This document provides context on China's education system by discussing its history and key influences. It describes how Confucianism in early China promoted education equity and quality. Mao's rule politicized education and increased rural access but lowered quality. The reform period prioritized urban education, increasing disparities. The document aims to understand factors shaping China's modern system, like the 2001 curriculum reform.

1. Contextualizing China’s Education System
And Analyzing the New National Curriculum Reform
Introduction
Long before even the founding of the People’s Republic in 1949, China has been
traversing the long path toward educational equality. Although the country carries an extensive
history which outruns many other nations, it still requires further progress on the education front.
Recently, the world’s gaze has come to rest on Mainland China in response to its rise in power
and economic stature. Despite the many implications and obstacles this country encounters, the
government’s main goal has been to develop an educational system that encourages China’s
economic growth while establishing an equitable society (Hannum 1999). With approximately
fifty percent of Mainland China’s overall population living in rural areas (Mu 2013),
experiencing great educational disparity, perfecting the national education system plays a large
role in determining China’s future, and thus greatly affecting the overall outcome of the
country’s continued development. However, observing educational inequalities, rural citizens
possess significantly lower educational qualifications and a lower socioeconomic status on
average than urban residents (Mu 2013), placing them at an obvious disadvantage. The existence
of this disparity, along with other issues instigated approaches from the Chinese government. In
recent years China has issued reforms within the educational system so as to strengthen
educational equality, as well as quality.
Within this writing, my research orients itself around the context of China’s educational
infrastructure. Researching the history behind China’s education system and its major influences
reveals major factors which are involved in the current status of China’s education. Through this

2. research, I intend to achieve a more complete perspective of China’s modern education system,
understanding a multitude of factors which come into play during education reforms, such as
China’s New National Curriculum Reform.
Once I have set the stage by contextualizing China’s education system within its national
history, I will to transition into a case study which investigates different aspects of China’s New
National Curriculum Reform (CNNCR) issued in 2001. Observing China’s most extensive
attempt to reform its education system will offer an analysis of how influences translate within
today’s setting. Furthermore, by researching the strengths and pitfalls of this education reform, I
hope to offer deeper insight into solving the challenges China currently faces. It is my belief and
hope that reestablishing a foundational understanding of historical influences in China’s
education system and their interlocking nature with reform approaches will open up
opportunities for progress in the field China’s education.
Literature Review:
China’s Education Contextualized in History
First, to fully understand China’s contemporary education system, we must delve into
main periods within the country’s history, obtaining a contextual perspective of educational
development. Within China’s history, both positive and negative influences have been present on
the development of education throughout these different periods. The next few moments, I plan
to observe Confucianism in Ancient China, Mao Zedong’s influence, and leadership in the
Reform and Opening Period.

3. Early China
When observing the country’s education system, Confucius and Confucian Thought
cannot be ignored as the first great factor influencing education in China. As a leader of
education and political thought, Confucius embodied the earliest socialist, egalitarian values of
the country (Hannum). An article headed by Guanglu Mu, a leading scholar in analyzing the
implications of Confucianism on education in China, partnered with scholars and professors
from both Beijing Normal University and Queensland University to craft a paper offering insight
into China’s educational path. Confucianism’s societal focus carried positive implications within
the early development of education (Mu 2013).
Existing almost three thousand years ago, this famous Chinese philosopher and educator
encouraged the idea of equal education opportunities for all citizens to influence the level
development of society. Dr. Guanglun along with his team compare this grassroots concept to the
definition of quality education mentioned in UNESCO Education for All, published in 2000.
Most notably, Confucianism agrees with contemporary ideas regarding educational equity. This
source also clearly depicts similarities in both conceptualizations of educational quality. Suzhi,
(素质) a term which translates as ‘quality’, refers to the ability, skill, or quality of a person
(Dello-Iacovo). This term has returned within the implementation of the Suzhi Jiaoyu (素质教
育) education reform, which opened the door for new teaching techniques and a focus on the
well-rounded development of students (Murphy).
Pushing for the betterment of each individual as the main purpose of education,
Confucian Thought led to a society-oriented educational foundation (Mu). China’s citizens
believed that society could be strengthened by extensive study and learning. This mindset reveals

4. the existence of a socialist, egalitarian model of education, simply implying that the main goal of
education early in China’s history was high equity and spurring on contributions to society.
It was also during this time that China’s meritocratic trends become more established.
Examinations were adopted as the fairest opportunity for social mobility upward through the
class system. Excelling in China’s exam system meant a stable career within the country’s
government sector. Much of the influence of this meritocracy still transfers into today’s structure
of education in the form of high school and college entrance exams. Although there was the
individual incentive for citizens to achieve an increased quality of life through excelling in
examinations, the overall foundation behind education in early China was equality and the
betterment of society.
Mao’s Leadership (1949-1976)
Second, Chairman Mao, from 1949 to 1976, also greatly impacted China’s educational
infrastructure. Under his leadership, China experienced a transition in educational goals. The
new hope for rural education was found in manufacturing informed laborers. With Mao’s Great
Leap Forward in 1958 and the Cultural Revolution in 1966, China lost many intellectuals due to
criticisms and hostility toward right winged ideology, while turning its eye to economic
development through adopting the Soviet Model. Mao’s influences owed to a sense of “hyper-
egalitarianism” (Murphy 2009). Throughout Mao’s political movements, the percentage of
China’s population attending school experienced rapid increase, especially within rural areas
(Hannum 1999).
The Cultural Revolution marks the main point at which China’s government strengthened
its attempts at politicizing education. During the Cultural Revolution and under Mao’s leadership

5. in general, political agendas were combined with the country’s education policies, as a means of
strengthening government power and citizen support. Mao made sure that his revolutionary
agenda was still implemented into the education system, radically revolutionizing students’
ideologies in the classroom (Dello-Iacovo).
From this point onward, the country’s main agenda in educational development was to
spur on economic development. This depicts side-effects from the entrance of the soviet
education model, which also involved the spread of political agendas within China’s curriculum.
Leftist ideological goals leapt their way into the realm of educational policy-making, while
political recommendation and class background became the primary means of determining
opportunity for pressing on toward further education (Hannum), instead of the previous exam
system.
An abundance of scholars note how the Great Cultural Revolution created numerous
problems that plagued the society for years after it was completed. Due to the delegitimizing
effect which the revolutionary period had on the leadership of the Communist Party of China,
after its attempts to build a utopia failed, this political movement was removed from national
history for quite some time (Jones). Interestingly enough, and in contrast to most assumptions,
the revolutionary period under Mao lowered some forms of educational stratification and its
uneven transmission. Rural schools were less politicized during the Cultural Revolution, and
gave farmers an adequate educational foundation for maintaining production (Murphy).
Throughout her writing, renowned China Studies scholar, Hannum exquisitely meshes
her field study research methods with understandings of history in order to tie the Cultural
Revolution into trends within the country’s education system. Placing emphasis on the
revolutionary period as the main point where political roots began taking advantage of

6. educational policies, Hannum brings up a very interesting perspective. While there were a
plethora of negative aspects in this period of China’s history, rural education experienced great
progress during the revolution. A much larger population in China’s rural society attended school
throughout Mao’s leadership, owing to the government’s powerful emphasis on education as
main means of boosting transmission of political agendas and national strength (Hannum 1999).
However, unfortunately even this simple positive effect of the revolutionary period was
short-lived. After many viewed the Great Leap Forward as a failure to achieve an utopian
society, most investors in education chose to capitalize on the higher and much speedier returns
from funding education within urban areas (Murphy). The borderline extremist political
movements under Mao’s leadership had unique effects on education, which may be further
observed by looking at the following period.
Reform and Opening Period
Third, China’s Reform and Opening Period exists as another transitional period in the
development of national education. Again, with the failure of China’s Great Leap Forward and
Cultural Revolution, China’s government all but abandoned attempts at developing rural
education, switching toward a focus on urban schools and producing experts in academic fields
as its main goal in education(Murphy). This period meant drastic changes for China’s education,
as well as the whole country. It still meant maintaining ties between education and promoting
economic success, but the path was paved much differently than under Mao’s leadership.
Both leaders met a strong desire to compete with the progress of Western countries by
transitioning into a market economy system. Deng Xiaoping’s and Liu Shaoqi’s arrivals in
China’s leadership after 1976 marked a turn to the adoption of a more liberal and competitive

7. educational model (Hannum 1999), defined by the inception of Western practices and increased
competition in the examination system which restricted the advancement of a great deal of
students hoping to pursue further education. Sadly, Deng Xiaoping’s mode of educational
progress for China meant bad things for rural-urban disparity (Murphy). Much of the educational
focus was placed on urban areas, which were believed to offer the timeliest returns for
government investment. The failure of the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution
caused the government to abandon earlier attempts within rural areas to develop curriculum and
preparing students for work beyond agriculture.
Furthermore, structural changes regarding the norms within society, such as the
dismantlement of communes, the implementation of the household contract system, and
transitions toward a market economy all paved the way for abandoning rural schools for a focus
on urban education (Murphy). The important role of colleges for producing more specialized
experts in varying fields, and the natural concentration of these institutions in urbanized regions
increased the importance of educational investments in urban areas (Hannum). Simplistic
methods from the revolutionary period were condemned and abandoned, replaced with a
diversity of complex, hierarchical education programs (Hannum).
Following this was the reinstatement of the exam system and the return of twelve years of
schooling (Jones). Regarding the content of history curriculum specifically, this reorientation
still highlighted communism and patriotism within the textbooks as invincible forces which
could continue uniting the country (Jones). Believing to hold the potential to delegitimize party
leadership, the blows from the Cultural Revolution were softened in writing. Growing economic
competition under Liu Shaoqi and Deng Xiaoping’s leadership led China to another educational
goal, which was to produce a newer, economically competitive generation of experts to elevate

8. China’s capabilities. Sadly, Deng and Shaoqi’s more competitive mode of educational progress
for China has carried negative impacts for its rural-urban disparity as well as the positive
implementation of the earlier egalitarian model of education.
Combating Influences
When researching the important transitional periods of educational development in
China, it is necessary to observe the influence of ideas. Since the beginning of China’s existence
ideology has supported and molded the transition of knowledge. The most important forms of
thought in China are Confucianism, both conservative and normative socialism, egalitarianism,
and nationalism. Touching upon each of these terms and their definitions will continue to paint
an accurate canvas for understanding China’s modern education system.
Confucianism, Equity, and Quality
Early in history, China possessed a much more philosophical approach to education,
viewing it as a step toward the larger goal of creating a more dependable society (Mu 2013).
Confucian Thought catalyzed the egalitarian mode of education and promoted equality. At this
time, the main goal of educating each class included perfecting the quality of all citizens to
create a more honest, collective society. An approach such as this kept educational equity in the
mix and avoided discrimination between aristocrats and ordinary citizens. In addition, an
emphasis placed on individual academic merits further encouraged the spread of education to all
levels of society. Narratives were written about citizens from lower classes gaining renown
through succeeding in examinations. As an early meritocratic society, examinations were

9. adopted as a means of developing a higher standard of academic levels, evaluating progress, and
discovering talent for future leadership (Wen 2007)(Hannum 1999).
Confucianism most likely still exists as the leading influence on China’s education
system. Existing over two thousand years ago, Confucius was a largely influential philosopher
and teacher in Chinese history. At the root of his teaching, Confucius stressed the importance of
educational equity and quality, making Confucianism very attractive to other societies around the
world (Mu). Throughout his life, Confucius’ perspective was that education existed solely for the
betterment and benefit of societal development. Viewing well-rounded individuals that can give
back to society as the end product of education, this famous Chinese teacher commonly utilized
the word suzhi (素质) in education, which refers the overall quality of an individual person,
based upon their knowledge and abilities (Murphy). Although the implications of this ideology
dominated the educational scene early in China’s history, however, there recent curriculum
reforms have marked the return to emphasizing individual development.
While mentioning individual development of attributes with a societal focus, one must
also recognize the meritocratic forces in China’s education, as well. Meritocracy refers to a
system in which people possessing higher achievements advance on to higher statuses, but its
main existence in China comes through the form of yingshi jiaoyu (应试教育), or exam-oriented
education (Dello-Iacovo). China famously possesses a strict exam system, which constricts the
progression of students in their pursuit for higher education. Looking at the incredible resiliency
of the examination system, earliest traces are found before the transmission of Confucianism,
and even the Cultural Revolution could not completely wipe it out (Dello-Iacovo). Mao removed

10. the regular system during his reign, but it was later welcomed back with the end of the
revolutionary period.
Socialism and Egalitarianism
Socialism strongly influenced China’s educational environment. At its root, the
Communist Party of China possesses the socialist ideal of establishing and maintaining an
equitable society (Hannum). This form of socialism compliments egalitarian ideals laid down
during China’s earliest years. Commitment to egalitarianism denotes the removal of inequalities
between all people, attempting to remove lines between all societal stratifications. All of China’s
earlier educational policies, especially during the political movements, took these ideological
factors of socialism and egalitarianism into account.
Although normative socialism has been present all throughout the country’s history,
socialism became extremely concentrated during the Cultural Revolution. An overpowering
emphasis on socialism and egalitarianism led to the basic literacy and numeracy of large
populations within rural areas (Hannum). Urban areas were adversely affected by the
revolutionary forces, but rural education experienced large increases in numbers (Murphy).
Thoughts competing against socialist influences were targeted by the persecution of scholars
under the party’s directives throughout the revolution. Now, however, the inception of market
economy tendencies has contested how deep these drive into the country’s educational structure.
Since the Chinese government was founded in 1949, it has heavily guarded these values as a
communist country, but more recent adoptions of Western methodologies challenge the existence
of these influences, thus leading to cultural dilemmas within the education system (Feng).

11. Nationalism and National Identity
Nationalism and national identity also carries powerful influence on the education scene
in China. During the Cultural Revolution, this was most transparent, seeing as how curriculum
development centered on spreading party initiatives and legitimizing leadership. Political ends of
the Proletariat were dominating the educational policymaking up to 1976, focusing in on
collectivization, the mobilization of labor, and (Hannum). Furthermore, China’s nationalism
most commonly presents itself through the form of pursuing economic success. The China
Communist Party emphasizes this as a core goal within the curriculum, especially through the
foundational history curriculum. Political legitimacy, nationalism, praise, and blame are all
transmitted down to students through a party constructed ‘official history’ (Jones). Legitimizing
the political system has led to communicating and transmitting stable nationalist ideals to all
students. This is also often times referred to as moral-ideological education, a means of molding
students into ideal citizens.
As previously mentioned, a transition in policy planning for education within China and
economic changes has led to contention between these influential ideologies. Much of my
research drives these influences into two sides of opposition. Confucian values, egalitarianism,
and socialism all place the educational emphasis on eliminating inequalities and pursuing
educational equity. Meanwhile, nationalism and economic tensions place a spotlight on pursuing
more competitive educational means, and producing experts that can give leverage to the
country’s abilities in international competition. These two oppositions consisting of different
philosophies remain at odds with one another. They are referred to as the socialistic egalitarian
and competitive liberal views of education (Dello-Iacovo). China’s socialist egalitarian model of

12. education has been in the works since the transmission of Confucianism, which placed more
emphasis on societal gains of education (Mu). Existing as opposites, though China’s early
approach to education focused on societal benefits, the more competitive approach in many ways
perpetuates the rural-urban disparity. When China adopted the Soviet Model for education,
which emphasized rapid industrialization and the accumulation of capital, it was sent down long,
winding path toward a competitive liberal model of education (Murphy). It is my firm belief that
the collective contention formed by these two opposing philosophies will in many ways
determine the future of China’s educational infrastructure, the successful implementation of the
curriculum reform, and most likely the future leadership of the country.
Competing Models
Considering how we have covered the different influences, it is time to view the three
education models these construct within China. Initially, the socialistic egalitarian model
dominated the education scene in China, denoting a focus on educational equity and eliminating
social inequalities affecting outcomes within the education system. Then, this was met by the
entry of the Soviet education model and the politicization of education. After the Cultural
Revolution, China transitioned to a more competitive, liberal education model. The conflict
surrounding these different philosophies within China’s education system warrants further
investigation in order to better understand the mechanics of educational reform and structure.
The combination of multiple philosophies in the country’s education system reveals a combined
focus on education’s relationship with society, politics, and economic progress.
The Socialist Egalitarian Model

13. Early in history, China possessed a much more philosophical approach to education,
viewing it as a step toward the larger goal of creating a more dependable society (Mu 2013).
Confucian Thought catalyzed the egalitarian mode of education and promoted equality. At this
time, the main goal of educating each class included perfecting the quality of all citizens to
create a more honest, collective society.
An approach such as this kept educational equity in the mix and avoided discrimination
between aristocrats and ordinary citizens. In addition, an emphasis placed on individual
academic merits further encouraged the spread of education to all levels of society. Narratives
were written about citizens from lower classes gaining renown through succeeding in
examinations. As an early meritocratic society, examinations were adopted as a means of
developing a higher standard of academic levels, evaluating progress, and discovering talent for
future leadership (Wen 2007)(Hannum 1999).
The Soviet Model
Later on, China adopted the Soviet Model of education, which was devised to
attain speedy development and industrialization, as well as, increase the amount of capital
accumulated (Murphy 2009). After the perceived failure of Mao’s political movements such as
the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution mentioned before, rural literacy rate
decreased once again. Policymakers, dealing with a lack of resources in rural areas, turned their
sights to urban education reforms, where they could quickly capitalize on gains from investments
(Hannum 1999). Progress slowed in rural education due to static goals. Better educational
infrastructure was established in urban areas, while the rural population was given mass
education programs decided upon by cost-effectiveness. Given the country’s hopes of raising

14. national strength at the quickest possible speed, the government spoon-fed urban education
institutions. Progressing into an educational system which orients itself around economic
development has led to the creation and perpetuation of educational inequalities. A lack of
funding in rural areas automatically determines that students attending schools in urban areas
will receive a better education.
Another aspect of the Soviet education model is the high level of politicization. Today,
this is most noticeable in how curriculum developers, specifically those in charge of history
curriculum are influenced by “contemporary political imperatives” (Jones 2002). This does the
opposite of lessen their load of responsibilities, considering how their decisions are also
influenced by “professional academic and pedagogical concerns, and “efforts to justify the status
of History in an increasingly crowded curriculum” (Jones 2002). As with all countries,
curriculum development can be formulated in such a way as to compliment the landscape of
national identity, and China is no different. The most important takeaway from researching the
Soviet education model is recognizing how deeply embedded curriculum, especially history
curriculum is in China’s national identity, and we may further apply this concept to explain the
resistance met in the further implementation of curriculum reform.
The Competitive Liberal Model
Lastly, the Soviet model has morphed in China’s more recent history into a competitive
liberal model, placing emphasis on China’s desire to have a globally competitive education
system. Competitive influences introduced into China’s education system have arguably created
and perpetuated already existing inequalities. I have previously touched on the uneven
distribution of investments in education owing to and further perpetuating the rural-urban

15. disparity, but it is still important to note that the transition into a market economy further
encouraged funding urban regions (Hannum). Organizations and individuals were further
incentivized by the system of quicker returns. Moreover, this new liberal competitive approach
led to the adoption of Western educational tactics, which in turn, invited cultural conflicts into
China’s educational structure (Feng 2006). Educational practices differ greatly between Eastern
and Western educational institutions.
For example, inviting comments and discussion from students, or solely lecturing may be
encouraged in one system but not the other. At first glance, adopting new teaching techniques
may appear simple, but they can have adverse effects on leadership approaches that have been in
effect long before. China, attempting to gain a competitive edge through diversifying it teaching
curriculum, is experiencing difficulties in translating Western practices into its own domestic
culture.
Case Study: China’s New National Curriculum Reform
Goals of Curriculum Reform
Over recent years, there has been an outcry from China’s public, demanding a drastic
change in the educational infrastructure. Fierce international competition, technological
advancements, and a focus on all-round development have been the main symptoms encouraging
waves of educational reform (Guan). Hoping to answer the many aspects of this need, the
Chinese government put forth a curriculum reform to develop high quality education (Feng).
Suzhi Jiaoyu(素质教育), or Quality Education acts as one of the guiding principles behind
China’s education policies, but some see it simply as an umbrella term covering many different
points within educational reform and leading to unwanted ambiguity (Jones). However, as

16. mentioned before, there are assumed historical meanings for the term suzhi which dates back to
the Confucian period (Dello-Iacovo) (Mu).
Therefore, we can at least be certain that this latest curriculum reform focuses mainly
upon students’ development. This reform’s six main goals are as follows, shifting learning
formats within the classroom, developing a balanced curriculum setup, establishing foundational
and practical learning, encouraging active and student-oriented learning models, revitalizing the
country’s examination system, and decentralizing authority over curriculum (Feng).
Problems Affecting Implementation of the CNNCR
So far, my research has revealed several important points of contention within the New
Curriculum Reform. Some of these include: inflexibility, increased levels of stress and burdens
placed on both students and teachers, a lack of acknowledgment toward the wants and needs of
parents and students, supposed cultural dilemmas, and uncertainty with regards to proposed
methods for continuing implementation of the reform (Feng). While these factors were no doubt
present, within my case study, I focused mainly upon other issues, such as the diverse effects of
the decentralization in curriculum authority, resource scarcity and mismanagement, teacher
training and effects from traditional learning methods.
Decentralization of Responsibilities
First, the content of the CNNCR reveals a transition into three part leadership between
national, local, and school (Guan 2007). Although the decentralization of curriculum control was
meant to spread the responsibility between three levels, it has actually had adverse effects in the
overall implementation of the reform. Under this restructuring, the Ministry of Education

17. maintains its role of leader and coordinator (Feng 2006). Local governments and the schools are
tasked with funding and also adapting the curriculum to their perspective needs. Placing this
burden of funding on the shoulders of local governments many times proves too heavy a
responsibility. The issue of uneven funding relates closely to the problematic points of
decentralization. Along with the trend of decreased funding in rural areas (Hannum) (Murphy),
an Evaluative Report on the Ten Year Layout Revision of Rural Education reveals the dramatic
decrease of schools from the year 2000 to 2010. It depicts how the country lost an average of
sixty-three schools each day (Li, 2014).
Moreover, investigations show not only the incredible lack of investments, but also how
the amount currently received is continually decreasing. From 2001 to 2005, the amount of funds
spent on schools in the Shandong province relative to the country’s GDP decreased from 1.89%
to 1.56% (Li, 2014). Without the necessary funding, the future of many schools outside urban
areas looks bleak. If this current trend is continued, many more schools will remain unable to
meet the state’s requirements, not have a positive effect on students’ learning, and will most
likely have to close. As long as this new curriculum reform is not meant as an excuse for the
central government of China to ignore funding needs, it could still achieve its desired effects.
Lack of Resources
Second, the lack of resources definitely carries a heavy weight on schools’ ability to
implement new curriculum reforms, especially in rural areas. An incredibly large difference in
size of government investment between rural and urban schooling systems still exists (Zhai
2014). China’s government has poured funding into a few schools in order to promote them as
leaders in educational research and role models for quality education (Dello-Iacovo), but other

18. schools must watch as the resources they require are funneled into a few select schools. Uneven
resource management further perpetuates educational disparity between renowned schools and
lesser known institutions.
The Academy of Educational Research within China performed an investigation into the
state of rural schools, revealing the poor conditions which students have to experience. This
investigation revealed that out of all the targeted schools, at least 32.9% were deemed “unsafe”
and “lacking in quality” (Li, 2014). In addition to observing the condition of school buildings,
this research also looked at dorms. Many of the students in rural areas must live in dorms at their
schools, however, research revealed that at 75% of these schools, there were ten or more students
living in a room. Overcrowding has become a common issue in many schools.
The more recent phenomenon known as ‘left behind children’ also increases the burden
on educational institutions in rural areas. This term refers to children of migrant workers, who
must stay at home without supervision for long periods of time, owing to the fact that their
parents must often times travel to urban areas to find adequate work (Yao). An abundance of
institutions must now house students in their facilities, owing to the unhealthy living situations
within their homes.
Teaching
Third, general teacher training to implement the new curriculum has become an
obstacle for implementing the education policies. The instructional paradigm shift encouraged
within the new policy reform has been painful to apply to Chinese classrooms. Untrained
teachers, misappropriations in teaching methods, unsuccessful teaching conferences all
combined inhibit China’s curriculum reform (Zhong 2006). Teaching methods inspired by the

19. New Curriculum regards student-centered learning, but can often end up in a complete loss of
control over curriculum, thus adding more stress to both students and teachers instead of
relieving them from the unbearable burden of an impassable examination system.
Classroom control has been a major problem for teachers. A large majority of teachers
are above the age of fifty. Considering how many years have passed since their last time in
education classes, there is a large divide in materials and methodology. The implementation of
curriculum development has created the need for reeducating teachers, further hindering its
application in the classroom (Li, 2014).
In addition to the lack of effective means to teach and prepare teachers leaving
“indoctrination-centered teaching” for “inquiry-centered teaching” has met much resistance in
China (Zhong). China’s spoon-feeding teaching techniques, similar to lecturing methods, have
not been challenged for centuries. Dating back to the times of Confucius, for well over a
thousand years, the main mode of learning has been rote-memorization and countless hours of
force feeding material to students in the classroom or teacher-centered education (Dello-Iacovo).
With such a close tie with culture and history, there is bound to be some bumps along the way.
Some scholars have mentioned the trouble in applying curriculum reform is first teaching
students to learn in these new ways, then beginning to teach them required curriculum through
these new modes.
An additional aspect of resource management remains teachers’ revenue. This too is
unevenly distributed. Looking at the amount of pay teachers receive also reveals the lack of
resources for rural schools in China. The average teacher in a rural school makes approximately
two hundred dollars a month (Li, 2014), compared to a much higher amount received by teachers

20. of urban schools. This lack of adequate compensation has meant fewer teachers pursue careers
at rural schools, in turn, leading to an incredible lack in teaching resources.
Cultural Conflicts
Another interesting difficulty with this problem remains the belief that the process of
implementing the CNNCR needs to carry a more democratic structure, but this holds heavy
implications within a communist society such as China. Logic is confused within the optimism
of Feng’s, and Guan and Meng’s writings. Both sources do well to explain issues that would
arise were China to continue adopting Western techniques in education, but at the same time,
they call for more democratic modes of management at the base level.
Examination System
When mentioning issues and the remaining effects of the old educational infrastructure
on new curriculum development, it is crucial to mention that possibly the greatest obstacle for
the new curriculum reform is the old exam-based education system (Feng). Literature regarding
the problematic situation of China’s incredibly reselient exam system reveals how what progress
has been made with curriculum reform is in danger of being choked out(Zhong 2006). Even the
Cultural Revolution could not completely destroy the traditional exam-based system within
Chinese educational culture. An education system based too strongly upon exams has lead to a
disconnect between schooling and practical application in real life situations, returns to rote
memorization, teacher-centered learning, cramming, reduction of mental wellbeing of students,
and a lack of initiative and responsibility for students (Dello-Iacovo). After the Reform and
Opening period, new criticisms arose claiming that the exam system perpetuates social inequality
and leads to unequal funding opportunities for schools. Deep -seated educational culture and its

21. ties with heritage mean that while the public recognizes problems with the exam system, they are
not fully prepared to abandon it and accept completely new modes. Currently, the exam system
continues to hold meritocratic implications, focusing on achievements instead of diagnosing
issues within the education system. The exam system’s misplaced focus reveals its
ineffectiveness as a system of evaluation and accountability for the curriculum (Guan). In the
end, the largest obstacle for the further implementation of the curriculum reform in China
remains the education system’s most prized cultural heritage. If the country does not correct the
examination system, it will be unable to progress in fortifying its educational infrastructure. The
truth remains that the exam system acts as the trend setter for education, and combining this
stress with meeting requirements from the body of the central government, it becomes too much
for individual schools to bear.
Other Unattended Needs
While a large number of parents and teachers feel strongly in support of the curriculum
reforms, they do little in means of backing and applying the material to the classroom (Murphy
2009). Their worries stem from the effects that curriculum reform could have on their students
test scores during examinations, considering that the Ministry of Education has done little to
change the exam system. Among these groups of issues remains the lack of recognition and
awareness in adopting measures to protect minorities. Instead of being taken care of, the needs of
many minorities are often overlooked, leaving them at a disadvantage in the realm of education
(Dello-Iacovo 2009).
Conclusion

22. Reviewing literature pertaining to the historical development of China’s education system
reveals how much of the ideology and cultural implications still present an obstacle for
developing the curriculum today. Confucianism, scars from the Cultural Revolution, and
influences from the Reform and Opening are still present today as forces molding the country’s
national educational infrastructure. Closely observing the path and transition of ideological
foundations within China’s education serves as a method to better understand the terrain in
which the Curriculum Reform must be implemented.
Researching what specific issues have arisen through the implementation of the reform
will strengthen future attempts at synthesizing solutions. There is an abundance of literature and
research pertaining to trends in education in China, especially with regards to rural China.
Curriculum reform remains one of the largest hurdles to further advancing China’s education
system. Currently, research points toward several necessary steps for solving the problems
halting further implementation of the New Curriculum Reform. First, China’s examination
system must be altered to make way for the complete application of the CNNCR. Second,
methods such as China’s Special Post Teacher Plan in rural areas and developing schools for
floating children would work to overcome educational inequalities (Mu 2013). These are each
great avenues for raising education equity in the China’s society. Establishing a better
relationship between rural schools and their communities has great potential in overcoming
difficulty with lack of resources (Zhai 2014). Third, a simple increase in government funding
would also alleviate much of the financial struggle surrounding the development of rural
education (Li 2014), causing more funding to trickle into local governments and eventually
schools. As of now, political and economic agendas are preventing the decrease of rural-urban

23. disparity and in many ways even perpetuating it. For the CNNCR to be successful in application,
each of these areas must be taken into account.
Overall, through this research project, we reviewed the difficulties and obstacles China
faces in the process of advancing implementation. The history of Chinese society also reveals
past successes in implementing new educational policies. All hope is not lost regarding the
effectiveness and timely implementation of this curriculum reform, however, the specific hurdles
to its implementation must be targeted in order to experience progress in both quality and equity
of China’s education.

24. Bibliography
Baohua You, Xia Gao, Wenjing Wang, and Li Zhao. Educational Reform and Curriculum
Change in China: A Comparative Case Study. International Bureau for Education, 2007.
1-57.
Cui, Yunhuo, and Yan Zhu. "Curriculum Reforms in China: History and the Present Day."
Revue Internationale D’éducation De Sèvres (International Review of Education), 2014.
Accessed March 11, 2015. http://ries.revues.org/3846.
Davidson, Shannon and Jennifer Adams. (2013) “Adversity and internalizing problems among
adolescents in rural China: the protective roles of parental and teacher
support,” International Journal of Behavioral Development, 37(6): 530-541.
Dello-lacovo, Belinda. "Curriculum Reform and 'Quality Education' in China: An
Overview."International Journal of Educational Development 29, no. 3 (2009): 241-49.
Accessed February 1, 2015. doi:10.1016/j.ijedudev.2008.02.008.
Feng, Danming. "China's Recent Curriculum Reform: Progress and Problems." Planning and
Changing 37 (2006): 131-44. Accessed February 1, 2015. http://eric.ed.gov/?
id=EJ756220.
Guan, Qun, and Wangjin Meng. "China's New National Curriculum Reform: Innovation,
Challenges and Strategies." Frontiers of Education in China 2, no. 4 (2007): 579-604.
Accessed February 1, 2015. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11516-007-0043-6.
Hannum, Emily. "Political Change and Urban-Rural Gap in Basic Education in China, 1949-
1990."Comparative Education Review 43, no. 2 (1999): 193-211. Accessed February 1,
2015. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1189018.
Jia, Lijie, “China: Poverty Reduction Program” (presentation, International Poverty Reduction
Center in China (IPRCC) Kunming, Peoples Republic of China, October 23-25, 2012).
Jones, Alisa. (2002) Chapter 2“Politics and history curriculum reform in post-Mao China,”
International Journal of Educational Research, 37: 544-566.
Lam, Kevin. "Curriculum Reform in Chinese Secondary Education." World Education Services,
2011. Accessed March 11, 2015.
Li, Ling. "Suzhi Jiaoyu Diaocha: Liu Wenti Burong Hushi Si Su Zhiyue Fazhan (Survey on
Quality Education: Six Problems Which Can’t Be Ignored, Four Factors Restricting

25. Development)." Xinhua Wang, August 20, 2007. Accessed February 1, 2015.
http://www.ah.xinhuanet.com/hfnews/2007-07/20/content_10635423.htm.
Li, Xinling. "Nongcun Xuexiao Hai Xuyao Shenme? (What Do Rural School Still Need?)."
Jiaoyu Sixiang Wang. January 20, 2014. Accessed February 1, 2014.
Mu, Guanglun Michael, Xinrong Zheng, Ning Jia, Xiaohua Li, Shaoyi Wang, Yanchuan Chen,
Ying He, Lyn May, Merilyn Carter, Karen Dooley, Adon Berwick, Angela Sobyra,
Carmel Diezman. (2013) “Revisiting Educational Equity and Quality in China through
Confucianism, Policy, research, and practice,” Australian Association for Research in
Education, Inc., 40: 373-389.
Murphy, Rachel. "Turning Peasants into Modern Chinese Citizens: “Population Quality”
Discourse, Demographic Transition and Primary Education." The China Quarterly 177
(2004): 1-20. Accessed February 1, 2015.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0305741004000025.
Murphy, Rachel, and David Johnson. (2009) “Editorial: Education and development in China-
Institutions, curriculum, and society,” International Journal of Educational Development,
29: 447-453.
Pang, Lili. "Suzhi Jiaoyu Vs Yingshi Jiaoyu: Shu Sheng? Shu Fu? (Quality Education versus
Examination-oriented Education: Which One Is Winning?)." Xinhua Wang Shang Dong
Shi Dao, August 27, 2004. Accessed February 1, 2015.
http://www.sd.xinhuanet.com/news/2004-11/27/content_3294815.htm.
Suzhi Jiaoyu Chronicle of Events, 2005Suzhi Jiaoyu Chronicle of Events, 2005. Suzhi jiaoyu
dashiji. 18 October. http://www.edu.cn/20051018/3156152.shtml.
Tiedao, Zhang, and Zhao Minxia. Universalizing Nine-Year Compulsory Education for Poverty
Reduction in Rural China.” The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development.
2004.
“The 10th
5-Year Plan for China’s Educational Development and the Development Outline by
2010.” Ministry of Education of the People’s Republic of China. n.d.
“The Development-oriented Poverty Reduction Program for Rural China”. Information Office
of the State Council of the People’s Republic of China. n.p.
http://news.xinhuanet.com/zhengfu/2002-11/18/content_633166.html
Wen, Hongyan. "Suzhi Jiaoyu Weihe Bulu Panshan Zhaozhun Dakai Gaige Jiban De Guanjian
(Why Quality Education Is Faltering—finding the Key to the Shackles to Reform)."
People's Daily, March 1, 2007. Accessed February 1, 2015.
http://news.xinhuanet.com/edu/2007-03/01/content_5786357_2.htm.

26. (Wen, Peng J., Elizabeth McNess, Sally Thomas, Rongwu Xiang, Zhang Chong, Zhongli Jian,
and Shengtian Hui. "Emerging Perceptions of Teacher Quality and Teacher Development
in China." International Journal of Educational Development, no. 34 (2014): 77-89.
Accessed March 11, 2015.
Yao Lu. Education of Children Left Behind in Rural China. Journal of Marriage and Family,
Vol. 74, No. 2 (April 2012), pp. 328-341. National Council on Family Relations.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/41507274.
Yiu, L. & Adams, J. (2013). Reforming rural education: Understanding teacher expectations for
rural youth. The China Quarterly, 216, 993-1017. doi: 10.1017/S0305741013001136.
Yu, Jianfu. CERNET. October 25, 2005. Accessed February 1, 2015.
http://www.edu.cn/li_lun_209/20060323/t20060323_145757.shtml.
Zhai, Jinyu. "Xiao Guimo Xuexiao Fuxing: Nongcun Jiaoyu de Weilai? (The Return of Small-
Scale Schools: The Future of Rural Education?)." Jiaoyu Sixiang Wang. January 8, 2014.
Accessed February 1, 2014.
Zhong, Qi-quan. "Curriculum Reform in China: Challenge & Reflection." Comparative
Education Review, 2005. Accessed February 1, 2015.
http://en.cnki.com.cn/Article_en/CJFDTotal-BJJY200512004.htm.
Zhou, Mary Huiquan. “What Should China’s NPOs Do to Promote Rural Education?” China
Development Brief. 2013. http://chinadevelopmentbrief.cn/articles/what-should-chinas-
npos-do-to-promote-rural-education/#rf1-1727.