China’s pursuit of social equality between 1949 and the start of economic reform in the late 1970s is of worldwide fame. Since then, the country has experienced unprecedented economic growth and urban development that has transformed China beyond recognition. So how goes equality now? Let’s look at the differences between rural and urban education provision.
To improve school accessibility and equality of opportunity, the Chinese government built many new schools in rural areas during the late 1980s and early 1990s as the country reformed with Deng Xiaoping’s opening-up policy. The process of industrialization has accelerated rural reforms in China, increased agricultural productivity, and freed agricultural labour. As a consequence large numbers of former rural labourers have headed into more urbanized areas, looking for better employment opportunities and sources of income. Some parents have no choice but to leave their children living in rural hometowns. Drop out rates, though declining, are a constant problem for rural teachers. Since migration nearly always selects positively for the young, the able, and the most aspirational, there is an inbuilt inequality between city and countryside.
These problems are not unique to China of course. The situation is reversed in many western countries where the inner cities are least favoured educationally, and the leafy suburbs and rural areas usually have better schools. Just as divisive in the UK is the inequality caused by the fee-paying establishments which leaches the wealthiest families, and their kids, out of the state system. A less rigid curriculum and use of modern teaching methods has not necessarily meant success in the west either – the best Chinese students outperform the UK’s in linguistic and mathematical tasks.
Our student friends, both successful university teachers, are now a married couple. Tao is from a poor Ordinary School in a rural province while Li attended a top Local Key School in Shanghai. The vast majority of Key Schools are in urban areas, and the vast majority of Ordinary Schools in the countryside. Tao comments on the differences in infrastructure and teaching quality: “First, the facilities. I liked playing football, but I could only play on a playground covered by lots of cinder, whereas Li's school had a sports centre. Secondly, the teachers were so different from Li’s. I remember nearly all my teachers were not well-educated. My local Normal University aimed to train the best teachers in my home province, but in my Middle School, only one or two of the teachers graduated from there. Instead they were from low-level colleges: some of them even did not even have degrees and were unable to teach the most advanced concepts and knowledge. The question is, where are the top teachers? Of course, they have migrated to urban areas”.
The enrolment rate (the proportion of first level students) is used to value the quality of a school. Tao’s school year of 200 students, had only 8 (not even 8%!) in the first level. In Li’s school more than 90% of students went to university, and more than 50% of them were in the first level. Rural schools, of necessity, put the emphasis on test grades in order to compete, and may not be able to encourage the students’ all round development of morality, intelligence, physique and aesthetics, as well as the critical thinking vital to the development of an innovative and managerial class for China’s future. Even so, Tao says “a good education does mean higher test scores……sometimes I think the education in rural schools is better because the children can have more time to play, not just doing homework”.
China has a great history of identifying issues and dealing with them - and fast. Some say the gap is narrowing with the Government’s introduction of new measures aimed at investing resources according to need: for example, many Normal Universities now charge no fees for their students if they promise to teach in rural schools. There is also more funding available to pay the better qualified teachers to move there. On the other hand, personal investment in education is increasingly high and only the richer city dwellers can afford the expensive extra classes for their children, thus widening the gap even further. There’s a lot of evidence that points to the fact that the most stable societies are the most equal - so this is the way forward to a more harmonious society.
(First published in The Nanjinger Magazine, March 2015)
To improve school accessibility and equality of opportunity, the Chinese government built many new schools in rural areas during the late 1980s and early 1990s as the country reformed with Deng Xiaoping’s opening-up policy. The process of industrialization has accelerated rural reforms in China, increased agricultural productivity, and freed agricultural labour. As a consequence large numbers of former rural labourers have headed into more urbanized areas, looking for better employment opportunities and sources of income. Some parents have no choice but to leave their children living in rural hometowns. Drop out rates, though declining, are a constant problem for rural teachers. Since migration nearly always selects positively for the young, the able, and the most aspirational, there is an inbuilt inequality between city and countryside.
These problems are not unique to China of course. The situation is reversed in many western countries where the inner cities are least favoured educationally, and the leafy suburbs and rural areas usually have better schools. Just as divisive in the UK is the inequality caused by the fee-paying establishments which leaches the wealthiest families, and their kids, out of the state system. A less rigid curriculum and use of modern teaching methods has not necessarily meant success in the west either – the best Chinese students outperform the UK’s in linguistic and mathematical tasks.
Our student friends, both successful university teachers, are now a married couple. Tao is from a poor Ordinary School in a rural province while Li attended a top Local Key School in Shanghai. The vast majority of Key Schools are in urban areas, and the vast majority of Ordinary Schools in the countryside. Tao comments on the differences in infrastructure and teaching quality: “First, the facilities. I liked playing football, but I could only play on a playground covered by lots of cinder, whereas Li's school had a sports centre. Secondly, the teachers were so different from Li’s. I remember nearly all my teachers were not well-educated. My local Normal University aimed to train the best teachers in my home province, but in my Middle School, only one or two of the teachers graduated from there. Instead they were from low-level colleges: some of them even did not even have degrees and were unable to teach the most advanced concepts and knowledge. The question is, where are the top teachers? Of course, they have migrated to urban areas”.
The enrolment rate (the proportion of first level students) is used to value the quality of a school. Tao’s school year of 200 students, had only 8 (not even 8%!) in the first level. In Li’s school more than 90% of students went to university, and more than 50% of them were in the first level. Rural schools, of necessity, put the emphasis on test grades in order to compete, and may not be able to encourage the students’ all round development of morality, intelligence, physique and aesthetics, as well as the critical thinking vital to the development of an innovative and managerial class for China’s future. Even so, Tao says “a good education does mean higher test scores……sometimes I think the education in rural schools is better because the children can have more time to play, not just doing homework”.
China has a great history of identifying issues and dealing with them - and fast. Some say the gap is narrowing with the Government’s introduction of new measures aimed at investing resources according to need: for example, many Normal Universities now charge no fees for their students if they promise to teach in rural schools. There is also more funding available to pay the better qualified teachers to move there. On the other hand, personal investment in education is increasingly high and only the richer city dwellers can afford the expensive extra classes for their children, thus widening the gap even further. There’s a lot of evidence that points to the fact that the most stable societies are the most equal - so this is the way forward to a more harmonious society.
(First published in The Nanjinger Magazine, March 2015)