are also going to professional photographers

Ordinary Private Schools

85

to ‘‘chase back their youth.’’ With skillful makeup, old and young, ugly or normal-looking people all turn out to look handsome and beautiful. Business has been so good that private schools catering to earnest learners in this skill are set up in many places. In recent years, interior decoration has also become a big business, as Chinese families are willing to invest heavily on making their homes beautiful and comfortable. As well, businesses are relying more and more on advertising to sell their products; thus special schools are set up to teach interior design and advertising. Schools teaching fashion design and sewing are also doing good business. Droves of schools have appeared teaching people how to profit from the stock market, and medical schools teaching traditional medicine and run by individual citizens number in the hundreds. CONCLUSION In sum, ordinary private schools open doors to the salaried class in urban areas and to peasants with low incomes or living in poverty in the rural areas. Urban and township private secondary schools offer a second chance to students who are kept out of senior high schools. Young people gain the opportunity to take the National University Entrance Exam and to receive training for employment opportunities. Rural private schools, in my observation, open doors to the people who need education the most. They are in fact helping the government to implement the law requiring nine years of compulsory education. Without them, many children would have no schools to go. All-girl schools provide an option for parents and open up alternatives for improving girls’ academic learning and self-confidence. In general, all-girl schools provide a positive environment for development of gender identity and academic learning. Overall, ordinary private schools have problems such as a shortage of funding and poor equipment and facilities, but these problems do not overshadow the benefits they provide for Chinese society.

6

Private Universities The first part of this chapter briefly reviews the history of private higher education in contemporary China; it then focuses on dilemmas troubling public universities and the tremendous social demand for higher education. The body of the chapter outlines the characteristics of private universities. HISTORY, CONTEXT, AND DEMAND FOR HIGHER EDUCATION Up to 1949 higher education in China was mainly private. Private universities in contemporary China appeared after the Opium War (1840), founded by foreign churches, individual citizens, and social groups. Foreign missionaries, the first group to open academies, later on expanded them into universities. Starting in 1850, over ten academies were built in major cities such as Shanghai and Beijing. By 1917, 80 percent of the country’s university students were studying in universities run by church groups from the United States or Great Britain. By the end of the 1940s there were 21 church-run universities in the country. They bore the marks of cultural imperialism but also facilitated the higher education development of China. The first private universities founded by Chinese citizens, the China Public School and the Fudan Public School in Shanghai, opened in 1905. In the 1920s more universities were set up by patriotic national capitalists; the number grew so fast that the government had to issue ‘‘rules for private universities and specialized schools’’ to temper the heat. By 1931 there existed 38 private universities and specialized institutions in the country, including the very famous

88

Profiles and Characteristics

Xiamen University, Fudan University, Nankai University, Xiehe Medical College, Jinglin All-Women College, and Lingnan University. After the ChinaJapan War in 1945, 20 more universities were added; by the time the CCP took over in 1949, 93 of the 223 universities over which the communist government had taken control were private universities. In 1951–1952, higher education in China underwent total reconstruction. In 1951, the CCP government took control of all foreign-subsidized church-run universities and converted them into state-controlled public institutions; in 1952, the government proceeded to rein in other private universities and placed them all under state control. Private higher education had completely disappeared from China by 1955. Following the Soviet model, comprehensive universities were divided into specialized colleges, such as medical colleges, teacher education colleges, mechanical engineering colleges, forestry colleges, and agricultural colleges all of which became independent systems. Regular universities are categorized into key universities and ordinary universities. Since the 1950s, they have been administered by various authorities, specifically, 35 by the Ministry of Education, 325 by the 63 central ministries of the State Council, and 720 by governments at the municipal and provincial levels. About 100 universities belonged to the category of ‘‘key universities,’’ while the rest were ‘‘ordinary’’ universities. Higher education under CCP control has experienced many big swings. From the 1950s to the year 1966, when the Cultural Revolution erupted, students were accepted into colleges and universities based on scores in the annual National University Entrance Exam. However, during the peak of the Cultural Revolution, universities in the entire country were closed down for two years (1966–1968). It was not until 1972 that universities reopened to admit students. This time, admission was based on the recommendation of workers and peasants, who evaluated the candidates’ eligibility based on their political performance and behavior in the productive labor process. Academic excellence was denounced and intellectuals were persecuted and defamed. In 1977, universities returned to order, and once again the University Entrance Exam was restored. The economic reform taking place in the country after 1978 called for universities to shift from serving the planned economy to training for wanted expertise and producing diverse practical talents to serve the modernization of the country. However, the pace of development for public universities has been slow. In 1980, the country had a total of 675 universities, enrolling around 1.5 million students. The number increased throughout the 1980s as the once-closed universities were reopened and new ones were constructed to meet social demands. However, despite the increase, only half a million of the 20 million applicants were admitted each year. In the 1990s, admission has increased to about 900,000 students per year, but still it is far from meeting the needs of the society. In 1996, the country had 1,032 regular (four-year) higher learning institutions enrolling 5.83 million students. Altogether, during the 20 years from

Private Universities

89

1977 to 1996, about 7.66 million university students were graduated, representing only 3.4 percent of the 18–24 age group. To view this in a comparative lens, China has only 1,175 public universities for its 1.2 billion people as of 1993, whereas Japan in 1985 had 890 universities for its 120 million people. By this measure China needs to have nearly 10,000 universities to catch up with Japan (Xu Jingyi, 1993, 20). Fierce competition for university seats creates an ‘‘examination hell’’ in public schools. There have been studies about examination hell in Japan and South Korea (Kwak, 1991; Ogura, 1987; Zeng, 1996); the one experienced by the Chinese students is quite similar, only more torturous (Lin and Chen, 1995). Japanese universities admit 30 percent of the high school graduates. Comparing China’s 3.4 percent rate of admission, it is not hard to imagine how fierce the competition is. To rely only on the government, which is already under a heavy burden providing funding for the existing universities, might mean decades for China to meet the demands of society. The difficulty of rapid expansion of higher education by the government is obvious. In the 1990s, training a university student costs about 8,000–10,000 yuan a year. As we have discussed, the government is hardly able to shoulder this load, let alone a dramatic expansion and increase in investment. To fulfill the Chinese government’s goals that in the decade before the year 2010 the economy will continue to grow at high speed, science and technology will experience rapid development, and the society will develop all around, China will need a large number of people who are highly trained. The current labor force also needs a tremendous investment in retraining in higher-level skills. This heavy task involves the training of over a hundred million people (Chen Baoyu, 1997, 4). Young and middle-aged people who have passed the age of 25 for admission to regular universities have turned to informal and adult education for higher learning. Various forms of adult education, such as informal and nonformal education, vocational and technical education, distance education, and TV universities, have grown to meet this social demand. The government-sponsored Central Broadcasting and Television University, formed in 1979, takes in onthe-job students from all walks of life and had graduated in total 1.05 million students by 1992. The number of Workers’ Universities and Workers’ Part-Time Universities reached 952 in 1986, enrolling 340,000 students. Meanwhile, correspondence universities and evening universities enrolled more than half a million students in 1988 (Yan Lankun, 1992). The most significant development has been in vocational education at the secondary level. In 1980, vocational education was restored after a decade-long closure during the Cultural Revolution. In 1984, the country had 2,138 vocational high schools; in 1988, vocational agricultural schools alone had reached 7,538, with 2.34 million students in school (Yan Lankun, 1992, 393). By 1996, there were 1.87 million vocational and technical schools in the country, enrolling

90

Profiles and Characteristics

10.84 million students. There were in total 10,390 general senior high schools in the country, enrolling 7.69 million students (Hu Reiwen, 1997, 4). In sum, adult higher institutions and vocational schools have answered some part of the incredible demand for higher learning. By 1997, the country had 1,138 adult higher learning institutions enrolling 2.65 million students, an increase of 59 percent from the total of 1.66 million students in 1990. CHARACTERISTICS OF STATE-CONTROLLED UNIVERSITIES The former Soviet Union has strongly influenced China’s higher education system. Following the Soviet model, as we have mentioned, the decade of the 1950s saw comprehensive universities split into independent colleges and institutes, which functioned as separate entities. Their programs were highly specific, and all programs and curriculum content were to be approved by the Ministry of Education and related government departments. Universities had little autonomy over academic affairs, finance, personnel, and construction of school buildings. Admission plans were to be based on the needs of the state-planned economy, and the assignment of students to jobs after graduation was controlled by the state up to 1996. The document issued in 1985 on ‘‘Structural Reform of China’s Educational System’’ allowed university departments to find part of their resources through engaging in business activities or through enrolling a certain number of students outside the admission quota set by the government. But the increase in autonomy was far from significant. According to Yang Deguang (1993), public universities in China have several problems. First, the government has maintained control of all activities in universities, restricting their ability to improve their efficiency and management; as a result, universities fell short by one-third to one-half of the funds needed. Second, up to the year 1993 the state government maintained the model of planned enrollment and planned job assignment, although the economy had changed profoundly. Third, under strict bureaucratic control, universities have very limited decision-making power over functions ranging from curriculum to personnel, from property management to equipment supply, from admission to program changes to job assignments. Consequently, most universities suffered from a lack of vitality and low efficiency. For example, the teacher-student ratio was only 1:5.3 and the staff-student ratio only 1:3 by 1993 (Yang Deguang, 1993, 11–12). The biggest and almost insurmountable obstacle to radical changes is that public universities function as a small society: They all have a full army of administrators, teachers, and support staff who live, work, procreate, and recreate on the university campus. Universities must provide housing, food, child care, health care, and security for their staff. They have to maintain student dormitories, canteens, grocery stores, medical clinics, banks, daycare centers,

Private Universities

91

affiliated primary and secondary schools, and so on. This ‘‘total’’ system greatly restricts the ability of universities to expand and adjust to demands in the economy. Most public universities can house only 2,000 to 4,000 students because of their complex responsibilities. Administrators have to spend a significant amount of time on nonacademic, trivial matters ranging from birth control to intervening in family disputes. In general, programs offered by universities have lagged behind the needs of the society. As Xiang Dong puts it: Our higher education system at present has these problems: The state is controlling too much, the government is controlling too much. Education is detached from economic needs, and there is a lack of a system and mechanism for universities to respond to the needs of the society. In the last few years, there have been calls to reform the higher education structure to fit in changes in the economic structure. But as a matter of fact, we have just been turning in a circle, for universities can not jump out of the palm of the government, which continue to follow the model of a state-planned economy. (Xiang Dong, 1993, 11)

Regarding centralized control over program planning, Zhang Chuting has this to say: Naturally, programs and specialties in universities should orient towards economic and social development. In our country, however, universities have neither the power to plan nor the power to approve their own programs, and the power is not even in the hands of provincial and city-level education departments. The decision over the ten-thousand programs in the country’s more than 1,000 universities concentrates in the central government—in fact, in a certain state department or actually, in the hands of a few people working in that department. It is hard to believe that this is correct and scientific, but things have been done this way for a long time, leaving universities who know most directly the needs of the society to have the least power in determining their own programs. (Zhang Chuting, 1992, 1)

Zhang Chuting held further that there was too little choice for students whose future is determined by the choices they made at the time of taking the University Entrance Exam, normally at age eighteen. Once admitted into a university, they could not change their fields of study or transfer to other departments or universities. Students must stay in a university for four years, no matter how good or how poor they are, in order to graduate. This rigid system is not conducive to the training of outstanding talents. DEVELOPMENT OF PRIVATE UNIVERSITIES It is in this context that private universities reappeared. In the early 1980s, private universities were largely evening or weekend classes or schools providing education of a remedial nature. Since the mid-1980s, private higher educa-

92

Profiles and Characteristics

tion has taken big strides, prompting the government to adopt a series of regulations governing the administration of these schools (Zhang Wen, 1994). The largest number of private universities, however, appeared only after 1992, and by 1994 over 800 private universities existed side by side with 1,075 public universities and 1,256 adult higher-learning institutions. By 1997, over 1,200 private universities existed in the country. Chinese scholars have divided the development of private universities into three phases. The first phase occurred from 1978 to 1982, when private universities took the form of tutorial classes, correspondence education, and TV universities. They allowed millions of young people to upgrade their educational qualifications. In 1982 alone, over 100 such institutions were established in close succession in Beijing, Shanghai, Harbin, Changchun, Wuhan, and Xi’an with the approval of local educational departments (Study Team, 1995). The first of these private universities, the China Social University, was founded in Beijing in 1982 by the China Talents Research Association. The university provided three years of training in practical subject areas. In 1985, the university collected 5 million yuan and constructed its own office and teaching facility. By 1993 it had developed into a full-scale university with ten departments offering studies in 20 specialty areas. That same year, it had 1,700 students attending classes at over ten sites (‘‘The First Private University in Beijing City: China Society University,’’ 1993, 37). Some higher-learning institutions during this time took the form of ‘‘magazine universities’’ or correspondence universities providing long-distance education. One such institution, started by the Shanxi Youth Magazine, drew half a million applications in the early 1980s. A large number of correspondence universities were founded by regular and adult higher-learning institutions. A colleague of mine headed a correspondence university that enrolled 15,000 students at its peak and 8,000 students at normal times. In 1981, 208 universities offered correspondence education enrolling 210,000 students. Some were evening universities, offering half-day or part-time study for young people to prepare for the National University Entrance Exam or for various social groups to enrich their cultural life. The second phase, from 1982 to 1987, was one of rapid development of private higher-learning institutions. A large number of them were formed to assist students to pass the National Self-Study Examination for Higher Learning. The self-study exam was first instituted in 1981 in three cities: Beijing, Shanghai, and Tienjin. In 1983, the National Supervision Committee was formed to oversee the self-study examination. By 1985, all the provinces except Tibet had installed the system in which examination for general courses of a program would be centrally administered, while tests on specialty subjects were administered by provinces. In 1988, the ‘‘Provisional Regulation on the Higher Education Self-Study Examination’’ was issued. By 1989, there were 97 programs for attaining bachelor’s degrees or specialty degrees. More than 10 million people took the exam, 4.7 million received a certificate for single-subject study,

Private Universities

93

410,000 people received a diploma equivalent to three years of post-secondary study, and 2,500 people received undergraduate bachelor’s degrees (Yan Lankun, 1992, 376). The self-study exam provided an alternative by which millions of young people could obtain some form of higher learning. According to regulations set by the government, people who pass the self-study exam for various required subjects shall receive a state-recognized degree. In promotion and salary increase negotiations, employing organizations must treat this degree as equal to those from formal universities. As a result, hundreds of private schools were opened to prepare students for this exam. By 1991, Beijing had over 40 such private universities, and 95% of the graduates were employed by state-run businesses or collective or foreign-owned enterprises (He Xiangdong, 1993, 7). In the third phase, 1987–1991, schools were consolidated and related laws were passed. The State Education Commission issued the Provisional Regulation on Schools Run by Social Forces. Some local governments and education administrative organs issued their own rules and also set up administrative units for these schools. In many places the number of private schools doubled. By the end of 1991, the number of private universities whose graduates received certificates through the self-study exam reached 450 (Dong Mingzhuan, 1995, 6–7). The fourth phase, from 1992 to the present, saw the appearance of the greatest number of new private universities. By 1994 there were 880 private universities in the country, with eighteen having obtained the approval of the State Education Commission to issue degrees. The number of students (including correspondence students) studying in these universities totaled about 1.45 million, forming a ratio of 1:3.2 with public university students (Dong Mingzhuan, 1995, 7). Altogether, 5 million people have gained higher-learning certificates or degrees from these institutions since the early 1980s. POLICIES AND REGULATIONS REGARDING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF PRIVATE UNIVERSITIES In response to the rapid growth of private higher-learning institutions, the government has issued a series of regulations. ‘‘The Provisional Stipulation on Establishment of Non-Governmental Higher Learning Institutions’’ was issued in 1993. Local governments of the 30 provinces, autonomous regions, and municipalities directly under the Central Government and about ten large and medium-sized cities (listed separately on the state plans) have formulated corresponding local laws and decrees or regulations. In order to implement the local governmental regulations effectively, a number of local educational departments have also drawn up implementing regulations and have collaborated with local departments of price control, industry and commerce administration, public security, and publicity in jointly formulating regulations and measures concerning private higher-learning institutions in matters related to teaching,

94

Profiles and Characteristics

financial affairs, norms for tuition fees, advertising, and seals (Study Team, 1995). These documents set requirements for founders of schools, procedures for examinations and approval by the local educational department, and the operation of schools. They stress that private institutions of higher learning must observe the state’s regulations and may not violate the four cardinal principles, that is, they must adhere to the leadership of the communist government. All the documents state that private institutions of higher learning may not be profit seeking. The tuition fees paid by the students should be used for educational purposes, guided by the principle of maintaining a balance of income and expenses with a little surplus. On principle, the norms for tuition fees should be set for NGO-sponsored schools (Study Team, 1995). The government has also set a series of requirements for a university to be approved and recognized. These requirements include: 1. The chief executives (the president and his or her deputies) should have the following attributes: at least a first degree level college education or equivalent professional qualifications; work experience in tertiary education; strong management abilities and good health; and work full-time in the new university. The institution should be equipped with departmental and/or sectional heads with at least the academic rank of associate professor. 2. A university approved by the State Education Commission must have a stable contingent of teachers with their numbers commensurate with the total enrollment of students. All commonly required obligatory courses, courses on the fundamentals of a specialty, and specialized courses should have at least one teacher with the rank of lecturer or higher; for each specialty provided there should be at least two backbone faculty members with the academic rank of associate professor or higher. 3. At least three programs (specialties) should be provided, and the total enrollment of an institution should be no less than 500, of which students studying for formal tertiary qualifications should number be no less than 300. 4. There should be permanent, independent, and relatively compact school grounds and buildings comprising classrooms, libraries, laboratories, and rooms for administrative offices and other purposes. Norms for per-student floor space in the aggregate are as follows: for an institution providing programs in the humanities and social sciences, 10 square meters; for one providing programs in science, engineering, agriculture, or medicine, 16 square meters. An institution should have space for students’ physical activities and sports. 5. There should be available instruments and equipment as well as library resources necessary to meet the needs of teaching and learning. Funds should be available to meet the needs of the school, and steady sources of operating expenses should be available. The norms for funding are set by provincial-level governments.

Only private institutions of higher education that fully meet these requirements are authorized to award state-recognized academic qualifications, subject to the examination and approval of the State Education Commission.

Private Universities

95

The State Education Commission meanwhile drafted documents regulating foreign citizens and organizations wanting to establish schools in China. The commission recognizes that Chinese-foreign jointly operated educational institutions constitute an important form of international exchange and cooperation in education and play a supplementary role in China’s educational undertaking. According to current regulations, institutions located outside the territory of China are welcome to make donations for educational purposes or to co-sponsor with Chinese partners to jointly operate educational institutions in accordance with Chinese laws and decrees. These jointly operated institutions must abide by Chinese laws and decrees, implement China’s educational policies, provide programs in response to the needs of manpower training and educational development, guarantee the quality of education, and do no harm to societal and public interests. The educational activities of jointly operated institutions are conducted under the jurisdiction of and protected by Chinese laws. No groups should use private schools to practice religion, and in any case they should seek collaboration with Chinese citizens and organizations. In sum, efforts have been put into formulating educational legislation concerning private education. However, a comprehensive law with authority did not come into existence until 1997, when the Regulation on Schools Run by Social Forces was issued on July 31. The lack of concrete laws governing private school development has created many problems. We will discuss them in detail in subsequent chapters. CHARACTERISTICS OF PRIVATE UNIVERSITIES In my field trips, I visited four private universities and collected a great deal of secondary information on other schools. One distinctive characteristic of private universities is their independence, which gives them autonomy in administration and decision making but also forces them to be flexible for the sake of meeting the needs of society. Private universities break the old model of centralized control and facilitate exploration of new ways for conducting education (Yang Deguang, 1993). Founders Founders include retired professors and administrators from public universities, retired government officials, various social organizations and individual citizens, business enterprises, joint-venture economic organizations, learned societies and academic research associations, and fellow-students associations, or alumni associations. Autonomy and Flexibility in Administration Private universities in general do not have the massive staff reserves and the well-established bureaucratic structures of public universities; neither do they

96

Profiles and Characteristics

have the buildings or equipment and regular financial support from the government. These disadvantages, however, are accompanied by advantages: They have the autonomy and flexibility to build their niche; their small size allows them to be focused and practice-oriented. They are not burdened by all the problems of a ‘‘small society’’ such as providing housing and various benefits to the staff. Their programs are offered based on the needs of the society, which allow their graduates to be competitive in the job market. Private universities make their own plans on admission, program arrangement, and administration. In forms and levels of education, they offer degree or nondegree programs, single-subject study, short-term training, or full degree programs. In their arrangement of the time schedule, they offer full-day or half-day classes, evening classes, weekend classes, and correspondence classes, all depending on the needs of their clientele. They place fewer restrictions on students’ sex, age, occupation, and education level. The students they accept differ among themselves in intellectual endowment, educational preparation, occupational and life experiences, tastes and interests, family environment and economic conditions, and many other aspects. Flexibility in their operating mechanisms and a streamlined internal management system constitute the basis for the existence and development of private institutions of higher learning (Li Weimin, 1993; Study Team, 1995). Administration and Personnel Private universities usually have a small staff, and each administrator has several roles to play. For example, Shanda University, a private university in Shanghai, has only 20 administrative staff for its 840 students, making the ratio of administrative staff to students 1:41. The cost of training each student (for three years) is about 3,000 yuan per year, only half of the amount spent on students by state-run universities (Xiao Qingzhang, 1995). In personnel, private universities try to avoid the dilemma of public universities by limiting the size of the staff so that overhead cost is spent as efficiently as possible. They need not be responsible for the staff’s housing, insurance, pension, medical care, and child care, because many of their teachers also work and reside in public universities, which provide benefits of all kinds. Teachers are hired on contract and paid course by course, according to the principle of ‘‘more work and more pay.’’ They travel to school only when they have classes and ordinarily stay on for a couple of hours after class if they need to coach students. Some universities provide a commuting service to the teachers, while others subsidize teachers for their travel. In general, a full-time teacher teaching ten classes a week earns from 500 to 1,000 yuan a month, and the amount varies substantially according to the region in which the teacher resides. Normally, teachers in major cities and in the southern province of Guangdong make higher salaries, and sometimes the difference can be two times or higher. The teachers are given autonomy in selecting teaching methods. Generally,

Private Universities

97

they adopt standardized textbooks used by public universities; for subjects that do not have textbooks, they compile their own textbooks. Quantitative measures are adopted in evaluating teachers. Some universities adopt a 100-point system to rank teachers in terms of student learning results and disciplines. Some ask students to evaluate their teachers in each course to determine a teacher’s teaching effectiveness, something that is not practiced in public universities. These measures exert pressure on teachers who have to deal with students admitted with much lower scores than those of students in public universities. Teachers have to find ways to adjust to the characteristics of the students; they need to revise or compile textbooks to fit the students’ level and have to answer many questions from students. ‘‘We are much more tired but very happy,’’ some teachers said (Shang De, 1993, 23). Retired university teachers form the core of the teaching staff in some universities. As is the case for primary and secondary school teachers, male professors in China retire at 60 and female professors at 55. After retirement, many are still quite energetic and look for opportunities to continue to work. In the early 1990s, three major research universities alone, Beijing University, Qinghua University, and Shanghai Transportation University, retired nearly 1,300 teachers with titles from senior lecturers to full professors. They possessed rich teaching experience and were fully covered by their former employer in terms of pension and medical care. A great many went to work for private universities while bringing very little burden to them. Universities that draw retired teachers from famous universities attract students easily. Shanda University in Shanghai, for example, banked on availability of retired teachers from the above-mentioned three universities. Among the students admitted in the first year, 90 percent were graduates of key secondary schools who had gotten high scores in the University Entrance Exam (Shang De, 1993, 23–25). A large number of private universities have only a few or no permanent teachers. A survey of 200 private universities found that only 20 percent of teachers are long-term employees; the rest are temporary (Dong Mingzhuan, 1995, 6–7). Some universities are able to be selective and to pay high salaries in order to gather good professors from famous universities (Chen Mingshu, 1993, 6). Some founders and administrators go a long way to hire good teachers. They will visit the professors’ homes many times if necessary to persuade them to teach in their universities. Since public universities have an abundance of teachers, for a long time it has not been difficult for private universities to recruit teachers. However, it is beginning to get tough for some private universities to find teachers, as public universities are also setting up their own for-profit institutions of all kinds and employing their own staff to teach there. Programs In program offerings, private universities have performed the role of filling in the gaps left by public universities. They try to respond quickly to market

98

Profiles and Characteristics

needs and are especially concerned with what to offer to enhance their students’ employment opportunities. In setting up programs, they particularly cater to demands from the new economic sectors. They try to orient themselves to the needs of society, to the needs of the labor market, and to the needs of the students as clients. A survey of 270 private universities conducted by a study team indicated that 143 programs (specialties) provided by these institutions aim to train personnel in short supply: In China University of Science and Technology and Business Administration, an NGOsponsored higher education institute in Beijing, 88 of these programs are offered, ranging over a wide spectrum of fields including: mechanical engineering, electronics, automation, finance and accounting, journalism, advertising, English for foreign trade, international finance, international trade, accounting involving foreign transactions, business administration, industrial arts, nutrition and food, etc. All of them are highly practical. Meanwhile, the NGO-sponsored higher education institutes strive to offer newly created courses catering to the needs of these new programs. For example, in Yanjing Huaqiao University at Beijing, for the program of international finance, the following courses have been offered: international finance, international settlements, money and banking, financial markets, fundamentals of accounting, introduction to national accounting, bank accounting, finance, bank administration, bank credits management, computer and its applications, foundation of English, aural comprehension of English, specialized English, and so on. These efforts fully reflect the practicality and diversity of the programs provided by the NGO-sponsored higher education institutes. (Study Team, 1995, 25–26)

A well-known private university, the Yellow River University of Science and Technology, is located in Zhengzhou city of Henan province. The university was founded by a female professor in 1984, first as a preparatory school for young people to take the University Entrance Exam or to pass the Self-Study Exam for Higher Education. As the economic conditions changed, the university adopted scores of new programs, after surveying government departments for employment projections and needs of the market. The programs they offered included: international trade, accounting, computer science, public relations, administration of rural enterprises, practical arts, marketing and sales, and stocks and bonds. The programs feature a close connection with the new needs in the booming market economy. By 1993, the university had eight faculties with 23 specialties enrolling 8,000 students. The university also has labs, factories, a research institute, and a series of business companies. A workforce of 653 longterm or contract teachers is employed in the university. In administration, the university delegates power to individuals and departments while holding them accountable. Reward and punishment are based strictly on performance (‘‘Yellow River University of Science and Technology Shining with Glory,’’ 1993, 38). The graduates of this university are known for their ‘‘quick mind, sharp eyes

Private Universities

99

and practical ability’’; they have been especially welcomed by employing institutions (Wang Fangjie, 1995). The female president, Hu Dabai, operated her college with a unique mind. She said: A fatal weakness in the education in our country is stress on academic ability to the neglect of practical ability; stress on exam scores to the neglect of personal qualities; stress on book-learning to the neglect of practice. Our education from primary and secondary level to university can be called education for grades and education for examination. This produces great contradiction with the needs of the society. Our success lies in our ability to identify this vacuum in formal education and place much stress on personal qualities and ability, so that students acquire the necessary skills for survival. (Wang Fangjie, 1995, 29)

Toward this end, the university has focused not on book learning but on handson skills and a strong sense of competition. They also work on students’ public mannerisms, speaking ability, ability for conflict resolution, and self-protection. A foreign-language college is known to implement a system of ‘‘one specialty and multiple certificates,’’ that is, the students master a foreign language while also learning computer science, driving, abacus, and calligraphy. Such colleges feel that to train students with multiple abilities is a response to needs in the market economy and helps with cultivating the various talents of the students. Parents have been especially supportive of this method (Gui Zhaoheng, 1996). ‘‘Easy Admission and Strict Graduation’’ As private universities generally lack social prestige and suffer from lack of equipment and government support, the majority of high school graduates understandably opt for public universities if their examination scores surpass the admission line. They opt for private universities only after they have failed to enter a public university. In order to attract students but also to build a reputation, some private universities adopt an ‘‘easy admission and strict graduation’’ approach. ‘‘Easy admission’’ means that students are admitted with scores below the admission line of public universities. In some universities, nearly all high school graduates who apply are admitted. The measure practically opens university doors to all high school graduates who can pay for a higher education. ‘‘Strict graduation’’ means that students who fail in the middle and at the end of their study will be eliminated so that only the qualified students graduate. It also means that the universities have to impose a strict discipline on students so that they concentrate on their studies and are able to compete with graduates of public universities. Because the onus of finding a job rests on the university and the students themselves, the pressure to work extra hard to win recognition from society has been very high. ‘‘Strict graduation’’ further means that students will be intensely supervised. Full-time teachers are assigned to take charge of students’ academic, moral, and

100

Profiles and Characteristics

physical growth on an all-day-round basis. They live in the school, sit in classes with students, talk with delinquent students, and make contacts with parents. Sometimes, the students are supervised so closely that there is no major difference with what is practiced in primary and secondary schools. Administrators feel this approach to be necessary, arguing that the students they admit are not as strong in academic background and not as well disciplined as public university students. On their way to build a name for themselves, private universities cannot afford to leave the students to themselves (Dong Mingzhuan, 1995). Some universities make finding jobs for their graduates a priority. They link up with government agencies and collaborate with private businesses. However, the majority of university graduates have to find opportunities for themselves. Jiangxi province had 29 private institutions of higher learning in 1996 enrolling 30,000 students; 90 percent of their graduates found employment and reportedly won praise for practical ability and hands-on skills (Cheng Hua, 1996, 27). Summing up, the notion of ‘‘easy admission’’ broke the long tradition of difficult admission and easy graduation in China. China’s highly competitive examination system has kept many capable students out of the doors of universities. Those students who were fortunate to enter a university endured little pressure to study hard, since all would eventually graduate. ‘‘Easy admission,’’ as practiced by private universities, allows a large number of students to enter higher education regardless of their educational level, age, sex, and occupation. ‘‘Strict graduation’’ practiced by private universities highlights the significance of paying attention to the process of learning so that quality is achieved and maintained. In all, the idea of ‘‘easy admission and difficult graduation’’ satisfies the needs of the society, providing opportunities to millions of young people who have potential in various areas. This approach also allows for diversity in higher education and creates competition with public universities. Finally, it propels China’s educational reform to focus on differing abilities of students and to shift away from an overwhelming emphasis on academic learning (Chen Baoyu, 1996). Space and Facilities At an early stage, most private universities have to rent classrooms, administrative offices, and student dormitories. Some even have a number of teaching locations spread throughout the city. They lack appropriate space and equipment for sports activities and dining facilities, and boarding places for students tend to be very run-down. Some have to move constantly in search of new locations as their lease expires every year. A medical college reportedly lacked the most basic material—textbooks—before students were accepted. It had only a few medical charts and pictures to hang up on the wall. In anatomy class, pig organs were used as a replacement for human organs, on the notion that they are ‘‘almost the same’’ (Huang Jingzhang, 1996, 23). In contrast, a small number of private universities, after years of managing

Private Universities

101

and accumulation, have built up their own teaching buildings and have purchased the necessary equipment and facilities. Some quickly improve their conditions by actively searching for support from businesses in China and abroad. A university I visited in Shanghai represents such a case. The university at the beginning needed to rent space to function, but one year later with donations from Chinese compatriots from abroad, it set up a campus and quickly increased its total enrollment of students. Some universities solve their space problem by affiliating with private primary and secondary schools—they get the needed space, and the primary and secondary schools have a guarantee of their students’ future admission into the university. The best situation is that of the Yellow River University of Science and Technology, which has a campus of 300 mou, with 23 programs, a library with 60,000 books, and more than 10,000 students studying on campus. The university was approved by the State Education Commission in 1994 to become a state-recognized degree-offering private university (Wang Fangjie, 1995, 29). Finance Personal savings, fees collected from students, funds from business operations, or a combination of state funding and donations and collections from other sources form the source of funding for a large number of private universities. Of these, tuition and fees form the main source of income for most private universities. A survey of 100 private universities in 1994 found that 82 universities receive 90 percent of their revenue from student tuition and fees. Other income comes from donations and the profits from running businesses (Dong Mingzhuan, 1995). Finding it difficult to rely solely on fees collected from students, some universities adopt a strategy of ‘‘using school business to support education.’’ Working equally hard to run their business operations, they have often transformed themselves into shrewd business people. If possible, the students are involved in the school businesses; they practice their skills in the factories, and the university gets cheap labor. Because funding comes mostly from private sources, private universities have more autonomy in the allocation of funds. In public universities, ‘‘money for buying soy sauce cannot be used to buy salt’’; in private universities the use of funds is much more flexible (Li Weimin, 1993). Competition between Institutions Private universities operate in the environment of market economy and face many competitions. Not only there is competition between NGO-sponsored HEIs (higher education institutions) of the same category, but also there is competition between them and regular HEIs. Besides external competition, there is internal competition within an institution, such as

102

Profiles and Characteristics

the competitive appointment system applied to faculty members, etc. Thus, each phase of the development of an NGO-sponsored HEI is full of competition, a natural outcome of the operation of the market mechanism. (Study Team, 1995, 25)

Private universities first compete among themselves. This feature is first of all evident in their advertising. Some universities boast about having a high employment rate among students; others guarantee that students will get their money back if they do not learn. Still others promise that students will be able to go abroad to study after graduation. To recruit students, one university employed its students and paid them 200 yuan in a kickback if they brought in a new student to the university. Students were reported to earn as much as 10,000 yuan in a year. Some universities also advertised in newspapers for lists of high school graduates. The universities then sent out thousands of application forms, hoping this canvassing method would result in a large enrollment. Private universities also come into head-on competition with public institutions. Today most public universities admit self-paying students, who pay from 3,000 to 10,000 yuan a year. Public universities have been able to become much wealthier because of these students. Subsidiaries are also spun off to form a ‘‘private university,’’ which is contracted to teachers, and the university in return collects a portion of the profit year after year. Government agencies are also joining in the competition. For example, CCP leader training schools have dealt with their decline in social prestige and their lack of funding by shifting their programs to accounting, economics, marketing, and so on. Government agencies such as a provincial or city bureau of personnel set up their own schools and promise a ‘‘whole dragon service,’’ meaning that students will receive favorable treatment ranging from admission and granting of state cadre status to degrees and employment opportunities. The infiltration of public universities and political power into the realm of private higher education has rendered it very difficult for private universities to recruit students (Liu Peizhi, 1995). The competition became even more fierce after 1995, when public universities started to collect tuitions ranging from 2,000 yuan to over 10,000 yuan per student per year. In fact, public universities are moving toward private financing. With their decisive advantages in staff, social acceptance, and facilities, private universities will be challenged even further to survive. The impact will be great, but private universities can be expected to continue to operate, for demands for higher education will remain strong in Chinese society for decades to come. In sum, private universities have become a main force in providing higher education in China. They supplement the inadequate provision of public higher education, satisfying the aspirations of individual citizens for acquisition of knowledge. They break the government’s monopoly over higher education and serve to explore new ways of educational reform. These institutions depend largely on funds raised by themselves, guided by the desire to satisfy social demands and to supplement inadequate public institutions. They cater to the needs of local economic and social development and

Private Universities

103

focus on training a large number of practically oriented skilled personnel. With regard to the provision of educational programs (specialties), curriculum development, utilization of faculty resources, charging of tuition fees, internal administration and management, and collaboration with industrial and commercial enterprises, they have gradually developed their own specific features and have even shown certain advantages over conventional regular institutions of higher learning. Despite their problems they have made positive contributions to the evolution of the country’s higher education system (Study Team, 1995).

PART 3

CULTURAL CHARACTERISTICS AND MORAL AND DEMOCRATIC EDUCATION IN PRIVATE SCHOOLS

7

Characteristics and Culture of Private Schools Over the years of development, private schools have formed their own distinctive characteristics. In particular, elite private schools, with their strong financial resources and highly qualified teaching force, as well as the unprecedented pressure they are placed under, have cultivated a unique organizational culture. This chapter first attempts a broad and general comparison of private and public schools; it then examines the organizational culture of private schools, particularly elite private schools. COMPARING PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SCHOOLS Public and private schools in China operate under vastly different conditions. However, they share some parallel conditions; for example, elite schools have much in common with key (public) schools, as do rural private schools with rural public schools and urban ordinary private schools with urban ordinary public schools. Because of the diverse conditions of individual schools, our comparisons can only be broad and general. Comparing Key Schools with Elite Schools Key schools and elite schools share two features: (1) Both are exclusive and inaccessible to the large majority of Chinese students and (2) both have highly qualified teachers and a supply of superior equipment and facilities to assist teachers in the teaching process. Both types of schools, together, provide the best kind of education for the rich and powerful in China. As key schools

108

Cultural Characteristics and Moral Education

Table 7.1 A Comparison of Key Schools and Elite Private Schools

Elite Schools

Key Schools

Access based on

Money

Scores/connections/money

Teaching approach

Flexible

Traditional

Equipment

Very good

Good to very good

Orientation

Holistic/exam

Exam

Boarding

Yes

No

Teacher qualifications

Best

Best

Teacher salary

High

High

Fees

High

Very low to high

represent only 4 percent of all public schools, and as elite schools make up about 10 percent of all private schools, exclusivity is the main feature of both types of schools. Despite their similarities, their differences are also fundamental: Elite schools are run primarily on market terms, while key schools are state-supported and endowed with all kinds of privileges, ranging from student selection to preferential treatment in funding from the government. In admission, elite schools have to take in nearly all students who can afford to come in, whereas key schools can be highly selective and choose only the highest-achieving students among hundreds or even thousands of applicants. Key schools open doors mainly to children of government officials and intellectuals, though a small proportion of children (usually 20 to 30 percent) come from rural peasant and urban working-class families who are accepted solely on their academic achievement. Teachers in both types of schools earn higher incomes than other school teachers because of their institutions’ stronger financial position. In educational practice, however, elite schools tend to offer more alternatives for students’ allround development—this will be elaborated on later in this chapter. They also try to be innovative in their teaching approaches. Table 7.1 highlights some features of elite and key schools. Comparing Elite Private Schools with Ordinary Public Schools Elite schools have decisive advantages over ordinary public schools in many respects. From funding to equipment to teacher qualification, elite schools are far superior. The tuition and fees they charge are beyond the wildest dreams of working-class parents. But both types of schools have something in common: Both have no choice over the students they want to admit, that is, they literally have to admit all students regardless of their academic background. Both have

Characteristics and Culture of Private Schools

109

Table 7.2 A Comparison of Elite Private Schools with Ordinary Public Schools

Private Elite

Public Ordinary

Access based on

Money

Residence in district

Teaching approach

Flexible

Traditional

Equipment

Very good

Poor/average

Orientation

Holistic/exam

Exam

Boarding

Yes

No

Teacher qualifications

Very good

Poor/mixed

Teacher salary

High

Low

Tuition fees

High

Low

to deal with students who tend to have low motivation to learn. Elite private schools draw students mainly from ordinary public schools. Some of the students have encountered numerous academic and behavioral problems before they join private schools. Students in ordinary public schools have a low chance of passing the University Entrance Exam, since fewer than 10 percent of them can go on to universities, as compared to 95 percent of key school students. The students’ chances, however, may be enhanced after entering an elite private school, due to individualized teaching and higher teacher quality supported with advanced technology. Basically, the two types of schools have vastly different operating conditions, despite their sharing some common features (Table 7.2) Comparing Public Ordinary Secondary Schools with Private Ordinary Secondary Schools Private ordinary and public ordinary secondary schools are very similar in teaching conditions and schooling practice (Table 7.3). They have little choice about the students they want to admit. Neither can they afford to purchase such equipment as pianos or computers. Their difference, if any, is that students and teachers in ordinary private schools are under greater pressure from the parents who pay for their children’s education. The private schools also have lower stability, as their survival depends on tuition and fees. Further, many of the students they admit have been pushed out by ordinary public schools. The poor teaching conditions have caused high teacher turnover and difficulty in recruiting young teachers for ordinary private schools. Comparing Elite Schools with Rural Private Schools Elite schools, although enjoying a decisive advantage over rural private schools in terms of teacher qualification, equipment, and facilities (Table 7.4) also have to endure higher pressure from parents and scrutiny from society.

110

Cultural Characteristics and Moral Education

Table 7.3 A Comparison of Private Ordinary Secondary Schools with Public Ordinary Secondary Schools

Private Ordinary

Public Ordinary

Elitist

No

No

Fees

Low

Low

Orientation

Exam

Exam

Equipment

Poor

Poor/average

Curriculum

Standard

Standard

Parents

Working class

Working class

Salaried class

Salaried class

Gov’t. workers

Gov’t. workers

Teacher qualifications

Mixed

Mixed

Teacher salary

Low

Low

Table 7.4 A Comparison of Elite Private Schools with Rural Private Schools

Elite Private

Rural Private

Elitist

Yes

No

Fees

High

Low

Orientation

Holistic/exam

Exam

Equipment

Good

Poor

Curriculum

Computer/English Little English/no computer

Parents

Rich

Poor/peasants

Teacher qualifications High

Low/mixed

Teacher salary

Low

High

Both have to find ways to improve themselves in order to compete with local public schools. Beyond this point, they can hardly be compared. Rural private schools have no computers or pianos and could not even dream of hiring foreign teachers to teach. In stark contrast to elite schools, they open their doors to lowincome families and serve students who have been forced out by the high fees charged by public schools. While elite schools attract a lot of attention from the mass media and the government, rural private schools are known to few but the local people.

Characteristics and Culture of Private Schools

111

Table 7.5 Comparing Elite, Urban/Township, and Rural Private Schools

Teachers from

Elite

Urban/Township Rural

Public school

Retired teachers Local grads

New grads

Public school

Retired teachers

Poor

Poor

Retired teachers Equipment

Excellent

Orientation

Holistic/exam

Exam

Exam

Boarding

Yes

Some

No

Fees

High

Low

Low

Teacher qualifications High

Mixed

Low/Mixed

Teacher salary

Low

Low

High

Comparing Elite, Urban/Township, and Rural Private Schools Among private schools, elite schools are way ahead of urban and rural ordinary private schools in terms of financial resources, equipment, teacher quality, staff salary and benefits, and so on (Table 7.5). Yet they share these similarities: They have limited choice over the selection of students, tuition and fees form the base of their financial resources, and they operate on market terms. In general, the pressure to perform is much higher for elite schools because of the high fees charged, but ordinary private schools are much more vulnerable in terms of survival because of their lack of financial resources, which gives them low stability and problems in the teaching force. A COMPARISON OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE UNIVERSITIES Private universities, as discussed in Chapter 6, have greater financial independence and autonomy in administration than public universities (Table 7.6). Their programs tend to be more connected to the needs of the market economy. This flexibility, nevertheless, is offset by a lack of a stable teaching force and strong financial resources. As a large majority are still at the first stage of development with a limited capacity for expansion, they remain teaching institutions that conduct little or no research and have low social recognition. Students are self-paying and self-selecting, and most private universities can only accept students who have been left out by public universities. In contrast, public universities have been under tight control by the state government in aspects such as admission, program offerings, and job assignments for its graduates. Administrators have low autonomy in administration, and the bureaucratic system limits their capacity to change and expand. Since 1995, public universities have been undergoing fundamental changes.

112

Cultural Characteristics and Moral Education

Table 7.6 A Comparison of Public and Private Universities

Public Universities

Private Universities

Program

State controlled

Based on market needs

Program flexibility

Low

High

Student learning

Academic

Practical

Social recognition

High

Low/high

Autonomy

Low

High

Teaching force

Strong

Mixed

Funding

Stable

Unstable/mixed

Employment

State assignment

Self-search

Equipment and facilities

Good/fair

Poor/good

Research

Yes

No

Self-search

They have started to collect tuition in the range of 2,000–10,000 yuan a year, and more and more students now have to search for jobs for themselves. The impact of this change on the private universities can be threefold: First, private universities may have to lower tuition and admission standards even further in order to attract students; second, students may choose public universities over private ones since they have to pay anyway and since public universities, after all, have state support and a strong, stable teaching force. Third, private universities will face the challenge of having to be even more distinct so that they can survive. However, the demand for higher education in the whole society will remain strong, since the state government lacks the resources to expand the public higher education system substantially. Therefore, although the government is still attempting to cap the expansion of private higher education, the tremendous social demand for higher education will allow private universities to continue. Some may ultimately earn social recognition and become established institutions.

FEATURES AND CHARACTERISTICS OF PRIVATE SCHOOLS AND UNIVERSITIES Private educational development is a response to social demands arising from the market economy. Private schools, in fact, force China’s existing educational structure to adapt to the new economy, creating a new system in which private and public schools will exist side by side, forming an inevitable trend of development for the future of Chinese education (Zeng Tianshan, 1993, 31).

Characteristics and Culture of Private Schools

113

Autonomy in management is the most striking characteristic of private schools. As Qu Tiehua put it: They can accept students, hire teachers and choose teaching materials independently. This has turned around the phenomenon of education being the sole responsibility of the government and being centrally controlled by the government. Private schools have the right to hire and dismiss personnel by adopting a system based on competition. Teachers have to go through a hiring process, be the term of employment a year or a semester. Salaries and bonuses are linked to the quality of one’s work. Outstanding and diligent performances are rewarded, while sloppy and lazy performances are penalized. (Qu Tiehua, 1993, 89)

To meet the needs of the market economy, many private schools tend to adopt a flexible operational mechanism and try to transcend the uniformity of public schools. To form their own special characteristics, some schools draw students by employing a large number of foreign teachers and teaching all classes in English; some focus on cultivating students’ musical and artistic talents. One school tried to distinguish itself by having all students take a cold shower daily, even in winter, to attract parents who worry about the ability of their overprotected single child to survive in a tough environment. According to Li Weimin (1993), the characteristics of private schools are as follows: 1. The government’s administrative departments of education have a limited role to play in private schools. Their functions are chiefly examining and approving the new schools, providing guidance, and evaluating objectives of school operation without interfering with the schools’ specific management. Private schools thus have fewer superiors and less intervention from authorities above them. 2. Private schools do not request financial allocations from the state. Their funds come chiefly from donations, tuition, and business activities. They enjoy freer use of funds without too much restriction from state regulations. 3. They draw students from the market and return students to the market for its benefit. A market orientation directs private schools to respond quickly to market needs. 4. Private schools are flexible and offer diverse forms of education at different educational levels. Learners are not restricted by sex, age, occupation, or educational background when they are admitted into private universities. 5. Small size and a slim workforce allow private schools and universities to be efficient in administration. Staff members do not have job security and are held more accountable. 6. The state does not provide job assignments. After graduation or completion of school, students search for jobs on their own.

Summing up the features of private schools, Li Weimin has this to say: The characteristics of private schools bear resemblance to those of the socialist market economy: Extensive involvement of social sectors, independence in management, a great variety of managing patterns, flexibility in internal management, competitiveness based

114

Cultural Characteristics and Moral Education

on quality, profit orientation, and responsibility for one’s own profit and losses. The root cause for the development of private schools in spite of hardships is that private education has been on the track of accommodating the market economy ever since its birth, and is now reaping educational, social and financial gains. (Li Weimin, 1993, 16)

Private education emerges when China’s public education is in a ‘‘crisis’’ (Hao Wenwu, 1995, 11). Public schools have many advantages over private schools in general. As they have a large workforce and many excellent teachers, it is much easier for them to make flexible arrangements in terms of personnel. They have over the decades built up solid positions in terms of space and facilities. Yet the rigidity in the administrative system limits their ability to change. For a long time public schools do not have any autonomy to run their schools. There is so much and so tight a control by educational administrative departments that schools cannot make use of their own potential and creativity. They have no choice but to follow the uniform model set by the state. If they try to run schools according to their own ideas they will get into all kinds of trouble. They are forced to deal with all sorts of bureaucratic formality, attending many relevant or irrelevant meetings, fulfilling all kinds of social responsibilities and participating in all forms of social tasks; they have to deal with inspections and evaluation of all kinds. Further, they have to take care of teachers’ and students’ medical care, food, boarding and transportation and many other problems of daily life. School leaders do not have much energy and time to ponder on any plan for the school’s development. Without autonomy, they have to ‘‘wait, depend, and ask for’’ everything; they have to follow rules strictly thus forming a dependent mentality. (He Qizong and Zhang Yizhong, 1994, 28)

The authors point out that in contrast, private schools have greater autonomy, which can be seen in admissions, hiring of teachers, textbook selection, teaching models, program design, and teacher salaries. They have a leaner administrative structure which enjoys greater efficiency. However, the differences must be seen in relative terms. Under the central control of the State Education Commission, private schools also share a lot of common features with public schools. Compared to public schools, their teaching content, curricula, teaching materials and methods are no different from the teaching outline announced by the State Education Commission. The evaluation and test standards of graduates and higher-level school entrance exams are also consistent with those of public schools. In such major matters as direction, policies, goals and educational principles, they are essentially the same as public schools. Administratively, they, too, accept the leadership and supervision of educational agencies at relevant levels. In short, private schools must also observe the laws, regulations and policies of socialist education. (Bi Cheng, 1994, 235)

My observation confirms Bi Cheng’s viewpoint. Indeed, resemblances between private and public schools are as profound as their differences. Having said this, I agree with two Chinese scholars’ view that

Characteristics and Culture of Private Schools

115

The birth and growth of nongovernmental private schools will necessarily result in creating some competition for public schools and without doubt, force the latter to carry out reform and make progress so as to come out ahead. This race and competition between public and private schools will be a major impetus to raising the overall level of Chinese education. (He Qizong and Zhang Yizhong, 1994, 29)

BUILDING A NEW SCHOOL CULTURE: OBSERVATION IN ELITE PRIVATE SCHOOLS Private schools reemerged in China partly because of the inability of public schools to meet the needs of the society. To survive and prosper, however, they have had to establish their own characteristics and cultivate a unique school culture. They need to have an accommodating system in order to deal with their students’ vast array of abilities. Under the watchful eyes of parents and the public, they have to produce solid results indicating the quality of their schools. Many private schools hence take establishing their distinctive culture to mean the life or death of their schools. Elite schools I visited especially demonstrate unique features in their organizational culture. Although I also observed similar characteristics in some ordinary private schools, they are restricted by how much they can do due to a great lack of funding. Unless an exception is especially pointed out, the following section refers to elite schools primarily. My personal observation will be supplemented by secondary sources as well. Creating a Distinctive Culture Elite schools face stiff competition from both key schools and the better ordinary public schools, which have the government’s financial support as well as a supply of teachers. To add to the pressure, elite schools also have to compete with each other for students and resources. Knowing that they cannot survive solely by having superior equipment and facilities, they envision their school to be ‘‘new and future looking, with a highly qualified teaching force and a focus on students’ all-around development.’’ They attempt to achieve this vision by the following means: 1. Adoption of a new curriculum that focuses on learning for the future, for the global economy, and for scientific and technological development. Translating into learning, this means cultivating students’ abilities and creativity and prioritizing English and computer science in the curriculum. 2. Emphasis on all-around development of the children and avoidance of a single-minded drive for book learning. This is done mostly through offering a great variety of extracurricular activities such as painting, music, handicrafts, calligraphy, and sports and integrating them into the main curriculum. 3. Fostering of a nurturing environment that not only offers healthy and nutritious food

116

Cultural Characteristics and Moral Education

and a safe and comfortable living environment but also provides a warm community in which single children can make friends and learn to live with each other. 4. Adoption of a boarding system to relieve parents of worries and to teach students independence and interdependence; the boarding system also allows schools to exert consistent influence on students and to help them form certain habits and values. 5. Small class size and attention devoted to individual students, and an emphasis on teaching according to students’ level and ability. 6. A heightened sense of responsibility among school staff, with heavy pressure placed on teachers and administrators to deliver. 7. Encouragement of new teaching approaches, especially with regard to helping students who are poorly prepared in academic learning.

The more than a dozen elite primary schools I visited during my fieldtrips demonstrated all seven features. They adopt a diverse curriculum and devote a substantial amount of time to helping students to build up self-confidence. They focus on fostering good habits in students and teach them effective learning skills. The students learn computer science and English as well as how to take care of themselves in daily life. Finding that it is much easier to shape children from an early age, some elite schools opt to offer only primary education, or they open a secondary school only for students who have been trained in their own primary school. Elite secondary schools experience many difficulties in trying to put the listed items into practice. The heavy pressure to prepare students for the University Entrance Exam has dictated their agenda. For the school to achieve a high admission ratio, teachers have to forgo ‘‘well-rounded development,’’ knowing that diverting students into activities not related to the exam invites self-defeat. They therefore offer very limited extracurricular activities; in teaching, rote learning is predominant. This is similar to what has happened in Japanese schools, where learning in the primary school classrooms is active, creative, and collaborative (Sato, 1993). At the secondary level, ‘‘the examination hell’’ sets in, and schools have to adjust their agenda to meet the challenge of getting as many students as possible to pass the university entrance exam (Bossy, 1996). Serving Students’ Needs One distinct feature of elite schools is that they take an active approach toward improving students with a poor academic background. One school reportedly enforced a ‘‘three-never principle’’ for its teachers: Never to lose control of any student, never to look down upon any student, and never to give up on any student (Tian Zanzhu, 1995). In this school, when the students came to the classroom for self-study at 6:30 A.M., the teachers would be there to provide coaching; during weekends, teachers would gather to talk about various teaching approaches and problems. When correcting students’ home assignments, the

Characteristics and Culture of Private Schools

117

teachers wrote detailed notes analyzing problems and discussing ways to correct them. Although this made the teachers’ work very strenuous, the principal said this: The life of our school comes from our students, the school’s fame comes from quality, and quality comes from responsibility. We are facing a serious and difficult challenge, that is, we want our poorly-prepared students to achieve a high level of moral and academic development. We are not standing on the same starting line with public schools, but we must catch up and surpass them. We are charging under a heavy burden! (Tian Zanzhu, 1995, 17).

A principal in a private school in Heilongjiang province invested 92 million yuan to fulfill his childhood dream of owning his own school. Facing the reality that the students were mainly those who had been filtered out by public schools, he promised the parents that their children would receive high-quality education in his school. To keep the promise, he instituted a system in which students at any time can seek help from teachers, and teachers at any time should be ready to coach students. The school has its own teaching research center, and the founder/principal often sits in the classrooms to get a feel for what is going on. The founder promised publicly that his school practiced ‘‘four 100 percent responsibilities,’’ 100 percent responsibility for students’ safety, for their healthy development in morality, for students’ learning, and for students’ health. The parents were happy to find that their children became more independent in thinking and more law abiding after studying in this school for a period of time (Yuan Weidong, 1996). Student Motivation and Education for All-Around Development Students in elite schools come from all kinds of backgrounds; some have been turned away or given up on by public schools for low academic achievement, and some have behavioral problems. In some schools, one-third of the students come from disintegrated families or families that could offer little help in the children’s academic learning. Many students suffer from low self-esteem and have lost confidence in themselves. Good equipment and highly qualified teachers are not enough to help these students to gain confidence and achieve academically. The students themselves must be motivated to learn. Looking for ways to help motivate the students, elite schools have relied on extracurricular activities as a means to discover students’ special talents; they make various efforts to cultivate these talents and encourage students by giving them recognition and rewards in a timely and public manner. In the elite schools I visited, a large majority of the students have received some type of award for their participation in extracurricular activities. In the afternoon, students are organized to practice musical instruments, play ball, and participate in other ac-

118

Cultural Characteristics and Moral Education

tivities. Recognition give them a sense of achievement, which they did not get in the process of learning academic subjects. ‘‘Students need to feel that they are still valuable,’’ the principals told me. Students who have serious learning and behavioral problems receive special attention. Teachers are especially assigned to help them and, if necessary, criteria are redefined so that students’ progress is measured against their past records, not against that of other students. This attempt helps all those concerned—the teachers, the parents, and the students themselves—to see the students’ improvement. The students’ talents in extracurricular activities are especially encouraged and rewarded. When the students gradually catch up with others, standards are adjusted upward so that the students eventually become fully integrated into the class. Despite all these efforts, pressure to achieve high scores in examinations often create dilemmas for schools. For example, the Guangya Private School in Chengdu city once tried the A-to-D scoring system to relieve the pressure of grades on students and their parents, but before long the school had to return to the percentage system because the parents wanted to compare their children’s grades with those of students in other schools (Hou Jianwen, 1993). In some schools, tracking is practiced. Several schools I visited track students by subjects and by academic levels to help students with learning difficulties. But a few also track students in order to focus on ‘‘university materials.’’ The elite schools I visited all have bulletin boards to display students’ art work, something one does not normally see in public schools. The work demonstrated a lot of creativity and imagination, in my judgment. Extracurricular activities also serve to enrich the children’s lives. Elite school staff felt propelled to make students’ lives interesting: ‘‘The students would be bored to death if there were not many interesting things going on in their lives. Remember, they stay in the school twenty-four hours a day, six days a week,’’ they told me. These practices—respect for students, patience, individual attention, and teaching to the needs of the students—have indeed helped students improve their academic achievement; more significantly, each and every student improves in different ways, which is the advantage of many private schools (Guo Ge, 1996). The intention to emphasize the well-rounded development of students goes beyond enriching student life. A principal in the opening speech for an arts festival of her school stated that education for a whole being is the goal for her school: An educator once said: Education without the learning of arts is not a complete education. In the past three years, to provide students with a sound and comprehensive education, our school has initiated many colorful activities of different types, which combine art appreciation and education throughout the whole educational program. Through all types of ‘‘arts groups’’ and extracurricular interest groups, students are guided into the wonderful worlds of the arts and beauty. These interest groups include the orchestra band,

Characteristics and Culture of Private Schools

119

the dancing group, singing group, piano group, painting group, calligraphy group, handicrafts group, sea and aero-models making group, natural science group, football team, basketball team, field and track sports team and so on. These activities have not only enriched the students’ school life, but also have met the students’ need to develop their interests and special skills. In fact, students’ interests and skills are being improved day by day. (Wang Jianchao, 1996)

The principal noted that after one year’s training, the school band, though in an early stage of training, can perform in ceremonies of welcoming guests and national flag raising. The singing group won the first prize in the singing contest participated in by all primary schools in the district. The ‘‘dragon’’ kite made by students from the primary school was awarded the first prize for folk crafts in a contest participated in by students from all the primary and secondary schools in the city. In addition, students have won prizes in contests of aircraft model design, recitation, and performing arts in the district. The school can be said to have set a distinct example for using arts education and extracurricular activities to foster student development in moral character, intelligence, physical fitness, and sentiments. School as Community Most elite schools and a small number of ordinary private schools are boarding schools. This arrangement allows schools to adopt an integrative approach toward students’ academic, personal, and moral development. The intention is to bring together activities pertaining to the cultivation of students’ intelligence and personality. It is hoped that the boarding school will become a community that teaches students mutual responsibility, consideration for others, and a sense of independence. The boarding system also works to keep students away from the contamination of social corruption so that they can grow up healthily. In a school visit, a principal of a school I visited stated the following: Our school organizes all the students to be involved in extracurricular studies, with each student participating in at least two to three interest groups. In their daily living, we try to teach the students the sense of independence and responsibility by requiring them to do many things for themselves and for the collective. We try to create a caring and supportive environment in which teachers help the students and the students help each other in their daily lives. We believe that environment shapes people and thus we put in great effort to build a positive educational environment. A colorful life and creative learning activities provide students with an environment where they can study happily and grow healthily.

Students I interviewed in several elite schools told me that they like their schools very much and that the teachers are like their parents to them. Some said they would like to become teachers or principals after they grow up, taking their teachers as their role model. Most said they were very happy in the elite schools, where they find friendship and no longer feel lonely. I was told by

120

Cultural Characteristics and Moral Education

teachers that the children learn to care for each other in such an environment, and some bond so tightly that during the weekends they would rather stay in school than go home to stay with their parents. Small class size makes it possible for teachers to attend to students individually. Unlike public schools with 45 to 70 students in each class, the average class in elite schools has 25 to 30 students. Teachers find it easier to manage the class and to cater to the level and needs of the students when they teach. I visited many classrooms, and they all look more spacious than public school classrooms; instead of rows of tables squeezed together, students have their own separate table and chair. There is enough space for teachers to organize group activities and to shuffle tables and chairs around. The boarding system, with one of its intentions being to isolate students from negative influences in the society, has been under fire. One criticism is that detaching students from the society would eventually render them unfit for dealing with people when they have to immerse into the society again. The principals I interviewed disagree. They maintain that the idea of a boarding school is about ‘‘total’’ education, or an ‘‘integrated’’ approach to education. The boarding system provides students and teachers whole-day contact, allowing the teachers to learn about the students and to befriend them. This relationship helps with student learning and allows schools to exert consistent influence on children to achieve the desired outcome. In my observation, however, this notion is pushed to the extreme in some schools, so much so that the children complain they are staying in a military camp. Some schools line up students to go to the bathroom, wash their faces, eat in the dining hall, go to the classroom, and return to the dormitory. Students thus have very limited time and space for themselves. In our interviews, some students, especially high school students, stated that they should be given more time to be themselves, since they felt they were grown up enough to know what to do. Life on campus was highly collective. Together students study, sing songs, play games, practice musical instruments, and engage in sports activities. The children also use their spare time to practice oral English and typing on computers. Collective life is fun for many students: Another aspect of their life at school which they really seem to like is meal time. In fact, almost every student’s meals at home are actually of better quality than those at school, but they seem to enjoy eating more at school. One parent told a teacher that her child liked a certain brand of bread very much at school, but would not touch it at all when she bought some of the same brand bread at home. Several students described this attitude as follows: ‘‘I eat much more in the school. I feel that I want to eat when so many friends are eating. But at home my parents always fill my bowl with food, but I feel full without even touching the food.’’ ‘‘I like the food here. It’s so much more fun to eat with so many friends! I feel the food is much more delicious than the food at home.’’ (Liu Yufeng, 1995, 53–54)

Characteristics and Culture of Private Schools

121

Teacher Autonomy and Responsibility Elite schools attract teachers partly by high salaries, but also for other reasons. As Liu Yufeng (1995) points out, the situation is much more complex; it is necessary to look at teachers’ social status in China, the low esteem from which they suffer, and the measures that have been taken to raise the esteem of the teaching profession:

Traditionally, teachers in China occupy a respected position, but they are not paid accordingly. In fact, they are among the lowest paid of all employees in China. For a long time, teachers have felt that they are treated like second class citizens, despite the fact that the government gives teachers very high, but empty, praise. After the economic reform in 1978, thousands of teachers left teaching for better paid positions. An unfortunate result of this move is that the teachers that remained in the profession now occupy a position that has sunk even lower on the scale of prestige and socio-economic status. Although dissatisfaction with the financial reward is a key factor in the disillusionment of teachers, they also lack non-material rewards such as professional support, selfsatisfaction and respect. (Liu Yufeng, 1995, 45–46)

In my interviews, teachers told me that they chose private schools not only for the pay but also for support in their work. In private schools they have opportunities for professional development. They are encouraged to be creative in their teaching. Some teachers joined private schools because they share the philosophy of the school owners and principals. Elite schools also hold high professional expectations for teachers. For example, one school I visited required teachers to read academic journals regularly and to attend professional seminars and conferences in order to update their knowledge in their fields. They are encouraged to write research papers for submission to academic journals. ‘‘Teachers are not only to teach, but also they are at the forefront connecting theory with practice,’’ the principal commented to me. Some teachers mentioned to me that the possibility of innovation and creativity in elite schools gives them a sense of freedom and fulfillment. In return they are highly motivated to do a good job in teaching. They gave me an example of the autonomy they enjoy. On a winter day when beautiful snow was flying in the sky, the teachers decided to cancel the Chinese language class for that day and took the students out to play in the snow for a whole hour. The teachers then asked students to describe their experience of playing in the snow in a composition. ‘‘The students described very vividly their feelings of playing in the snow. The experience, we believe, is worth a thousand words in the book.’’ This change in class arrangement would have been impossible in public schools, as the teachers would have had to report to several levels of government

122

Cultural Characteristics and Moral Education

education offices, and by the time they received permission, the snow might have long melted away. In another school, the teachers and principals found that the state curriculum has a lot of redundancies and that the organization of course contents for some subjects are truncated or disconnected. To improve the situation, they put their heads together to pull out all related vocabularies from the Chinese language textbooks for grades one to six and compose them into rhythms; every morning the teacher would play this rhythm on the piano and students would sing along with the music. Within half a year, the students had learned all the vocabularies by heart and had started to read quite sophisticated materials. In mathematics, they searched for better ways to teach students to add, subtract, multiply, and divide. They stressed the inner connections of these skills and did not wait until fourth or fifth grade to introduce division. Elite schools require great dedication from teachers and place enormous responsibilities on their shoulders. Often, their job is far from just teaching; they have to act as mother, nurse, caretaker, and friend as well. They line up students for morning exercise and classes, supervise their eating in the student canteen, coach the students in evening classes, and check that students are warm in bed. They have to take students who are sick to the clinic and set a good example of not wasting any food in the canteen regardless of appetite. Their days usually start at 6:00 A.M. and end at 11:00 or 12:00 P.M. Some schools require all teachers to take a one-hour nap after lunch, locking doors to visitors to ensure that the teachers are not disturbed. Further, teachers are under the constant scrutiny of parents and principals. For example, a private school I visited gave its teachers’ home telephone numbers to the parents, who can call at any time for information about their children. In another school, there is a central monitoring system through which all teachers are on camera during teaching hours. The principal can choose to audit any teacher’s teaching. Having every move under observing eyes definitely places great pressure on teachers. Teachers also have to be well-prepared for their classes, writing detailed teaching plans that will be checked periodically by the director of teaching, who is usually a senior teacher, or by the principal. Often, during the day the teachers do not have the time to prepare for their lessons; only after ten at night can they start to write their teaching plans. The teachers have smaller classes to teach, but they also have to pay more attention to individuals. They also have to deal with a group of students who are very different from those they would teach in key public schools. Compared with key school students, many teachers feel that the students in elite schools are slower learners and require much more patience. Several principals noted to me that an excellent teacher in a key school may not fit in a private school. The students’ starting point is much lower in private schools, improvement costs a lot more effort, and the result may not be as evident. A principal said, ‘‘In a key school, you explain a problem once, and the students get it right away; in

Characteristics and Culture of Private Schools

123

a private school, you explain it five times and some students are still in the clouds.’’ The adjustment is tough for some teachers. Teachers also face many dilemmas. They have no job security and could be fired for being ineffective; due to ambiguity in government policies, they have no guarantee for their professional titles and ranks should they want to transfer to a public school. The ambiguity of their status as private school teachers makes it unlikely that they serve in a private school for long. While working at a private school, some are also looking for jobs in public schools or in other sectors of the economy. Some teachers eventually forgo the comparatively high salary in a private school and return to their job in a public school. High teacher turnover was a constant headache even for elite private schools, a factor that threatens their operation and thus the quality of education. School Leadership Almost all elite school administrators I met put in great effort to make their schools responsive to parents. They stressed they cannot take anything for granted in dealing with parents, as their very survival hinges on tuition and fees. Not having the government on their back, they must rely on themselves to rent spaces, purchase equipment, and pay the teachers. They also have to pay all kinds of taxes and fees demanded by local tax collectors and various government departments. They even have to bribe the local police to avoid harassment from rascals (Liu, 1995). Dealing with rigid local government officials who look down on private schools was a great headache for many principals. One principal told me that her request for approval to expand sections of her school had no result after five months of waiting, even though she assigned two full-time employees to try to meet all kinds of demands from government officials. Self-dependence gives private schools an urgent sense of insecurity. Nearly all the principals of the elite schools I visited live in the school and seldom go anywhere unless it is very necessary. They monitor activities in the school closely and encourage the teachers to do the same. They endure tremendous stress from their work. A 40-year-old principal I met moved his family to the school so that he could save time from traveling back and forth during the weekend. He had lost most of his hair at age 40 and wore a wig to conceal the fact in daily life. ‘‘Our principal gives his all to the school,’’ a teacher remarked to me. Others travel abroad to build up connections for an outlet for their graduates, despite the huge cost of traveling. This sense of urgency and competitive orientation in fact penetrates all activities organized in the school, including decisions on new goals, styles of school administration, teacher training, improvement of the curriculum, and innovation in teaching methods. The principals noted that they spend a large amount of time dealing with harassment from local governments. They are often troubled by ambiguities and inconsistencies in government policies and feel strongly that they lack support

124

Cultural Characteristics and Moral Education

from local government. Every day, they have to face some government department demanding that they pay taxes or fees. The principals are also constantly searching for teachers, as some schools experience high teacher turnover. SUMMARY In brief, conditions for private schools of various types are vastly different. They generally bear greater pressures and have less stability because of their financial independence. They are more autonomous and more conscious of market needs. Elite private schools try to be innovative in their educational philosophy, teaching methods, teacher-student relationships, curricula, and extracurricular activities. They strive to build a reputation for themselves so that they can survive in the competition with public schools as well as with other private schools.

The campus of an elite private school.

Students of an elite private school during recess.

A typical classroom of an elite private school.

Extracurricular activity is an emphasis in elite private schools.

Saluting to the national flag: a ritual aimed at teaching patriotism.

A dormitory for primary school students.

A student making his own bed.

These three-year-olds have already begun to learn English.

Students in a girls’ school performing martial arts.

Private university students in a class.

Villa built near an elite private school.

Classroom of a rural private school.

8

Moral and Democratic Education in Private Schools School is a key agent of socialization. In China, education has always assumed a vital role in transmitting political ideologies and training citizens into obedient citizens for the CCP government (Lin, 1991). For decades, Chinese students were required to take such courses as ‘‘Marxist philosophy,’’ ‘‘political economy,’’ ‘‘history of the Chinese Communist Party,’’ and the ‘‘history of international communist movements,’’ all of which aimed to inculcate communist beliefs in students. During the period from the 1950s through the 1970s, even courses on math, physics and chemistry were inundated with political messages. In post–Mao China, political control in education has relaxed, as schools were given the task of imparting scientific knowledge and transmitting skills for China’s modernization. New courses were added to the moral education curriculum, some of which are ‘‘citizenship education,’’ ‘‘moral education,’’ ‘‘social history,’’ and ‘‘common knowledge of socialist reconstruction.’’ Although they continue to preach communist ideologies, new contents emphasizing traditional values such as filial piety and benevolence, once banished, appear in these courses again, as does common knowledge about society and economy as well as knowledge about environmental protection and the legal system. Cultivation of personal qualities such as curiosity and diligence is stressed in these courses, along with politically desired attributes such as communist heroism and collectivism. Private schools, as schools providing a new form of education, stand in a unique position to take on new approaches toward moral and democratic education. To date, China remains a tightly controlled society, a condition that renders the possibility of substantial change in moral education rather limited.

126

Cultural Characteristics and Moral Education

However, some changes in private schools do present hope for the development of democratic education in China. COMMUNIST MORAL EDUCATION Under the policy of the CCP, private schools have an obligation to follow many of the practices featured in public schools. Regardless of their nature, both public and private schools are required to teach communist beliefs and inculcate obedience to the government. As Peng Deng puts it: More than the government in any other culture, the Chinese government saw schools as institutions to imbue the minds of the younger generation with politically correct ideas. Education was expected to contribute to social stability rather than to challenge the status quo, and to create and maintain consensus rather than to foment dissension. (Deng, 1997, 136)

In this light, Li Tieying, a former minister of education, stated: Regardless of the nature of a school [e.g., whether public or private], it must serve the country’s economic construction and bring up constructors and successors for the cause of socialism. Whom a school serves and what citizens it turns out have always been a fundamental question for our education. (Li Tieying, 1993, 4)

Accordingly, moral education in private schools is very similar to that in public schools (Xu Honglie, 1996, 6). Specifically, teaching still centers on concepts such as patriotism, collectivism, altruism, idealism, and heroism. Public schools and private schools alike utilize the following to teach these concepts: 1. They use occasions such as raising the national flag and singing the national anthem to inculcate patriotism and belief in communism. Students are taken to visit museums and memorial sites to learn about Chinese history and the struggle the Chinese people have gone through to win independence. 2. They use films and reading materials to teach students about the greatness of the Communist Party in changing China from a semicolonized country to an independent, self-sufficient sovereign country. Students are organized to listen to the government’s news broadcasts and take part in the activities such as annual celebrations of the birth of the People’s Republic and the CCP. 3. They organize activities for students to learn from people such as Lei Feng, Lai Ning, or Kong Fansheng, who were established as national role models by the government, and who displayed such virtues as collectivism, self-sacrifice, courage, and idealism. Students are urged to think of the collective and others before they think about themselves. 4. They organize students to march on foot or to travel to distant places to form friendly relations with children living in poor rural areas. The students are reminded through such experience that there are many children in this world who are not so privileged

Moral and Democratic Education

127

and that the students should never take what they have for granted. Students are urged to cultivate attributes such as persistence and endurance; they should never yield in face of difficulties and hardships. 5. They organize students to plant trees and flowers during springtime, and to denounce such deeds as littering and flower picking in public gardens. Through visiting beautiful scenic spots and viewing the great changes in the country students are to learn to love their motherland deeply and to develop a sense of responsibility for her protection and beautification.

Private schools engage in such activities in order to conform with the government’s requirements on moral education. Organizationally, private schools are also like public schools, that is, they have to have a party committee, a communist youth league, and a primary youth league in the school. These groups should convene regularly to study documents passed down from the central government. They must also monitor the orientation of the school to make sure that the school does not stray from the ‘‘correct’’ political track. In adhering to the state-prescribed curriculum for moral education, however, private schools attempt to exercise their autonomy. In my observation, they try to be politically neutral when following government guidelines. For example, in recent years the CCP government requires that all schools must hang up pictures of communist leaders (such as Marx, Lenin, Stalin, and Mao Zedong), revolutionary heroes, and other prominent social and political figures. While public schools followed the instruction by hanging mainly pictures of CCP leaders and revolutionary heroes, private schools placed pictures of scientists, writers, poets, and inventors in the most prominent places. The pictures I saw most often were those of Einstein and Madame Curie, pictures of ancient Chinese inventors and medical doctors, and those of contemporary scientists such as geologist Li Siguang and mathematician Hua Logeng. Overall, private schools tend to uphold politically ‘‘neutral’’ figures as role models for students. This modification implies a subtle reluctance on the part of private schools to indoctrinate students according to the expectations of the government. The messages they want to transmit to their students lean overwhelmingly toward nurturing love and respect for knowledge and innovation, rather than political conviction and obedience. All the elite schools I visited displayed their educational mottoes on the walls of the schools. Words I saw most often were words such as creativity, innovation, pragmatism, independent thinking, and respect for others. Some schools give special importance to the development of individual character and creative potential; others emphasize traditional virtues such as respect for the elderly. The following are some examples I copied from walls or the front gate of some schools: School 1: Solidarity, reform, creativity and pragmatism, and first-class performance School 2: High morality, high intellect, and multiple skills.

128

Cultural Characteristics and Moral Education

School 3: Diligence, friendship, honesty, and bravery. School 4: Fitness, integrity, erudition, and creativity. School 5: Pursuit of love, of beautiful things, and of knowledge. School 6: Respect for teachers, a pragmatic attitude, and an innovative mind. School 7: We must put students in the center of learning and focus on cultivation of creativity and qualities for the next century; we must guide students to be independent, knowing how to pursue their values and develop their individuality and becoming capable and achieving persons. School 8: Eight habits: diligence, frugality, wisdom, persistence, aspiration, bravery, collectivism, and balance. Eight moral principles: benevolence, righteousness, piety, respect, justice, modesty, trust, and honesty. School 9: Respect for teachers, frugality, diligence, and independence. School 10: Be patriotic, study hard, get solid results, and be creative.

CITIZENSHIP EDUCATION Like public schools, private schools must teach students a strong sense of national loyalty. The students, besides studying texts that use stories and theories to influence them in this respect, also learn about patriotism through the ritual of raising the national flag every Monday morning. During the ceremony, students and teachers stand solemnly, listening to the playing of the national anthem and staring at the slowly raising flag with respect. The ceremony ends with student and teacher representatives reading speeches expressing their vigorous love for the country and determination to fight for it. The ritual is deemed so serious that people passing by while the flag is being raised must stop and look at the flag with respect. To teach compassion for fellow citizens, a popular program organized by urban private schools is the ‘‘hand-in-hand program’’ in which urban children go to the countryside and make friends with rural children. The purpose is to remind the privileged urban students that there is still poverty in the country and that some children are much less fortunate than they are, for which they must feel grateful for what they have. The children live with the peasant children for a few days and afterwards write to them and exchange pictures. Students are also encouraged to donate money for people living in regions suffering from natural disasters or for people who have fallen victim to illness or accidents. As well, children are taken to memorial sites of historical and revolutionary heroes to learn about their courageous deeds and the sacrifices of precious lives for the country. DISCIPLINE AND CHARACTER EDUCATION Based on the fact that elite schools tend to be a gathering place of ‘‘little emperors or empresses,’’ discipline and character education are given high pri-

Moral and Democratic Education

129

ority in the agenda of these schools. Questions facing the schools are: How to educate children who tend to be self-centered and wasteful? How to handle students who were accustomed to throwing tantrums at home and who beat up schoolmates and curse teachers? How to deal effectively with students who constantly break school rules? Many ways have been tried. One interesting measure adopted by some elite schools is to take the children to the People’s Liberation Army, from whom they learn conformity to discipline. Following the PLA soldiers, the children get up early in the morning, run and jump under the hot sun or rain, take long marches, and sleep on hard wooden beds in the evening. I was told this measure was quite effective in teaching children that discipline and endurance are essential for success. To learn to appreciate and care for others, some schools require students to help their parents receive guests and do household chores; a school I visited urged students to remember to give their parents birthday presents to express their gratitude for their parents’ love for them. Eating well and getting rid of wasteful habits preoccupied elite schools. A principal told me: Under the direction of a famous nutritionist, our school diet follows the principle of eating a full meal in the morning, a good meal at noon, and eating only enough at night. We also provide snacks between meals. The ‘‘little emperors,’’ who are used to eating whatever they want and whenever they want at home, began to complain of being hungry at night. A flood of complaints came from the parents, who stopped doing this a month later when they found every single child had gained weight and actually looked healthier.

I visited many school canteens, which are all laid out in an orderly manner. The student canteen is usually a huge hall with the capacity to house from 100 to 500 students. Some are colorfully decorated, while most have only rows of tables and chairs with sets of plates and soup bowls placed neatly on each table. Some school canteens serve all students the same meal, while others allow students several choices. The menus are often quite simple but nutritious dishes. The menu of one school cafeteria looks like this: Breakfast: noodles and egg sauce Lunch: fried fish, vegetable with meat, and rice Dinner: mushu pork with eggplant, tofu, and rice Evening snack: milk, chestnut cookie

Students are expected to finish the food on their plates, and wasting food is discouraged. One school assigns students to take turns as the ‘‘service worker’’ serving meals and gathering dishes after meals. Some schools have teachers eating together with students, while others have separate canteens for teachers. One school I visited had a huge rice-steaming room that can steam rice for thousands of students and staff. The school also has half-a-dozen workers mak-

130

Cultural Characteristics and Moral Education

ing desserts and snacks for students, who have them twice a day. The school, like most other elite schools, grows its own vegetables. All these measures are intended for saving on the cost of operating a big school. In daily life, students are urged not to aspire to extravagance but to live a simple life; they are forbidden to compare and show off their families’ wealth. The majority of schools I visited require students to wear uniforms so that their families’ economic and social status are not visible. The children are not allowed to display any expensive items on their beds except a couple of toys. One school, however, required students to wear uniforms only during festivals. ‘‘Children have the natural tendency to love beautiful things, and we want to give them choice on their clothing,’’ I was informed. Some parents have no intention of cooperating with the schools. A principal said this to me: Some students have many bad habits, such as smoking, gambling, spending money extravagantly, unwillingness to take any tiresome work, and having no motivation to study. The parents give them a lot of money or agree to any demands from the children, as a compensation for their lack of attention to their children’s life. They really don’t know how to love their children. As a result, the students feel that everything comes easily and do not want to confront any hardship in their study. Quite a number of the students have psychological problems.

Principals told me that their efforts cannot be successful unless the parents work with them. They noted that despite their repeated emphasis on eating healthily, some parents would take their children to good restaurants during the weekend and the children would eat all they could. They then returned to school suffering from diarrhea, and the school clinic was often crowded with students on Monday mornings. The school would then call the parents to come take their children home, and the parents would be reprimanded. Adolescent students are particularly difficult to deal with, principals noted. A couple of students with very bad habits can exert very negative influence on a whole group of students. As the old saying goes, ‘‘A piece of mouse stool can ruin a whole pot of soup.’’ For example, although most elite schools set strict rules against students dating each other, a small number of students still find every opportunity to pass love notes and see each other off campus. Teachers try but often fail to stop students from reading pornographic magazines, which the students hide in places teachers cannot find. As a result, some students lose concentration and fall behind in their studies. To stamp out the trend, some schools resort to expelling the students, while others try to talk with students and reason about how falling in love at such a young age may divert their attention from studying and eventually affect their future; they encourage students to interact openly but not in secret. To correct adolescent delinquencies such as stealing and fighting, a school

Moral and Democratic Education

131

adopted a principle which is ‘‘to feel heartache but not headache,’’ meaning that the staff should still be full of feelings for these students and not treat them as a burden. Some schools, however, would expel students for serious behavioral problems. Parents who do not cooperate with the schools are also asked to withdraw their children. Schools also have to face the problem of spoiled single children. A principal noted to me that a student demanded his parents buy him a computer; when they decined, he staged a two-day hunger strike until they succumbed. The principal felt he could hardly handle such a situation. One elite school I visited punished students who swear, smoke, read pornographic magazines, and fight by sending them back to their parents. The students dreaded this punishment, I was told. While staying at home, the students were allowed neither to watch TV nor to call their friends; they would be constantly scolded by their ranting parents, whose frustration and disappointment made the life of the children miserable. After a few days, the students longed to get back to their friends so much they would promise (and indeed make an effort) to correct their behavior. Another punishment implemented in this same school is sending students who have broken rules to work in the school’s vegetable garden under the gaze of all the faculty and students. Everyone in the school knows that whoever is working in the garden must have done something wrong. This embarrasses the students and makes them feel ashamed of what they have done. The school’s vice principal told me that they also use means such as restraining students from playing their favorite sports or sending them to meditate in a private room as other options to discipline problem students. Arrogance is strongly discouraged in elite schools. The students are urged to focus on developing their academic strength and to help each other. Many classrooms and school halls have posters such as, ‘‘Persistence and perseverance bring success,’’ ‘‘We need high ambition,’’ ‘‘Success awaits those who are prepared,’’ and the like. Students are also urged to love physical labor. A few schools I visited have a piece of land for students to learn to grow crops so that they know what it takes to get food and learn to appreciate other people’s labor. This effort, however, was largely symbolic, because the school had hundreds of students but only tiny pieces of land for them to work. In some schools docility is clearly favored. Teachers monitor the students closely and control every aspect of their lives. In some primary schools, students sit with their hands behind them so that the class is in good order. Most schools require students to put their hands on the table. I observed that students tend to be very attentive during class, but after class they can be boisterous and lively. They are not shy when talking with strangers and find every opportunity to practice their spoken English with foreigners. In brief, all of the above practices aim at students ‘‘learning to live with limits, learning to play by the rules, and especially trusting and being trusted by adults’’ (Esty, 1991). The private schools, especially the boarding schools,

132

Cultural Characteristics and Moral Education

are designed to be ‘‘total institutions’’ with the aim of creating a moral community, a distinguishing difference from the mission of public schooling (see Goffman, 1969, and Dornbush, 1955). DEMOCRATIC EDUCATION: PRACTICE IN PRIVATE SCHOOLS Democratic Education: A Definition According to John Dewey, a democratic society is based on the equality of all citizens, with free communication among the people and responsibility and concern for shared interests. Participation in democratic government relies on schools’ teaching students to make independent and intelligent choices. ‘‘A democracy is more than a form of government; it is primarily a mode of associated living, of conjoint communicated experience’’ (Dewey, 1916, 87). Dewey stresses that school, as a place for learning, should first recognize a child as a valuable, equal human being, who is to be treated with respect. Schools should provide a living experience in which children can explore and think with their own minds. A positive environment should be provided so that children can cultivate their interests and develop their intellectual abilities (Dewey, 1938). Democratic education, as reflected in the goals of education, is to train students to be active beings in the society, who are able to make decisions for themselves responsibly. In the curriculum, it means to recognize individual differences and offer a diversity of programs to develop the students’ diverse potentials. In the learning and living environment, it means having a sense of community and an ethic of care. On the philosophical level, democratic education recognizes the value of individuals and treats people with respect and dignity regardless of their background. Implementing democratic education requires an open atmosphere in the society. In this respect, the drive toward modernization in China lays the crucial foundation for democratic changes in Chinese schools (Lin, 1994b). Goals of Education As discussed in Chapter 7, most elite schools I visited emphasize all-round development for children. Teachers work hard to bring students’ potential into full play, and students are encouraged to develop creative and independent thinking. For example, through learning in the arts, students find outlets to express their inner selves. In my previous works, I have discussed how Chinese schools from the 1950s to the 1970s taught students to love and hate based on a person’s social class background and how relaxation in the political environment has brought autonomy back to China to a certain extent (Lin, 1991, 1994b). During my field trip, I was struck by two bold words carved on a stone and placed at the entrance

Moral and Democratic Education

133

of a private school. The two words read: ‘‘Universal Love.’’ I discussed with the principal his intent and learned that the principal, like millions of the Chinese people, had suffered during the Cultural Revolution, which sowed the seeds of hatred among generations of Chinese people. He believed past education in China had taught students to hate but not to love. He therefore wished that his school would start a new culture, in which students learn to love each other, love their families and friends, love their fellow citizens, and love all people in the world deeply and without conditions. The principal stated: We need to form a community characterized by unity, love, friendship, and mutual support. Older children should help taking care of younger ones and brotherhood and sisterhood should be fostered. We must shed ourselves of selfishness and squeamishness, which are usually the problems with the only child in families. To this end we need to enhance their collective sense and learn to show concern for others. We as a school are to take advantage of the reform spirit rising in society to shift education for examination to education for the development of human qualities; while we strive to fulfill the teaching requirement set by the state, we will make use of our after-school time to strengthen the education of individual human qualities and abilities.

This principal/owner has gone a long way in developing his school. He set up the school in 1985 to teach a group of 3- to 5-year-olds Chinese classical music, which he believed was fundamental for training ‘‘humane’’ qualities and all-round persons. Later, the school evolved into a primary school for the students who had reached school age. As the school expanded, the principal decided to build a new building, which was pulled down when half complete by the city government, which charged that the school had violated a building code. The principal, not wanting to close his school, took the 200 students and teachers to a city in southern China, where he set up a business and made 2 million yuan in half a year. Armed with this money he moved the school back to Beijing and settled in a courtyard house near Tiananmen Square. Today the school’s administrative office remains in the ‘‘courtyard house’’ while the students and teachers have moved to a newly constructed campus in the suburbs with several school buildings. The principal insisted that moral education should not be purely political education. It should instruct students to be honest, fair-minded, and friendly. Politics can only teach people to tell lies, he believed. In other examples, democratic education can be found in the attention paid to teaching students to be open-minded. In my contact with many private school principals I found them to have a global mindset. Many stated their goals to be training global citizens for the 21st century, not obedient tools for political control. Aiming for students to be flexible, open-minded, and armed with new knowledge and new skills for the 21st century, they reform their curricula, allowing students to be themselves and striving to liberate them from the ‘‘iron clasp of the examination hell.’’ When talking about why they make extracurricular activities a high priority in their schools, principals maintained: ‘‘Every

134

Cultural Characteristics and Moral Education

student needs to feel respected, and respecting students is the best way to motivate them to learn. We believe no matter how slow a student seems in academic learning, the student must have some strength in some areas, and we are determined to kindle the spark of talent in them.’’ Liu Yufeng (1995), in his study of the Jinghua school in Beijing, points out: Perhaps the most important factor in the school’s philosophy is a spirit of educational reform. Many reform-minded educators in China believe that the rigidity of traditional Chinese teaching has impaired students’ creativity and self-esteem. In order to change this situation, the school encourages its students to do critical thinking, and gives its students the authority to challenge their teachers’ opinion if they have a different idea. (pp. 28–29)

Liu notes that classroom atmosphere is also very different at Jinghua. While in public schools, students are taught using a very serious, humorless approach, in which the teacher and the textbook are seen as the unquestionable authority, and students are expected to listen and take notes passively, Jinghua tried to change this by encouraging a more relaxed atmosphere, in which students feel free to participate and respond to the teacher and other students (p. 30). Teacher-Student Relationships In my interview with the students, I was most impressed by the feeling they hold toward their teachers. In today’s China, a popular saying is, ‘‘Everybody wants their children to have a good teacher but no one wants their children to become one.’’ Many children I interviewed, however, indicated that they wanted to become a teacher or a principal when they grow up, because they see their teachers as their role models in life. They remarked that the teachers were just like their mother, who cares for them deeply and gives them love and encouragement. This positive relationship is not easy to achieve. It means that teachers have to shoulder multiple responsibilities, performing simultaneously the role of mother, educator, nurse, manager, and counselor. It means that they have to make great efforts to befriend and get to the hearts of students. It means that the children are kept warm in the middle of the night, and it means working into the wee hours preparing for the following day’s work. The teachers ultimately create an environment that the children love and call home. ‘‘The students really like the school and don’t want to go home on weekends. Some students were looked down upon by teachers and classmates while studying in public schools. But they are respected here,’’ the teachers told me. The students I interviewed noted their teachers treat them just like they treat their own kids. They feel they are respected, whereas while they were in public schools they were treated like ‘‘garbage.’’ Some of the students were always ‘‘standing guard’’ in public schools, meaning they were ordered to stand in the front corner

Moral and Democratic Education

135

of the classroom all the time while the other students sat and listened to the teacher. Liu Yufeng (1995) relays similar findings in his study: Principals and teachers at Jinghua are encouraged to make friends with their students. As a result, students are much more involved in class and after class. In addition, because Jinghua is a boarding school, teachers spend a lot more time with students than public school teachers do. They are not only with the students in class, but also accompany the students in the extracurricular activities, and spend time with them on the playground and dormitory. After a period of time, a very close relationship develops between students and teachers, as well school administrators. Some students call their teacher mother or father, and when they meet a problem, it is more likely that they will tell that problem to their teacher rather than tell their parents. Some students actually prefer to stay in school with their teachers than at home with their parents during weekends. (pp. 34–35)

I heard very similar things described by Liu in the dozens of elite private schools I visited. In contrast, public schools overwhelmingly emphasize students’ academic achievement, and the living and caring aspects are notably lacking. One therefore can say the main strength of elite schools is the living and caring aspect of their practice, which contributes to a strong sense of community among faculties and students.

Autonomy in Administration, Curriculum, and Teaching As we have noted, autonomy is one major characteristic of private schools. Teachers and principals whom I interviewed took advantage of their autonomy and used their school as a forum to practice their educational philosophy. For fear of political retaliation, sometimes they couched their ideas in politically acceptable terms. For example, they would say they are training ‘‘socialist successors’’ who are to become intelligent and critical human beings for a ‘‘new era.’’ Some schools avoid overtly indoctrinating students. The refusal to place pictures of revolutionary figures in the school buildings, as mentioned earlier, is one such example. Some schools reduce the number of hours spent on teaching communist philosophy and history and use the time to teach computer skills and develop students’ extracurricular interests. Overall, private schools try hard to build a neutral, open, and active learning environment for their children.

Parents and Their Participation in School Parental involvement is another indication of democratic education in private schools. Under the public school system, how well a school does is the government’s business. Parents have little say in how a school should be run. However, the parent-school relationship in private schools is much closer. For example,

136

Cultural Characteristics and Moral Education

private schools have the obligation to inform parents on how their children are doing in school and involve the parents in the process of administration. A private school I visited sends a monthly report card to the parents and holds parents’ meetings twice a semester. The contents of the report card for each student are stored in the computer system, and parents can retrieve data any time they want from computers at home. Students of the school are allowed to make phone calls to their parents from school, and parents can also call teachers to request information about their kids. Every class supervisor’s home is equipped with a telephone through which parents and the teachers are in constant contact. Parents also see themselves as having a bigger role in education in private schools. In one school I visited, parents, especially intellectual parents, expect much from their children. They often come to school for information about their children. Teachers and principals sit down with the parents and share their opinion on school affairs. The school has a report card system, and parents can learn about their children’s behavior from the weekly report cards. Most schools hold parents’ meetings twice a year so that parents and the school exchange information about the children both at home and in school. In one school, the principal advises parents to contact him whenever they want to talk with him about their children, whereas in public schools, parents can only talk to class supervisors. Parents’ involvement in school, however, varies according to their interests and available time. There are four main types of parents, I was informed: 1. One type of parents adopts a hands-off approach. Some parents basically hand the child over to the school and pick the child up once a week. Some parents send their children to a faraway city, and the child returns once every three or four months. Some school administrators refer to their school as ‘‘a dumping ground,’’ as these parents pay to have their own problems taken care of by the school. 2. A second type of parents believes that they have a say in school administration. They participate in parents’ committees and school activities and try to stay informed about changes and problems in school. The schools usually have two or three meetings with these parents each term. 3. The third type of parents is very involved. They call principals or teachers up to ask about their child, even at late hours. Basically, they are collaborative. As elite schools stress the importance of cooperation with parents and are more responsive to parents than public schools, the parents are also willing to help. A private school was founded with a lot of help from parents who donated tables, TV sets, light bulbs, and even baskets of fruit. They feel that they are co-founding the school with the principal, who is very dedicated and experienced. 4. The fourth type comprises a small number of parents who believe that money buys them superior power over teachers and administrators. They demand differential treatment for their children, chide the teachers rudely, and walk around the school as if they own it. They adopt a confrontational attitude when the teachers report problems with their kids. They often threaten to pull their children out of school. A school I

Moral and Democratic Education

137

visited has to make it clear to the parents that the educators are professionals who know how to educate the children and that parents are to cooperate with but not to harass the teachers. When the relationship with one or two parents really deteriorated, the school asked the parents to withdraw their children. Principals note that there is a delicate line to walk, as many schools still have a quarter to a third of their seats unfilled and therefore can’t afford to let the relationship with parents become too tense.

Regardless of many problems in the parent-school relationship, this is the first time that Chinese parents are joining the process of school administration. The role of parents is important in private schools, which could potentially transform Chinese education in a democratic way. The tradition of education for the government and by the government may eventually change to that of education for the society and by the society. CONCLUSION Private schools in China remain under the tight control of the CCP government, but they have also achieved greater autonomy in implementing moral and democratic education. It is encouraging to see that private schools are willing to take the risk of implementing new ideas in education. Parents’ participation in school administration and the close relationship between teachers and students provide hope for democratic changes in Chinese education. In all, the initiatives of democratic education in China come from the grassroots, from people who have suffered the consequences of undemocratic education. This development would be impossible without the changes taking place in China’s social, political, and cultural context. In the reform era, as Chinese people are reflecting on their past practices and searching for alternatives, private schools, with greater autonomy, will be at the forefront of practicing democratic education in China.

PART 4

PRIVATE EDUCATION: RESPONSES, ISSUES, PROBLEMS, AND THEORETICAL REFLECTION

9

Response from the Public, Scholars, and the Government Private education development has raised sensitive questions and triggered much response from parents, the media, scholars, and the government. Questions of common concerns are: What are the purposes of these schools? Do they serve only the rich? Is private education against socialist principles? Should it be encouraged or constrained? What can be done to enhance the development and administration of private education? In this chapter, responses to private education development are examined, and particular attention is paid to the reactions of government officials at national and local levels. Issues caused by ambiguity in government policies are also discussed. RESPONSE FROM THE PUBLIC If you ask a Chinese citizen on the street about what he or she thinks of private schools, she might say, ‘‘Oh, are you talking about the ‘school for the aristocrats’?’’ To the majority of Chinese citizens, private schools are elitist in orientation and out of their reach. Most of them have not had the opportunity to visit an elite school, and their impressions of private schools are formed mainly from the picture painted by the media. In a survey of parents of students in public schools, parents were found to be quite aware of the existence of private schools. Of the 488 parents of Beijing children and teenagers, 89 percent said they have heard and read about private schools, 72.3 percent said they are concerned about privately run schools, and 69.7 percent held China today needs to develop privately run schools (Zhang

142

Private Education

Zhiyi, 1994, 161). What did the parents feel about private schools, then? In this same study, 28 percent of the parents thought that private schools can supplement the insufficiency of public schools in number and type to provide students and parents with more choices; 22 percent thought that these schools were created to give high-quality education and provide special features; and 27 percent thought that these schools were established to break down the unitary mode in schools, join in the competition, and improve the quality of the entire educational field. These three items total 77 percent, which demonstrates that parents are in general positive about private schools. The rest, about 22 percent of parents, opine that private schools serve the rich; that impression was based on the high fees charged by private schools (pp. 159–167). The study further reveals that despite holding a very positive view regarding the role of private schools, 88 percent of the parents did not plan to send their children to private schools. The reasons given include the view because of the large number of public schools, there was no reason to send children to private school. Further, most parents could not afford the high tuition. The study reveals that more than 90 percent felt they could afford only 600–1,000 yuan in fees for primary school and 800-1,600 yuan for secondary school; only 4.8 percent felt they could afford the high fees of 5,000–10,000 yuan for a boarding school (p. 164). In another study conducted by Xu Guangyu (1994) in Tianjing city and the nearby areas, 582 parents from key schools, regular schools in the city, regular schools in the nearby suburbs, and regular schools in outlying rural areas were surveyed. The findings revealed that 66 percent of the parents were concerned with private education development and 34 percent were not. On the question ‘‘Do you think educational administrations should limit the range of fees charged by private schools?’’ the findings of this study are: 68.9 percent felt there should be limitations, 14.8 percent felt there should not be, and 16.3 percent did not know. This shows that the majority of people want educational departments in charge to impose restrictions on the range of fees charged by private schools. From one perspective, this reveals that the public still doubts whether the market competition mechanism is capable of regulating private school fees and people are worried that the random fees charged by private schools will increase their financial burden. (Xu Guangyu, 1994, 174)

In my own research, I found citizens to be generally neutral about private schools. Some see private schools as another fad created by the reform, much like the stock fad and the real estate fad, which will recede after a few shocking waves. Some are frustrated by the exclusivity of the schools. To them, this is another way the rich show off their wealth, and they call for the media to pay more attention to the poor children in rural and remote areas. Still others maintain that it is better that rich people spend on their children’s education rather than on fancy cars and expensive meals, not to say on pets or mistresses.

Response from the Public, Scholars, and Government

143

In fact, in my contact with ordinary Chinese residents, they also harbor a strong desire to send their children to an elite school if they could ‘‘make it’’ financially. The middle class and ‘‘latent’’ middle-class people actually welcome this new development, which presents them an alternative should their children fail to enter a competitive key school. I know of parents who are preparing themselves financially to send their child to a good private secondary school even though the child is still studying in a primary school. In general, the parents’ attitudes vary based on their income level, their expectations for their children, their current class status, and the information they have about private schools. RESPONSE FROM THE MEDIA The development of private schools or, to be more precise, elite schools has received widespread coverage in the media. The Central TV Station operated by the government has run programs introducing and discussing the pros and cons of elite private schools. An incident was widely reported in which a school principal was hit on the nose by an attacker. The attacker was hired by the company investing in the school. The cause of the attack was over the use of tuition collected: The company investing in the school’s founding wanted to move the money out for other business ventures while the principal had disallowed it, arguing that the school needed to keep the money to fend off potential pitfalls. Media coverage of private schools centers on the high fees as well as the ‘‘luxurious’’ living and learning conditions of the elite schools. Many reports assumed that children growing up in such an enclosed environment will turn into arrogant nuts. The schools were called ‘‘schools for aristocrats,’’ even though only one principal had publicly announced this to be the orientation of his school. In contrast, the media have largely ignored the existence of urban ordinary private schools and rural private schools, to the extent that many people in China and internationally do not even know that they exist. CHINESE SCHOLARS ON PRIVATE EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT Chinese scholars have heeded the rapid development of private schools. In 1992, 1995, 1998 and 1999 they held conferences discussing private school development and issues concerning private education. In 1994, a book providing comprehensive discussion of theories and practices in private education in China was published with Zhang Zhiyi as the chief editor and more than 25 other contributors (Zhang Zhiyi, 1994). Numerous articles were published discussing all aspects of private education development. However, it is those who are directly involved in the founding and running of private schools who have played the most active part in exploring these issues.

144

Private Education

At present, there is still no nationwide association for private schools with wide participation from scholars, but a large number of provinces have associations founded mostly by owners and principals of private schools for liaison and support. In 1994, Henan province set up its association for the province’s 1,511 private schools and 200,000 students. In 1996, Jilin province followed suit. Their stated goals include sharing of information, conducting research on theories and practice of private education, supervising and evaluating local private schools, and provision of support and protection for each other. By 1997, more than half of the provinces in the country had formed an association of private schools. A nongovernmental national association for private higher education formed in 1993 holds annual meetings and brings founders and administrators together to discuss problems they have encountered and strategies for improvement. Under this association’s initiative, the journal World of Private Higher Education began to be published in 1993; it later expanded its scope and was renamed World of Education Run by Social Forces (minban jiaoyu tiandi). Today, the journal continues to publish and plays a pivotal role in facilitating information exchange and serving as a forum for active discussion of issues and problems relating to private education development. Chinese scholars have in general been positive about private education development. Their publications cover theories and practices of private education development; they debate over the nature of private schools and issues related to social equality, government approval criteria, and the management, evaluation, and supervision of private schools. In general, scholars positively affirm the role of private education in China’s educational reform. Private schools’ focus on children’s all-round development is applauded as a bold move toward training China’s new generation for the 21st century. Scholars tend to view private education as an inevitable outcome of the development of a marketoriented economy. They express little doubt that private schools will help with China’s education development, noting that the central government cannot by itself meet all the demands of the population of 1.2 billion for education. As a scholar puts it, ‘‘To take in funding from abroad and from the society in order to increase education funding from all angles is a good thing for the country and for the people; the more funding input, the better’’ (Gu Meiling and Liu Dexuan, 1994, 59). In discussing the roles and features of private schools, scholars often criticize China’s public school system—rigid top-down control, formalism, lack of autonomy, exam orientation, unequal access to quality education, and so on. They cannot, however, agree on the role private education should play in the country’s education system; some see it to be only supplementary to public education, while others perceive it as one of the two legs of China’s educational development, which therefore entitles private schools to equal treatment with public schools. The media’s negative coverage of private schools was criticized by some

Response from the Public, Scholars, and Government

145

scholars. Zhang Zhiyi pointed out that the mass media have been less than fair in stigmatizing private schools as ‘‘schools for aristocrats.’’ Zhang claims: It is not fair that the press simply categorizes all schools that charge high fees or all private schools as schools for training aristocrats. The standard for evaluation of a school should be the school’s goal of education and what it actually does in trying to reach the goal. High fees, expensive equipment and special grade senior teachers can not be equated with education for aristocrats. As a matter of fact, our schools should strive to own good equipment and facilities and hire and retain senior level teachers in their teaching force. This should be our goal for education and should not be biased against. (Zhang Zhiyi, 1995, 10)

Chinese scholars are especially critical of the ambiguities and uncertainties in government policies. They call for implementable laws specifying the rights and responsibilities of private schools; they urge the Chinese government to provide necessary financial support to private schools, especially to the secondary vocational schools that provide educational opportunities to the millions of young people who cannot go on to higher education. However, scholars also hold different opinions on various issues. The autonomy enjoyed by private schools is perceived by some scholars as essential for private schools to achieve efficiency and effectiveness and by others as calling for government to tighten political control and administrative supervision. Worrying that private education at the primary and junior secondary levels could undermine the country’s nine-year free compulsory education system, some scholars saw allowing schools to charge fees at this level equivalent to allowing parents to buy education and grades with money, a practice that would fundamentally alter the principle of fairness and meritocracy, thus leading to further stratification and commercialization of education. Opponents to this view insist that the principle of distribution—‘‘to each according to his/her labor’’— should be used not only in the distribution of goods and wealth but also in education. Their rationale is that running schools generates returns as well as costs money. It is natural for people who have become wealthy to want better education for their children, and it is a positive thing that they want to invest more on education (Gu Meiling and Liu Dexuan, 1994). Differential earnings create different demands on education, and this phenomenon is not different from consumption of goods, they argue. Public schools, like private schools, should become more effective by reforming the administrative system and by increasing its source of funding to fulfill various social needs (Hao Wenwu, 1995). Some scholars are critical of the government’s reluctance to support private education. Zhu Yiming (1996) notes that the government policy of ‘‘active encouragement, vigorous support, correct guidance and strengthened administra-

146

Private Education

tion’’ has not been well implemented—there is neither enough support nor effective administration in private schools. Zhu urges: Educational administration department should answer directly to, not avoid, problems and questions regarding private education development. They should define clearly in their policies who should be ‘‘supported and encouraged’’ and who should not, so that there are laws for private schools to abide by for their establishment and development. (Zhu Yiming, 1996, 8)

He further asserts: Government departments, in dealing with private schools, need to change their administration modes to take into consideration the special characteristics of private schools. The uniqueness of private schools lies in their autonomy in running these schools. Government departments should give them necessary space for free development and abstain from interfering with the internal management process of the school. The main function of the government should lie in evaluation and appraisal of private schools’ achievement and educational orientation. (Zhu Yiming, 1996, 8)

Scholars also introduce and analyze laws and regulations concerning private education in other countries, notably in the United States, Japan, Britain, South Korea, and Hong Kong. Studies were also conducted on China’s long history of private education. They point out that while private schools in North America and in East Asian countries comprise a significant part of their education system, China has been lagging far behind. They comment that this is rooted in the reluctance to accept private schools by some people who believe that ‘‘private’’ is often worse than ‘‘public,’’ regardless of quality and intentions. They insist that problems faced by private schools have been paid insufficient attention by the society and especially by governments at all levels. GOVERNMENT POLICIES AND REGULATIONS CONCERNING PRIVATE SCHOOLS Government Policy on Private Education Response by the Chinese government to the rapid development of private schools has been affirmative in rhetoric. In fact, private education could not have developed so fast were it not for the relaxation in government control. As early as 1982 the revised Constitution states, ‘‘The state encourages the collective economic organizations, state enterprises and institutions and other sectors of society to establish educational institutions of various types in accordance with law.’’ On May 27, 1985, keeping step with profound transformation in the economic system, the ‘‘Resolution on the Reform of the Educational System’’ stipulated that ‘‘local authorities should encourage and give guidance to the

Response from the Public, Scholars, and Government

147

establishment of schools by state enterprises, social organizations, and individuals.’’ In 1987, the ‘‘Provisional Regulation on the Establishment of Schools by Societal Forces’’ was issued, containing concrete provisions on the establishment and management of nongovernmental schools. The 1993 ‘‘Outline of Chinese Educational Reform and Development’’ further pointed out: ‘‘The state adopts a sixteen-word policy of active encouragement, vigorous support, correct guidance and enhanced management of schools established according to law by social organizations and individual citizens.’’ In July 1997, the Regulation on Schools Run by Social Forces was passed into law after much anticipation. Government officials also voiced their support of private education on various occasions. Li Tieying, former minister of education, said: Education run by social forces concerns an important issue in education development in our country. Presently if we depend solely on the state to run schools, can we solve the problems of running schools on the largest scale in a country which is relatively backward in the economy? Obviously, the government cannot undertake it all. First, the country cannot undertake it, because the number of people to be educated is extraordinarily large. Second, the development of economic construction requires improving the quality of workers greatly. Third, the country is not financially strong enough to run more schools. (Li Tieying, 1993, 4)

Li asserts that private education is a good deed for the society and that to receive an education is a basic right of every citizen. He notes that presently the government’s capabilities are limited for satisfying the people’s everincreasing requirement for education and that there exists a big gap between needs and available resources. Therefore, social groups should be encouraged to open schools and provide solutions to existing problems. Problems in Implementation of Policies However, government policies regarding the administration of private education have fallen behind grassroots initiatives. In my interview, school founders and principals again and again said they suffered from a lack of support from all levels of governments. They complained that the government’s principle of ‘‘active encouragement and vigorous support’’ represents just words, not actions. The principals’ frustrations have good reasons. First, for more than one decade since the reappearance of private schools, legislative actions have been taken reactively rather than proactively. The Regulation on Schools Run by Social Forces did not come into effect until July 1997, leaving private schools wondering for years where they stood in China’s education system. Second, the State Education Commission has been conservative in demonstrating its seriousness about private education. Chen Baoyu, a scholar, illustrates this situation very well:

148

Private Education

The state education administration departments from the top level to provinces and cities assign very few people to oversee private education, unequal to their task. For example, the State Education Commission is a state organization with 700 employees; the office directly administering private schools is a low level office with only three staff. From the position of the office to the number of people, it is hard to imagine how they can shoulder the task of planning and managing nearly 70,000 private universities, secondary schools, primary schools and kindergartens. (Chen Baoyu, 1997, 6)

At the local level, policies made by different levels of governments have varied tremendously, and government education departments often fail to designate staff to be in charge of private schools. I visited some offices in charge of private education and found that only two to three officials are assigned to look after private schools aside from their other duties, often their responsibility over adult and vocational education. They are crammed into an office with several other people, usually together forming only a tiny section in the government’s education departments. Local governments, not clear about their responsibilities and authority with regard to private schools, often exclude private schools from enrollment plans, teacher training programs, participation in teaching and administrative activities, awards of titles, and allocation of employment quotas. As Zhang Wei and Ji Ping put it: Nobody oversees our teaching and research activities. When we knock on their door, we are told: ‘‘You have to pay a charge.’’ Nobody cares whether our younger teachers join the Youth League or the party. We are not even notified of district athletic events. . . . We had gone to some normal schools or colleges to recruit teachers. But the minute they hear you’re from a private school, they demand a ‘‘training fee’’ from you. Besides, if a teacher is transferred over, which school keeps his or her dossier? If some of the teachers wish to leave the private school after a time, can they take up where they left off as far as their [official] records are concerned? Also, they have no assurance of welfare and benefits. There is an old-age pension insurance that we can participate in, but there is no medical insurance out there, so what are we to do? Moreover, who is going to take care of teachers’ titles, housing, etc.? What are we supposed to do? In short, there should be a set of policies for private school teachers the same as for public schools, and they should all be coordinated, otherwise no one will come here even if the pay is higher. (Zhang Wei and Ji Ping, 1994, 9–10)

All of this causes some people to wonder if private schools are ‘‘born of a stepmother’’ (Bian Qingli, 1995). Ambiguities over the nature and role of private education have long haunted private schools. Among officials, there is a belief that since China is a socialist country, anything ‘‘private’’ in education could create a ‘‘blind spot’’ where the government could lose its tight control. Therefore, despite the policy of ‘‘active support and vigorous encouragement,’’ private schools are seen by some people as ‘‘monsters of capitalism which can only undermine the foundation of socialism.’’ Some government officials even say that ‘‘private education is mur-

Response from the Public, Scholars, and Government

149

dering people for money’’ and that private schools are ‘‘breaking up the principle of equal and free educational opportunities’’ (Zhang Zhiyi, 1995, 9). Based on such attitudes some government officials have doggedly rejected private education development: In the circles of education, the leftists have displayed themselves in many ways. For example, if you propose developing higher education to join state and local forces in order to turn out more talented people, the leftists will charge you with bringing confusion and disorder, arguing that it will be difficult to handle too many college graduates, and that the normal order of state-run universities will be disrupted. If you propose authorizing local universities to award their own diplomas in order to arouse their enthusiasm for conducting education and make it easier for graduates from those universities to seek a job, he will charge you with awarding diplomas recklessly, arguing that graduates from private universities will take jobs away from graduates of state-run universities and thus damage the reputation of state-run universities. If you propose allowing local universities to recruit students nationwide, he will charge you with recruiting students without authorization. If you propose opening further to the world by establishing joint schools with foreign countries, he will charge you with opening schools blindly, reasoning that unlike economy, joint schools between China and foreign countries will violate the country’s educational right. . . . He always asks you whether it is of a socialist or a capitalist nature, making it impossible for you to move and take steps. (He Xiangdong, 1993, 9)

The suspicious reactions have led to negative attitudes toward private schools. Some officials in the taxation department, police department, or city planning department treat private schools and universities as private businesses, imposing all kinds of taxes and fees on them. Private schools even have to bribe a multitude of government departments in order to prevent harassment. However, not all government officials resist private education development. In fact, some are very enthusiastic about it. According to Zhang Zhiyi, head of the Office of Schools Run by Social Forces in the State Education Commission, the local educational administration leaders in Beijing, Shenyang, Guangdong, Guangzhou, Tianjing, Shanghai, and Wenzhou have given great support to the development of private and nongovernmental schools. Private education would not have developed at such a fast pace if it were not for the support and concerns of the local educational administrations (Zhang Zhiyi, 1995). Shenyang city in northeastern China has seen private education develop very fast. The city government in the early 1990s adopted four policies to encourage private school development: (1) that no restriction should be imposed on the enrollment of students in private schools; (2) that fees charged should be based on needs of the market and should be decided by the school itself; (3) that the school-run businesses should enjoy the same preferential benefits (e.g., not to have to pay tax on profit) as public schools; and (4) that private schools should receive the same treatment in acquisition and use of land use for construction of housing and teaching buildings. The city also made sure that obstacles are re-

150

Private Education

moved from the hiring of teachers by private schools. For example, university graduates and teachers in public schools should be allowed to teach in private schools, where their seniority, professional titles, and ranking would also be maintained. This measure removes a major obstacle for transferring teachers to private schools (Guo Ge, 1996). The goal of the city is that eventually private schools would reach the stage of ‘‘self-governance, self-support, selfdevelopment, and self-restriction.’’ GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO VARIOUS TYPES OF PRIVATE SCHOOLS Response to Elite Schools It is a concern of the Chinese government that elite schools may cause serious social tension by their exclusivity. Echoing the central government’s concern, the head of the State Education Commission, Zhu Kaixuan, voiced his worries in a speech in which he wondered whether such schools can implement the state’s education policy in an overall way, whether this is a good way to educate children, and whether such a school environment and mode of education will help them grow up into being successors to the cause of socialism (Zhu Kaixuan, 1994). Zhu stressed that no matter how superior the conditions or how much money people pay, private schools must follow the socialist direction, implement the state education policy, and enable students to develop morally, intellectually, and physically. If there is deviation, they should be corrected, for the matter concerns not only the students and their parents but also the future of the country. In response to the criticism that many elite schools are meant for the rich and focus on training elites, Li Lianqing, deputy minister of education of the State Education Commission, sternly denounced elite schools in a speech in January 1995. He said, ‘‘We should oppose all kinds of elite schools which charge a fee of several thousand yuan. We will help such elite schools to change their purpose. The private elite schools will be closed if they refuse to accept our proposal.’’ Upon hearing the speech, elite schools throughout the country reacted strongly and swiftly. One school I visited stopped constructing its secondary school building for three months, although the owner had already invested 10 million yuan in it. He was not sure whether he should put in more money or if the government could come and pull down the building. During this sensitive time, there was also a rumor flying around that a ‘‘blacklist’’ had already been compiled of a number of schools to be closed down by the government. Banks started to refuse loans to elite schools. This strong reaction is an illustration of the precarious position of private schools. After this event, principals called loudly for legal recognition of their position in China so that they would not have to suffer big swings again in the changing political climate. For some top-ranking government officials, private schools contravene the

Response from the Public, Scholars, and Government

151

government’s nine-year compulsory education law. In a 1995 speech, the minister of the State Education Commission reiterated his points: In the compulsory free education phase, the ‘‘Compulsory Education Law’’ stipulates that there should be no fees charged; schools can collect only some miscellaneous fees such as textbook fees. At present some schools are charging high miscellaneous fees; some good schools are charging high fees to students who are admitted with lower grades; some private schools are collecting high fees. This is against the ‘‘Compulsory Education Law,’’ undermining our principle of equality and free education, shoring up the fees charged by all schools. They have caused very bad influence in the society and the State Education Commission reiterates here that it is not allowed to charge fees at the free compulsory education stage. (Zhu Kaixuan, 1995, 4)

Schools that charge very high fees, such as the Yinghao School in Guangzhou, known for asking 300,000 yuan for its education savings fund, have been under fire since their inception. To improve the situation, the Guangzhou education bureau decided to impose strict supervision on expensive private schools and would not approve any new schools like Yinghao. However, the officials also maintain that the key to evaluating schools is to see what kind of educational policies the schools implement and as what kind of citizens the schools are training the children. ‘‘From this point, we do not have elite schools,’’ they claimed. The Education Bureau also audits the accounts of the province’s elite schools to see how they use and manage school funds, in other words, whether the money is used on education or not (Guangzhou Education Commission, 1995). Response to Rural Private Schools Rural private schools have encountered significant problems with local government officials. The rural schools I visited have been ordered to close their doors, charged with all kinds of wrongdoing, and fined heavy fees. One school had to spend 3,000 yuan for its three principals to travel to different levels of government to get the matter straightened out so that the school could continue to operate. The 3,000 yuan represented one-third of the tuition the school collected that term. The school was also excluded from all kinds of activities organized by the county education office, including listening to government documents, being considered for awards, and participation in sports events. The school had to borrow exam papers from a nearby public school in order to participate in the county-level midterm or final examinations. In another report, a local government in Anhui province charged a 150 yuan ‘‘compulsory education fee’’ to parents who sent their children to private schools. The local government ordered that children attending private schools be forbidden to advance to public secondary schools after graduating from private primary schools. They also announced that anyone providing space for

152

Private Education

private schools would be fined 1,000 yuan (Xu He, 1995, 18). This occurred despite the fact that the school had won praise from parents for its high quality in teaching. Reasons underlying local officials’ reluctance or even hostility toward rural private schools stem chiefly from the fear that allowing too many private primary schools to exist would affect the local county’s ratio of school-age children enrolling in compulsory education. To elaborate, each year the State Education Commission constructs a list of counties that have fulfilled the task of generalizing the nine-year compulsory education free of charge. Local officials are rewarded or penalized for their records. They are thus worried that allowing students to attend private schools would reduce the ratio of school-age student enrollment in public schools. The officials are also concerned that some people might use the name of setting up a private school to reap profits, while others worry that private schools might cause an exodus of students from local public schools. Indeed, the worry is warranted: One school I visited had 150 students the first year, 300 the second year, and 450 the third year. Most of the new students came from the nearby public schools which could not compete in quality and fees. Response to Ordinary Urban/Township Private Schools Ordinary urban/township private schools have similarly experienced much unfair treatment from local officials. For example, the private schools are allowed to admit students only after all public schools have picked their students. A school I visited was allowed to admit its first group of students on September 17, 1992, long after public secondary schools had admitted their students. The school had to take in only those abandoned by public schools. In Beijing, a computer system is used to allocate students to various schools. The rule is that key schools will be the first to select students, ordinary public schools next, and private schools last. This order gives private schools only students with low academic achievement. Private vocational schools also find themselves deprived of job quotas for their graduates, and students have to sink or swim in the job market (He Qizhong and Zhang Yizhong, 1994, 30). Urban and township private schools thus find it very difficult to recruit enough students to generate sufficient revenue and to build up a reputation. The schools also have to spend a large amount of time dealing with constant interference from government officials. ‘‘We are expected just to accommodate, and we can never work on our own,’’ principals complained to me. Private schools for rural children living in urban cities have encountered serious conflicts with officials. Today, hundreds of millions of rural peasants have migrated to urban cities. They live at the margin of the city, being looked down upon by urban residents, doing the heaviest and dirtiest work for very low pay. The parents cannot afford to send their children to public schools, which demand that non-urban residents pay a ‘‘school support fee,’’ an amount that could run

Response from the Public, Scholars, and Government

153

as high as 12,000 yuan a year. Private citizens therefore open schools for these children and charge only moderate fees. However, the schools are still at the beginning stage of development, and because of a lack of capital the schools’ conditions often cannot meet the criteria set by the government for a new school. One school in Guangzhou was forced by the district office of education to shut down, leaving children and parents crying helplessly and demanding why they could not have their own school (Jiang Feng and Lin Lin, 1996). Another similar incident is reported in the nearby city of Shenzhen. Voicing criticism of a forcible closing of a school for immigrant children in the city, Zhu Jingguo wrote: The current population of Shenzhen is over three million, yet only 800 thousand people have official residence cards. Not all of the 2.2 million migrant workers are young, and many of them came to Shenzhen for work with their families. For example, the parents of the students from Shanglu School are all peasants from the countryside of Lufen, invited by Shenzhen city departments to plant vegetables and cultivate flowers for Shenzhen residents. There are therefore tens of thousands of children who come from rural areas and live in Shenzhen. However, public schools in Shenzhen were designed only for those with official residence cards. The schools are well-conditioned and demand high tuition and fees. Even permanent residents in Shenzhen find it hard to afford them, let alone those poor children of migratory workers without Shenzhen residence cards. (Zhu Jingguo, 1995, 17)

Zhu concludes that not allowing the children of migrant workers to have their own schools, no matter how shabby the schools are at the beginning, is depriving these children of their right for education. He worries about the prospect of China’s having many new young illiterates in major cities because of the lack of schools for migrant children. Response to Private Universities Private universities have called themselves the ‘‘stepchildren’’ of the government, a criticism of the government’s reluctance to grant private universities the right to issue degrees. China maintains a national unified degree system, which was put into place by a bill passed by the People’s Congress in 1980. The State Council Academic Degree Committee established in 1981 holds the authority for determining the types of degrees to confer, setting rules and approving applications for degree-awarding universities. It is illegal for a school to award degrees without approval from the committee (Zhao, 1998). Up to 1997, fewer than two dozen of the more than 1,200 private universities have been granted the authority to issue degrees. Despite calls to loosen the criteria, Article 5 of the Regulation on Schools Run by Social Forces issued in 1997 reiterates the government’s stand that it will continue to maintain strict control over private higher education development. In my discussion with school founders on the government’s reluctance to encourage private higher education, one notion is that the government worries that with too many university students outside its

154

Private Education

tight control, another event such as the student movement in 1989 might be caused, a prospect the government definitely wants to avoid. A private university approved to grant degrees must meet criteria set out in Article 7 of ‘‘The Provisional Stipulation on Establishment of Nongovernmental Higher Learning Institutions’’ issued in 1993: The school must have at least three specialties, the number of students should be at least 500, among whom at least 300 are taking degrees in higher education. The school must also have fixed, independent, and relatively concentrated land and buildings. Buildings are to be in five categories: classrooms, library, laboratory (including lab site and auxiliary rooms), administrative buildings, and other housing. The reference index of total floor space is: 10 square meters per student in schools of arts and letters, law, or finance and economics; 16 square meters per student in engineering, agricultural, or medical schools. The land area should also meet the government’s requirement for the construction of buildings and students’ athletic activities. However, most private universities cannot meet these criteria. Having an independent campus seems to be most difficult for private universities that rely on renting space. Sometimes students live in one place, have classes in another place, and move to conduct scientific experiments in a third place. Falling short of requirements for space or equipment, nearly all private universities are granted only preparatory status. This in turn affects their ability to attract students, forming a negative cycle for their survival and development. A government organization justifies its policy this way: A system of diplomas and certificates is an integral part of a nation’s education system, representing the requirements set by the state on graduation, on level of academic achievement, and on the quality of education. In order to maintain the solemnity of academic qualifications the state has taken the following policy measures: Any NGOsponsored HEI which offers formal tertiary programs and wants to be authorized to award academic qualifications recognized by the state has to obtain such authorization through a process of examination and verification conducted by the local educational department, subject to the final approval of the State Education Commission. Any institution without such authorization may not award diplomas or certificates of graduation testifying to such formal qualifications. However, such an institution may issue ‘‘certificates of completion of courses’’ to students who have finished their studies, testifying to the courses studied and scores of examinations. Any student who has completed his or her study in such an institution and wants to acquire state-recognized academic qualifications has to prepare for and sit the state-administered higher education examinations held for the specific field. Anybody who has successfully passed such examinations will be awarded a certificate of formal qualification recognized by the state. (Study Team, 1995, 30)

The strict control of private higher education puts private universities in an unequal position vis-a`-vis public universities. The outlet for students to gain formal recognition, as mentioned, is through passing the state-administered examination for self-study students. The proportion of students passing the exam

Response from the Public, Scholars, and Government

155

then becomes one of the most important criteria of success for a private university. The role of many private universities is thus limited to that of a preparatory school preparing and coaching students for the examination. The self-study examination reportedly tends to be too difficult, and course work for some subjects is too heavy. This unfair competition leads to calls for equal treatment of well-run private universities with public universities in their right to issue graduation certificates and let the market decide who are the qualified employees (Yang Songtao, 1993, 19). There is a suggestion that the market be made the final judge of the quality of a university, based on the achievement of its graduates. Reluctance to recognize the profound importance of private higher education is demonstrated in other areas as well. One example is that some officials tend to be very negative in attitude. Whenever they heard others mention private universities, they would arbitrarily condemn them as ‘‘admitting students recklessly,’’ ‘‘running schools recklessly,’’ and ‘‘giving out diplomas recklessly.’’ They fix their eyes on the fact that some schools were set up for quick profit, while ignoring that the majority of founders are retired administrators and teachers who want to contribute to the development of higher education by using their expertise. A private university president (Wang Hongzhi, 1993) thus called for a change in attitude toward private education, from seeing private universities as picking up ‘‘leftovers’’ from public universities, to seeing them as an important and necessary component of China’s economic development. He states: Private universities benefit our country, for they do not require the government to spend any money but they train expertise for the country’s economic reconstruction; they benefit the people, for they provide young people and those who could not get into universities learning and employment opportunities; they allow retired people to contribute their remaining energy to the training of talents and improving the overall educational level of the country, which benefits the nation over the long term. Denying the achievement of private universities and neglecting their impact were the result of some people’s hanging onto a uniform, single state-run higher education system. (Wang Hongzhi, 1993, 14)

About the fact that by 1995 only eighteen universities had been given permission to issue degrees recognized by the state and that all other universities had to rely on the state-administered examination to qualify their students, bitter criticism has been voiced, for example, in 1995: Of the over 800 private higher learning institutions only over 10 have the right to issue graduation certificates recognized by the State Education Commission, and 95% of private universities do not even have the right to issue graduation certificates for their own education; in actuality, they have been deprived of the basic condition to participate in equal competition in the talents market. If only a few universities will be granted this right to issue their certificates at the current speed by the State Education Commission Higher Education Evaluation Committee, then it would be one hundred years before

156

Private Education

private universities can participate in equal competition with public universities in the market. (Ding Runsheng, 1995, 18)

Ding Runsheng (1995) argues that Harvard, MIT, Cambridge, and Oxford, all famous private universities, issue their own graduation certificates and let the market test the quality of their graduates. They became famous not by higherlevel government approval or self-claim, but by equal competition. He maintains that for Chinese education to orient toward the world, modernization, and the future, as urged by Deng Xiaoping, equal competition must be the road to follow. CONCLUSION Private education involves many sensitive and important issues. For the parents and the media, the cost of private education is the main concern; for the scholars, determining the role of private education in China’s schooling system and establishing laws and an effective system of administration dominate their discussion. The Chinese government in general has demonstrated an affirmative but also contradictory position toward private schools, which results in ambiguities in policies and conflicts with private schools. It seems that the government is still striving to come to grips with how to maintain a balance allowing private schools to exist while also keeping control over the education system in China.

10

Issues and Problems This chapter focuses on issues and problems facing private schools. The discussion continues to touch on government policies which are inextricably connected. Property ownership, whether or not schools should make profits, malpractice, and abuse of power are the key issues examined in this chapter. OWNERSHIP OF PRIVATE SCHOOLS Of the many issues facing private education development in China, a major one concerns ownership of private school property. Regarding this, Article 36 of the Regulation on Schools Run by Social Forces states that ‘‘no organization or individual can take possession of the property of an educational institution.’’ Article 43 stipulates that in case a school decides to close, funds from the liquidation should first go to teachers’ salaries and social insurance. The investors will be refunded their original investment, and the rest will be handed over to the government. However, these official statements are far from concrete, and implementation is very much up to individual interpretation. First of all, there exists a big gap in understanding between government officials and school owners. Based on the regulation, government officials have reportedly declared that all properties of a private school belong to the state; should founders wish to withdraw their investment from the school, they cannot sell off the school assets and convert them into cash. The owner may receive some sort of compensation or pull out only part of the original investment. The justification of this policy is that since education is a public undertaking, people investing in education should not ex-

158

Private Education

pect personal return; rather, they should see their investment as a voluntary, notfor-profit contribution to the public good. However, answers to many questions are not clear, such as: Who is responsible for liquidating assets and compensating school owners? How to calculate the worth of school properties? What are the tax implications? How can owners pull their part of the investment out while the school remains open? How is ownership defined? Can the owner pass on the school property to his/her successors? Since these vital questions concerning the rights of private schools over their property are not clear, conflicts have arisen. The motives of many school founders are all very complex: Apparently some make the investment expecting a big return; some want to make more money to improve their life after retirement while at the same time continuing to contribute to the educational cause. Many of them never intended to ‘‘donate’’ all of their savings or to have all of their assets tied up in the form of statecontrolled school property. Clashes have thus occurred. In a meeting of government officials and school owners, an uproar was caused when an official declared, ‘‘Not even a penny of the owner’s investment can be taken back from schools.’’ One owner attending the meeting protested that this was equivalent to confiscation. Other attendees confronted the official emotionally. After the meeting, Ren Wanjun, the chairman of the board of Xi’an Banpo English School, said, ‘‘Her speech gave me a terrible shock. I’ve invested about 10 million yuan in my school, and now I have nothing left.’’ Yu Wenli, the chairman of the board of Nanjing Experimental School, said, ‘‘Among the total investment of 20 million yuan in my school, the majority comes from bank loans. I’m nuts for taking all the risk and working hard to pay off the loans all by myself.’’ The owners fear that ‘‘such a policy will discourage people from setting up schools’’ (Tu Yuanxi, 1996, 10–11). That school owners were dumbfounded by the official’s comments can be understood. As Qiu Chen explains, many owners have come a long way: A citizen invests in education because he loves his motherland and loves education. He contributes his deposit from many years’ saving and hard work. That is to say, he invests in money, time and energy to the educational cause. Through hard work of more than a decade, the school turns from a small one into a large one. The properties increase year by year, and the school changes from relying on renting to owning its own buildings. The value of school assets increases to 7 digits, for which the school has received neither financial allocation from the government nor help from other social organizations. The whole property is operated by the citizen himself, who invests and whose fortune gradually accumulated from tuition and fees. In this situation, can the private property of the school owner be separated from the property of the school? How to do this? This issue concerns whether personal property and rights of citizens are protected or infringed upon. (Qiu Chen, 1996, 12–13)

Thousands of private schools and universities were set up by retired intellectuals in the 1980s and early 1990s. As the years go by, some owners reach their

Issues and Problems

159

sixties and seventies and wish to stop working and turn the school assets into cash for retirement. The declaration that all school property belongs to the state devastated them. Even if they are paid back their original investment, they still feel short-changed, given the time and energy they have put into their schools and the risks they have assumed. How to deal with the property issue touches on critical issues. As He Xiangdong puts it: The Regulation on Schools Run by Social Forces which will soon be enforced contains such a clause: ‘‘School property invested privately are to be completely transferred into the account of the school (only when the school is terminated will the property be liquidated and paid back, otherwise, no return for individuals).’’ This clause violates the Constitution’s stipulations that socialist citizens have the right to private property and that their property is to be protected from invasion. Confiscating schools from owners is not different to what happened during the Socialist Reform in the 1950s, when private properties were turned into state-owned properties. The state has the unequivocal obligation to stipulate that private investment in education should be protected from any forms of invasion. (He Xiangdong, 1993, 9)

The absence of clear policies has caused confusion. Law-abiding principals were accused of pocketing school money and detained by local governments (Liu, 1995). Schools were closed over disputes about the use of school funds. Some owners, fearing that their investment might be confiscated, transfer funds out of a school secretly, even though the school did not intend to shut down. Some distribute school funds among administrators and teachers in the form of a bonus. I personally know of people who have given up the idea of setting up a private school after learning about the governmental regulations regarding school property. As the Chinese government continues to be vague about the nature and handling of school property, investors’ interest in private education will be affected. So far, the government has not made strong efforts to enforce the official policy; but as more and more founders plan to retire and wish to cash out part of their investments, serious problems may arise if no concrete laws are in place to clarify the ownership issue rather soon. SHOULD PRIVATE SCHOOLS MAKE PROFIT? Likewise, questions such as: ‘‘Can private schools be allowed to make profit?’’ ‘‘Can they set profit-making as their aim in running a private school?’’ have led to many controversies, again over the notion that education is a public undertaking that therefore should not be a profit-making endeavor. Article 6 of the Regulation on Schools Run by Social Forces states that private institutions of higher learning should not aim at profit-making, and Article 37 stipulates that accumulation and savings from private school operations can be used only in

160

Private Education

increasing educational investment and improving the conditions of a school. They cannot be distributed or invested outside the school. Article 25 of the Law of Education also affirms that ‘‘no organization and individuals can use the name of setting up schools and other educational organizations to gain profit.’’ The head of the State Education Commission, Zhu Kaixuan, said this: Education is a public undertaking, and schools including private schools cannot run schools for profit; they could charge an appropriate amount of fees according to the cost of education, and the level of fees they charged should be verified by the government office of education and should receive supervision from parents and the society. It is OK for some non-governmental schools to charge higher fees, but they should not be too high. Too high a fee diverts from the situation of China and is detrimental to the healthy growth of children. To those ‘‘schools for aristocrats’’ or ‘‘luxurious schools’’ that charge high fees or use different names to charge high fees to serve the rich, the State Education Commission reiterate disapproval (Zhu Kaixuan, 1995, 4)

The attitude of the government has been based on the fear that some individuals or organizations might use the name of running a private school to reap huge personal gains or to shield their business profits from taxation. To curb the possibility that private schools are established to make a quick profit, Shengyang city evaluated new school applications by looking at the following: (1) Whether or not the school fits in with the requirements of the State Education Commission in terms of educational orientation, planning, and curriculum; schools found to be set up to make a profit would not be approved; (2) whether or not administrators of the schools know about education and the management of schools; and (3) whether or not the school has the necessary facilities and equipment, for example, whether they are renting space or building their own buildings. Besides these criteria, the city required that schools show they have 50 percent of the required capital in the bank, certified or backed by sponsors; this was an increase from the previous requirement of 25 percent. Individuals applying for permits to open schools usually would not be approved, while schools supported by big companies would be favorably considered. The teaching force is also scrutinized in terms of teacher qualifications, teachers’ professional titles, and their former work unit. In all, the purpose is to avoid granting schools a go-ahead and later finding them to be ‘‘without funding resources, without buildings, and without equipment’’ (Guo Ge, 1996, 51). Indeed, cases of people using the name of private schools to profit for themselves are not just a few. For instance, some ‘‘school shops’’ use the name of private schools to swindle money and get windfall profits to the detriment of the students. One private correspondence school reportedly offered courses in the hottest specialties. In five months, they enrolled 200,000 students and raked in 14.4 million yuan. The school executives went on a spending spree and subsequently transferred the money to other uses. When the scandal was exposed, the impostors had left with all the money (Qu Tiehua, 1993, 88–91).

Issues and Problems

161

This kind of malpractice has turned ‘‘profit’’ into a negative term associated with private schools. Despite the problem, some individuals suggest that the Chinese government should avoid overstressing private schools that are ‘‘not taking profit as their aim’’ in order not to dampen the enthusiasm of many people for investing in education (Lin Rongri and Du Zuorun, 1996a, 15). Some people even go so far as to argue that private schools should be profitable, and should strive to make a profit, for without being profitable, they cannot hope to survive and expand: It is true for any business that without profit there cannot be development and expansion. Big profits allow for big development, small profits allow for small development, and no profit for no development and bankruptcy ensues. Profit is the driving force of the market economy and private schools are the outcome of the development of a market economy in our country. Lacking any investment from the government, we are just fooling ourselves to reject profit. (Tian Xin, 1995, 22)

Tian Xin (1995) believes that the crux of the profit issue is not whether or not private schools should make a profit or have savings, but how the profit is to be employed. Private education is a public undertaking, which qualifies private schools to receive preferential treatment in taxation and accepting donations; this in turn should obligate private schools to use their profit in improving school conditions and prohibit them from spending money or dividing the money up for personal gain. Tian Xin notes that because laws have not been issued as to how the profits should be used, some school owners have been acting like the super rich, driving brand-name cars and spending money freely; some have shifted the funds to other places; some have bought properties in foreign countries; and some have made schools into a ‘‘family business’’ or ‘‘wife and husband shop’’ (p. 22).

MALPRACTICE Much malpractice has stemmed from profit chasing. For example: Some private school owners take no notice of laws and regulations that stipulate that ‘‘no organizations or individuals should set money-making as their goal.’’ Taking advantage of people’s enthusiasm for education, they apply illegal schemes in business competition to the running of schools, and illegal practice abounds in school activities. From the amount of money invested in school buildings, to the selection of students and setting tuition standards, from the employment of teachers to the evaluation of teaching quality, and from advertising to the relations between teachers, students and their parents, the problems stemming from the incorrect goal of education have made students victims of the so-called private education. Although it is only a small number of schools which have had these problems, the impact is widely felt. (Zhang Zhiyi, 1995, 12)

162

Private Education

Some private schools have been called ‘‘xuedian’’ or ‘‘school shops,’’ meaning that they are set up just like shops to make money. In Guangzhou, there are many such schools. At major traffic intersections they flash their advertisements on neon-lighted boards, which shine and blink like those in a bar or a restaurant; they issue graduation certificates casually, as long as the students pay them money. They make false claims of their linkage with famous public universities to create the impression that their certificates carry the same weight. They canvass the city with dozens of admission sites and charge from 5,000 to 7,000 yuan per student for two years’ study; some schools offer programs for a couple of months and charge nearly 3,000 yuan for tuition (Feng Jingwei, 1995, 20–21). Such problems caused one province, Shanxi, to rectify the situation through an evaluation of all private schools in the province. As a result, 963 schools received the new ‘‘approval for school operation,’’ while 284 schools were deemed unqualified and closed down. ‘‘This restored order and brought schools run by social forces in check through standardization’’ (‘‘Shanxi Province Closed Down 284 Schools Run by Social Forces,’’ 1996, 41). There have been reports of swindlers who created big frauds to become instant millionaires. For example, in Xi’an city, a man was arrested for cheating parents out of over a million yuan. In Guangxi province two men set up a false correspondence university to take in hundreds of thousands of yuan and then fled. A school in Hebei province made false promises to students, saying that they would receive degrees recognized by the government and that students would be helped to change from rural residents into urban residents, something very difficult to do in China’s rigid household registration system, which favors urban residents. Another school in Hebei (‘‘Gaocheng Painting School Is a Big Hoax,’’ 1995) deceived 400 students into paying 4,200 yuan each for a ‘‘college education.’’ The students came from all parts of the country. After they arrived at the local train station, they were hauled to a remote place with only one run-down building. One hundred students crammed into a room of less than 100 square meters for their classes, and the founder hired his wife, brothers, and parents to take up positions in the school. The two ‘‘teachers’’ had received only junior secondary education and ‘‘can hardly speak.’’ The school was often without electricity or water, and students had to travel far away to take a bath. Despite the students’ complaints and their demands for the return of their money, the school continues to operate without any intervention from the local government. In still another case, Xu Chongyang, a retired employee of a Wuhan auto repair and rebuilding shop with only a junior high education, started the private Yinghua Foreign Language School in April 1993 without putting in any of his own capital. Yet he managed to obtain permission from the Wuhan City Education Commission to enroll students in the preparatory stage. This first ‘‘highcost school’’ in Wuhan required each enrollee to pay 6,000 yuan per year for

Issues and Problems

163

tuition and expenses as well as a one-time school-construction fee of 10,000 yuan. Tens of thousands of applicants came, and many parents paid all fees on the spot. On June 25, a couple of months after the enrollment, the Wuhan Education Commission came to inspect the progress of Xu’s preparations for the school and discovered that the 8 million yuan collected from parents were gone. The commission then declared that ‘‘the Yinghua Foreign Language School (preparatory) has to stop enrolling students for this year.’’ The parents reacted strongly and staged a protest for six hours, causing close to a riot situation, which later on was referred to as the ‘‘June 27th Security Incident’’ in Wuhan (Xi Ling, 1994a, 19). An even more serious case was reported in Renshou county, Sichuan province, where a local private school named the Zhongxiang Xianwen Private Middle School was opened by a father and son. The father, Chen, named himself the school’s principal and his son the assistant principal. From September 1990 to May 1992, Chen Junliang sodomized, raped, and seduced 22 students, of whom fifteen were boys between fifteen and nineteen and seven were girls of fifteen or sixteen (Xi Ling, 1994, 19). To attract students, some private universities leave out words such as ‘‘private’’ or ‘‘run by social forces’’ from their advertisements. Applicants are thus misled into believing that they are applying for a public university. Students who had not even graduated from high school were accepted by some private universities. People who submitted their applications to correspondence universities but did not participate in any of the learning activities received graduation certificates. Some schools allowed their students to take examinations repeatedly until they all passed. This kind of cheating behavior left a very bad impression on parents. ADMINISTRATION OF PRIVATE SCHOOLS AND UNIVERSITIES Problems also abound in the administration of private schools and universities. As is required by the Regulation on Schools Run by Social Forces, most private schools have adopted a school board system that includes founders, principals, staff representatives, and parent representatives. The board is supposed to be responsible for decisions on teaching, personnel, budget, and school development plans. The government, however, retains the ultimate authority in disbanding or reorganizing the board if necessary. The school board is usually comprised of a number of social elites who have no direct interest in the school. They are invited to sit on the board in order to lend the school fame and credibility; in return, they receive certain monetary and social benefits. Retired government officials with wide social connections are often recruited to provide a protective umbrella and give the school much

164

Private Education

needed social connections. The school founder is usually the director of the board; sometimes, the school board hires a principal who will be included in the board. The founder has the ultimate decision-making power. In some schools, the board is only a symbolic fixture, as the schools are run very much like a family business. The founders appoint family members to fill all the important positions in the school so that they can maintain tight control over the school’s finance and personnel. Should the owner want to shift money to other businesses, the teachers and the principal usually have no knowledge or cannot say anything about it. This type of administrative practice has led to problems. In a study of private schools in seven provinces and municipalities, confusion and disorder were found to prevail in some schools, and conflicts have erupted between investors and founders, among leaders of the schools themselves, between parents and the school, or between the school and the government administration. In severe cases, there have been lawsuits, students dropping out, demands for refunds, or investors withdrawing their capital (Zhang Zhiyi, 1994, 147–158). Fights over school properties continue in some cases for years; the students suffer in their learning, and the school’s reputation is severely damaged. Internal fighting has become a more prominent issue as the end of the 1990s approaches. Schools have been broken up, closed, or split because of disputes among founders. During my trip in 1999, a principal who opened two schools told me he was on the verge of separating from his co-founder. He said very bitterly, though not without a sense of humor, that when he and his co-founder are planning for the school, they work heart to heart, as he expressed it, and they endure hardships side by side. But when they succeed in their efforts, they then are like those who sleep in the same bed but experience different dreams, and when it comes time to divide power, they start to fight. In the end, he stated, all parties perish. Private schools concurrently face a variety of other administrative problems from external sources. In an interview with eleven private school principals (Zhang Wei and Ji Ping, 1994, 8–10), the principals noted that since they do not have free access to the land their buildings were built on, as public schools do, the cost of education is much higher for them. It is not surprising that they spend half of their budget on paying for rent. Because of their private nature, they are taxed on many fronts as a private business is taxed. In school construction, many schools have no guarantee of fixed asset input, and people who have promised to make asset inputs often fail to do so. In another study (Jiangsu Provincial Education Commission’s Policy Research Office, 1995), it was found in Nanjing that some founding persons of private schools put in virtually no funds of their own or that funds promised by businesses did not fully come through. Some schools rely on tuition, which can only meet normal educational expenditures, leaving the schools with little surplus to fend for themselves. The Nanjing private schools in this study charged students from 800 to 1,200 yuan per semester, an amount that was basically only enough

Issues and Problems

165

to pay teachers’ salaries, the rent, and normal operational costs. Some schools are constantly struggling for survival. Their buildings are overcrowded and facilities are insufficient. In poor conditions, they exist one day at a time—some schools have buildings and equipment for one semester but no assurance for the next one, or they have teaching facilities for one grade but no assurance for the next grade. TEACHING AND LEARNING Small size and lack of continuous source of support characterize the condition of many ordinary private schools. To attract students, elite and ordinary schools alike find themselves having to lower their admission standards. Quality of teaching is thus affected, as teachers have to spend a lot more time dealing with poorly prepared students in the highly competitive education system. Aging of personnel is a serious problem in a large number of ordinary and rural private schools. In some schools, teachers are as old as 70. According to a survey made by Wenzhou city of the teaching staffs of ten private schools, 90 percent of the 140 full-time teachers were retirees. Though they are skillful teachers, their advanced age limits their energy and makes it hard for them to manage the young people (Qu Tiehua, 1993). The situation is serious, but there is no easy way out. First, teachers are still largely assigned to schools by the state, which forbids private schools to easily recruit teachers. Second, because policies are not coordinated to standardize teacher treatment, young and middle-aged teachers now working in public schools generally do not want to give up their public jobs for private ones (Jiangsu Provincial Education Commission’s Policy Research Office, 1995). Young and middle-aged teachers quitting their jobs in public schools have much to lose: their job security, professional rank, medical benefits, pensions, housing allocations, and others. Since there is little protection for teachers in private schools, to teach in a private school sometimes means giving up one’s power and individuality to the school principals or owners. Their professional respect can also be threatened, as private school parents can call teachers to ask for or demand explanations for their children’s behavior. Teachers are evaluated every half year or every year. The ax could fall on them should they be given unfavorable evaluations. Some teachers are even given a ‘‘class contract,’’ that is, by whatever means, their students have to make certain marks in examinations. Although private primary schools strive for all-round student development, in the larger environment of education in China exam scores still count more than talents and skills, and private schools, with no exception, are under tremendous pressure to teach students to study for examinations. Some private schools cancel routine physical training classes, and students take as many as 42 class periods a week. Some private senior high schools give classes even during evenings and weekends, and students are bombarded with simulation exams. Within China’s educational system, the dilemma of exam or no exam will continue to haunt all

166

Private Education

private schools despite their greater autonomy. There is no easy solution as long as only a small number of students can go on to universities. PROBLEMS WITH PRIVATE UNIVERSITIES Because private universities are built from scratch, they are, in most people’s eyes, low-quality schools. Like private primary and secondary schools, they can take in only lower-tier students. To change this requires that private universities improve their teaching force and facilities significantly and build up a consistent record of excellence. To create a ‘‘brand name’’ for themselves is the greatest challenge for private universities, which is difficult to accomplish without support from the government (Liang Si, 1995; Dong Mingzhuan, 1995). Many private universities are established very hastily. For example, I visited one which had erected its teaching buildings and dormitories for staff and students in less than two months. The university had no time to install the equipment necessary for sports activities, and there was only one half-finished basketball court for the 700 students. For a while, the university housing did not even have shower facilities. Some private universities have neither the necessary facilities nor a stable site for operation. They do not have libraries or science laboratories. Some have only a faculty of retired teachers and teachers from nearby universities who teach on a part-time basis; staff members are often hired because they are relatives or friends of the founders, regardless of their qualifications. Still another problem is that private universities tend to follow the needs of the market too closely. While this policy can be an advantage, it is also a disadvantage. It means the schools change their majors from year to year, which directly affects the continuity of their programs and the quality of teaching. Curricula are established mainly for short-term purposes and focus largely on narrow practicality. There are many duplications in course offerings across private universities (Wu Zongkui, 1996). Also, as they function mainly as teaching institutions, little or no research activity is going on. As research plays a pivotal role in the prestige of a university, private universities in China lack prestige. The development of private universities on the whole breaks down the notion that universities are ‘‘ivory towers’’ detached from a society’s needs. While they actively adapt themselves to market needs and respond to local economic trends, private universities cannot rely for further development on ‘‘renting, borrowing, hiring, and dividing up profits’’ to survive. They need to improve their teaching, equipment, and facilities; in program arrangement, they need to emphasize basic knowledge and training in basic skills (Zhang Cheng and Zhang Xiaorong, 1993, 13). INVASION OF POWER AND INADEQUATE LAWS There is a lack of laws or regulations that define and protect the position, role, significance, requirements for establishment, examinations, approval pro-

Issues and Problems

167

cedures, organizational operation, supervision, and management of private schools (Zhang Zhiyi, 1994, 147–58). In many instances, their autonomy has been challenged. Government agencies have invaded the rights and powers of private universities. For example, government agents have dismissed a university president and his staff and replaced them with people who were not involved in the founding of the university; they have transferred funds out of the university accounts for other uses; they have even resorted to means such as cutting off electricity and water to force private universities to comply with their wishes. Such cases have happened in cities like Beijing and Wuhan and in provinces such as Xinjiang, causing wide concern over the violation of the legal rights of private universities (Qiu Chen, 1995). In some areas, public schools are challenging private schools. One example is that government cadre training schools have switched gears to offer degree programs far outside their mandate; instead of teaching Marxist theories, they offer programs on domestic animal science, business management, accounting, and the like. They utilize public funds as well as state property to generate profit. As well, government departments at all levels, such as the bureau of education and the bureau of personnel, have set up for-profit schools promising students jobs upon graduation. Public universities entrusted to design exam papers for self-study students offer classes to provide the ‘‘whole dragon’’ service, that is, they promise to drill students with simulation exams, teach students tricks for passing the exam, and during the examination they actually help the students cheat to pass the exam. Private schools and universities compete for students with such public facilities at a great disadvantage. Some private schools, unable to recruit enough students, closed their doors as a result of such interventions (Liu Fengshan, 1995, 6–7). In the shortage of financial resources, some public schools have turned themselves into private-like schools: The school is still owned by the state, yet it is contracted out to principals for management; the school has to find means to support itself, while enjoying the benefit of using state-owned land and buildings. These schools collect tuition and fees from parents, and the principals have the authority to hire teachers and recruit students on their own. The government still has responsibility over building construction and the purchase of major equipment (Li Jinchu, 1996). Another type of school, as we have discussed, is set up by key public schools; they are dubbed ‘‘schools within schools,’’ as the key schools have a private section attached that uses their reputation to collect fees from the society. Ordinary public schools and private schools have protested the unfair competition, but to no great avail. These situations present tremendous challenges for private schools, considering the inequality between public and private schools in the granting of land for construction, equipment purchase, operation of school-owned factories, student recruitment and teacher employment, teacher evaluation and the granting of professional titles, and the provision of medical insurance and old-age pensions. In all these areas, private schools are at a disadvantage in the competition for survival.

168

Private Education

CONCLUSION Private education in China, if it is to continue to develop, faces a great variety of problems. Some come from internal sources, such as the composition of the workforce; others arise from external sources, such as ambiguities in policy and laws. A general statement that ‘‘schools cannot make profit their goal’’ has caused confusion, dampening interest in the development and expansion of private schools. Meanwhile, profit chasing has also caused serious malpractice, which has damaged the reputation of private education. In sum, there clearly needs to be a balance of policy, both encouraging private schools and improving their macro and micro management to correct malpractices and invasions of power. Government will need to adopt measures to provide financial support for private schools until they become stronger and eventually can survive on their own. It will take a long time for all relevant laws and regulations to function in a coordinated manner.

11

Equality and Choice: Theoretical and Practical Concerns Do private schools, elite private schools in particular, help perpetuate social class inequality in Chinese society? What creates inequality? Is it the money of the parents? Is it the high tuition? Is it the superior conditions of elite private schools? Or is it their educational goals? Finally, should choice be allowed in Chinese education? Private education touches on fundamental issues in education: equality, choice, and efficiency. This chapter looks at arguments for public education and private education and then discusses specific issues relating to social equality and private education in China. It argues that private schools in fact have positive roles to play in improving social equality in China.

EQUALITY, SOCIAL CLASS, AND THE ROLE OF EDUCATION With the spread of democratic ideals in the 20th century, the beliefs that education is not a privilege but an inherent human right, and that human beings are entitled to an education regardless of their social class, gender, race, and ethnicity, have come to be widely adopted. Countries throughout the world have made basic education compulsory for their citizens, and enrollment ratios in developing countries are fast catching up with developed countries. In modern times, generalizing education has become one basic condition and important connotation for [a country’s] modernization. Many international organizations have taken

170

Private Education

literacy rate and average years of education of a nation as the necessary landmark for measuring a country’s economic and social development. (Tan Songhua, 1994, 14)

However, quality education for all children remains far from a reality, because of unequal distributions of wealth and power and a lack of financial and human resources. Shortage in resources has resulted in poor teaching conditions and large classes where students’ special needs are ignored. Even in an affluent country like the United States, it has been difficult to change educational inequality based on class, gender, race, and ethnicity (DeMarrais and LeCompte, 1995). The concept of equality of educational opportunity contains these elements: (1) equality of access, measured in terms of enrollment, retention, and dropout rate; (2) equality of treatment, measured in terms of curriculum exposure, teacher qualification, teacher-student relationships; and equipment and facilities; and (3) equality of output and outcome, measured in terms of what the students learn and where they end up in the social hierarchy (Farrell, 1982). As countries strive to provide free basic education, a high ratio of enrollment of school-age children has been achieved in developed and developing countries; what differentiates students’ life chances and social mobility is more and more related to their treatment in school, namely, the quality of education the students receive in school. Education has been seen by many as a social equalizer, providing opportunities to ordinary citizens to develop their potentials to the fullest. However, in spite of much public school development, there always exists a tension between the number of people who need education and the availability of funds for schools. In the early 1980s, a lack of resources in China prompted some policy makers to suggest that instead of spreading educational resources and letting all schools be mediocre, resources should be concentrated on some regions and populations to improve the quality of some schools first (Lin, 1993a). This argument has led to the formation of key schools in the country. Fundamentally, generalizing basic education has had limited impact on changing patterns of social stratification. The rich and powerful have always been able to maintain their advantages by paying for their children to attend good schools, private or public. In fact, education serves to justify and perpetuate social and economic stratification (Bowles and Gintis, 1976). Education reproduces the social relations in the economy that decide who gets what. In a stratified society, individuals and groups with authority and power will be able to demand more influence and respect and accumulate a greater share of goods and services. Such inequality may or may not be accepted by a majority in the society, but it is recognized as the way things are (Kerbo, 1991, 12). A society is formed of classes, which, broadly categorized, are composed of an upper class, a middle class, and a lower class. Class divisions are based on three main criteria: a person’s position in the occupational structure, a person’s position in authority structures (how many people a person must take orders

Equality and Choice

171

from versus how many people the person can give orders to), and a person’s ownership of property (more specifically, property that produces profit, such as stock) (Kerbo, 1991, 13.) According to Kerbo, three major dimensions of inequality can be found in most human societies. These three are (1) inequalities of honor, status, or prestige; (2) inequalities of economic influence and material rewards; and (3) inequalities based on military, political, or bureaucratic power (p. 16). In China, as discussed in Chapter 2, an individual’s position in the authority structure carries especially heavy weight in gaining access to services and opportunities. This power extends into the economic structure and penetrates the education system as well. For example, as we have mentioned, key schools in China are dominated by children from the families of government officials. Increasingly in today’s market economy, a person’s position in the occupational structure is crucial in gaining access to quality education. Highly skilled professionals taking up high-paying jobs can afford to send their children to key schools or elite private schools. The newly rich in the country have fundamentally propelled the growth of elite private schools. As social class is highly fluid and rapidly changing in China, redistribution of educational opportunity will continue, needless to say. This redistribution, however, is not random. As Heller writes, ‘‘The inequality is not random but follows a pattern, displays relative constancy and stability, and is backed by ideas that legitimize and justify it’’ (1969, 4; also cited in Kerbo, 1991, 12). The fact that the Chinese Communist Party is the sole governing power gives government officials enormous power over economical and educational opportunities, while the public can do little to change the power structure. ARGUMENTS OVER PUBLIC AND PRIVATE EDUCATION A fundamental belief in a democracy is that all children are entitled to education, regardless of their background. This belief has led to the conviction that public education ensures social equality and is indispensable for any democratic system. In contrast, private education is taken by many people to be a potential threat to public education. Heated debates in developed and developing countries alike have centered on whether choice should be allowed for parents in selecting their children’s schools. Public education has been argued to be fundamental in building up a democratic system, strengthening communities and providing equal opportunities. Supporters believe that public education nurtures the skills and knowledge necessary for democratic citizenship and fosters a common grounding in the habits, skills, and knowledge essential to democratic citizenship. The wide diversity of students in public schools offers students the opportunity to interact with others who may not share their background or their outlook. Public schools allow all parents to participate in decision making, as power and authority are broadly dispersed (NEA-Alaska, 1998).

172

Private Education

Hence, proponents of public schools are critical of elite private schools that charge high tuition and preclude the majority of the population. In the United States, the average tuition for a private day school was $7,200 in 1990–1991. The average boarding-school tuition was $13,700 (Toch, 1991). In Great Britain, just room and board cost 4,000 pounds in Eton School. Elite private schools there have long been used to perpetuate parents’ economic advantages. Schools such as Eton, St. Paul, and Westminster in Britain have historically had close relations with prestigious universities (Tian Dewen, 1993). They serve as the training ground for the elite colleges and provide their students a shortcut to upper-class social status. ‘‘Schooling has become an important talisman to latterday seekers of class’’ (O’Reilly, 1990, 126). However, public schools have also been criticized. First, they have not always been able to provide equal educational opportunity for all children. For example, in the United States, the best public schools are in fact rather exclusive, usually located in wealthy neighborhoods that are very costly to buy into: Directly or indirectly, most Americans choose their children’s schools. From the middle class on up, Americans with children purchase houses in the best school districts they can afford. Educational opportunities are assigned by income, with those wealthy enough to afford the best neighborhoods receiving the best opportunities. (Roggeveen, 1993, 27)

Public education has also been viewed as giving government too much control over schools, leaving the teachers and parents who are most directly related to education powerless. The role of public education as a provider of equal opportunity has been questioned. After all, many unequal practices take place in public schools, such as tracking systems that legitimize discrimination against less powerful minority and working-class people (Oakes, 1985; Lin, 1993a). In Hong Kong, public secondary schools are divided into five bands; schools in the best condition with the best teachers are band 1 and band 2 schools, which admit predominantly children from wealthy families; band 4 and band 5 schools house mostly children from lower-class and working-class family backgrounds. Therefore, even if nearly all school-age children enter schools in Hong Kong, the treatment they receive is highly unequal (Zeng Rongguang et al., 1997). Problems in public schools have caused some people to raise strong voices in behalf of private education. They argue that parents should have the right to choose their children’s schools and contend that this choice is a fundamental human right. Private education places more power in the hands of educators and may bring children’s potential into fuller play. Educational opportunity may also be enhanced for children who have not been successful in a public school environment. People are of different attributes and abilities, and private schools can cater to the different interests and needs of students. Further, society’s demands for education is greatly diverse, which means schools should be measured by multiple sets of criteria (Tan Songhua, 1994).

Equality and Choice

173

Problems in public schools such as low teaching quality and lack of efficiency have prompted researchers and educators to ask if it is possible for a school system to achieve both efficiency and equality without sacrificing one for the other. One major difference between public and private schools is that private schools have greater autonomy and responsibilities. Public education is often state- or community-funded and therefore subject to central or local government control, notably in curriculum and teacher employment. In contrast, private schools are more autonomous, relying mostly on themselves for survival. They usually adopt a more flexible structure that allows them to adjust to various needs in a society. As fees and tuition make up the bulk of their funding, they are held more directly responsible by the parents. The parents’ sense of responsibility is enhanced when they choose private schools with clear goals in mind. Contrary to the public’s belief, school choice in fact fosters equality of opportunity (Boyd and Walberg, 1990, 4). Choice can be provided without losers (Randall and Geiger, 1991). Choice is a form of empowerment and is ultimately a question of values (Cookson and Schneider, 1995). Most educational systems in the world allow private schools to exist. In the United States in 1990, 1,972 or 55.8% of the 3,535 universities are private universities; at the primary and secondary level, 26,807 or 24.4% of the 110,055 schools are private, providing education to more than 5 million students, or 11.2% of the national total (Shao Jinrong, Zhang Wen, and Zhang Xiaodong, 1994, 71). In Canada, about 4.8% of students were enrolled in private schools in 1992 (Brummelen, 1996, 1). Some governments have actively encouraged private education development; for example, Japan has passed various laws (including the Law of Private Education and Implementation of the Law of Private Education) to regulate and encourage private education development (Wang Jun, 1996). The private schools in Japan provide learning opportunities to around 30% of the students and serve diverse purposes. Of the 553 universities in Japan, in 1994 407 were private, comprising 73.6% of the total. In Hong Kong, the government has been providing financial subsidies for private schools, which helps the government fulfill its nine-year compulsory education goal. In the United States, charter schools—namely, schools set up by parents and professionals but supported by the government—have caused heated debates (‘‘New Options for Public Education,’’ 1996). Charter school advocates believe that they will spur reform in noncharter schools by breaking up the monopoly of the public school system through the introduction of competition and choice. They also believe that charter schools encourage innovation, are more accountable, and offer increased opportunities for professionalism for teachers (Garcia and Garcia, 1996, 34). In another form of school choice, the voucher system, the government gives parents a subsidy (voucher) to send their children to a private school of their choice. This permits parents living in low-income neighborhoods to move their children to better schools. It is believed that the voucher system will remedy some of the disparities between schools. ‘‘We must restore some of the freedoms on which this country was built, allowing parents to have

174

Private Education

greater options and the resources to make their choices’’ (Ratteray, 1995, 498). Opponents argue strongly against this scheme, stating that taxpayers’ money must not be used for private schools; they fear that public schools will be undermined, since public schools with poor records could see an exodus of students. INEQUALITY IN CHINESE EDUCATION Chinese education has never been equal for all (Feng Jianjun, 1996; Lin, 1993a, 1991). Politically, from the 1950s to the end of the 1970s, students were treated differently based on their social class background, as defined by political criteria. In terms of regional differences, rural children have had far fewer educational opportunities than urban children, and regions in central and western China have much higher ratios of dropouts due to low economic development. China has achieved significant progress in providing access to basic education to the general populace; by 1996, the enrollment ratio of school-age students reached 98.8 percent, and enrollment in junior secondary schools reached 82.4 percent (News Office of the State Council, 1997). However, western provinces such as Qinghai and Tibet have only 83.9 percent and 52.35 percent of their school-age children in primary schools, respectively (Feng Jianjun, 1996, 35). Further, a high enrollment ratio overall does not mean that equality of educational opportunity is achieved. For example, in 1991, more than 42 percent urban secondary schools and 24 percent of primary schools met the requirement for teaching equipment and facility set by the state government, while slightly more than 17 percent of rural secondary schools and only 8.46 percent of rural primary schools met the requirement. Urban secondary school students on average have 20.9 books, while rural students have 3.6; urban primary school students have 7.6 books, as compared to 1.9 books for rural children (Feng Jianjun, 1996; 37– 38). Minority students still suffer serious discrimination in curriculum and the learning process (Lin, 1993b, 1997). Social class transformation in the reform era has enlarged gaps in educational opportunities among different social classes (Lin and Ross, 1998). Structurally, China’s secondary level has built-in inequality in the form of favorable treatment of key schools over ordinary schools and of universities over primary and secondary schools: Compared both to the state’s funding in regular education or to high education funding abroad, Chinese educational funding basically focuses on institutions of higher learning accredited to give formal records of schooling as well as key middle schools which are truly capable of sending students into higher education. Higher education and priority middle school (including key elementary school) education are to be nominally, equally and fairly accessible to all education recipients in society, with equal opportunities for all. In fact, however, because of the influence of various objective factors such as social

Equality and Choice

175

status, the location where a family is registered to live, financial conditions, availability of teachers and so on, entrance to key elementary/middle schools to receive quality education has been just a pipe-dream to the large numbers of children of the middle and lower strata of society. (Bi Cheng, 1994, 231–232)

Separating schools into key and ordinary schools has served to legitimize inequalities among different social groups. A study by Yuming Zhao (1995) indicated that key schools in Shanghai have much better facilities and teachers, and parents put more financial resources and time into their children’s education. She found that parents of key school students are mostly government officials and high-level intellectuals, while ordinary schools are dominated by children from working-class backgrounds. During one of my field trips, I visited a key school in Shanghai. The majority of the students come from government official and intellectual family backgrounds, while less than 20 percent are from working-class backgrounds, although workers represent more than 80 percent of the workforce in Shanghai. The school features excellent equipment and facilities. Students are organized into all kinds of science interest groups, and some are sent to participate in national and international competitions for scientific invention or in science and math. The school building contains a ballet studio, a theater, an astronomy dome, fully equipped laboratories for science classes, a film studio, and TV in each classroom. Teachers teaching in this school are the best, selected from schools in Shanghai. Senior teachers and elderly teachers are paid from 1,700 to 1,800 yuan per month, and young teachers 1,000 yuan a month (as compared to teachers in other schools who are paid 300–600 yuan per month). The school is located near the most developed area in Shanghai. The education office of the district has given this school exclusively more than 100 million yuan to set up the new ten-storey building I visited. To do that, they relocated hundreds of residents to faraway suburban areas with inconvenient transportation. The school’s admission rate to universities is 100 percent, with 70 percent of the students going to key universities. In Beijing, Dalian, Shanghai, Shengyang, and Guilin, key schools I visited share similar characteristics. In contrast, a public ordinary junior high school I visited in Beijing has only chairs and tables for students, with no lab equipment. The children come from a peasant family background in suburban Beijing. The classrooms are colorfully decorated, and the students all look quite lively and talked in a friendly fashion with us. They did not look different from the students in the key schools, yet less than 10 percent of them will advance to senior high schools adjacent to their school; only 2–3 percent of these students will eventually go on to study in a university. In sum, Chinese public education is inherently unequal, even though progress has been impressive. The public schools, in fact, have perpetuated and reinforced social inequality.

176

Private Education

ELITE PRIVATE SCHOOLS AND EQUALITY OF EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITY The appearance of elite schools in China has epitomized concern over educational equality in China. Highly expensive, they serve chiefly the well-to-do or the economically advantaged. Because children’s access to private schools is closely connected to parents’ political and economic power, these schools might reproduce unequal social hierarchies, similar to elite private schools in other countries (Kane, 1992; Griggs, 1985; Cookson and Persell, 1985; Baird, 1977). The chief concerns for policy makers in China therefore have been the following: (1) Would the grouping together of rich children produce a bunch of little elitists, and would elite schools become a breeding ground for the fetish for money, hedonism, and individualism? (2) Would the educational goals of elite schools result in deviations from education with socialist characteristics and from the country’s education policies, as well as deviation from education laws and the laws of development of talented people? (3) Would the legal entities running the schools use high rates of investment and fees as profit-making instruments for personal gain? Delving deeper to see what actually happens in elite schools, as described in previous chapters, shows that any judgment on the schools should be much more complex. First, the 10,000–20,000 yuan parents pay often includes not only tuition but also materials, food, and other living expenses. Liu Yufeng recounts how the school he studied spends its budget: There are two major funding sources in this school: tuition fees make up about 80% of revenue, and donations from enterprises and parents make up the remainder. In the first school year of 1993–1994, Jinghua had an income of 6,750,000 Yuan. It spent 3,000,000 Yuan on its property, including equipment in the computer room and language room, books in the library, pianos, etc. They have also bought a sizable piece of land and a big building is under construction. It spent 2,200 Yuan on food and 700 on clothes for each student, totaling 580,000 Yuan on food and clothes for the year; 950,000 Yuan went for salaries; 700,000 Yuan was paid in rent to the education board; 200,000 went to administrative fees; telephone, hydra, gas, water, and so on cost about 50,000. In this first 1993–1994 school year, Jinghua was in deficit 200,000 Yuan. Jinghua has an income of 2,900,000 Yuan for the 1994–1995 school year, and the school is hoping to break even in this second year. (Liu Yufeng, 1995, 68–69)

Principals I interviewed repeatedly claimed that they did not spend a penny of government money, but had tried to provide first-rate education. In another study (Zhang Wei and Ji Ping, 1994), private school principals and founders in Beijing reacted very strongly to charges that they are ‘‘charging high fees’’ and ‘‘nurturing elitists.’’ ‘‘How high is high? 30,000 yuan, 50,000 yuan? What is the standard?’’ They noted that in many private schools, the ‘‘tuition fee’’ includes everything. Breaking the sum down, room and board and other living expenses make up a large proportion, and the real tuition is not much. They

Equality and Choice

177

argued that fees charged by some public key elementary and middle schools outside of the planned quota are not in any way less than their own. Key schools have state input, revenue from school-run enterprises, and fees charged for outof-plan students. Much of the state input, such as land, facilities, and labor insurance and other benefits enjoyed by teachers and staff, were given to public schools free of charge, while private schools can rely only on tuition and on raising funds by themselves. The principals conclude that their charges are no higher than those of key public schools (Zhang Wei and Ji Ping, 1994, 8). They also argue that ‘‘high fees’’ is not the same as ‘‘high consumption,’’ that it is not too much to make a campus on which kids live 24 hours a day more ‘‘beautiful, neat, and comfortable’’ and that giving them some fruit after meals is not an extravagance. ‘‘High fees’’ do not make an ‘‘elite school’’ is the claim that these principals, as well as principals in other parts of the country, make. In contrast, they are trying to turn the students into all-round children. They insist that parents send their children to the schools for the quality of their education. No parents would be willing to pay high fees to a low-quality school (Zhang Wei and Ji Ping, 1994). Zhang Zhiyi, vice-director of the Office of Schools Run by Social Forces in the State Education Commission, has disagreed with using the term ‘‘elite school’’ to characterize all high-fee schools: In passing, let us talk about the question of whether high-tuition nongovernmental-run schools have been or will become schools for the elite. We cannot deny that one school had actually proclaimed as its aim the nurturing of elitists. After some work, this has changed. Of the hundred-plus schools in the 7 provinces/municipalities, no other has declared the same aim. As for whether a big tuition fee, fine facilities, living in, and a shut-in type of management will breed elitists, this needs to be explored in practice. (Zhang Zhiyi, 1994, 153)

Zhang maintains that issues related to high fees such as fine facilities and boarding are operational issues, not related to educational aims. The aim of the current founders is that the facilities should serve the cause of high quality, which is above reproach. Boarding and a shut-in type of management are used to share the cares of the parents, taking care of the children’s living arrangements, to avoid their being alone at home, or going bad, or joining their parents in business or social activities. The term ‘‘shut-in type of management,’’ to a certain extent, denotes the shutting off of kids from activities they have no business participating in and enabling them to avoid such environments; it does not mean shutting them off from society. In many schools, Zhang further explains, the emphasis is on a shut-in type of management along with an ‘‘open’’ type of operation, which includes military training, camping, hiking, and visiting martyrs’ tombs. These schools actively open themselves to significant social activities. In the food, clothing, transportation, and other living arrangements involved in a boarding school, most follow

178

Private Education

the principles of simplicity and frugality and being practical, sanitary, and healthy. They do not blindly seek a luxurious lifestyle (pp. 147–158). Further, elite schools provide choice for children who, if staying in public schools, would otherwise have no opportunity to develop their talents. In fact, the elite schools solve big problems for parents and for public schools. Some principals note that they are actually running ‘‘priority schools which are not priority schools,’’ ‘‘work-study schools which are not work-study schools,’’ ‘‘special children schools which are not special children schools,’’ and ‘‘orphanages for non-orphans’’ (Zhang Zhiyi, 1994, 154). One argument raised by critics of elite private schools is that there are thousands of children in poor areas who cannot go to any school at all because their parents cannot afford the tuition and materials fee, which is less than 1 percent of the elite school’s tuition fee. Many feel that everyone is responsible for helping those who cannot go to school. One parent’s response was, ‘‘It is impossible for everyone to receive the same treatment and live on the same level. Our country tried and paid a lot for practicing the socialist concept. It is not a good idea to ‘be poor together.’ It would not be any better if every child had to study in the same poor school system’’ (Liu Yufeng, 1995, 75). In my field trips, some elite schools I visited have four to eight students, even twelve to twenty students, sharing one dormitory. Students eat in the canteen and wash their own clothes. Compared with their environment at home, where they have housekeepers, an abundance of food and snacks, and a large sum of pocket money to spend freely, the conditions in the school are not better but may be worse. One may say that the elite schools are pursuing educational goals different from many people’s perception. One opinion holds that it is more appropriate to look at the educational goals the schools pursue (Gu Meiling and Liu Dexuan, 1994). Pragmatically, it is better that rich people spend money on education than on extravagant items; it is natural for them to want good educations for their children. Many of them were deprived of a good education by the Cultural Revolution, and they did not want their own fate to be repeated. Their spending money on an elite school in this sense is justified. DIVERSITY AND EQUALITY AND EDUCATION REFORM Private schools give Chinese education a much needed dimension, diversity. Diversity in school development provides hope for improving the educational opportunities for some children. Ordinary private schools, for example, open doors to those excluded by the public school system. They charge low to medium fees affordable to the majority of Chinese parents. As less then 60 percent of rural primary school graduates can advance to secondary education and only 20 to 30 percent can go on to senior high schools, ordinary private schools give rural students a second chance for education, preventing a large number of young people from becoming illiterates. They allow rural students a chance to

Equality and Choice

179

stay in school. They are in fact enhancing opportunities for students disadvantaged by social class. The practice of all-girl schools not to teach ‘‘girl stuff’’ but to teach unconventional skills such as wrestling and driving opens a window to new ways of conducting education. These schools have arranged the curriculum in a way that allows the girls to be confident in their own abilities and to be more employable in the very competitive job market in today’s China, while also giving them the option of heading toward higher education. Private vocational schools, arts schools, medical colleges, and other types of schools widen employment opportunities for millions of young people who cannot attend a university. Private universities, despite their many problems, give people hope for higher learning. Elite private schools, charging high fees and offering excellent conditions for learning, are also at the forefront of educational reform. Diverging from the traditional model of excessive emphasis on academic learning, they offer a unique curriculum focusing on the well-rounded development of children. Besides fulfilling the compulsory subjects of study as set in the national teaching syllabus outlined by the state, they also offer numerous extracurricular courses catering to students’ interests and developing special expertise to meet the future needs of society. Through all types of ‘‘arts groups’’ and extracurricular interest groups, students are guided to develop their imagination and creativity. CHOICE AND EQUALITY: BOTH ARE IMPORTANT In analyzing private education in China, it is clear that equality cannot be pursued in absolute terms. In fact, allowing for choice amounts to allowing for diversity and reform. Diversity injects vitality into the education system. In actuality, private education is urgently needed in China’s educational context, where education funding is low; the more avenues open for inputs into education, the better. Further, the practices in private schools are not necessarily unequal or elitist, and it is unrealistic to have all students attending the same kind of education with poor conditions. What happens in private schools can effectively help children who have been ignored or forced out by public schools. In all, educational alternatives allow greater autonomy and accountability in the schooling system, and greater motivation on the part of teachers and administrators. Choice and equality should not be seen as being in opposition to each other. Rather, one needs to view them in light of the social and cultural context in which they are upheld. CONCLUSION Equality of educational opportunity is a social ideal. Based on the belief that all human beings are born equal, it gives birth to the development of mass education throughout the world. However, many countries, constrained by scarce

180

Private Education

economic resources, can provide only minimal education to all of their children. State monopoly of education also allows little competition and diversity, and the vitality of the system is hampered. Private schools in China have relieved the financial burden of the state. It also hands part of the power of education back to parents. Thousands of schools are under the obligation to satisfy compulsory attendance requirements and therefore claim to represent schooling as a public good (James and Levin, 1988, 2). They are necessary for the country’s great diversity in population, regions, and social classes. Private education development also recognizes that students differ in learning abilities and interests. Private schools may add to educational opportunities for children, not in conflict with the notion of equality, but in support of each other. Regarding the orientation of elite schools, scholar Hao Wenwu believes the emphasis in supervision of private education development should be on the direction of the schools, for example, what kind of citizens are they training the students to be? If high fees are used for improving conditions of learning, they should be seen as justified. There is no necessary link between the ‘‘training of aristocrats’’ and the fees charged (Hao Wenwu, 1995). The focus should be placed on reforming public schools, not on banning private schools. Public educational reform, reflecting private education development, should improve the vitality, financial resourcefulness, and capabilities of schools to improve their quality. This should be the way out for public schools (Hao Wenwu, 1995).

12

Significance and Future Prospects The reappearance of private schools in modern China reflects changes in the country’s social class structure that have created new demands for education. Private schools are the product of a time when the country is severely strapped for educational funds and public schools cannot satisfy the public’s diverse needs for education (Zhang Wei and Ji Ping, 1994). From the very beginning, private schools attracted attention because of their special features and because of important issues they have raised relating to efficiency, quality, and equality in education. The resurgence of private schools is a direct response to the rise of a marketoriented economy flourishing in China. With the burden of providing education for hundreds of millions too heavy, the Chinese government has passed regulations allowing social groups to set up private schools, in effect, injecting more autonomy and vitality into the country’s school system. The greatest force propelling the rapid increase of private schools came from the reaffirmation of the country’s reform and opening policy by Deng Xiaoping in his South China tour in 1992. It was then that private education truly became an educational force that cannot be underestimated. The rise of private schools has brought fresh air into China’s education system: The reappearance of private schools and their development have helped reform the traditional Chinese education system, structure, school management mode and teaching mechanism. It has broken down the monolithic pattern of overall government control which has existed for a long time. It has made education into a social behavior, rather than a state behavior. (Qu Tiehua, 1993, 90)

182

Private Education

According to Guo Ge (1996), six advantages have accompanied the development of private education: (1) They arouse the enthusiasm of different social forces and individual citizens to establish schools and thus quicken the step of educational development; (2) they break the government’s monopoly and push for the reform of educational structures; (3) they accumulate funding to increase educational expenditure in the society; (4) they strengthen the competitive mechanism in the education system and push public schools to improve their quality; (5) they push for the adoption of different educational thinking and teaching methods so that education orients toward the future and the world; and (6) they strengthen the consciousness of the public about investing in education (p. 50). The reappearance of private schools in China has historical significance. Not only do they continue a long tradition of private education in the country; more important, they also hand part of the power of running education back to the grassroots level. They have broadened the channels for educational investment and fundamentally changed the concept that education can only be run by the government. Private schools bring together the state, the society, and individual citizens to share the obligation to develop education (including compulsory education) for all. They demonstrate that in the Chinese society there lie tremendous potential and enthusiasm for providing education. Private education creates learning and career opportunities: Millions of elementary or middle school graduates in this country are unable to advance to the next higher level of school every year because of the state’s limited enrollment capacity. . . . Private schools have provided the opportunity for part of these youngsters to study culture and science, as well as the opportunity for people waiting for jobs to learn job skills. (He Qizong and Zhang Yizhong, 1994, 28)

In another dimension, private education gives real meaning to China’s educational reform. Many changes introduced in teaching and management in private schools have pushed Chinese education in the direction set out in the 1985 document, ‘‘Decision on Educational Structural Reform.’’ Concepts such as decentralization, efficiency, accountability, enlarged financial resources, and creative teaching have been implemented in many private schools. Private schools furnish the stage for innovative educators to implement their educational philosophies, permitting them to be innovative and giving them a greater sense of fulfillment in their professional pursuits. Private schools also establish the model of connecting education to the needs of the society. They force the society to be aware of the economic values of education and its direct impact on individuals’ welfare (Zeng Tianshan, 1993, 32). Greater plurality in China’s education system is a direct consequence of the rise of private schools: The traditional school system under the sole charge of the state was the product of the planned economy and served its purposes. It is extremely incompatible with an economic

Significance and Future Prospects

183

system which has changed profoundly. As economic reform continues in depth, the contradiction between the old school system and the economy will become more acute. The former will even become a major stumbling block to economic development. With the ever-deepening economic reform surging ahead, the old school model compatible only with the planned economy will increasingly be buffeted by the waves and a new, pluralistic school system compatible with the pluralistic economic system will be born. Thus, like the private and individual economic sectors, nongovernmental private schools will gain new life in the tide of reform and reappear across the land, gradually becoming an indispensable part of our socialist education. (He Qizong and Zhang Yizhong, 1994, 27)

The most criticized form of private education, the elite private schools, has been at the forefront of changing educational practices. They have given more attention to individual students and worked to build a community of learning and living for children who have been abandoned by public schools. Because private schools generally have small classes, teachers are able to spend time on individuals, giving extra help and guidance when needed. In this way, the selffulfilling prophecy of labeling children as ‘‘slow’’ or ‘‘problematic’’ can be avoided (Liu 1995, 77). Further, the elite schools create an environment for single children to find friendship and teach them values such as independence and interdependence. Financially, private schools have saved a huge amount of money for the government. Training a university student can cost the government 30,000– 50,000 yuan. A private university enrolling 1,000 students could save the government tens of millions. The rise of private universities serves the function not only of alleviating the financial burden of the state but also of training skilled laborers and professionals needed for the new economy. They open doors for higher learning to millions of young people who have been kept outside public higher education. Urban/township and rural primary and secondary schools not only save the government hundreds of millions a year, but they also save many young people from remaining illiterate. In a sense, one can say private schools are indispensable for Chinese education. As Zeng Tianshan puts it:

To force the government to be the only provider for education and allow public schools as the only form of schooling is neither reasonable nor realistic, for education is first and foremost an undertaking of the whole society, for citizens receiving education there should be a combination of the rights and responsibilities, and the society should take an active role in educational development. Further, we are a big country shouldering a huge education system over the past several decades. Although in recent years the government’s educational expenditure has increased year by year, rising from 7.2% in 1978 to 14.7% in 1991 in national expenditure, this amount is still too little considering that there are more than 500 million people of education age and more than 200 million in compulsory basic education. And most of our expenses are on teachers’ salaries. This financial ‘‘anemia’’ is seriously limiting our educational development. (Zeng Tianshan, 1993, 31)

184

Private Education

To conclude, private education development has broken down the government’s monopoly on education and opened a new stage in China’s educational development. Private schools have brought out the enthusiasm of individuals and organizations for opening schools and infused a new vitality into Chinese education. They have played a positive role in Chinese education (Qu Tiehua, 1993). CHALLENGES AND FUTURE PROSPECTS Broadly, what are the prospects for private schools in China in the near future? It seems that private education development is in its initial consolidation stage. Private schools were growing very fast from 1992 to 1996; however, in 1998, this growth has shown signs of slowing down, for several reasons. First, a lack of implementable legislation and much confusion in the administration of private schools have continued to hamper the growth of private schools. There is still no clear framework for the approval, supervision, and position of private schools; there are still too many restraints by government education departments for private schools to function autonomously. Second, private schools, especially ordinary private schools, still lack the resources to attract a large number of students. They still face serious problems in school buildings, teacher qualifications, and financial resources. Without strong policy and financial support from the central government, many of these schools will struggle merely to survive, not to say to expand and gain social recognition. Third, for elite private schools, the market has shown sign of saturation. The huge cost of sending a child to an elite school has effectively limited the pool of students from which elite schools can draw. This is coupled with parental concerns for the quality of the schools. Competition among elite schools for students will drive down costs eventually, and only schools that have demonstrated success will be able to expand. As for private universities, they have been restricted in their growth because they are mostly vocational and practical schools. Research is not on their agenda any time soon, given the government’s reluctance to grant private universities the right to issue degrees. In 1997, private universities numbered 1,246, surpassing the total number of public universities, now at 1,078. It is not difficult to see that private universities have a role to play in China’s education system. But it would take many changes in government policies and years of practice by the private universities for them to fully play their important role in China’s higher education system. In the next decade, private education development will hinge especially on government action. First, without an infusion of government funding, many private schools and universities will remain substandard. A dramatic shift in policy is called for, in which the government really treats private schools as providers of education for the public good and adopts a systematic approach in their administration. The government needs to be willing to analyze the situation of individual schools and provide financial or asset inputs to allow private

Significance and Future Prospects

185

schools to become truly self-sufficient. Government support should also come in the form of making clear-cut provisions for salaries, medical insurance, title determination, housing, and retirement benefits for public school teachers who transfer to the private sector. By resolving the worries of private schools about the future and protecting their legal rights, this action will stabilize the teaching force (Qu Tiehua, 1993). The government also has to clarify policies regarding these questions: If private schools have temporary financial troubles, could they get loans? Can schools with purely private investment be allowed to run their enterprises and enjoy the same favorable state policy as enterprises run by public schools? Should private schools make profits? To what extent? Who has control over the profits? The administration of private schools must be streamlined and coordinated so that various social institutions (such as the taxation department in taxing private schools as private businesses or the transportation department in honoring student IDs from private schools) recognize private schools’ legal rights and their equal status with public schools. Chinese culture and society also affect private education development. For example, while elite schools’ emphasis on students’ all-round development is highly applauded, they continue to face the pressures of teaching for examination. Private schools and parents will continue to feel a tremendous tug away from their efforts to divert from the ‘‘examination hell.’’ This question will be daunting: How can private school students compete in the National University Entrance Exam while they continue to develop in an all-round manner? To answer this question requires government action to provide mass higher education, a societal change in values, and profound adjustment in schooling practices in the country. Rejuvenation of the teaching force is critical for ordinary private schools and for private universities. With the aging of the retired teachers who set up schools, many will have to close down, especially ordinary private secondary schools run by retired teachers. It can be expected that new schools will be opened, but the tendency may be that younger people become the main body of founders, taking running a private school as a career, not as a retirement alternative. Private education operates in the Chinese context of centralized control and a huge bureaucracy. The problems faced by the schools will continue to be too much red tape in the complex web of bureaucratic rules and personal relationships. Parents may become used to the idea of private education and may start to prepare their children at an early age. In conclusion, private schools in China will have to expect years of struggling before they can solidly stand on their own; it will be years before they build a tradition and win social recognition through providing quality education and alternatives to meet the diverse needs of the society.

Appendix: Regulation on Education Run by Social Forces In order to promote the healthy development of education run by social forces, on July 31, 1997, Premier Li Peng signed the State Council Decree No. 266, which issued The Regulation on Education Run by Social Forces, which is now published in full as follows. CHAPTER I. GENERAL RULES Article 1 This regulation is formulated so as to encourage the healthy development of education run by social forces and to maintain the legal rights of school runners, schools or other educational institutions, teachers or other educators and the people being educated. Article 2 This regulation is applicable to any organization of enterprises or institutions, any social groups or other social organizations and any individual citizens that establish and run schools and other educational institutions (all titled as educational institutions in this and the following chapters) for the needs of society but without using state educational funds. Article 3 Education run by social forces is an integral component of the socialist educational cause. People’s governments at all levels should enhance their leadership over education run by social forces and should include it in the planning of national economy and social development. Article 4 The government policy on education run by social forces is active encouragement, vigorous support, correct guidance and strengthened administration. Article 5 Education run by social forces should focus on establishing schools

188

Appendix

to provide vocational education, adult education, senior secondary education and preschool education. The government encourages social forces to establish compulsory education institutions to supplement the state-run compulsory education. But the government will maintain strict control on higher education run by social forces. Social forces are not allowed to establish or run religious schools or religious schools in disguised forms. Article 6 Educational institutions run by social forces should not aim at making profit. Article 7 Any organization or individual is not allowed to use the name of running ‘‘education by social forces’’ to collect funds from enterprises, institutions or individuals. Article 8 The legal rights of education run by social forces are protected by the government. Education institutions run by social forces have the autonomy protected by law to run their schools. Article 9 Educational institutions run by social forces should abide by laws and regulations and insist on socialist orientation in the running of schools. They must implement the state’s policies on education and ensure the quality of education and teaching. Article 10 Educational institutions run by social forces and their teachers and students, according to law, have equal legal status as the state-run educational institutions and their teachers and students. Article 11 The State Council Educational Administrative Department is in charge of the overall planning, coordination and the macro-administration of the nation-wide education run by social forces. The State Council Educational Administrative Department and Labor Administrative Department and other applicable departments should be responsible for the work concerning education run by social forces within the limits stipulated by the State Council. The applicable department of all regional People’s Government above county level should be responsible for the work concerning education run by social forces on the basis of duties stipulated by the People’s Government of the Province, Autonomous Region and Municipality Directly under the Central Government. Article 12 Organizations and individuals that have made outstanding contributions in education run by social forces should be awarded. CHAPTER II. THE ESTABLISHMENT OF EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS Article 13 Any administrative unit that applies to establish educational institutions should have the title of Legal Person; any individual that applies to

Appendix

189

establish educational institutions should have political rights and full Civil Action Ability. Testing institutions that are responsible for holding the state educational tests, professional qualification tests and technical competence level tests are not allowed to run educational institutions that concern their respective test services. Article 14 Basic requirements stipulated by the Law of Education and the Law of Vocational Education should be met to be qualified for establishing educational institutions. Establishment requirements for degree-granting higher learning institutions are to be stipulated by the State Council Educational Administrative Department. Establishment requirements for other educational institutions are to be stipulated by the People’s Government of Province, Autonomous Region and Municipality Directly under the Central Government, according to their respective categories. Article 15 Establishing educational institutions for diploma education, remedial education, preschool education or preparational education for the Exam for Self-Study Students should be examined and approved by the Education Administrative Department of the People’s Government above county level on the basis of the approval authority assigned by the state. Establishing educational institutions for professional qualification training, technical competence training and for professional technical competence training for labour employment should be examined and approved by Labour Administrative Department of the People’s Government above county level on the basis of the approval authority assigned by the state and a copy should be sent to Educational Administrative Department on the same level to be put on file. Establishing other educational institutions should first be approved by the concerning administrative department on the basis of the approval authority assigned by the state and then be examined and approved by the Education Administrative Department on the same level. Article 16 The person that applies to establish an educational institution should submit to the approval organizations the following documents: 1) Application report 2) Proofs of qualification of the applicant 3) Proofs of qualification of the prospective principal or main administrative leaders and teachers 4) Proofs of assets and financial resources of the educational institution under application 5) Prospectus and developmental plan of the education institution under application 6) Other documents required by the approval organization.

Agreement on establishing and running the school should be submitted if the educational institution is to be jointly established. Article 17 Educational institutions should be judged by their establishment conditions and their setup standards and they should meet the requirements of

190

Appendix

the benefit of the state and the public and the requirements of reasonable educational structure and planning. Applications of educational institutions for diploma education are accepted before the end of the third quarter of each year and response is to be issued in written form before the end of April of the second year. Applications of educational institutions for other purposes should be responded to in written form within three months from the date of acceptance. Article 18 Authorizations for school establishment will be issued by the approval organization to the approved educational institutions. The authorization is designed by the State Council Education Administrative Department and the Education Administrative Department, and Labour Administrative Department are jointly responsible for the printing on the basis of their respective duties. After obtaining the authorization, the educational institutions should register according to the Administration Rules concerning registration of non-enterprise institutions run by social forces. And they are eligible to carry out education and teaching activities afterwards. Article 19 Educational institutions are not allowed to have branch institutions. Article 20 Titles of educational institutions should represent correctly and properly the categories they belong to, levels they are on and administration regions they are in. Titles such as ‘‘China’s’’ or ‘‘international’’ should not be used without the approval of the Education Administrative Department or Labour Administrative Department of the State Council.

CHAPTER III. THE ADMINISTRATION OF TEACHING AND MANAGEMENT OF EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS Article 21 Educational institutions are allowed to have a school board, which is responsible for nominating the principal or the main administrative leaders and deciding important issues such as development, funds collection and budget of the educational institution. The school board is to be composed of the founder or the founder’s representative, representatives from the staff of the education institution, and upright social personages that are enthusiastic in the cause of education. At least one third of the trustees should have five years of experience in education or teaching. The first board of directors is to be appointed by the founder; afterwards the board of directors will be elected according to the regulation concerning the setting up of the school board. The directors should be checked and approved before being appointed. Government employees on the job are not allowed to sit on the school board, but exception can be made for those appointed by the People’s Government above county level or by other concerning departments.

Appendix

191

Article 22 Principals or main administrative leaders of the educational institution are responsible for administrating teaching and other work. The requirements for the principals or main administrative leaders of the educational institution run by social forces are the same as the requirements for the principals and administrative leaders of the state-run educational institutions in the same category on the same level, except that the age requirement can be reasonably relaxed. Principals or main administrative leaders of the educational institutions are to be appointed by boards of trustees. If there is no school board, the founder is responsible for the appointment, which should be checked and approved by approval organizations before implementation. Article 23 In the nomination of boards, principals or main administrative leaders and the nomination of the persons in charge of general affairs, accounting and human resources, a system of avoiding appointment of relatives should be adopted. Article 24 Teachers and other educators of the educational institutions have the right to organize labour unions according to Labour Union Law so as to protect their legal rights. Article 25 Educational institutions have the autonomy to hire teachers and other educators according to the applicable government stipulations. Teachers hired should have teacher’s qualifications and meet the requirements stipulated by the government. Educational institutions should also enhance political and moral education and professional training for the teachers employed. Contracts should be signed between the educational institutions and their employed teachers or other educators. Employment of foreign teachers should be conducted according to the applicable government stipulations. Article 26 Educational institutions have the autonomy to recruit students according to the applicable government stipulations. Admission procedures and advertisements cannot be released without being examined by approval organizations. Admission of students from abroad should be conducted according to the applicable government stipulations. Article 27 Educational institutions have the autonomy to establish their specialties and programs according to the applicable government stipulations. Article 28 The teaching content of educational institutions should abide by the stipulations of the Constitution, laws and regulations. Education and teaching in secondary and elementary schools run by social forces should meet the requirements on curriculum and syllabus designed by the Education Administration Department of the State Council, and by the respective People’s Government of Province, Autonomous Region or Municipality Directly under the Central Government. The chosen textbooks should also be approved by the Education Administration Department of that particular province, autonomous region or municipality directly under the central government.

192

Appendix

Article 29 Educational institutions should make good use of public educational facilities, equipment and materials, and make full use of Radio and TV Broadcasting Universities or Schools to hold educating and teaching activities and to improve teaching quality. Article 30 Educational institutions should establish and implement systems for managing student files and for administration of teaching activities according to the applicable government stipulations. Article 31 Diplomas will be issued by educational institutions according to the applicable government stipulations to students of the approved schools for diploma education, who have finished their studies and passed all the examinations. Training certificates or other certificates will be issued by educational institutions according to the applicable government stipulations to students from other educational institutions, who have finished their studies. The courses taken and final scores should be stated on the certificates. Students can also sit for Professional Qualification Examinations or Technical Competence Level Tests. Those who passed will obtain their respective Professional Qualification Certificate or Technical Competence Level Certificate. Article 32 In order to get an official stamp made, educational institutions should submit their certificate of establishing school and documents issued by approval organizations to the local Public Security Department of the People’s Government above county level for an approval. The design of the official stamp should be submitted to the approval organization and the Public Security Section to be put on file. Article 33 Education Administration Department, Labour Administration Department and other applicable departments should enhance their supervision and administration over education run by social forces. The local People’s Government on all levels should enhance their guidance and assessment of the school running and teaching quality within their respective limits of administration. No fees should be charged for any supervision or administration of the administration departments. CHAPTER IV. THE PROPERTY AND FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION OF EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS Article 34 Educational institutions should set up financial, accounting and assets and property management systems according to laws and account books should be set up according to the stipulations of the Accounting Regulation for Administrative Institutions. Article 35 Fees charged by education institutions should abide by the applicable government stipulations. Educational institutions can put forward their own items and standards of fee charges, which will be examined by approval organizations and checked and determined by the Financial Department and Price Administration Department

Appendix

193

according to their respective division of responsibility and on the basis of the cost of teaching and situation of the funds received. Article 36 Educational institutions can manage and use their assets and property during their existence but the property cannot be transferred or used as collateral. Any organization or individual is not allowed to seize the possessions. Article 37 Educational institutions should determine the proportion of employees’ salary and welfare spending to the school running expenses and submit it to approval organizations to be put on file. The accumulation of educational institutions should only be used to increase educational investments or to improve school conditions. It should not be used for distribution in the institution or investments outside. Article 38 Financial and Accounting Report should be done at the end of each accounting year and, according to the requirements of approval organizations, social audit institutions should be entrusted to audit the financial and accounting situation of the educational institutions, the results of which should be reported to approval organizations for examination. CHAPTER V. CHANGES AND DISSOLUTION OF EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS Article 39 Any change of name, nature or level of the educational institutions should be reported to approval organizations for approval. Changes of other items should be reported to approval organizations to be put on file. Article 40 If educational institutions merge, their property should be cleared and accounts closed. Proper arrangement should be made for students in the educational institution after merging. Article 41 Educational institutions should be dissolved if any of the following situations happens: 1) Dissolution is demanded by the school board or the founder of the educational institution according to its regulations. 2) Normal education and teaching activities cannot be carried out for certain reasons.

The dissolution should be checked and approved by the approval organizations. Article 42 When educational institutions dissolve, students in school should be well settled with the assistance of the approval organizations. When educational institutions that implement compulsory education are to dissolve, approval organizations should arrange for students still under compulsory education to continue their studies in other schools. Article 43 When educational institutions dissolve, their property should be cleared. When the dissolving educational institution’s account is being cleared, the salary and social insurance expenses owed to employees should be paid first.

194

Appendix

Property left from the clearing should be returned according to the founder’s investment, or returned after being converted into money. If there still is property left, approval organizations are responsible for using it for the overall planning of the course of education run by social forces. Article 44 Approval authority should announce the dissolving of educational institutions and should notify the education institutions to return their certificates and official stamp, which will be sealed. CHAPTER VI. GUARANTEE AND SUPPORT Article 45 People’s Government of all levels above county should support education run by social forces according to the applicable law and regulation and stipulations. Article 46 Education Administration Department, Labour Administration Department and other applicable departments of the People’s Government above county level should treat education run by social forces equally in aspects such as professional guidance, teaching and researching activity, teacher administration and recognition and reward. Article 47 When land is needed in the construction of educational institutions, People’s Government above county levels should take it into overall planning according to the applicable government stipulations and the case can be processed as those lands appropriated for public welfare. Priority may be granted. Article 48 The salary, social insurance and welfare of teachers and other educators should be guaranteed by educational institutions according to laws. Teaching years should be counted for professional teachers during their working years at educational institutions run by social forces. Article 49 Students in educational institutions run by social forces have equal rights as students in state-run institutions in entering higher level schools, sitting for exams and participation in social activities according to the law. When students educated by schools run by social forces are in the job market, principles of selection based on social needs, fair competition and meritocracy should be followed, and they should not be discriminated against by the employers. CHAPTER VII. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES Article 50 In the process of education, any violation of the Law of Education will be punished according to relevant stipulations in the Law of Education. Article 51 Any false investment or withdrawal after establishment of the founder will be ordered by approval organizations to be amended. Any refusal of amendment will be fined up to twice the amount of the falsely invested or withdrawn amount. In case of serious violation, student recruiting will be stopped and certificates will be revoked by approval organizations.

Appendix

195

Article 52 Any forgery, change or buying and selling of the certificate will be punished by the Public Security Department according to the Public Security Administration Punishment Regulation. For criminal offense, those responsible should be investigated and prosecuted. Article 53 If education institutions collect fees that exceed the indicated limit or the standard approved, the approval organization will order the money overcharged to be returned within a stipulated period and the educational institution will be fined by Financial Department and Price Administration Department according to the applicable laws and stipulations. Article 54 Educational institutions that do not determine the proportion of employees’ salary and welfare spending to the school running expenses, or that fail to comply with the determined proportion, or that use their accumulation for distribution or investment outside the school, will be ordered by approval organizations to amend and they may also be issued a warning. In serious cases or in case of refusal, recruiting will be stopped and certificate revoked by approval organizations or the institution may be taken over. Article 55 Educational institutions that have administration in confusion or low teaching quality and that are causing very bad influences will be ordered by approval organizations to be reorganized within a stipulated period and warning may be issued. In serious cases or in case of the school not meeting the requirements after reorganization, student admission will be stopped and certificate revoked by approval organizations or the institution may be taken over. Article 56 In case of any abuse of power, cheating or negligence in administrating the approved education institution by the approval organization that has caused serious negative impact, disciplinary sanction will be imposed according to the law on the administrative person and other people who are directly responsible. For criminal offenses, those directly responsible should be investigated and prosecuted. If fees are charged by administration departments in their supervision and administration of educational institutions, fees should be returned and disciplinary sanction will be imposed according to the law on the administrative person and other people who are directly responsible.

CHAPTER VIII. SUPPLEMENTARY ARTICLES Article 57 This regulation is also applicable to training activity run by social forces without establishing independent organizations. Article 58 This regulation is not applicable to foreign organizations or individuals that establish and run schools independently or jointly with Chinese institutions. Applicable measures are to be stipulated by the State Council. Article 59 Educational institutions run by social forces that have been lawfully established or registered with the approval of relevant authorities before the implementation of this regulation can continue to operate. But the missing

196

Appendix

certificates should be obtained retroactively and the requirements stipulated in this regulation that are not met should be fulfilled within the stipulated period. Article 60 This regulation will come into effect on October 1st, 1997, except for the second item of Article 18, which will be implemented on the day when the Administration Regulation for the Registration of Non-Enterprise Institution Run by Social Forces is implemented.

Bibliography Bai Yueqiao. (1994). ‘‘Suggestions to Substantially Reform the Curriculum in Our Primary and Secondary Schools.’’ Journal of Chinese Education (Beijing), no. 3, 21–25. Baird, Leonard L. (1977). The Elite Schools: A Profile of Prestigious Independent Schools. Lexington, Mass.: D. C. Heath. Bangsberg, P. T. (1996). ‘‘China to Set Investment Record.’’ The Gazette (Montreal), December 27, b5. Barbieri, Richard. (1992). ‘‘Different Forms of Independent Education.’’ In Independent Schools, Independent Thinkers, edited by P. R. Kane. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 27–41. Bauch, P. (1988). ‘‘Differences among Single-sex and Coeducational High Schools.’’ Momentum, 56–57. Bi Cheng. (1994). ‘‘Exploring the Practice and Theory of Chinese Private Schools.’’ In Theory and Practice of Private and Nongovernmental Schools, edited by Zhang Zhiyi et al. Beijing: China Workers’ Publishing House, 225–241. Bian Qingli. (1995). ‘‘A Broad Perspective on Running Schools by Social Forces.’’ World of Education Run by Social Forces, no. 4, 11–13. Biklen, S. K., and Pollard, D. (Eds.). (1993). Gender and Education: Ninety-second Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education: Part I. Chicago, Ill.: University of Chicago Press. Borthwick, Sally. (1983). Education and Social Change in China. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 6–7. Bossy, Steve. (1996). ‘‘Academic Pressure and Impacts on Japanese Students.’’ M.A. thesis, McGill University. Bowles, S., and H. Gintis. (1976). Schooling in Capitalist America. New York: Basic Books.

198

Bibliography

Boyd, W. Lowe, and Herbert J. Walberg (Eds.). (1990). Choice in Education: Potential and Problems. Berkeley, Calif.: McCuthchan. Brimelow, P. (1984). ‘‘Public and Private Schools: The Need for Competition.’’ The Education Digest, April, 14–17. Brummelem, Harro Van. (1996). ‘‘Independent Schools in Canada.’’ Private School Monitor, vol. 17, no. 2, 1–6. Cai Min. (1996). ‘‘More than 4 Million Students Took the Higher Learning Self-study Exam.’’ World of Education Run by Social Forces, no. 4, 13. Carnoy, Martin, and Samoff, Joel. (1990). Education and Social Transition in the Third World. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press. Central Normal University (Research Team). (1996). ‘‘Research on Reform of School Leadership Structure: A survey on the principal responsibility system.’’ Secondary and Primary School Administration, no. 4, 8–9. Chen Baoyu. (1996). ‘‘On ‘Easy Admission and Strict Graduation.’ ’’ World of Education Run by Social Forces, no. 2, 10–12. Chen Baoyu. (1997). ‘‘The Future and Choice of China’s Private Universities Heading Towards the 21st Century.’’ World of Education Run by Social Forces, no. 1, 4–8. Chen Mingshu. (1993). ‘‘Private Universities Going toward Glory.’’ World of Private Higher Education, no. 4, 6. Cheng Hua. (1996). ‘‘A Charming Scenic View: A Glance at Jiangxi Private Universities.’’ World of Education Run by Social Forces, no. 1, 27–28. Cheng Jianguo and Su Hong. (1991). ‘‘On principals’ influence and efficiency.’’ Nantong Normal College Journal, no. 4, 71–72. Cheng, Kai Ming. (1992). Chinese Educational Reform: Progress, Limitation, and Trend. Hong Kong: Shang Wu Publishing House. China Facts and Figures, 1997. (1997). Beijing: New Star Publishers. ‘‘China’s Crackdown on Extramarital Sex under Fire.’’ (1998). The Gazette (Montreal), October 17, c16. Cleverly, John. (1985). The Schooling of China. Sydney: George Allen and Unwin. Coleman, James S. (1961). The Adolescent Society. New York: Free Press of Glencoe. Coleman, James S., Thomas Hoffer, and Sally Rilgore, (1982). High School Achievement: Public, Catholic, and Private Schools Compared. New York: Basic Books. Cookson, Peter W., Jr., and Barbara Schneider (Eds). (1995). Transforming Schools. New York: Garland. Cookson, Peter W., Jr., and Caroline Hodges Persell. (1985). Preparing for Power: America’s Elite Boarding Schools. New York: Basic Books. Dang Songhua. (1994). ‘‘On the Issue of Equality of Education Opportunity in Present Stage of China.’’ Educational Research, no. 6, 14–18, 40. Davis, D. (1992). ‘‘ ‘Skidding’: Downward Mobility among Children of the Maoist Middle Class.’’ Modern China, vol. 18, no. 4 (October): 410–437. Delamont, S. (1990). Sex Roles and the School (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge. Delany, Brian, and Lynn Paine. (1991). ‘‘Shifting Patterns of Authority in Chinese Schools.’’ Comparative Education Review, vol. 35, no. 1, 23–43. DeMarrais, K. B., and LeCompte, M. D. (1995). The Way Schools Work: A Sociological Analysis of Education (2nd ed.). New York: Longman. Deng Peng. (1997). Private Education in Modern China. Westport, Conn.: Praeger. Dewey, John. (1916). Democracy and Education. New York: Free Press. Dewey, John. (1938). Experience and Education. New York: Collier Books.

Bibliography

199

Ding Runsheng. (1995). ‘‘Reform the System of Granting Graduation Certificate and Enhance Equal Competition of Universities.’’ World of Education Run by Social Forces, no. 8, 18. Dong Mingzhuan. (1995). ‘‘The Present Situation, Problems and Strategies of Chinese Private Higher Education.’’ World of Education Run by Social Forces, no. 6, 6–7. Dong Mingzhuan. (1995). ‘‘Private Education Will Benefit Our Many Generations to Come.’’ World of Education Run by Social Forces, no. 4, 9–11. Dornbush, S. (1955). ‘‘The Military Academy as an Assimilating Institution.’’ Social Forces, vol. 33, 316. ‘‘Brief Report on the First Seminar on Theories of Private Education.’’ (1993). Educational Research, no. 1, 78–79, 52. Epstein, Irving (Ed.). (1991). Chinese Education: Problems, Policies and Prospects. New York: Garland Publishers. Esty, J. (1984). ‘‘The Public Purpose of Nonpublic Education.’’ Momentum, vol. 15, no. 3 (September):48–52. Esty, J. (1991). ‘‘Independent Schools: What, Whither, and Why.’’ Teachers College Record, vol. 92, no. 3, Spring, 485–490. Farrell J. (1982). ‘‘Educational Expansion and the Drive for Social Equality.’’ In Comparative Education, edited by Philip Altbach, R. Arnove, and G. Kelly. New York: Macmillan, 39–53. Feng Jianjun. (1996). ‘‘Research on Problems Concerning Equality of Educational Opportunity at Present Stage in Our Country.’’ Journal of Eastern China Normal University (educational science version) (Shanghai), no. 1, 35–46. Feng Jingwei. (1995). ‘‘School Shops in Guangzhou.’’ World of Education Run by Social Forces, no. 4, 20–21. ‘‘The First Private University in Beijing City: China Social University.’’ (1993). World of Higher Education Run by Social Forces, no. 1, 37. Gaier, E., and Monaco, N. (1992). ‘‘Single-sex versus Coeducational Environment and Achievement in Adolescent Females.’’ Adolescence, no. 27, 107, 579–594. ‘‘Gaocheng Painting School Is a Big Hoax.’’ (1995). World of Education Run by Social Forces, no. 5, 36–37. Garcia, George F., and Mary Garcia. (1996). ‘‘Charter Schools: Another Top-down Innovation.’’ Educational Researcher, vol. 25, no. 8, 34–36. Gardner, Howard. (1989). ‘‘The Key in the Slot: Creativity in a Chinese Key.’’ Journal of Aesthetic Education, vol. 23, no. 1, 141–158. Gasper, Barbara. (1989). ‘‘Keypoint Secondary Schools in China: The Persistence of Tradition?’’ Compare, vol. 19, no. 1, 5–20. Ge Zi. (1996). ‘‘A Topic Going into the New Century: Increasing Gap between Rich and Poor.’’ Jiangsu Economics Exploration (Nangjing), no. 2, 39–41, 46. Goffman, E. (1969). ‘‘The Characteristics of Total Institutions.’’ In A. Etzioni (Ed.), A Sociological Reader on Complex Organizations. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Goldman, Merle. (1992). ‘‘The Intellectuals in the Deng Xiaoping Era.’’ In State and Society in China: The Consequence of Reform, edited by Arthur L. Rosenbaum. Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press, 193–223. Griggs, Clive. (1985). Private Education in Britain. London: Falmer Press. Gu Meiling and Liu Dexuan. (1994). ‘‘Private Schools and Market Economy.’’ Journal of Sichuan Normal University, Social Science Edition (Chengdu), no. 1, 56–63.

200

Bibliography

Guangzhou Education Commission. (1995). ‘‘We Do Not Have ‘Aristocratic Schools.’ ’’ World of Education Run by Social Forces, no. 4, 21. ‘‘Guangzhou Private Schools Filled with Students, Adopting Guerrilla Strategies to be Short, Sharp and Quick.’’ (1993). World of Private Higher Education, no. 1, 45. Gui Zhaoheng. (1996). ‘‘One Specialty and Multiple Abilities; One School and Multiple Certificates.’’ World of Education Run by Social Forces, no. 2, 18–19. Guo Ge. (1996). ‘‘An Investigation Report on Shen Yang Private Primary and Secondary Schools.’’ Educational Research, no. 1, 49–53. Hao Wenwu. (1995). ‘‘From Private Education Development to the Reflection of Public Education Reform.’’ Modern Education Platform, no. 2, 11–14. Harding, Harry. (1986). ‘‘Political Development in Post-Mao China.’’ In Modernizing China: Post-Mao Reform and Development, edited by Doak Barnett and Ralph Clough. Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press, 13–38. Hawkins, John N. (1983). Education and Social Change in the People’s Republic of China. New York: Praeger. Hayhoe, Ruth. (1984). Contemporary Chinese Education. London: Croom Helm. Hayhoe, Ruth. (1992). Education and Modernization. New York: Pergamon Press. Hayhoe, Ruth (Ed.). (1992). Education and Modernization: The Chinese Experience. Oxford: Pergamon Press. He Qizong and Zhang Yizhong. (1994). ‘‘Several Points on Private Education Problems in Our Country at Present.’’ Educational Theory and Practice (Taiyuan), no. 2, 27–31. He Xiangdong. (1993). ‘‘Extricate Private Schools from the Dilemma.’’ Private Higher Education, no. 1, 6–9. He Zenghao. (1992). ‘‘Transform the [Personnel] Structure to Strengthen Faculty Vitality and Stimulate Their Potential to Improve Educational Quality.’’ Secondary Education, no. 11, 15–21. Heller, Celia (Ed.). (1969). Structured Social Inequality. New York: Macmillan. Heyward, C.B. (1995). ‘‘Catching Up: Gender Values at a Canadian Independent School for Girls.’’ Gender and Education, vol. 7, no. 2, 189–203. Hou Jianwen. (1993). ‘‘China’s First Elite School.’’ East, West, South and North, no. 5, 7–8. Hu Junjuan. (1994). ‘‘An Analysis on the Problem of Teachers Leaving Their Job.’’ Administration of Secondary and Primary Schools, no. 2, 20–22. Hu Reiwen. (1997). ‘‘Advancement of China’s Education in the 1990s and Prospect toward 2010.’’ Paper presented at Chinese Education for the 21st Century Conference, August 14–19, 1997, at the Chinese University of Hong Kong. Huang Jingzhang. (1996). ‘‘Different Aspects of Schools Run by Social Forces in Meizhou City.’’ World of Education Run by Social Forces, no. 3, 22–23. Iritani, Evelyn. (1996). ‘‘China Emerges as Major Player in World Economy.’’ The Gazette (Montreal), August 31, D2. James, Thomas, and Levin, Henry (Eds.). (1988). Comparing Public and Private Schools. London: Falmer Press. Ji Yueshu. (1996). ‘‘Is There a ‘Middle Class’ Forming in China?’’ The Weekly Digest, July 1, 5. Jiang Feng and Lin Lin. (1996). ‘‘When the Flag was Being Raised, the School Founder was Taken Away.’’ World of Education Run by Social Forces, no. 2, 22–23.

Bibliography

201

Jiangsu Provincial Education Commission’s Policy Research Office. (1995). ‘‘Correctly Grasp the Role of the Market Mechanism in the Operation of Nongovernmental Schools: Survey of Nanjing’s Nongovernmental Schools and Some Thoughts Thereof.’’ Educational Research, no. 3, 30–36. Jimenez, E., and Lockheed, M. E. (1989). ‘‘Enhancing Girls’ Learning through Single Sex Education: Evidence and a Policy Conundrum.’’ Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, no. 11, 117–142. Jin Wenbin. (1996). ‘‘On How Wenzhou Entrepreneur Chen Guotong Set Up His School.’’ World of Education Run by Social Forces, no. 4, 31. Johnson, D. (1987). Private Schools and State Schools. Philadelphia, Penn.: Open University Press. Joseph, William A. (Ed.). (1992). China Briefing. Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press. Kane, Pearl Rock. (1992). ‘‘What Is an Independent School?’’ In Independent Schools, Independent Thinkers, edited by P. R. Kane. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1–4. Kerbo, Harold R. (1991). Social Stratification and Inequality: Class Conflict in Historical and Comparative Perspective (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. Klein, S. S. (1988). ‘‘Sex Education and Gender Equity.’’ Educational Leadership, vol. 54, no. 6, 69–75. Kleinberg, Robert. (1990). China’s Opening to the Outside World: The Experiment with Foreign Capitalism. Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press. Kristof, Nicholas D. (1993). ‘‘China Sees ‘Market-Leninism’ as Way to Future.’’ New York Times, September 6, 1, 5. Kwak, B. (1991). ‘‘ ‘Examination Hell’ in Korea Revisited.’’ Koreana, vol. 5, no. 2, 45– 55. Kwari, Francis. (1991). ‘‘Educational Changes and Problems in Zimbabwe.’’ Paper for the course ‘‘Sociology of Education,’’ McGill University. Kwong, Julia. (1996). ‘‘Introduction: Private Education in China (II).’’ Chinese Education and Society, vol. 29, no. 5, September–October, 3–5. LaFrance, M. (1985). ‘‘The School of Hard Knocks: Nonverbal Sexism in the Classroom.’’ Theory into Practice, vol. 24, 40–44. Lai Qunyang. (1994). ‘‘A Look at the Problem of Fee Charging in Secondary and Primary Schools.’’ Chinese Education Newspaper, no. 8, 24. Lever, J. (1976). ‘‘Sex Differences in the Games Children Play.’’ Social Problems, 23, 478–487. Levy, Daniel C. (1986). Private Education: Studies in Choice and Public Policy. New York: Oxford University Press. Li Jie-shan. (1995). ‘‘The Cradle for Famous People and Scholars: Bei Man All Girl Secondary School.’’ Administration of Secondary and Primary Schools, no. 5, 44. Li Jie-shan. (1996). ‘‘The No. 161 Secondary School.’’ Administration of Primary and Secondary Schools, no. 1, 37. Li Jinchu. (1995). ‘‘Reform Brought Our School into a New Stage of Development.’’ Secondary and Primary Education Administration, no. 7–8, 1. Li Jinchu. (1996). ‘‘On Schools Owned by the State but Run by Social Forces.’’ Administration of Secondary and Primary Schools, no. 9, 18–20. Li Qiang. (1993). Social Stratification and Mobility in Modern China. Beijing: China Economics Publishing House.

202

Bibliography

Li Qiang. (1997). ‘‘Political Stratification and Economic Stratification.’’ Research in Sociology (Beijing), no. 4, 32–41. Li Qiang. (1998). ‘‘Two Phases in the Economic Transition of the Social Structure in Our Country.’’ Guangming Daily (Beijing), February 3, 5. Li Qiang, Hong Dayong, and Song Shige. (1995). ‘‘An Analysis on Income Gap of China’s Social Groups.’’ Science and Technology Guardian (Beijing), no. 11, 61–64, 20. Li Shoufu. (1993). ‘‘Should It Be Called ‘Civilian’ or ‘Private’? A Discussion on the Appellation of a School Type.’’ Private Higher Education, no. 1, 25–26. Li Tieying. (1993). ‘‘It Is Meritorious to Run Schools and Faultless to Pursue Education.’’ Private Higher Education, no. 1, 4. Li Weimin. (1993). ‘‘A Waterfront Pavilion Gets the Moonlight First: Enlightenment of Locally-Run Schools on Reform of Adult Education.’’ Private Higher Education, no. 4, 16–17. Li Yixian. (1993). ‘‘Educational Reform under the Socialist Market Economy.’’ Educational Research, no. 6, 6–8. Li Yuantian and Qiu Jiangling. (1995). ‘‘Difficulties Facing Ordinary Senior High Schools.’’ Administration of Secondary and Primary Schools, no. 6, 16–19. Li Zhaoyang. (1994). ‘‘An Investigation on Education Governance by Law.’’ Administration of Secondary and Primary Schools, no. 7–8, 20–21. Liang Si. (1995). ‘‘Crisis and Strategy.’’ World of Education Run by Social Forces, no. 6, 20–21. Lin, Jing, and Chen, Q. (1995). ‘‘Academic Pressure and Impact on Students’ Growth in China.’’ McGill Journal of Education, vol. 30, no. 2 (Spring), 149–168. Lin, Jing. (1991). The Red Guards’ Path to Violence. New York: Praeger. Lin, Jing. (1993a). Education in Post-Mao China. New York: Praeger. Lin, Jing. (1993b). ‘‘Ethnic Relationship and Minority Education in Guangxi, China: A Case Study.’’ Canadian and International Education, vol. 22, no. 1, 5–21. Lin, Jing. (1994a). ‘‘Development and Prospect of Private Education in China.’’ Canadian and International Education, vol. 23, no. 2, 85–97. Lin, Jing. (1994b). The Opening of the Chinese Mind. New York: Praeger. Lin, Jing. (1997). ‘‘Policies and Politics of Bilingual Education in China.’’ Journal of Multilingual Multicultural Development, vol. 18, no. 3 (October), 193–205. Lin, Jing (Ed.). (1996). ‘‘Private Schools in China.’’ Chinese Education and Society, no. 29 (March–April); no. 30 (November–December). Lin, Jing, and H. Ross. (1998). ‘‘Potential and Problems of Diversity in China’s Educational system.’’ McGill Journal of Education, vol. 33, no. 1, 31–49. Lin, Jing, and Yuming Zhao. (1995). ‘‘School Supervision in China: Development and Problems.’’ International Journal of Educational Reform, vol. 4, no. 3 (July), 310–317. Lin Rongri and Du Zuorun. (1996a). ‘‘On Laws Concerning Private Higher Education.’’ World of Education Run by Social Forces, no. 3, 14–15. Lin Rongri and Du Zuorun. (1996b). ‘‘Autonomy and Common Good Are the Soul and Core of Judging Private Run Universities.’’ World of Education Run by Social Forces, no. 2, 8–9. Liu Bohuong. (1995). ‘‘The Employment Situation of the Chinese Women.’’ Research in Sociology, no. 2, 39–48.

Bibliography

203

Liu Fengshan. (1995). ‘‘Problems and Suggestions.’’ World of Education Run by Social Forces, no. 5, 6–7. Liu Peizhi. (1993). ‘‘Transferring Education Provision to Local Level Is Inevitable.’’ World of Private Higher Education, no. 4, 5. Liu Peizhi. (1995). ‘‘Unity, Collaboration and Common Effort: Advancing the Healthy Development of Higher Education Run by Social Forces.’’ World of Education Run by Social Forces, no. 8, 7–8. Liu Yufeng. (1995). ‘‘Elite Private School in China: A Case Study of Jinghua Private School.’’ M.A. thesis, McGill University. Marsh, H. (1989). ‘‘Effects of Attending Single-sex and Coeducational High Schools on Achievement, Attitudes, Behaviors and Sex Differences.’’ Journal of Educational Psychology, vol. 81, 70–85. McCormick, Barrett L. (1990). Political Reform in Post-Mao China, Berkeley: University of California Press. Mei Ruli. (1994). ‘‘Private Schools in Contemporary China: Part II.’’ Administration of Secondary and Primary Schools, no. 5, 20–22. Mei Ruli. (1998). ‘‘Public Secondary and Primary Schools Also Have to Absorb Funding from the Society.’’ Administration of Secondary and Primary Schools, no. 2, 6–8. Mickleburge, Rod. (1997). ‘‘China Strips Party Boss of Power.’’ The Globe and Mail (Toronto), September 10, 1, 7. NEA-Alaska. (1998). ‘‘Why Public Schools? A Primer on Democracy, Community, and Opportunity.’’ Internet: www.ak.nea.org/Building/why.htm. ‘‘New Options for Public Education.’’ (1996). Educational Leadership, vol. 54, no. 2 (October). News Office of the State Council. (1997). China Marches toward 2000. August. Oakes, Jenny. (1985). Keeping Track: How Schools Structure Inequality. New Haven and London: Yale University Press. Ogbu, John U. (1994). ‘‘Racial Stratification and Education in the United States: Why Inequality Persists.’’ Teachers College Record, vol. 96, no. 2, 265–298. Ogura, Y. (1987). ‘‘Examination Hell: Japanese Education’s Most Serious Problem.’’ College Board Review, 8–30. O’Reilly, B. (1990). ‘‘How Much Does Class Matter?’’ Fortune, 122, July 30, 123–128. ‘‘Outline of China’s Educational Reform and Development—Printed and Distributed by the CPC Central State Council.’’ (1993). People’s Daily, February 27, 2. Peng Guangrong. (1996). ‘‘A Survey Report on Secondary and Primary Schools Run by Social Forces in Guangxi.’’ World of Education Run by Social Forces, no. 4, 14– 16. Potter, S. H. (1983). ‘‘The Position of Peasants in Modern China’s Social Order.’’ Modern China, vol. 9, no. 4 (October): 465–499. Potter, Sulamith Heins, and Jack M. Potter. (1990). China’s Peasants: The Anthropology of a Revolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Powell, Arthur G., Eleanor Farrar, and David K. Cohen. (1985). The Shopping Mall High School: Winners and Losers in the Educational Marketplace. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Project Team. (1998). ‘‘An Analysis on Social Classes in Present Chinese Society.’’ Theoretical Forefront (Beijing), no. 3, 9–11. Qin Guozho. (1991). ‘‘Private Donation and the Development of Higher Education.’’ In

204

Bibliography

Research on Private Higher Education, edited by We Yitong. China: Xia Men University Press, 33–42. Qiu Chen. (1995). ‘‘Investigation into the Violation of Legal Rights of Several Private Universities in Xinjiang.’’ World of Education Run by Social Forces, no. 6, 22– 24. Qiu Chen. (1996). ‘‘Money, Right, Law.’’ Private Education, no. 6, 12–13. Qu Tiehua. (1993). ‘‘A Brief Description of Current Private School Development in China.’’ Northeastern Teachers’ University Bulletin: Philosophy and Sociological Edition (Changchun), no. 6, 88–91. Randall, Ruth, and Keith Geiger. (1991). School Choice: Issues and Answers. Bloomington, Ind.: National Educational Service. Ratteray J. (1987). ‘‘Escape to Freedom.’’ Vital Speeches of the Day. June 1, 497–498. Ravitch, Diane. (1992). ‘‘The Role of Private Schools in American Education.’’ In Independent Schools, Independent Thinkers, edited by P. R. Kane. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 20–26. Reform of China’s Educational Structure—Decision of the CPC Central Committee. (1985). Beijing: Foreign Languages Press. Robinson, Jean C. (1991). ‘‘Stumbling on Two Legs: Education and Reform in China.’’ Comparative Education Review, vol. 35, no. 1, 177–189. Roggeveen, D. (1993). ‘‘Choice for America’s Poor.’’ Momentum, vol. 24, no. 4 (November/December): 26–28. Rosenbaum, A. Lewis (Ed.). (1992). State and Society in China: The Consequence of Reform. Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press. Sadker, M., and D. Sadker (1994). Failing at Fairness: How Do Schools Cheat Girls? New York: Touchstone. Sadker, M., Sadker, D., and Steindam, S. (1989). ‘‘Gender Equity and Educational Reform.’’ Educational Leadership, March, 44–47. Sato, N. (1993). ‘‘Teaching and Learning in Japanese Elementary Schools: A Context for Understanding.’’ Peabody Journal of Education, vol. 68, no. 4, 111–153. Sautman, Barry. (1991). ‘‘Politicization, Hyperpoliticization, and Depoliticization of Chinese Schools.’’ Comparative Education Review, vol. 35, no. 4, 669–689. Schmetzer, Uli. (1993). ‘‘The Lei Feng Fairy Tale: Hard to Sell.’’ Chicago Tribune, November 27. Schneider, F., L. Coutts, and M. Starr. (1988). ‘‘In Favour of Coeducation: The Educational Attitudes of Students from Coeducational and Single-sex High Schools.’’ Canadian Journal of Education, vol. 13, 479–495. Shaffer, L. N. (1983). ‘‘The Chinese Working Class.’’ Modern China, vol. 9, no. 4 (October): 455–464. Shang De. (1993). ‘‘Privately-run Shanda University.’’ World of Private Higher Education, no. 4, 23–25. Shanghai Research Institute of Intelligence Development. (1996). ‘‘Statistics on National Education Funding in 1994.’’ Secondary and Primary School Administration, no. 1, 31–33. Shanxi Province Closed Down 284 Schools Run by Social Forces. (1996). World of Education Run by Social Forces, no. 3, 41. Shao Jinrong, Zhang Wen, and Zhang Xiaodong. (1994). ‘‘American Private Education: History, Present State and Implications.’’ Educational Research, no. 6, 71–75.

Bibliography

205

Smith, R. (1985). ‘‘Quality Private and Public Schools Compared.’’ Momentum, vol. 16, no. 2 (May):36–39. So, Alvin Y. (1990). Social Change and Development: Modernization, Dependency, and World-System Theories. London: Sage. ‘‘The Story of Loss and Recovery of Legal Power of Shandong Dongchang Jianshe College for Further Study.’’ (1995). World of Education Run by Social Forces, no. 6, 24–26. Study Team, organized by China National Institute of Educational Research. (1995). A Study on NGO-sponsored and Private Higher Education in China. May. Beijing: China National Institute of Educational Research. ‘‘Survey of Parents of Students in Private Schools.’’ (1994). Theory and Practice of Private and Nongovernmental Schools, edited by Zhang Zhiyi. Beijing: China Workers’ Publishing House, 159–67. Tan Songhua. (1994). ‘‘On the Issue of Educational Equality in Our Country at Present.’’ Educational Research, no. 6, 14–18, 40. ‘‘300,000 Chinese Officials Snared in Corruption Net.’’ (1994). The Globe and Mail (Toronto), January 5, 1994. Tian Dewen. (1993). ‘‘ ‘Elite’ Education in England.’’ Europe (Beijing), no. 1, 72–75. Tian Xin. (1995). ‘‘On Profit.’’ World of Education Run by Social Forces, no. 4, 22. Tian Zanzhu. (1995). ‘‘Our Wishes.’’ World of Education Run by Social Forces, no. 5, 16–17. Toch, T. (1991). ‘‘The Exodus.’’ U.S. News and World Report, December 9, 66–77. Tong Xing. (1996). ‘‘All Sorts of Gaps between the Rich and Poor in Our Country.’’ The Pursuit of Truth (Beijing), no. 2, 22–25. Tu Yuanxi. (1996). ‘‘My Viewpoint of the Sensitive Issues.’’ Private Education, no. 6, 10–11. Walger, Andrew G. (1984). ‘‘The Remaking of the Chinese Working Class, 1949–1981.’’ Modern China, vol. 10, no. 1 (January):3–48. Wang Fangjie. (1995). ‘‘On Hu Dabai and Her Private University.’’ World of Education Run by Social Forces, no. 5, 29. Wang Hongzhi. (1993). ‘‘The Spring Is about to Come, But the Weather Is Still Cool.’’ World of Higher Education Run by Social Forces, no. 4, 14–15. Wang Jianchao. (1996). Speech at the Opening Ceremony of 3rd Art Festival of Beijing Shuren School, June 1. Wang Jun. (1996). ‘‘Japanese Private Schools and Laws.’’ Foreign Education Research, no. 1, 16–20. Wang Minda. (1996). ‘‘Create a New Phase for Schools Run by Social Forces.’’ World of Education Run by Social Forces, no. 4, 4–6. Wei Yitong and Li Zeyu (Eds). (1991). Research on Private Higher Education. Fu Jian, China: Xia Men University Press. Whyte, Martin K. (1992). ‘‘Urban China: A Civil Society in the Making?’’ In State and Society in China: The Consequence of Reform, edited by Arthur L. Rosenbaum. Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press, 77–102. Wortzel, Larry M. (1987). Class in China—Stratification in a Classless Society. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press. Wu Degang. (1992). Compulsory Education of China. Xi’an, China: Shanxi People’s Education Publishing House. Wu Jiqing. (1994). ‘‘Some Thoughts on Secondary and Primary School Students Paying Fees to Select Schools.’’ Education Finance Research (Wuhan), no. 2, 55–57.

206

Bibliography

Wu Tangqing and Wang Fang. (1995). ‘‘SOS! ‘Poor’ Students Are Enjoying ‘High Consumption.’ ’’ Administration of Primary and Secondary Schools, no. 10, 21–22. Wu Zongkui. (1996). ‘‘A Comparative Analysis of the Relationship of the Government and Private Schools in Terms of Their Administration in China and Japan.’’ Comparative Education Research, no. 1, 33–39. WuDunn, S. (1992). ‘‘Profit, Not Equality.’’ The Gazette (Montreal), July 29, A7. Xi Ling. (1994a). ‘‘For Whom Does the School Open Its Door?’’ Comprehensive Monthly of Society, no. 3, 17–19. Xi Ling. (1994b). ‘‘A Look at Private School.’’ People’s Daily, overseas edition, January 29, 9. Xi Ling. (1994c). ‘‘Worries and Happiness about Private Schools.’’ Democracy and Law, no. 2. Xiang Dong. (1993). ‘‘Return the Decision-making Power to the People-run University.’’ Private Education, no. 1, 10–12. Xiao Qingzhang. (1995). ‘‘On Shanda College.’’ World of Education Run by Social Forces, no. 12, 31–33. Xiao Yonggu. (1996). ‘‘Divorce: A Great Revolution in 1996.’’ Behavioral Science (Xi’an), no. 2, 4–10. Xu Guangyu. (1994). ‘‘Survey on the Public Mind-set Regarding the Development of Private Schools and the Public’s Ability to Pay for Them.’’ In Theory and Practice of Private and Nongovernmental Schools, edited by Zhang Zhiyi. Beijing: China Workers’ Publishing House, 168–176. Xu He. (1995). ‘‘Why Was This Private Primary School Not Allowed to Continue?’’ World of Education Run by Social Forces, no. 5, 18. Xu Honglie. (1996). ‘‘Moral Education Is of the First Importance.’’ Private Education, no. 6, 6. Xu Jingyi. (1993). ‘‘Break a Road for Privately Run Schools.’’ World of Higher Education Run by Social Forces, no. 4, 20–22. Xue Jianguo. (1995). ‘‘New Experiment by Key Schools in Hangzhou City.’’ World of Education Run by Social Forces, no. 4, 8. Yang Deguang. (1993). ‘‘We Should Actively and Steadily Develop Universities Run by Social Forces.’’ China Higher Education Research (Beijing), no. 2, 11–14. Yang Ding. (1995). ‘‘Half Worry and Half Delight on Private Education Development.’’ World of Education Run by Social Forces, no. 5, 5. Yang Minqing. (1996). ‘‘A Critical Look on the ‘Fad of School Selection.’ ’’ Secondary and Primary School Administration, no. 5, 10–12. Yang Songtao. (1993). ‘‘Loosening the Bindings [private universities] Reconsidered.’’ World of Higher Education Run by Social Forces, no. 4, 19. ‘‘Yellow River University of Science and Technology Shining with Glory.’’ (1993). World of Higher Education Run by Social Forces, no. 1, 38. Yan Guangfen. (1995). ‘‘Reflection on Female Education in the New Era.’’ He Bei University Scholarship Journal (Philosophy and Sociology Edition), no. 4, 29– 33, 144. Yan Jie. (1993). ‘‘Adult Women’s Education Today.’’ Half the Sky, no. 3, 13. Yan Lankun (Ed.). (1992). Great Dictionary on Reform in Modern China. Beijing: China Social Science Publishing House. Yuan Weidong. (1996). ‘‘Wang Weicai—Determination to Nurture Talents.’’ World of Education Run by Social Forces, no. 4, 27.

Bibliography

207

Yun Xun. (1996) ‘‘Shen Hao and His Primary School.’’ World of Education Run by Social Forces, no. 6, 27. Zeng Hangshen and Feng Dayong. (1996). ‘‘The Main Connotation in China’s Social Structural Transformation.’’ Research in Sociology, no. 1, 58–63. Zeng, K. (1996). ‘‘Prayer, Luck, and Spiritual Strength: The Desecularization of Entrance Examination Systems in East Asia.’’ Comparative Education Review, vol. 40, no. 30, 264–279. Zeng, Rongguang et al. (1997). Report on a Study of 50 Schools in Hong Kong. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Institute of Educational Research. Zeng Tianshan. (1993). ‘‘On the Prospect of Co-existence and Development of Public and Private Schools in Our Country.’’ Educational Theory and Practice (Taiyuan), no. 4, 31–34. Zhang Cheng and Zhang Xiaorong. (1993). ‘‘Adjustment or No Way Out.’’ World of Private Higher Education, no. 4, 11–13. Zhang Chuting. (1992). ‘‘On the Closing Nature of Higher Education in Present China.’’ Journal of Social Science of Hunang Normal University (Changsha), no. 6, 1–6. Zhang Fengmin. (1994). ‘‘Introducing Private Schools in Tien Jin City.’’ Administration of Secondary and Primary Schools, no. 4, 10–11. Zhang Jijiao. (1997). ‘‘The Transformation of China’s Social Classes from Rigid Definition to Elastic Definition.’’ Jishou University Journal (social science version), no. 1, 9–12, 23. Zhang Jing. (1996). ‘‘The Reform Trend in Our Country’s Secondary and Primary School Curriculum.’’ Secondary and Primary School Administration, no. 1, 4–7. Zhang Kuan and Wang Wenyuan. (1998). ‘‘Current Condition, Problems and Strategies of Private Secondary and Primary School Development.’’ Administration of Secondary and Primary Schools, no. 1, 20–23. Zhang Wei and Ji Ping. (1994). ‘‘An Interview with Private School Principals.’’ Administration of Secondary and Primary Schools, no. 1, 8–10. Zhang Wen. (1994). ‘‘Current Laws and Regulations on Schools Run by Social Forces in Our Country.’’ In Theory and Practice of Private and Nongovernmental Schools, edited by Zhang Zhiyi. Beijing: China Workers’ Publishing House, 330– 352. Zhang Zhen. (1993). ‘‘An Elite Primary School in Sichuan Province.’’ Mainland China, December, 47–48. Zhang Zhiyi. (1994). ‘‘A Survey of Student Parents on Private Schools.’’ In Theory and Practice of Private and Nongovernmental Schools, edited by Zhang Zhiyi. Beijing: China Workers’ Publishing House, 159–67. Zhang Zhiyi. (1995). ‘‘Development, Prospects, Difficulties and Strategies for Private Schools in China.’’ Beijing: Central Institute for Educational Studies. Zhang Zhiyi. (1996). ‘‘Developmental Characteristics of Educational Undertaking Run by Social Forces in Our Country.’’ World of Education Run by Social Forces, no. 1, 8–9. Zhao, Juming. (1998). ‘‘The Making of a Chinese University: A Case Study of Organization and Administration of a Key Chinese University circa 1995.’’ Ph.D. dissertation, Faculty of Education, McGill University. Zhao, Juming. (1995). ‘‘Social Class and Parental Expectation and Involvement in Children’s Education: A Case Study in Urban Shanghai.’’ M.A. thesis, McGill University.

208

Bibliography

Zhe Wen. (1993). Statistics on Schools Run by Social Forces in Different Areas, no. 1, 41–42. Zhu Jingguo. (1995). ‘‘Shishu, after Being Leveled by a Bulldozer.’’ Private Education, no. 6, 17. Zhu Kaixuan (1993). ‘‘Education of the People, by the People.’’ World of Private Higher Education, no. 1, 5. Zhu Kaixuan. (1994). ‘‘On Some Problems of Private Education.’’ Excerpt of an address by Zhu Kaixuan, Director of the State Education Commission, to the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference. Zhu Kaixuan. (1995). ‘‘On a Few Hot Issues in Education That Have Caused Social Concerns.’’ Administration of Secondary and Primary Schools, no. 4, 4–5. Zhu Shifeng. (1994). ‘‘Guide to Secondary and Primary Schools Run by Social Forces toward Healthy Development.’’ Secondary Education (Shanghai), no. 1, 24–25. Zhu Yimin. (1994). ‘‘A Sharp Look at Minban Schools.’’ The Future and Development, no. 6, 39–42. Zhu Yiming. (1996). ‘‘Problems with the Government in Dealing with Private Secondary and Primary Schools.’’ World of Education Run by Social Forces, no. 5, 8.

Index academic achievement, 117, 152 academic freedom, 5 academies (shuyuan), 4, 87 accounting, 84 administration, 136–37 administrative problems, 164 administrative structure, 114 administrators, 61, 82, 90–91, 95, 97, 100– 101, 116, 144, 159, 160; corporate, 26; school, 42, 48, 135–36 admission, 77, 88, 90, 96, 102, 111, 114; age, 89; criteria, 88; line, 54, 99; plans, 90; quota, 90; ratio, 116, 175; sites, 162; standard, 112; standards, 57, 165; universal, 70 adolescents, 75, 83; delinquencies, 130; students, 130 all-girl schools (also girl schools, singlesex schools), 12, 81, 83–84, 179 all-round child, 177 all-rounded development, 108, 132, 144, 185; of children, 179; persons, 133 alumni associations, 71 anticorruption campaign, 22 arrogance, discouraged in elite schools, 131

arts schools, private, 69, 84 attention to individuals, 122 authority, 170; absolute, 36; structure, 171 autonomy, 5, 9, 12, 42, 52, 90, 95, 114, 121, 132, 135, 137, 144–46, 166, 179, 181, 188, 191; in administration, 111; in management, 113; and responsibilities, 173 Bai Yueqiao, 40–41 Baird, Leonard, 176 Bauch, P., 83 behavioral problems, 117 Beijing, 5–7, 11–14, 21, 28–29, 39, 42, 46, 51, 53, 56, 58, 59, 63–64, 81, 87, 92–93, 98, 133–34, 152, 167, 175–76 Beijing University, 97 benefits, 25, 29–30, 36, 43–44, 63, 75, 85, 96, 111, 148, 163, 177, 185 Bi Cheng, 26, 30–31, 114, 175 Bian Qingli, 148 Biklen, S. K. and Pollard, D., 83 birth control, 91; policy, 77 bonuses, 28, 47, 55, 84, 113, 159; and housing, 48 Borthwick, Sally, 4

210

Bossy, Steve, 116 Bowles, Samuel, and Gintis, H., 170 Boyd, W. Lowe, and Herbert J. Walberg, 173 Buddhism, 4 buildings or equipment, 96, 165 bureaucracy, 185 bureaucratic: control, 90; power, 171; structures, 95; system, 7, 38, 111 Cai Min, 15 Canada, 54, 173 CCP (Chinese Communist Party): control, 5, 18, 88; government 5, 125, 127, 137, 171 charter schools, 173 Chen Baoyu, 89, 100, 148 Chen Jia, 4 Chen Mingshu, 97 Cheng Hua, 100 Cheng, Kai Ming, 40 China Facts and Figures, 39 China Social University, 92 China University of Science and Technology and Business Administration, 98 Chinese scholars, 144, 145 choice, 18, 35, 43, 45, 58, 76, 84, 85, 91, 109, 111, 114, 129, 130, 132, 142, 169, 172–73, 174, 178–79, 180; occupation, 20; school, 173 city planning department, 149 class, 39, 170; enemies, 24; extra, 34, 43, 48; layers of, 26; remedial, 6; size, 6, 40, 44, 60, 75, 116, 120; social, 23–24, 30, 174, 180; status, 24–25, 53, 143; struggle, 24; training, 7; transformation, 18 classical canons, 4 Cleverly, John, 43 Co-education, 83–84; classes, 85 collectivism, 126 communist: beliefs, 126; government, 133; ideologies, 125; party, 126; party’s dictatorial control, 21; youth league, 127 community, 116, 119, 133, 171; of learning, 183; schools, 8, 9, 11; sense of, 132, 135

Index

competition, 15, 23, 47, 54–55, 58, 65, 72, 89, 99, 100–102, 115, 167, 173, 175, 184, 194; and competitiveness, 26 competitive mechanism, 182 compulsory education, 31, 145, 152, 173, 182, 188, 193 Compulsory Education Curriculum Plan, 41 computer, 6, 44, 66, 82, 109–10, 120; room, 176; science, 7, 25, 35, 74, 98– 99; science and English, 116; skills, 30, 84, 135; system, 152; typing, 74 Confucius, 3 Constitution, 9 contemporary China, 5, 87 control, 4, 10, 36, 39, 59, 62, 88, 90, 111, 114, 137, 144, 148, 153–54, 156, 164, 172, 185, 188; centralized, 38, 40, 91, 95, 185; macro, 141; Mao Zedong’s, 35; tools of, 132 Cookson, Peter, et al., 176 Cookson, Peter, and Schneider, Barbara, 173 cooperative learning, 83 core subjects, 74 corruption, 21, 22, 59; social, 119; societal, 37 creative and independent thinking, 132 creativity, 115, 127; and imagination, 118 Cultural Revolution, 5, 24, 34, 46, 60, 72, 88–89, 133, 178 culture, 17, 126, 182; Chinese, 30; distinctive, 115; and education, 30; new, 133; organizational, 71, 107, 115; school, 115; sex, 82; and society, 185 curriculum, 5, 9, 12–13, 40–41, 52, 60, 66, 73–74, 80, 82, 90, 115, 123–24, 132–33, 160, 166, 173, 174, 179, 191; centralized, 40; content, 40; designated, 74; development, 103; diverse, 116; exposure, 170; national, 41, 80; national standardized, 66; state, 74, 122; state-prescribed, 127 Dang Songhua, 46 Delamont, S., 83 Delany, Brian, and Paine, Lynn, 42

Index

delinquency, 57 demand for education, 87, 112, 181 DeMarrais, K. B., and LeCompte, M. D., 170 democratic: citizenship, 171; education, 125–26, 132–33, 135, 137; ideals, 169; parties, 9, 11, 70–72; system 171 Deng, Peng, 126 Deng Xiaoping, 6, 17, 19, 24, 39, 156, 181; administration, 17; blueprint, 18; leadership, 24; speech, 15 Deng Yingchao, 83 developed and developing countries, 169 development: all-around, 115; and expansion, 168; of individual characters and creative potentials, 127; personal and moral, 119; of private education, 3, 4, 6, 9, 18, 33, 112, 141, 143–44, 146, 149, 157, 173, 180, 182; of private schools, 143, 146; of private universities, 92, 166; professional, 121; of public schools, 170; well-rounded, 52, 116, 118 Dewey, John, 132 dictatorship of the proletariat, 23, 26 Ding Runsheng, 156 discipline, 75, 80, 99, 129; and character education, 28; problem students, 131 disciplines, 65, 97 discrimination, 172 diversity, 11, 98, 100, 132, 171, 178–80; and plurality, 16 docility, favored in elite schools, 131 donations, 14, 45, 54, 95, 101, 113, 161, 176 Dong Mingzhuan, 93, 97, 100, 166 dormitory, 64, 120, 135, 178; supervisors, 65 Dornbush, S., 132 dropout rate, 45, 170 economic: and intellectual power, 24; and political systems, 21; reform, 14, 17– 19, 24, 30, 81, 88, 121, 183; reform and opening, 6, 10, 21–22, 24; resources, 180; and social status, 130; and social system, 30; stratification, 23,

211

170; structure, 91, 171; system, 146, 183 economy, 14, 17, 23, 81, 89–91, 147, 170, 183; changing, 40; local, 82; market, 7, 21, 24–25, 30, 48, 61, 81, 98– 99, 101, 111–13, 171; market-driven, 35; market-oriented, 17, 144, 181; modernized, 24; national, 5, 187; new, 35, 183; planned, 41, 88, 182, 183; private, 10, 19, 24; state-planned, 90– 91; transitional, 33 education: adult, 89; adult and vocational, 148; basic, 170; citizenship, 125, 128; correspondence education, 92; distance, 89; informal and nonformal, 89; mass, 179; for the minorities, 174; total, 120 education savings fund, 56, 151 educational investment, 160, 182 efficiency, 90, 114, 169, 173, 181–82; and effectiveness, 12, 14, 145 Einstein, Albert, 127 elite private schools (also elite schools), 12, 56, 63–64, 67, 69, 107–109, 111, 115–17, 119–22, 124, 131, 143, 169, 171–72, 176, 178–79, 183; administrators, 123; principals, 61 employment, 13, 15, 23, 25, 29, 35, 100, 148–49, 191; opportunities, 35, 85, 98, 102, 155, 179; projections, 98; rate, 102; of teachers, 161 empowerment, 173 English, 66, 74, 82, 98, 113, 120, 131; and computer science, 12, 66, 115 enrollment, 94, 101–2, 149, 163, 170; planned, 90; plans, 58, 148; ratio, 39, 169, 174; of school age children, 46; target, 15 entrepreneurs, 4, 11–12, 24, 26–28, 52– 53, 60, 62, 72, 73, 78, 82; business, 11, 72 entrepreneurship, 21 environment, 119, 120, 134, 177–78, 183; caring and supportive, 119; enclosed, 143; larger, 165; learning, 135; learning and living, 132; nurturing, 115; positive, 132; school, 84 environmental protection, 125

212

equality, 169, 171, 173, 179, 180–81; educational, 176; of educational opportunity, 170, 174; of opportunity, 173; social, 169 equipment, 30, 34, 44, 52, 72, 75–76, 90, 94, 99, 109, 111, 117, 123, 145, 160, 166–67, 176, 192; and facilities, 46, 56, 75, 81, 85, 101, 107, 109, 115, 166, 170, 174, 175 Esty, J., 131 examination, 4, 13, 15, 33, 55, 59, 70, 94, 99, 118, 133, 151, 154, 163, 165– 66, 167, 185, 192, 193; centers, 34; citywide or region-wide, 44; competitive, 58; hell, 89, 116, 133; score, 99; self-study: 92; state-administered, 15, 154, 155 exclusivity, 108 expansion, 89 extracurricular activities, 12, 66, 74, 115– 19, 133 facility and equipment, 160 family, 4, 20, 22, 28, 33–34, 36, 38, 44, 45, 48, 51, 55, 60–61, 63, 74, 77, 82, 84, 85, 123, 133, 153, 171, 175; background, 172, 175; broken, 37; business, 164; disintegrated, 117; environment, 96; extended, 36; low income, 110; members, 76; planning policy, 70; planning propaganda campaign fee, 43; poor, 58; relations, 37; salary-class, 69; structures, 33, 36; urban, 29, 30, 37 fees, 4, 5, 7, 12–13, 15, 22, 28, 31, 42– 43, 45, 48, 51, 55–6, 64, 69–71, 73, 76– 79, 84, 101, 142–43, 145, 149, 151, 160, 163, 176–77, 180, 192, 195; administrative, 176; extra, 57; high, 16, 37, 45, 110, 142, 145, 151, 176–77, 179, 180; high tuition and, 153, 163; illegal, 21; low, 13; low to medium, 51; miscellaneous, 41, 57; moderate, 6, 153; multiple, 43; service, 21; and tuition, 56, 173 Feng Jianjun, 45, 174 Feng Jingwei, 162

Index

finance, 9, 101 financial: allocations, 113; independence, 111; management, 55; support, 168 flexibility, 111 foreign: language, 81; missionaries, 87; teachers, 6, 66 forms of ownership, 11 for-profit: institutions, 97; schools, 167 founders, 8, 10, 11, 52–53, 55–56, 62, 71, 77, 84, 95, 97, 117, 144, 147, 153, 155, 157, 158–59, 163–64, 166, 176– 77, 185 frauds, 162 friendship, 119 Fudan University, 4, 88 funding, 12, 13, 14, 38–44, 46–47, 54, 89, 94, 101, 108, 144, 173–74, 182, 184; education, 179; lack of, 102, 115; resources, 90, 160; shortage, 42, 85; sources, 145, 176; state, 101 Garcia, George F., and Garcia, Mary, 173 Ge Zi, 30 gender, 65; discrimination, 83; equality, 84 girls, 80 goals: of education, 132; educational, 178; of the reform, 18 Goffman, E., 132 government, 4–6, 19–20, 26, 44, 173; agencies, 167; ambiguity of policies, 123; cadre 167; control, 146, 181; corruption, 17, 20–21; departments, 146– 67; education, departments, 148; officials, 11–12, 19, 21–22, 26, 28, 30, 35–36, 38, 44–45, 47, 54, 59–60, 73, 78, 82, 108, 141, 147–50, 152, 157, 163, 171, 175; policies, 145, 146, 147, 157; power, 35; response, 150; schools, 5 grades, 118 graduation certificates, 163 grandparents, 36, 60 Great Britain, 87, 172 Griggs, Clive, 176 Gu Meiling and Liu Dexuan, 144–45, 178

Index

Guangdong, 7, 96; province, 14, 28, 51, 53, 56, 78 Guangxi, 6, 69, 162; primary school, 6; private school, 118; province, 80 Guangzhou, 153, 162; Education Commission, 151 Gui Zhaoheng, 99 Guo Ge, 8, 13–14, 118, 160, 182 habits: bad, 130; wasteful, 129 Han dynasty, 3 Hao Wenwu, 145, 180 Harvard University, 156 He Qizong and Zhang Yizhong, 42, 114– 15, 152, 182–83 He Xiangdong, 93, 149, 159 Hebei province, 162 Heilongjiang province, 117 Heyward, C. B., 83 higher education, 87–88; development, 87; structure, 91; system, 90–91, 103, 112, 155 Hong Kong, 11, 54, 146 Hou Jianwen, 118 Hou Wenwu, 180 Hu Junjuan, 47 Hua Logeng, 127 human right, 169, 172; issues, 23 illiterates, 79 imperial: civil service examination, 3; examination, 4–5; examination system, 4, 33 independence, 119; and interdependence, 116; in management, 113 independent thinking, 127 individualism, 176 inequality, 45–46, 167, 169–71, 175; builtin, 174; educational, 170; social, 16 inflation, 17, 30, 42, 45–46, 72 innovation, 123, 127, 173; and creativity, 121 institutions of higher learning, 6 intellectuals, 4, 19, 23–26, 28–29, 44, 60, 71, 73, 84, 88, 108, 158, 175; class, 25; parents, 136; rightist, 24 intelligence and personality, 119 international trade, 82, 84

213

investment, 157–59, 176 investors, 164 Iritani, Evelyn, 23 James, Thomas, and Levin, Henry, 180 Japan, 23, 89, 116, 146, 173 Japanese universities, 89 Ji Yueshu, 27–28 Jiang Feng and Lin Lin, 153 Jiangsu Provincial Education Commission’s Policy Research Office, 42, 63, 164–65 Jilin province, 144 Jimenez, E., and Lockheed, M. E., 83 Jin Wenbin, 70 Jinglin All-Women College, 88 Kane, Pearl Rock, 176 Kerbo, Harold, 170–71 key schools, 44–45, 54–55, 58, 107–8, 115, 122, 142, 152, 167, 170–71, 174– 75, 177; students, 175 kindergartens, 6–8, 42, 66, 70, 148 Klein, S. S., 83 Kristof, Nicholas, 21 Kwak, B., 89 lab equipment, 175 laboratories, 75 LaFrance, M., 83 Lai Qunyang, 43 Law: of Compulsory Education, 39, 151; of Education, 160; of Teachers, 40, 47 laws and regulations, 146, 161 leadership skills, 83 learning and behavior problems, 118 learning conditions, 6; learning and living, 12, 143 legal: rights, 167, 185, 187; status, 10, 188; system, 125 Lei Feng, 126 Lever, J., 83 Li Jinchu, 167 Li Lianqing, 150 Li Peng, 187 Li Qiang, 23, 25 Li Shoufu, 10 Li Siguang, 127

214

Li Tieying, 126, 147 Li Weimin, 96, 101, 113 Li Xiao-jiang, 82 Li Yixian, 42 Li Yuantian and Qiu Jiangling, 46 Li Zhaoyang, 76 Liang Si, 166 Lin, Jing, 18, 20, 23, 40, 71–72, 76, 125, 132, 170, 174 Lin, Jing, and Chen, Qinghai, 34–35, 54, 89 Lin, Jing, and Ross, Heidi, 174 Lin Rongri, and Du Zuorun, 9, 161 Lingnan University, 88 literacy, 4 Liu, Bohuong, 123, 159 Liu Fengshan, 15, 167 Liu Peizhi, 8, 102 Liu Yufeng, 59, 120–21, 134–35, 176, 178, 183 living standards, 23, 31 local: community, 27; government control, 173; government officials, 151; governments, 148, 159, 162; officials, 76, 152 Madame Curie, 127 malpractice, 157, 161, 168 management, 10, 19, 39, 43, 72, 82, 90, 113, 144, 147, 160, 167–68, 177, 182; abilities, 94; business, 35, 167; mode, 10, 181; model, 9; shut-in type of, 177; systems, 192 market, 166; mechanism, 102 Marsh, H., 83 Marxist: philosophy, 125; theories, 167 media, 141–42; coverage, 143 Mei Ruli, 5, 41–42 Mencius, 3 meritocracy, 145, 194 middle class, 26–28, 30, 84, 143, 170; latent, 28, 30, 82, 84, 143 minban, or people-run schools, 5, 76 Ming dynasty, 4 Ministry of Education, 5, 88 MIT, 156 mobility, 18, 47, 56; social, 35, 77, 170 modernization, 18, 23, 39, 40, 44, 48, 88, 125, 132, 156, 169

Index

monopoly, 173; of education, 180; the government, 182 moral: and academic development, 117; and democratic education, 137; community, 132; corruption, 61; education, 125–27; education curriculum, 125; motivation, 109; political education, 74 mottoes, 127 musical instruments, 117 Muslims in China, 82 Nanjing, 164 Nankai University, 5, 88 nationwide association for private schools, 144 NEA-Alaska, 171 neo-Confucianism, 4 Ningxia province, 82 nongovernmental: organizations, 10; private schools, 115; schools, 7, 9–10, 147, 149 Office of Schools Run by Social Force, 56, 149 officials, 21–22, 35, 45, 55, 69–70, 77, 148–49, 151–52, 155 Ogbu, John, 33 Ogura, Y., 89 Opium War, 4, 87 opportunities, 19, 29, 47, 48, 52, 77, 81, 83, 92, 97, 100, 121, 170–73, 178, 179; economical and educational, 171; educational, 24, 46, 70, 145, 149, 172, 174, 180; equal, 171, 174; learning, 6, 173; learning and career, 182 ordinary: private schools, 12, 69–71, 73, 75, 81, 85, 111, 115, 119, 174–75, 184, 185; private secondary schools, 185; public schools, 72, 108, 152, 167; universities, 88; urban/township private schools, 152 O’Reilly, B., 172 Outline of Chinese Educational Reform and Development, 147 ownership, 10, 157, 158; collaborative, 11; and management, 9; of property, 171; of school properties, 168; shared, 11 Oxford, 156

Index

parents, 13, 30, 34, 36–37, 42–45, 47– 48, 52–56, 58, 59, 60, 61, 63, 65–66, 70, 73–77, 82, 84–85, 99–100, 109, 113, 115–18, 120, 122–23, 129–31, 135–37, 141–42, 161, 167, 171–73, 175, 176–78, 180, 185; concerns, 184; divorced, 61; expectation, 34; income, 55, 59; satisfaction, 62; school relationship, 135, 137 party committee, 127 patriotism, 126 peasant, 25, 77; families, 79; family background, 175 Peng Guangrong, 79–80 People’s Congress, 153 personnel, 96, 164, 167 philosophy, 121; educational, 172 physical education, 75 pluralistic school system, 183 pocket money, 37, 178 police department, 149 policy makers, 10, 170 political: control, 4, 125, 145; and economic power, 17, 26, 29, 176; environment, 132; ideologies, 125; right, 189; stratification, 23; structure, 11; system, 5, 20 popular cultures, 18 poverty, 18, 25, 29–30, 36, 77, 85, 128 power, 4, 5, 8, 11, 21, 24, 33, 35, 45, 76, 91, 98, 165, 167, 170–72, 180, 182; absolute, 22; abuse of, 157, 195; and authority, 171; and connections, 55; decision making, 10, 39, 90, 164; dictatorial, 21; governing, 171; invasion of, 167–68; official power, 44; political, 25, 27, 71, 102; political, economic, and intellectual, 44; power struggle, 34; and responsibility, 167; sexual, 37; structure, 171; superior, 136 pragmatism, 127 preferential benefit, 149 principals, 9–10, 11, 40, 52, 54, 57, 61– 62, 65, 71, 74–75, 82, 83–84, 117, 118– 24, 130, 133, 135–36, 143–44, 147, 150–52, 159, 163–64, 167, 176–78,

215

191; and founders, 28; of elite schools, 61 private education, ambiguities over role of, 148 private higher education, 155; characteristics of, 113; history of, 87; national association for, 144 private universities, 5, 10, 12, 14, 87–88, 91–93, 95–97, 101–2, 111, 153–54, 156, 163, 166–67, 179, 184; easy admission and strict graduation, 14, 99 Professional Qualification Examinations, 192 profit, 10, 21, 43, 53–54, 82, 101–2, 149, 152, 155, 157, 159–61, 167–68, 171, 185, 188; chasing, 161; making, 159; making instruments, 176; orientation, 114; seeking, 94 property, 26, 157–58, 176; management, 90; ownership, 24, 157; personal, 158; private school, 157; school, 158–59; state, 167 Provisional Regulation on Schools Run by Social Forces, 93 Provisional Regulation on the Establishment of Schools by Societal Forces, 147 Provisional Stipulation on Establishment of Non-governmental Higher Learning Institutions, 154 psychological problems, 130 public education, 114, 169, 171, 175; reform, 180; system, 40, 48 public schools, 5, 7, 10, 12–13, 15–16, 33, 38, 40–41, 48, 52, 56, 60, 62–63, 66, 69, 75, 77–78, 84, 89, 108, 110, 114–15, 117–18, 120, 126–27, 152, 164, 167, 171–74, 177–83, 185; environment, 172; system, 18, 42, 54–55, 63, 135, 144, 173, 178; teachers, 48, 185 public undertaking, 9, 157, 159, 160–61 public universities, 14, 87–88, 90, 92, 102, 111, 155, 162, 167 Qin Guozho, 14 Qinghua University, 97 Qiu Chen, 9, 158, 167

216

Qu Tiehua, 113, 160, 165, 181, 184 quality, 7, 15, 58–59, 66, 79, 100, 117, 120, 142, 146, 152, 177, 180, 181–82, 184, 192, 195; education, 12, 31, 44, 48, 95, 117, 123, 144, 154, 170–71, 175, 185; of education and teaching, 188; human, 30; local public schools, 77; of people, 30; primary and secondary education, 35; of private schools, 16; in public schools, 38; of a school, 40; teaching, 48, 60, 165–66; of a university, 155 Randall, Ruth, and Geiger, Keith, 173 Ratteray, J., 174 real estate, 56; agents, 28; development, 53; empires, 19; fads, 20, 142; prices, 21; speculation, 53; ventures, 53 recognition, 118; and reward, 117 redistribution of educational opportunity, 171 reform, 17, 61, 115, 127, 142, 179; educational, 16, 39, 54, 70, 145, 149, 172, 174, 180; era, 18, 25, 34, 37, 41, 46, 72, 137, 174; land, 17; socioeconomic, 29; spirit, 133 reformers, 4 Regulation on Schools Run by Social Forces, 153, 157, 159, 163 Resolution on the Reform of the Educational System, 146 resources, 10, 112, 115, 147, 170, 174, 184; educational, 42; faculty; 103; financial, 8, 44, 107, 111, 167, 175, 182, 184, 189; financial and human, 170; library, 194 responsibilities, 75, 117, 122, 167; and authorities, 148; multiple, 134; mutual, 119; sense of, 116, 173 retired: administrators, 155; government officials, 95; teachers, 11, 62, 70, 166, 185; teachers and administrators, 72; university teachers, 97 retrenchment policy, 73 rights, 73, 113, 155, 167, 172, 184, 191, 194; basic, 147; of citizens, 158; educational, 149; for education, 153; and

Index

power, 9; of private schools, 158; and responsibilities, 145, 183 rote learning, 4, 116 rural: children, 174; families, 36, 76, 77; peasants, 5, 152; primary school, 178; private schools, 79–81, 107, 109–10, 143; public schools, 76, 107; schools, 12, 69; students, 42, 46, 69, 174, 178 Sadker, M., and Sadker, D., 83 salary, 22, 28, 30, 35, 47, 52, 62, 66, 76, 82, 84, 93, 96, 108–11, 114, 121, 123 Sato, N., 116 Schmetzer, Uli, 19 school board system, 163 school canteens, 129 school leadership, 123 school-run: businesses, 43, 48, 149; enterprises, 43, 177; factories, 43 science and technology, 18, 24, 30, 35, 89 scientific experiment, 166 scientific knowledge, 125 self-esteem, 117 self-fulfilling prophecy, 183 self-study students, 167 Shanda University, 96 Shandong province, 11 Shang De, 97 Shanghai, 73, 87, 175 Shanghai No. 3 All Girl School, 82 Shanghai Transportation University, 97 Shanxi, 162 Shao Jinrong, Zhang Wen, and Zhang Xiaodong, 173 Shengyang, 8, 58, 149, 160 Shenzhen, 153 Sichuan province, 163 single children, 36, 48, 113, 116, 129, 183; and policy, 36 sishu, 4 So, Alvin Y., 18 social class, 27; background, 174; disadvantaged, 179; inequality, 169; structure, 23, 181; transformation, 174 social connections, 164 social demand, 112

Index

social elites, 163 social equalizer, 170 social welfare fund, 78 Song dynasty, 4 Song Qingling, 82 South Korea, 146 Soviet model, 88, 90 space: and equipment, 100; space and facilities, 100; space or equipment, 154 specialized colleges, 88 specialized vocational skills, 74 State Council Academic Degree Committee, 153 State Education Commission, 6, 7, 40, 56, 66, 80, 93–95, 101, 114, 147–52, 154–55, 160, 177 status, 19, 31, 44, 123, 154; equal, 185; social, 4, 19, 24, 27, 35, 40, 46, 172; socioeconomic, 26, 121 status quo, 126 stratification, social, 170 Structural Reform of China’s Educational System, 90 structure, 91; balanced (teaching), 63; educational, 112; flexible, 173; occupational, 170, 171 structures, educational, 182 student movement, 6, 20 students, 3–8, 11–15, 20, 26, 34, 39–45, 47, 52, 191–94 Study Team, 92, 94, 96, 98, 102–3, 154 Sui dynasty, 3, 33 Sun Yet-sun, 82 Sun Zi, 3 system, 33, 92, 117; administration, 4, 114; administrative, 145; boarding, 12, 58, 61, 116, 119, 120; boarding school, 60; central monitoring, 62, 122; centralized, 5; competitive education, 165; competitive examination, 100; contract responsibility, 17; dual-track, 44; education, 16, 44, 83, 144, 146–47, 154, 156, 171, 181–82; educational, 165; egalitarian; 35; household registration, 162; household responsibility, 17; income-tax, 59; internal management, 96; old class, 26; old school, 183; rigid, 91; social, 33; state-ownership, 5;

217

‘‘total,’’ 91; tracking, 172; traditional school, 182; voucher, 173; world’s largest educational, 39 Taiwan, 11, 54 Tan Songhua, 170, 172 Tang dynasty, 4 taxation department, 149, 185 taxes, 22, 43, 53, 149, 160–61; and fees, 123–24; implications, 158 taxpayers’ money, 174 teachers, 4, 12, 24, 36, 40, 42, 46–48, 52, 54–55, 57, 61–65, 70–71, 75–76, 79– 80, 82–83, 96, 120–22, 134, 155, 159, 161, 164–65, 167, 172–73, 175, 183, 187–88, 191, 194; and administrators, 136, 179; autonomy and responsibility, 121; best, 44; ‘‘core,’’ 63; employment, 167, 173; experienced, 12; highquality, 63; hiring of, 150; living condition, 46; market, 165; middleaged, 19; part-time, 75; poor quality of, 80; pressures on, 122; professional titles, 160; rights, 40; salaries, 80, 165; social status, 121; young, 47, 62; young and middle age, 165 teaching: and learning, 74, 80; conditions, 81; of English, 66; equipment, 13; equipment and facility for scientific experiment, 81; methods, 12, 74, 80, 96, 123–24, 182; quality, 6, 44, 77, 161, 173, 192 textbooks, 4; standardized, 97 theories of class and class struggle, 23 Tian Dewen, 172 Tian Xin, 161 Tian Zanzhu, 15, 116–17 Tianjing city, 69, 142 Tong Xing, 30 tradition, 33, 42, 48, 66, 81, 100, 137, 182, 185; of private education, 79; of valuing education, 77 traditional: Chinese teaching, 134; education, 30; lecturing and rote learning, 80; medicine 85; mode of learning, 74; model, 179; teaching, 4; teaching method, 134; values, 19, 125; virtues, 127

218

transformation, 23, 25, 30, 146; social, 52 treatment, 178; preferential, 108 Tu Yuanxi, 158 tuition, 56, 75, 112, 172; and expense 163; and fees, 6, 12, 13, 28, 30, 31, 57, 58, 67, 70, 72–73, 79, 82, 94, 101, 103, 108, 109, 111, 123, 158, 167, 176, 177–78 unemployment, 29, 35 uniformity, 113 uniforms, 130 United States, 23, 87, 146, 172–73 Universal Love, 133 university: admission, 13; comprehensive, 88; correspondence, 89, 92, 163; evening, 89; key, 88; students, 35; teachers, 28; TV, 89, 92 University Entrance Exam, 6, 12, 15, 34, 40, 52, 58, 72, 74, 77, 82, 85, 88, 91– 92, 97–98, 109, 116, 185 urban: ordinary private schools, 107, 143; ordinary public schools, 107; township and rural primary and secondary schools, 183; township ordinary private secondary schools, 12; township ordinary schools, 12, 71, 73; township schools, 69; workers, 25 village, 4 villagers, 77 vitality, 184 Vocational: all-girl schools, 84; cultural skills, 6; education, 89; schools, 8; skills, 12; and technical education, 89; technical schools, 8, 12, 69, 73, 89; technical training, 7 Wang Fangjie, 99, 101 Wang Hongzhi, 155 Wang Jianchao, 119 Wang Jun, 173 Warring Period, 3 wealth, 4, 17, 20, 24, 27–31, 33, 52, 65, 130, 142, 145; distribution of, 170 wealthy: families, 172; group, 12, 26–27; people, 20, 27–28, 44, 142, 178 weekend schools, 6 Wenzhou, 8

Index

Wenzhou city, 165 Western science and technology, 4, 30 white-collar workers, 12 Whyte, Martin, 18 Workers’ Universities and Workers’ PartTime Universities, 89 working class: families 73; parents, 108 Wu Degang, 45 Wu Jiqing, 45 Wu Tangqing and Wang Fang, 37 Wu Zongkui, 69, 166 Wudai Shiguo, 4 WuDunn, S., 43 Wuhan, 167 Wuhan Education Commission, 162, 163 Xi Ling, 61, 69, 163 Xiamen University, 5, 88 Xiang Dong, 91 Xiao Qingzhang, 96 Xiao Yonggu, 38 Xiehe Medical College, 88 Xu Guangyu, 142 Xu He, 152 Xu Honglie, 126 Xu Jingyi, 89 Xue Jianguo, 13, 55 Yan Lankun, 38, 89 Yang Deguang, 90, 95 Yang Minqing, 45 Yang Songtao, 155 Yellow River University of Science and Technology, 98 Yian Jie, 81 Yian Lankun, 93 Yinghao Middle School, 53, 153 Yuan Weidong, 117 Yumin Zhao, 175 Yun Chu, 79 Zeng, K., 89 Zeng Hangshen and Feng Dayong, 20 Zeng Rongguang et al, 172 Zeng Tianshan, 112, 182–83 Zhang Boling, 5 Zhang Cheng and Zhang Xiaorong, 166 Zhang Chuting, 91

Index

Zhang Fengmin, 12, 69 Zhang Jijiao, 24 Zhang Kuan and Wang Wenyuan, 6, 51 Zhang Wei and Ji Ping, 148, 164, 177, 181 Zhang Zhiyi, 5, 8, 12, 56, 60, 141, 143, 145, 149, 161, 164, 177, 178 Zhao, Juming, 153

219

Zhejiang province, 69–70, 79 Zhou Enlai, 5, 83 Zhu Jingguo, 153 Zhu Kaixuan, 7, 10, 151, 160 Zhu Shifeng, 73 Zhu Xi, 4 Zhu Yiming, 79, 145–46

About the Author JING LIN is Associate Professor of Education at McGill University. She is the author of several books including The Opening of the Chinese Mind (1994), Education in Post-Mao China (1993), and The Red Guards’ Path to Violence (1991), all by Praeger Publishers.