Yuan Li

The concept and practice of general education have been widely discussed and debated in the Euro-American world, but its adaptation in China needs further discussion and understanding. Over the past decade, its impact on Chinese higher education is increasingly salient, with a large number of Chinese first-tier universities claiming to initiate general education reforms to their previously narrowly focused undergraduate programs. This paper explores the development, implementation, and support of general education in a new type of research university in China from an organizational perspective. Through a case study of the Southern University of Science and Technology (SUSTech) prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, this paper examines SUSTech’s individualized and innovation-based general education system, highlighting its institution-wide approach and innovation-centered perspective. The findings underscore the importance of integrating general education principles throughout the university to foster self-directed thinkers and cultivate students’ self-awareness, interests, and passions. This study also reveals how general education is used as an organizational solution to address a variety of historical and complicated issues that challenge Chinese universities. This research serves as a catalyst for reform and innovation in Chinese higher education, inspiring transformative practices that meet the evolving needs of students and society.

This study provides an in-depth analysis of the effects of academic mobility on higher education innovation through an empirical study on returned Chinese academics at two research universities in China. Based on data obtained through document analysis and semi-structured interviews with 15 academic returnees, this paper aims to examine the everyday interactions between individual returnees and their environment, with a focus on exploring how different institutional contexts affect returnees’ capacity for integration and innovation. It finds that returned academics play an important role in promoting higher education innovation in China through mobilizing their transnational capital and resources. However, their capacity to innovate is largely subject to their working environment. Evidence from the study suggests that differing institutional contexts make a substantial difference to the reintegration experiences of returnees and to their contributions to institutional changes. This paper provides a window into the changing institutional environment in China and the academic lives of returnees there. It also provides important implications for talent policy decisions.