Home 亚洲 Chinese Universities: A Grand Makeshift Troupe
亚洲

Chinese Universities: A Grand Makeshift Troupe

Share

By Lin Zhaoyuan

In China, the academic reputation of universities no longer rests on genuine scholarly foundations, but rather on the workings of power and publicity. Academic freedom has been replaced by layer upon layer of bureaucratic evaluation, and governance philosophies have been consumed by officialdom. The entire higher education system resembles a massive “makeshift troupe”—outwardly bustling, inwardly decayed, filled with leaders who feign competence and subordinates who blindly follow orders.

The Appointment of University Presidents:Academic Silence, Power Dominance

University presidents in China are not selected based on academic merit or scholarly achievement. Instead, they are appointed from above—by authorities often lacking expertise in the disciplines concerned. These decisions are frequently based on “perception” and “reliability”. Even more troubling is that once in office, these presidents swiftly assemble administrative teams chosen for loyalty and obedience rather than expertise and academic vision. The result is a profound erosion of academic authority.

The Plight of Deans:Professionalism Undervalued, Management Reduced to Formalities

Within such a system, many deans are not academic leaders but proxies of bureaucratic compliance. It is an open secret that some deans know little about the disciplines they oversee, yet they stand in judgment over others, managing departments and evaluating faculty. Bereft of the capacity for academic judgment, these administrators are incapable of establishing fair and just evaluation systems. They neither can nor care to assess professional qualifications—what matters most is obedience.

Coercive Evaluations:Universities Transformed into Bureaucratic Barracks

The central task of university management has become ensuring “ideological security”. Performance evaluations, promotions, and project assessments—supposedly academic processes—are now tightly controlled by administrative authorities. Faculty members are no longer dedicated to teaching and scholarship, but are trapped in endless cycles of documentation, result packaging, and project competition. Teaching becomes rote; research is riddled with vested interests. The academic ecosystem is in steep decline.

The Price of a “Makeshift Troupe”:The Spread of Frivolity and the Death of Scholarship

This system of “non-experts managing experts” has stripped universities of both academic judgment and long-term vision. Faculty focus only on passing evaluations; research is frequently inflated or fabricated. The much-touted “Double First-Class Initiative” has become a mirage of rankings. Universities compete to “overtake on curves,” but end up deteriorating together. The farce of the makeshift troupe is a tragedy for both education and scholarship.

Lament: Whither Chinese Universities?

Unless the power-driven absurdities of the current university system are faced and reformed, China’s academic quality and global reputation will continue to wither. Only by restoring professional authority and respecting academic principles can we escape this makeshift predicament and reenter a scholarly landscape worthy of the name.

Epilogue

If you find this article too radical, it likely means you do not truly understand the realities of Chinese higher education. Those within the system mostly remain silent—not out of agreement, but exhaustion; not due to comprehension, but helplessness. More worrying still is that society at large continues to live in a romanticized illusion of the university—as if it were a temple of knowledge, a high ground of thought—without realizing how far it has already deviated and declined.

The author is a retired faculty member from a Chinese university.

Please follow and like us:
Related Articles

王沪宁论中美外交风格差异

1995年,上海人民出版社出版了王沪宁日记《政治的人生》,他在该书第116页写道: 注:“[外交]”是《无界传播》编辑加的。 Please follow and like us:

中国已建成453个区域国别研究机构(更新版)

文/《无界传播》信息中心 北京时间2025年9月23日17时更新 近年来,中国区域国别研究体系建设步伐加快。根据中国社会科学网报道,截至2022年底,中国教育部已批准建设 453个区域国别研究培育基地和备案中心,分布在 186所高校(中国社会科学网,2024年2月23日)。 这些是中国教育部批准成立的区域国别研究机构,实际上各省、直辖市、自治区教育厅还自行批准培育了若干区域国别研究机构。 需要明确的是,这453个机构在性质上并不完全相同,大致可分为以下两类: 一、培育基地(42个) 培育基地是教育部重点扶持的区域国别研究平台。它们通常具有以下特征: 二、备案中心(411个) 备案中心数量庞大,但形式多样,实体化程度差异显著: 从宏观上看,教育部备案的453个区域国别研究机构,为中国加强对外认知和国际传播提供了广泛的学术与智力支撑。然而,从建设质量上看,真正具有可持续研究能力和独立运作条件的实体机构仍显不足。未来,中国的区域国别研究需要在数量之外,更加注重实体化和高水平研究平台的建设,以提升对国家战略的支撑力。...

中国新型大学试验:福耀科技大学会成功吗

南方科技大学与福耀科技大学分别代表两种新型大学探索,是否也会遭遇两种不同的命运? 文/毕研韬 中国高校正处在制度转型的关口:过度行政化,学术自治受限,难以灵活回应产业与社会需求。如何突围,成为摆在改革者面前的现实课题。南方科技大学与福耀科技大学,恰好代表了两种不同的新型大学探索:一个理念超前却遭遇折戟,一个顺势而为引发社会期待。 一、南科大的超前试验 南方科技大学自 2007 年筹建以来,明确提出“去行政化、教授治校、国际化培养”的理念,意在打破传统高校的官本位逻辑。它尝试自主招生、强调教授治校、推动国际合作,目标是打造一个与全球顶尖大学接轨的学术共同体。 但这一试验过于超前。社会对绕开高考的招生方式缺乏认同,舆论质疑不断,监管部门也难以放任制度突破。最终,南科大纳入公办体系,其制度创新的锋芒被削弱。经验表明:先进理念如果与社会认知和制度土壤脱节,往往难以生根发芽。 二、福耀科大的顺势登场 与南科大的路径不同,2025 年开学的福耀科技大学,强调“小而精、面向产业、服务国家战略”。其治理结构采用理事会制,资金来源于企业家捐赠和慈善基金,政府则提供政策支持,形成“企业+政府+教育”的三元合作模式。 福耀科大的出现正值社会认知的成熟期:公众已普遍意识到行政化高校的弊端,产业界迫切需要与高校深度对接,政府亦鼓励多元办学。在这样的背景下,福耀科大的探索不仅没有超前,反而切合了产业和社会的现实需求,因此获得了广泛关注与政策扶持。...

中国各地已建成国际传播中心212家

文/毕研韬 BJT 2025-09-04 7:50发布 据北京一位同行在公开会议上透露,截至2025年8月20日,中国各地已正式成立国际传播中心212家,另外还有9家正在筹建或即将挂牌,总计221家。 在221家中,省级(自治区、直辖市)40家,占比18%;副省级7家,占比3%;地市级103家,占比47%;县(区)级59家,占比27%;村级/功能区3家,占1%;海外联络中心9家,占比4%。 据笔者了解,中国各省正在加速在境外布局,建立更多海外工作站或海外联络中心。笔者预判,这会不可避免地引发国际应激反应。让我们拭目以待。 Please follow and like us: