Amber Winkler, Fordham's VP for Research, is currently traveling China as a Senior Fellow with the Global Education Policy Fellowship Program (GEPFP). She'll be passing along her observations on education in the People's Republic with periodic ?Postcards from China.?
A few days in bustling, smoggy Beijing and one thing is clear: The Chinese appear to have woken up to the needs of all of their students, not just their best and brightest.
We met with officials yesterday from the Beijing Institute of Educational Sciences. Funded by the Chinese government, the Institute operates 16 research institutes across the country; each institute has a focus such as basic education, vocational education, curriculum development, etc.
A quick sampling of the Ministry's goals, as revealed in their "Chinese Outline 2010-2020"--and articulated by our MOE-affiliated presenters-- shows the country's dual focus on both the have and the have-not's:
Basis education (Preschool-secondary)
*Improve the chances of students with disabilities and ethnic minorities; and
*Address the gap between rural and urban schools
Higher education:
*Develop multiple world class universities;
*Ensure equitable development among the regions particularly in central and western China;
*Strengthen vocational education in higher ed institutes; and
*Continue development of long distance learning opportunities in higher ed.
Given China's competitive exam-based culture and the limited number of slots available in its 2,000 universities,* only the brightest students (some would say most test savvy) have traditionally been rewarded--along with those whose parents have the financial resources to pay handsomely for their college entrance. This tradition is and will remain alive and well. But is it possible, as we've often wondered, to be both equal and excellent?
China now thinks so. It spends roughly 3% of its GDP on education; its new goal is to raise that percentage to 4% by 2020. Officials told us much of that increase will be targeted to students in rural areas (especially central and western China)--who have traditionally received a sub-par education compared to their city peers--and to universities with "high prestige." Clearly both admirable but vastly distinct goals.
[caption id="attachment_19971" align="alignright" width="225" caption="Amber with her tour guide Oscar"]
[/caption]
China has historically operated "key schools" for its high achieving children. Our tour guide Oscar?told me that these elite schools exist at both middle and high school levels and that parents are desperate to get their child into them (recall China's one-child policy).
I asked our MOE staff about the key schools. They told me that MOE policy "does not encourage separate schools." ?In the next breath, they acknowledged that key schools have historically received "more money from government and society since they have such high prestige." They also explained a relatively new policy whereby "key school" teachers are now doing one to three-year rotations in "less developed" schools in rural areas. We're told that they are incentivized to move via financial perks such as free housing and other government subsidies. (Honestly, I'm not sure how much of this transfer is incentivized and how much is politely mandated.) In addition, they mentioned a new government program that will allow high achieving secondary students to work in laboratories with practicing scientists.
Time will tell whether the Chinese are serious about delivering a quality education to students in both rural and urban areas. (The recent bulldozing of schools for migrant children casts doubt.)
But they sure are giving it good lip service.
*China has a population of 1.37 billion with an estimated 31 million in higher education.
-Amber Winkler
