Title

Decentralization, marketization and organizational change in

higher education: a case study of an academic unitin China

Advisor(s)

Postiglione, GA

Author(s)

Yang, Dongsheng;

Citation

Issued Date

URL

Rights

2012

http://hdl.handle.net/10722/173834

The author retains all proprietary rights, (such as patent rights)

and the right to use in future works.

Decentralization, Marketization and Organizational Change in

Higher Education: A Case Study of an Academic Unit in China

by
YANG Dongsheng

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for

the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
at The University of Hong Kong
May 2012

Abstract of thesis entitled

Decentralization, Marketization and Organizational Change in Higher

Education: A Case Study of an Academic Unit in China
Submitted by
YANG Dongsheng
for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy
at The University of Hong Kong
in May 2012

Since the 1980s, decision-making and managerial power has gradually been handed
over to higher education institutions in China. This has helped to reduce the
governments financial burden and improve the administrative efficiency of
universities. A particular reform involves the establishment of autonomous
experimental units within 36 universities. These decentralized units are more highly
dependent on market forces than other parts of the university. This thesis examines
the development of one such academic unit within one of Chinas major universities.
The particular academic unit, heretofore referred to as a school is studied through a
detailed examination of its teaching, research and administration. It is granted a high
degree of autonomy to manage itself and its finance. Therefore, it is encouraged to be
innovative in its organizational structure and working procedures. This helps drive it
to cooperate with industry and adopt a market mechanism in management.

The research demonstrates the changing relationships of this school with its parent
university, with governments at different levels, and with industry and the wider
society. The results indicate that a major shift is taking place in Chinese higher
education, as China responds with increased marketization and decentralization.

Borrowing theories developed by Clark and Oliver in the fields of higher education
and organizational theory, this thesis not only provides a deeper understating of the

triangular relationship among universities, state authority and the market, but also
refines these theories to suit the Chinese context. This investigation reveals that thus a
particular academic unit, unlike most university units in China, must respond to
external pressures and expectations in order to survive in a new context of
decentralization and commodification. The thesis identifies and analyzes the critical
factors affecting the schools development and its coping strategies within an altered
environment of operation.

Employing a qualitative research methodology, this work views the selected unit of a
major Chinese university as an open organizational system, and analyzes the external
and internal forces that influence the schools development. The data collection
approach is comprised of semi-structured and unstructured interviews to elicit views
and perceptions from the respondents regarding the decision-making, policy
implementation and the development of the unit. A focus group interview method is
used to question current undergraduate and postgraduate students about perceptions
and attitudes towards the development of the unit. Documents are used to obtain
background information and to support and triangulate the data collected from
individual and group interviews.

Although the school failed to make radical changes to the existing university structure
and institutions, it has demonstrated the ability to sustain itself, innovate, and gain
legitimacy through continuing negotiation and compromise with university authority,
government and market. Based on the results of this research, I would argue that if
units similar to this one within Chinese universities are granted more administrative
autonomy and orient themselves to market forces, Chinese universities will be able to
integrate themselves into the increasingly marketized economy and contribute to
national development without sacrificing the core academic missions of teaching,
research and service.

Decentralization, Marketization and Organizational Change in

Higher Education: A Case Study of an Academic Unit in China

by
YANG Dongsheng

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for

the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
at The University of Hong Kong
May 2012

To Weizhuo, mum and dad

For your unfailing love and faith on me

Declarations

I declare that the thesis and the research work thereof represents my own work, except
where due acknowledgement is made, and that it has not been previously included in
a thesis, dissertation or report submitted to this University or to any other institution
for a degree, diploma or other qualifications.

_____________________________
YANG, Dongsheng

Acknowledgements
In my four years of study, I have benefited from many people. Without their valuable
support, the completion of this dissertation would have never happened.
First of all, I would like to extend my sincere and deep gratitude to my two
supervisors, Professor Gerry A. Postiglione and Dr. Cheung Kwok Wah. They
inspired me during this intellectual journey and gave me guidance and support. They
are the best teachers I have ever met. They led and encouraged me to explore a new
academic realm that I had never touched before.
I received generous support from the faculty, staff and students in the software
engineering school at University A when conducting the case study which involved
interviews and focus group discussions. The process was engaging and rewarding
since the views they shared with me are the biggest treasures I have acquired in the
entire course of study. I am very thankful to all of my research informants.
I am in indebted to my research panel members, Professor Nancy Law and Mr. Joseph
Lam, for their advice. Many faculty members at HKU as well as in other institutions
also gave precious advice to me. To name several of them, they are Professor Cheng
Kai Ming, Professor Philip G. Altbach, Professor Ma Wanhua, Professor Shen Hong,
Dr. Yang Rui, Dr. Anatoly Oleksiyenko, and Dr. Pan Suyan. My friends and
colleagues in the Faculty of Education helped me throughout the study process.
Last but not the least, are my family who have unfailingly supported my interest in
completing this study. Thanks to my parents, Yang Shizong and Xiao Li, who are
proud of whatever I have achieved and want to help me to achieve more. Finally, and
most heartfelt, is my thanks to my beloved husband, Li Weizhuo, to whom this
dissertation is dedicated. He encouraged me whenever I was confronted with pressure,
difficulty and frustration. His understanding, encouragement and love made the
completion of the long journey possible.
ii

Table of Contents
Declarations .................................................................................................................... i
Acknowledgements .........................................................................................................ii
Table of Contents ......................................................................................................... iii
List of Figures ............................................................................................................... vi
List of Tables ................................................................................................................ vii
List of Abbreviations ................................................................................................... viii
Chapter One Introduction ....................................................................................... 1
1.1
Background ...................................................................................................... 1
1.2
Rationale for the Study .................................................................................... 2
1.3
Statement of the Research Problem ................................................................. 5
1.4
Research Questions .......................................................................................... 6
1.5
Definitions of Terms ........................................................................................ 6
1.5.1 Decentralization ........................................................................................ 6
1.5.2 Marketization ............................................................................................ 7
1.5.3 Organizational change .............................................................................. 8
1.5.4 Academic unit ........................................................................................... 9
1.6
Limitations of the Study................................................................................. 10
1.7
Organization of the Dissertation .................................................................... 12
Chapter Two Literature Review and Theoretical Framework .............................. 13
2.1
Decentralization ............................................................................................. 14
2.1.1 Concepts .................................................................................................. 14
2.1.2 Decentralization in higher education ...................................................... 15
2.1.3 Decentralization in Chinese higher education ........................................ 23
2.1.4 Summary ................................................................................................. 30
2.2
Marketization ................................................................................................. 35
2.2.1 Concepts .................................................................................................. 35
2.2.2 Marketization of higher education around the world .............................. 42
2.2.3 Marketization of Chinese higher education ............................................ 54
2.2.4 Summary ................................................................................................. 60
2.3
Organizations and Organization Theories ...................................................... 63
2.3.1 Three perspectives .................................................................................. 64
2.3.2 Organizational study in Chinese higher education ................................. 71
2.4
Theoretical Framework .................................................................................. 73
2.4.1 Theoretical model of SSEs change ........................................................ 73
2.4.2 Analytical theories .................................................................................. 76
2.5
Summary ........................................................................................................ 82
iii

Chapter Three Methodology ................................................................................. 87

3.1
Research Design............................................................................................. 87
3.1.1 Rationale to adopt the case study approach ............................................ 88
3.1.2 Criteria to select the case ........................................................................ 90
3.1.3 Aspects to investigate ............................................................................. 92
3.2
Data Collection .............................................................................................. 93
3.2.1 Document review .................................................................................... 94
3.2.2 Individual interview ................................................................................ 96
3.2.3 Focus group discussion ........................................................................... 99
3.3
Data Analysis ............................................................................................... 101
3.4
Methodological Considerations ................................................................... 103
3.4.1 Insider issue .......................................................................................... 103
3.4.2 Triangulation ......................................................................................... 105
3.4.3 Reliability and Validity ......................................................................... 107
3.5
Summary ...................................................................................................... 111
Chapter Four Research Context .......................................................................... 114
4.1
Institutional Context..................................................................................... 114
4.1.1 Brief history .......................................................................................... 114
4.1.2 Organizational structure ........................................................................ 117
4.1.3 Organizational environment.................................................................. 123
4.1.4 Brief summary ...................................................................................... 126
4.2
Disciplinary Context .................................................................................... 128
4.2.1 Development of software engineering education in the world ............. 129
4.2.2 Software engineering education in China ............................................. 132
4.2.3 Brief summary ...................................................................................... 137
4.3
Summary ...................................................................................................... 139
Chapter Five Establishment and Destiny ............................................................ 141
5.1
The Experiment of National Pilot SE Schools............................................. 141
5.2
Establishment of SSE................................................................................... 145
5.3
Destiny ......................................................................................................... 148
5.4
Summary ...................................................................................................... 156
Chapter Six Administration ................................................................................ 158
6.1
The Structure of SSE ................................................................................... 158
6.2
Leadership .................................................................................................... 162
6.3
Finance ......................................................................................................... 167
6.3.1 Revenue................................................................................................. 167
6.3.2 Expenditure ........................................................................................... 173
6.3.2 Financial management .......................................................................... 176
6.4
Personnel ...................................................................................................... 178
6.4.1 Recruitment ........................................................................................... 178
6.4.2 Remuneration ........................................................................................ 182
iv

6.4.3 Appraisal system ................................................................................... 184

Student Affairs ............................................................................................. 188
6.5.1 Student management regulations .......................................................... 188
6.5.2 The relationships ................................................................................... 190
6.5.3 Employment consultancy ...................................................................... 194
6.6
Preliminary discussion ................................................................................. 196
6.7
Summary ...................................................................................................... 204
6.5

Chapter Seven Teaching and Research ............................................................... 207

7.1
Teaching ....................................................................................................... 207
7.1.1 Program development ........................................................................... 207
7.1.2 Curriculum Development...................................................................... 210
7.1.3 Pedagogical Development .................................................................... 232
7.1.4 Regulations regarding teaching............................................................. 242
7.2
Research ....................................................................................................... 245
7.2.1 Rationale to do research ........................................................................ 246
7.2.2 Strategies to do research ....................................................................... 250
7.2.3 Regulations regarding research ............................................................. 254
7.2.4 Orientation of research .......................................................................... 260
7.3
Preliminary discussion ................................................................................. 265
7.4
Summary ...................................................................................................... 272
Chapter Eight Further Discussion and Conclusion ............................................. 274
8.1
Further Discussions ...................................................................................... 274
8.1.1 Influence of decentralization................................................................. 274
8.1.2 Influence of marketization .................................................................... 282
8.1.3 Organizational change .......................................................................... 290
8.2
Implication for Practice................................................................................ 300
8.3
Recommendations for Future Research ....................................................... 304
8.4
Conclusion ................................................................................................... 305
Appendices ................................................................................................................. 314
References .................................................................................................................. 328

List of Figures
Figure 1.1

The general structure of Chinese universities......10

Figure 2.1

Chinas location in Clarks triangle of coordination.13

Figure 2.2

The theoretical framework of the study74

Figure 4.1

The administrative structure of University A ....118

Figure 6.1

the structure of the School of Software Engineering.158

Figure 6.2

The duty assignment of SSEs first leadership..164

Figure 6.3

The duty assignment of SSEs second leadership.....166

Figure 7.1

Research pyramid......263

Figure 8.1

Development of Chinese higher education system within the framework

of market influence and government control..289

Figure 8.2

Modified triangle of coordination for SSE.......307

vi

List of Tables
Table 2.1

Scotts Layered Model..68

Table 2.2

Comparison of institutional and resource dependence perspectives80

Table 4.1

The list of faculties and schools in University A.120

Table 6.1

Revenue composition.....171

Table 6.2

Financial summary sheet of SSE (2002 2005)....175

Table 7.1

Distribution of credits for undergraduate program.........217

Table 7.2

Preference of research orientation......263

vii

List of Abbreviations
ACM

Association for Computing Machinery

BBS

Bulletin Board System

CCP

Chinese Communist Party

CMU

Carnegie Mellon University

CpE

Computer Engineering

CS

Computer Science

DPMA Data Processing Management Association

EE

Electrical Engineering

GDP

Gross Domestic Product

HEI

Higher Education Institution

HR

Human Resources

IC

Integrated Circuit

IEEE

Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers

IP

Intellectual Property

IS

Information System

IT

Information Technology

MIT

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

MoC

Ministry of Commerce

MoE

Ministry of Education

PhD

Doctor of Philosophy

SE

Software Engineering

SEI

School of Electronics and Information

SSE

School of Software Engineering

viii

Chapter One Introduction

In this chapter, I will first introduce the background of the research and the rationale
for this study. This is followed by the statement of the research problem. Then several
research questions are raised to resolve the research problem. In order to clarify some
concepts and limit the scope of several terms, I will briefly define these key concepts
and terms. The limitation of the research is listed next and the chapter arrangement is
put at the end of this chapter.
1.1 Background
After the Chinese Communist Party took power of China in 1949, Chinese higher
education had been re-constructed as a completely centralized and planned system to
serve national development needs (Hayhoe, 1999; Min, 2004). Higher education was
completely funded by the government, and college graduates were allocated by the
government according to national manpower plans. Although the system had gone
through several rounds of critical changes (i.e. college reconstruction in 1952, the
Great Leap Forward in 1958, and the Cultural Revolution from 1966 to 1976), its
fundamental features of tight state-control, complete state-funding, and state-planning
had not been changed (Hayhoe, 1989a, 1999; J. Zhou, 2006).

Since the 1980s, Chinese education has experienced tremendous changes along with
the national economic reform and opening to the outside world policy (Mok, 2000a;
Wong & Mok, 1995). Higher education also faced the pressures and challenges
brought by fast economic development. The central government encountered financial
difficulties to support higher education and the conflict between manpower demand
and provision became a severe barrier to the high speed economic development (Min,
2004).

Beginning in 1994, the central government started to clarify the principles and
guidelines for higher education reform. In 1998, the reform was launched under the
principle of joint construction, re-adjustment, cooperation, and consolidation (J.
Zhou, 2006). The reform has changed the relationship between central and local
governments and the relationship between governments and higher education
institutions. The central government shifted some power to local governments and the
reformed system mainly relied on local governments to finance and manage higher
education institutions (J. Zhou, 2006). Both central and local governments delegated
more autonomy to universities than ever before, while also challenging them to take
more responsibilities for self and social development (Hayhoe, 1989b, 1999; Min,
1994, 2004).

Meanwhile, the government had to apply a market mechanism to support an ever

expanding higher education system from diversified sources (Kwong, 2000). Higher
education was no longer a common good and some of its characteristics, e.g.
practicalities, utilitarian aspects of knowledge, and meeting customer demands, had
been emphasized (Q. Yin & Gordon, 1994). Business practices had become
acceptable by higher education institutions with efficiency and cost-cutting as the
goals (Min, 2004; J. Zhou, 2006). However, market forces did not necessarily produce
positive results (Kwong, 2000; Mok, 2000a; Q. Yin & Gordon, 1994). Chinese higher
education faced the challenges of keeping a sustainable development of market-like
higher education and trying to maximize the positive effects of marketization while
minimizing its negative side-effects (Q. Yin & Gordon, 1994).
1.2 Rationale for the Study
In order to test the effectiveness of policies, Chinese governments prefer setting up
experimental programs before implementing them in the whole country. In 2001, the
Ministry of Education launched an experimental program a national pilot software
engineering school program to encourage the investment of financial and human
2

resources into software engineering education, as well as deepening the marketization

of higher education institutions. The ministry chose 36 universities to set up a
software engineering school in each of these universities. These schools were under
the protection of their mother universities, like other regular faculties/schools, while
being delegated more administrative autonomy in managing their internal affairs, such
as administration, teaching, and research.

As pilot schools, they were required to be self-supported and market-oriented. They

should closely collaborate with industries, cultivate students with practical knowledge
and skills, and meet labor market demands as much as possible. They were
encouraged to develop their own strategies to respond to external pressures and
expectations. These schools were given corresponding autonomy to implement these
strategies to ensure their sustainability.

When I worked in one of these national pilot software engineering schools, I noticed
some very interesting and inspiring changes that the school had made to ensure its
short-term survival and long-term development. I paid close attention to its endeavor
to get financial support from various sources, its close, deep, and wide collaboration
with industries, its different attitude towards students, faculty, and staff, and its
enthusiasm to try new things, such as new teaching materials, teaching methods,
curricula, cooperation patterns, service manners, managerial styles, etc. The school
had created a small innovative system within a bigger conservative system. The
tensions and conflicts caused by making changes to the current system were intense
and persistent. The incentives and rationale of the schools effort to make continuous
changes and its strategies to adapt to its environment are worth further investigation.

Higher education has become a hot academic topic which has been brought to
scholars attention, accommodating an increasing number of publications. Most
previous studies of Chinas higher education focused on government and institutional
levels. However, the expansion of higher education has caused the increase in size of
3

higher education institutions. The old university-department structure could not fit the
needs of internal administration, so the new university-faculty/school-department
model has been adopted by most Chinese universities (Zeng, 1997). Institutions have
then gradually shifted some management power with financial responsibility to the
faculty/school level (S. Hu, 2003). Faculties and schools become the end point of
decision-making and policy-implementation. This new phenomenon needs further
investigation and the new relationship between a university and its faculties/schools
needs more exploration. Very limited empirical studies have been conducted to
discover this newly established power level and to understand its functioning
mechanism.

This study targets a software engineering school in a key Chinese research university
and deeply explores its important strategic decision making, daily operations in
teaching, research and administration, and peoples perceptions of diverse influences
from internal and external forces. The outcomes of the research will definitely enrich
existing literature and give explanations to some rarely touched phenomena. The deep
understanding of how this academic unit has adapted to its environment and the path
of development may also provide practical implications to current Chinese higher
education practitioners.

Although the research is focused on only one case and would not be used to generate
a general conclusion valid for all faculties in Chinese universities, it still possesses
commonalities and provides implications for other Chinese universities. The school is
a part of a national experimental program which intensified some reform measures
and conflicts, so it can provide rich empirical data for analysis. It could offer valuable
data to support existing theories and give alternative explanations of some concurrent
phenomena in Chinese higher education.

1.3 Statement of the Research Problem

The purpose of this research is to investigate how the school responded to external
pressures and expectations (e.g. governmental policies, institutional institutions, and
market demands) in order to survive and sustainably develop. Through organizational
changes, I would like to uncover the critical factors affecting the schools
development and the strategies and measures the school adopted to deal with
environmental forces within governmental and institutional frameworks.

The studied school was established to meet market demands, so the influence of the
market force could be observed in many aspects of the school, such as curriculum
design, teaching and research, the personnel system, student management, etc.
However, the demands from the market are not always aligned with the schools
needs and sometimes conflict with academic standards and traditions. Moreover, the
school is under dual-direction from both the Ministry of Education and its mother
university. The requirements from these two superiors are sometimes inconsistent.
Understanding the strategies of coping with the inconsistent demands and
requirements from external forces (e.g. the ministry, the market, and its mother
university) is helpful to investigate the decision-making and implementation
mechanism of the school.

The school was endowed with the task of making changes to the existing
administrative system in the university. Even though the school was given more
decision-making power, it faced challenges of making good use of given power,
dealing with a new and strange environment, and avoiding abuse of power or making
mistakes. It had to learn how to cope with governmental and institutional policies and
adapt to environmental changes. Under such circumstances, its development process
and rationales behind its critical decision making is worth deep investigation from an
academic perspective.

1.4 Research Questions

The research problem was a vague and holistic view of the phenomenon. In order to
make it clear and solid, it has to be broken down into several practical and operational
parts. The following research question and sub-questions could be used to better
understand the problem:

How did SSE respond to external pressures and expectations in order to survive
and sustainably develop in the context of decentralization and marketization?
What were the critical factors affecting SSEs development?
What were the relationships between the school and critical factors?
How did these factors influence the school?

By answering these questions, we can have a clearer understanding of the schools

pattern of interacting with its environment, and how the schools development was
shaped by external forces.
1.5 Definitions of Terms
In this section, several key terms will be introduced to clarify the usage of these terms
in the following chapters of the dissertation.
1.5.1

Decentralization

The idea of decentralization is based on the attempts to make governments understand

peoples demands and to respond to them accordingly by locating the
decision-making bodies closer to people (UNDP, 2003; World Bank, 2003).
According to Welsh and McGinn (1999), decentralization is the shift of governing
location in educational organizations and the transmission of authority from one or
level to another level. The location of authority might be the location of the position
or the governing body, such as central, provincial, or municipal government levels.
6

Decentralization reform in education usually intends to transmit power and

responsibility from the central level to local levels. However, it is possible that only
tasks and the administrative responsibilities rather than power are transferred during
the process (Neave & van Vught, 1994a). It can be perceived as the transmission of
conflicts and problems from a higher level to a lower one. Therefore, decentralization
may have either a conflict-reducing or a conflict-increasing function (Karlsen, 2000).

A pure decentralization process seldom actually occurs while it seems to be absorbed

into the existing centralized or semi-centralized structure instead, so centralization
and decentralization coexist in any one system (Rondinelli, 1990; Weiler, 1990).
There is a tension between decentralization efforts and the need for central control
(Weiler, 1990). Many studies have shown that total political or administrative
decentralization does not exist since varying degrees of centralization and
decentralization still co-exist in all policy-making concerning finances and personnel
(Bray, 1999; Hanson, 1995; King, 1998; Zajda, 2003).
1.5.2

Marketization

The marketization of higher education has several layers of meaning in this study.
First, the purpose of education has been changed. According to Holcombs education
marketing concept, the traditional concept of schools providing common welfare
needs to be changed to schools as marketplaces to provide services: the outcomes of
students learning are the products; parents and students are consumers; and school
staff become the sellers (Holcomb, 1993). Yin and Gordon (1994) further defined this
concept in higher education that marketization of higher education is a process in
which education becomes a commodity provided by competitive suppliers where
educational services are priced, and access to them depends on consumers
calculations and ability to pay.

Second, the administration of educational institutions has been changed. Kwong

(2000) identifies that marketization in education refers to the adoption of free market
practices in running schools, including approaches such as cutting production costs,
abandoning goods not in demand, producing only popular products, and advertising
products to increase sales and the profit margin. Affected by a governmental cut of
educational funding, educational institutions have to introduce a market mechanism or
market-like efforts to secure external moneys (Slaughter & Leslie, 1997).

Thirdly, marketization of higher education can also be defined as the planning and
managing of the exchange relations of higher education sectors with its various
markets for survival and success (Q. Yin & Gordon, 1994). The relationship between
higher education institutions and other social sectors has been changed. Higher
education institutions are no longer closed systems in which members communicate
only with each other while producing knowledge and scholars. Under fiscal pressures,
they have to meet demands of national construction and needs from market and other
social sectors.
1.5.3

Organizational change

Nowadays, higher education institutions face increasingly complex external social,

economic, and political environments which shape the landscape of postsecondary
education (Paul, 2005). Institutions encounter both qualitative and quantitative
changes in many aspects of its governance, administration, teaching, or research.
Change may be an alteration in the structures, processes, or behaviors in a system, or
the introduction of new ideas, behaviors, or processes to an organization (Damanpour
& Evan, 1984; Zaltman & Duncan, 1977). For instance, universities need to deal with
the changes in student population and composition, the expanding knowledge realm,
and the dynamic competitive and collaborative relationship with industries, etc. All
these internal and external changes may bring changes to institutional governance or
decisions on research, curriculum, and admission (Browning, 2006; Gonsales & Dee,
8

2004).

Generally, there are two major types of organizational changes: transformational and
incremental changes. Transformational changes usually come with significant
modifications on existing structures or strategies or the attachment of innovative
components that may change the mission of an institution (Bess & Dee, 2008).
Therefore, careful investigation and strategic planning in advance is needed.
Incremental changes means adding less influence on existing organizational structures
or strategies. Nevertheless, the long-term effect of incremental changes may also be
critical. When the accumulation of incremental changes reaches a certain level,
transformational changes may be triggered (Bess & Dee, 2008).

Higher education has been criticized for slow response to both internal and external
demands for changing. Furthermore, it has been noted that higher education
institutions prefer incremental changes rather than transformational changes to obtain
a higher degree of stability and to avoid intensive conflicts (Lindblom, 1959).
However, incremental changes are usually conducted in an unplanned way and
sacrifice the efficiency. Incremental changes in higher education institutions cannot
address needs effectively from public and industry since they are not guided by clear
and strategic missions and plans, and therefore it is difficult to reach the intended
goals (Keller, 1983).
1.5.4

Academic unit

In this research, an academic unit is a branch of teaching or learning in a Chinese

university. It is similar to a faculty in a typical Western style university. In Western
universities, faculty is usually used to categorize disciplines, such as the Faculty of
Science or the Faculty of Engineering. In China, (xueyuan) is used to name the
administration layer between university and department. Typically,
(xueyuan) may be translated into faculty, school, or college.
9

Figure 1.1. The general structure of Chinese universities

(xueyuan) is a unit of a university managerial system and the end point of the
university administration power structure. In this study, the academic unit refers to a
software engineering school in a Chinese research university.
1.6 Limitations of the Study
One of the limitations, as well as a considerable advantage of this study, is my status
as a former faculty member in the studied school. As a former insider, I have a deep
understanding of the case and possess close personal relationships with leaders,
faculty, and staff in the school. This identity has helped me to get critical internal
documents and establish trust easily with informants. However, it is also very likely
that I stand in a biased position during data collection and data analysis. For instance,
the selection of informants might be biased since it is based on my knowledge on the
school. Moreover, the common understanding of many events and opinions with
informants may also reduce my sensibility in certain issues.

In China, personal influence on decision-making is very strong. For instance, a

10

university presidents leadership style and his academic beliefs and interpersonal
skills can affect the development of a university to a great extent. Similarly, a deans
personality can heavily influence his/her decision-making and thus affect the
development of a faculty/school. However, it is difficult to identify and isolate the
influence. Therefore, I mention this in the dissertation and make an assumption that
people would follow common-agreed logic to make decisions. Nevertheless, I am
aware that this may have influence on the conclusion of the study.

Another limitation is the timing of the study. The studied school has been set up for
less than ten years and it is still in the early stages of its development. So it is difficult
to develop a well-rounded pattern of development based on its short history.
Meanwhile, some events that happened in the initial phase have special features
which are not typical for a well-developed faculty. Therefore, the representativeness
of the conclusions drawn from these features may be reduced.

Finally, the external validity is a limitation of this research. The findings and
conclusions obtained in this study may be applicable to this specific case only, not
suitable to be applied to other engineering faculties in other Chinese universities.
However, case study relies on analytical generalization. By comparing the empirical
results of the case study with previously developed theories, existing theories could be
expanded and generalized (R. K. Yin, 1994). The purpose of the study is not to
generalize the conclusions suitable for all the faculties in Chinese universities and it is
unnecessary to do so. The goal of the study is to enrich the existing theories and
literature. Furthermore, this study has been conducted in the context of Shanghai,
which is one of the most rapidly developing coastal cities in China. There is the
maturity

of

higher

education

system,

degree

of

marketization,

and

internationalization in Shanghai where the higher education system is one of the most
developed in China.

Applying generalizations of this studys findings to the entire

nation is not possible because the development of a Chinese higher education system
is highly unbalanced and diversified across the whole country.
11

1.7 Organization of the Dissertation

This dissertation consists of eight chapters.

Chapter one provides an overview of the study, including the rationales of the study,
the statement of research problems, definitions of important terms, research questions,
and limitations of the research. Chapter two summarizes the existing important
literature on decentralization, marketization, and organizational change. The literature
on decentralization and marketization constructs the macro policy environment of the
development of the selected case. The chapter also selects and illustrates some
relevant organizational theories which will be used to build the theoretical framework
of the research. The third chapter outlines the research design, techniques to collect
and process data, and some methodological issues encountered in this research.

Chapter four introduces the research context of the study which helps to understand
the environment of the studied academic unit. It includes both the institutional and
disciplinary background. The fifth chapter describes the establishment of the school
and further gives the most important motivation for making changes the legitimacy
of existence. The next two chapters describe and interpret the changes made in
administration and teaching/research, respectively. These two chapters are the main
components of the study and build the basis of the research outcomes. The last
chapter

includes

discussion

on

the

findings,

implication

for

practice,

recommendations for future research, and then conclusions.

12

Chapter Two Literature Review and Theoretical

Framework
In this chapter, I would like to review current literature relevant to my study to see
what has been done by other researchers and where my study is located in the
theoretical knowledge base. After giving a detailed literature review, I will introduce
some organizational theories which construct the theoretical framework I used to
analyze research data, conduct discussion, and draw conclusions.

According to Clarks triangle of coordination, a higher education system always sits

somewhere within the triangle based on it characteristics of state authority, academic
oligarchy, and market (Clark, 1983b). Before the higher education reform started in
the 1980s, the Chinese higher education system copied the Soviet Union model which
was a relatively pure case of the state over market and oligarchy interaction (Burn,
1971; Glowka, 1971).

Figure 2.1

Chinas location in Clarks triangle of coordination

Since the 1980s, Chinese higher education has gradually moved towards the market
along with the national economic reform and the decentralization reform in education.
The movement towards market and the delegation of administrative power to lower
levels are the two important trends in the current round of higher education reform.
13

Therefore, marketization and decentralization are considered two very important

aspects affecting Chinese higher education institutions. In my study, I would therefore
like to choose these two aspects and try to find out how these two forces influence the
development of an academic unit in a Chinese university.
2.1 Decentralization
The decentralization reform has been widely observed in the world, from developed
to developing countries. In each higher education system, it has some common
characteristics as other systems and its own special features.
2.1.1

Concepts

The idea of decentralization is based on the attempts to make governments understand

peoples demands and to respond to them accordingly by locating the
decision-making bodies closer to people (UNDP, 2003; World Bank, 2003).
According to Welsh and McGinn (1999), decentralization is the shift of governing
location in educational organizations and the transmission of authority from one or
level to another level. The location of authority might be the location of the position
or the governing body, such as a central, provincial, or municipal level of government.

Decentralization reform in education is usually intended to transmit power and

responsibility from the central level to local levels. However, during the process it
may be only tasks and the administrative responsibilities being transferred rather than
the shift of power from the higher to lower level. Therefore, it can also be perceived
as the transmission of conflicts and problems from a higher level to a lower one.
Therefore,

decentralization

may

have

either

conflict-reducing

or

conflict-increasing function (Karlsen, 2000).

A pure decentralization process seldom actually occurs. Commonly, it seems to be

absorbed into the existing centralized or semi-centralized structure instead, so
14

centralization and decentralization coexist in any one system (Rondinelli, 1990;

Weiler, 1990). Hence, decentralization and centralization movements in two directions
will normally lead to tension (Karlsen, 2000).

Weiler (1990) presents a critical view of decentralization strategies where there is

tension between decentralization efforts and the need for central control. Many studies
have shown that total political or administrative decentralization does not exist since
varying degrees of centralization and decentralization still co-exist in all
policy-making concerning finances and personnel (Bray, 1999; Hanson, 1995; King,
1998; Zajda, 2003).

Among all the important drives for decentralization, accountability has been
considered the way to improve efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and choice (Samoff,
1990; Welsh & McGinn, 1999). However, some assumed benefits of decentralization
might cause inequity in education. A decentralized system constrains the
governments ability to equalize opportunity across regions and households (Burgess,
1997). In centralized systems, central authorities could redistribute financial and
human resources by extracting those resources from well-endowed regions to poorly
endowed regions (Bray, 1991).

Empirical studies of decentralization reforms over time found that decentralization

reforms are normally initiated from the top by the authorities at the central level, but
not from the bottom at general publics requests (Karlsen, 2000). Under this
circumstance, it is understandable that decentralization reforms have often led to new
central legislation and regulations (Karlsen, 2000).
2.1.2

Decentralization in higher education

It has been a general trend for government to reduce public funding to higher
education and lead to the current fiscal crisis of higher education (Altbach, 1997). The
15

burden of funding higher education is being shifted more and more to students and
their families. Furthermore, with a limited government budget, higher education is
being asked to be more accountable for how its diminishing portion of public
financial support is spent (R. Yang, 2003). This has therefore changed the relationship
between government and higher education systems and the degree of institutional
autonomy.
2.1.2.1 Government and higher education relationship
The relationship between government and higher education institutions reflects the
variety of historical, political, and cultural factors (Sawyerr, 1994). The changes in the
state and higher education have powerfully generated the changes in the relationship
between them (Hankel & Little, 1999). From the perspective of government
regulation, two basic models can be distinguished: state control model and state
supervision model (Neave & van Vught, 1994a).

State control model

The state control model could be described as the combination of authority of state
bureaucracy and faculty guilds (Neave & van Vught, 1994a). Traditional European
education systems have been relatively pure state control systems since the state has
created the systems, almost completely financed them, and therefore been the most
powerful regulator of the system (Neave & van Vught, 1994a).

In the state control model, senior chaired professors also hold considerable power at
the lower level of the system (Neave & van Vught, 1994b). The institutional
administrative level is rather weak and often bypassed while making system-wide
decisions (Clark, 1983b). When the state controls the appointments of chair holders,
the model represents the purest example of the state control model (Neave & van
Vught, 1994a). In this case, the state has a major influence on the system.
16

However, while the globalized market process has changed states interests and public
demands, traditional state control model systems have gone through various reforms.
Universities independence has been reinforced and they have been given greater
autonomy (Merrien & Musselin, 1999). Faculty leaders power of ruling the internal
administration of institutions has been gradually limited while other parties participate
in the decision-making process (Prost, 1968). An institutional dynamic has been
fostered within universities, the presidents position has been strengthened, and the
state-university relationship has been changed (Merrien & Musselin, 1999).

The state-only funding has no longer been a reality. Higher education institutions are
increasingly expected to function according to the principles of the market (Kehm,
2006). The state became less involved in developing, implementing, and controlling
nation-wide rules and are more involved in regulative interventions (Merrien &
Musselin, 1999; Schimank, Kehm, & Enders, 1999). Local authorities increased their
interest in higher education and were more involved in planning the universitys
development as well as financing (Musselin, 2006). Industries have shown a growing
interest in higher education and increasing support to higher education, as well
(Merrien & Musselin, 1999). Higher education institutions have acquired more power
to shape their own development and direction, resulting in greater institutional
diversity throughout the system (Kehm, 2006).

State supervision model

The state supervision model shows far less governmental influence on higher
education. The states role is supervising the higher education system to assure
academic quality and maintain a certain level of accountability (Neave & van Vught,
1994a). Government does not apply detailed regulations and strict control to the
higher education system. It rather respects institutional autonomy and stimulates the
self-regulating capabilities of institutions (Neave & van Vught, 1994a).
17

Higher education institutions are regarded as independent, self-governing bodies and

responsible for managing their own financial, administrative, and academic affairs
(Aslen, 1996). The influence of the institutional trustees and administrators is strong
while the authority of the faculty is nevertheless substantial (Neave & van Vught,
1994a).

The influence of government is rather limited and there is either a weak or no

formally organized system of national governmental control (Neave & van Vught,
1994a). Government supported higher education through funding and budget, and the
allocation of budget and funding, have relied on various academic or professional
committees (Eckel & King, 2006).

Since the 1970s, governments in many state-supervision countries have sharply

reduced the funding for higher education, followed by the introduction of a
businesslike managerial system and an approach of quality and performance
monitoring (Shattock, 2006). The allocation of grants to institutions has been
according to their conditions and universities have been stimulated to compete with
each other (Neave & van Vught, 1994a).

The authority at the state level has been growing, but is still rather weak compared to
the level of state influence in the European model (F. Newman, 1987). The
governmental regulation mostly concerns the mechanisms for quality assessment and
the regulation of awarding degrees (Berdahl & Millett, 1991). The state does not
directly intervene in the administration in detail. Instead, the government has applied
policies to change the financing structure and implement a market mechanism. Higher
education institutions have to change accordingly to meet public demand and to
survive international competition.

Comparing these two models, the state control model is based on the strategy of
18

rational planning and control while the state supervision model reflects the strategy of
self-regulation. They are the two ends of a continuum and the location of a higher
education system along this continuum is determined by the degree of state control on
institutional functions (Neave & van Vught, 1994a). In reality, it is difficult to find
these two models in practice at higher education institutions in most countries. It is
always a matter of balancing among alternative forms for effective governance (Clark,
1983a).
2.1.2.2 Institutional autonomy (Western style)
Basically, autonomy means the power to govern without outside controls (Berdahl,
Graham, & Piper, 1971). Institutional autonomy is different from academic freedom.
Academic freedom is a privilege of university teachers and/or researchers and it may
be protected in an institution with great autonomy (Ashby, 1966). But academic
freedom may also be guaranteed by a government that does not impose heavy controls
on a higher education institution (Neave & van Vught, 1994a).

Institutional autonomy refers to the universities responsibility to interact with their

environments, and includes their capacity and responsibility to manage the demands
of different external stakeholders (Hackl, 2000). Usually, it is a prior condition of
response to competition. Institutional autonomy could be classified as substantive and
procedural autonomy. Substantive autonomy is the power of a higher education
institution to determine its own goals and programs, and procedural autonomy is the
power of a higher education institution to determine the means by which its goals and
programs will be pursued (Berdahl, 1990).

The autonomy, control, and coordination of higher education is often characterized by

an interplay of three forces (Clark, 1983b). First, there are market forces, which in
theory can exert significant influence in the nature and direction of higher education.
This is particularly important in countries where the market forces are sufficient to
19

determine the employment opportunities of university graduates. In addition, in

developed countries, the private sector can fund a significant portion of university
operations, including endowments, chairs, scholarships, and physical infrastructure
(van Vught, 1992). Second, governments can significantly control and coordinate the
governance of higher education through a variety of mechanisms, including direct
funding, appointment of key executives, legislative regulations limiting academic
freedom, and day to day direct interference in the operations of higher learning
institutions (Clark, 1983b). This form of control was typical in the communist system
of higher education and applies in many developing countries (Omari, 1994). The
third form of control is the academic oligarchy which has significant influence on the
management and operations of higher education. The state typically plays a minimal
supervising role, and market forces are mediated by professional decisions of the
professors (Clark, 1983b).

Sizer and Mackie (Sizer & Mackie, 1995) have argued that universities enjoy
substantial freedoms in the framework of accountability. Their dependence on the
state for funding largely limits their freedom from that state. Within the framework of
accountability which defines the relationship between the state and higher education
institutions, institutions may enjoy considerable freedom to manage their own affairs.
If government is willing to accept their responsibility as the first line of public
accountability, the state should be able to respect the institutional autonomy (Sizer &
Cannon, 1999).

It has been argued that the additional universities responsibility to provide services to
other stakeholders than the state may strengthen universities autonomy by making
them less dependent on the state budget (Hackl, 2000). However, this may raise other
questions, such as the influence and pressure on the freedom to teach and to do
research, the increase of tension between self-government and individual autonomy,
and the responsibility of universities to provide services to different clients affecting
academic labor and production, etc.
20

In the past decades, the degree of autonomy has been increased in state-control model
countries along with the ongoing higher education reform. Each country has its own
approach closely related to the fundamental structure of the system and the attitude of
the state government and higher education institutions.

In France, after a series of higher education reform, the power of institutional

administration has been greatly enhanced. The independence of the universities has
been reinforced and the collective dimension of the university has been strengthened
by giving it greater autonomy (administrative, budgetary, and pedagogical) and by
bestowing it with decision-making organs (Merrien & Musselin, 1999). The power
distribution in traditional French universities has been changed from two poles of the
state and the disciplines to a balance among three actors which are the state,
university administration, and the collective of faculty, staff, and students. French
universities are making decisions about matters on which they were previously unable
to decide and they have become more successful than before in making decisions
(Merrien & Musselin, 1999).

In Germany, the higher education framework law was issued in 1998 and it loosed
governments control over higher education institutions. Higher education Institutions
became more autonomous and were able to organize their tasks in more efficient and
competitive ways. However, this autonomy came with conditions. Government
adopted new instruments to enable higher education institutions to respond to
demands more flexibly and to evaluate institutions on the quality of teaching,
accountability, and contract management (Kehm, 2006). Within the institutions,
internal organizational reforms were undertaken to develop individualized profiles
and missions, to strengthen the roles of rectors and deans, and to strengthen
institutional management. The traditional collegial model of governance has been
gradually dissolved and more hierarchical models of governance have been
introduced (Kehm, 2006).
21

In typical state-supervision model countries, the situation is different. In UK, higher

education institutions are chartered corporations, responsible for their own
management. Their autonomy and academic freedom are guaranteed by different laws
(Shattock, 2006). UK universities have been given a quasi-private status, with a high
degree of self-government, and constitutional protection from external regulations or
direction (Fulton, 2002). The government does not intervene in the higher education
institutions directly, but it has stronger influence on internal affairs by applying
external policies.

American institutions enjoy even greater autonomy and the influence of the
institutional trustees and administrators is stronger. They are also chartered
corporations which are responsible for their own administration. University boards are
the legal agents for the institutions and they grant much of the administrative power of
operating the institutions to university presidents (Eckel & King, 2006). Meanwhile,
most universities also rely on shared governance between faculty and administrators
for important institutional decisions. The primary organizational structure for shared
governance is the faculty senate (Eckel & King, 2006). The self-government status of
U.S. higher education institutions is protected by constitutions and therefore lasts for a
longer time. Even as the relationship between the government and institutions changes
a little, the autonomy stays unchanged. However, some government policies to ensure
education quality do have some indirect influence on institutions and they have to
react accordingly to meet the demands of the market and the public.

In recent years, there has been a trend that the middle management layer of higher
education institutions, which represents deans and department heads or other
equivalent positions, has ever increasing power with increasing academic and
financial responsibilities (Deem, 2004; Meek, Goedegebuure, Santiago, & Carvalho,
2010a). These middle-level managers act as important roles of intermediacy between
university control and academic values. In many institutions, deans and department
22

heads are no longer elected by academics but appointed by a central governance body
and they are expected to provide strong administrative and academic leadership
(Meek, Goedegebuure, et al., 2010a).
2.1.3

Decentralization in Chinese higher education

Historically, Chinese scholars were encouraged to take the responsibility of managing

the state in order to realize their ideals. As the result, Chinese universities serve the
countrys development through education and research (Min, 2004). Compared to
western universities, Chinese universities are more responsive to national and local
development needs, embracing a close articulation between institutional strategic
planning and national and local development plans (p.462) (Zha, 2011). Therefore,
state control has always been there, affecting the development of higher education
through

different

ways.

Through

decentralization,

government

exchanged

management for institutional accountability. At the same time, it tightened control on

knowledge production (Zha, 2011).

The motivation and implementation of decentralization in China is different from that

in the western world, but Chinese government has also been struggling with the issue
of centralization and decentralization of higher education almost since the founding of
the Peoples Republic of China in 1949 (Hayhoe & Zha, 2006).
2.1.3.1 Evolution of the government and higher education relationship until 1952
The Chinese higher education system started at the beginning of the 20th century,
copying western models, mainly from the United States and Germany. During the
period of the National Party in power, the relationship between state government and
universities was loose and universities enjoyed relatively high autonomy in teaching,
research, and administration (Hayhoe, 1999). In the early 1950s after Chinese
Communist Party (CCP) took the power, the higher education system had gone
through major reconstruction following the experiences of the former Soviet Union. A
23

need for much greater integration and uniformity among all institutions in the system
was claimed while no autonomy or academic freedom was considered an issue
(Hayhoe, 1999). This indicated the change of the government-university relationship
and the end of institutional autonomy in China until the start of education reform in
the 1980s.

In 1952, the central government started the nationalization to reorganize all higher
education institutions based on a state control model and the newly nationalized
system was characterized by central planning of higher education development (Min,
1994). The nationalization and specialization of higher education institutions in the
1950s still has influence on structure and the governance of todays Chinese higher
education system (Min, 1994).

Neave & van Vught (1994a) argued that in a specific social/economic development
phase, the state control model might be the reasonable approach to regulate a higher
education system. China, in that particular period, needed a powerful government to
make a unitary plan for the education development of the whole country and release
the educational problems as quickly and efficiently as possible (Min, 1994, 2004).
However, the efficiency of the single state planning model could not meet the
demands of national development later on, so the Chinese central government had
undertaken several experiments of decentralization.
2.1.3.2 Decentralization in higher education before the 1980s
In 1953, Chinese higher education went through the first round of decentralization;
comprehensive and polytechnic universities were placed under the direct jurisdiction
of the central Ministry of Higher Education, while specialized institutions were placed
under the control of relevant central ministries (Hayhoe & Zha, 2006). This round of
change was functional decentralization for better management of institutions in
different fields (Min, 2004).
24

During the Great Leap Forward period, many institutions under the central ministries
other than the Ministry of Higher Education had been transferred to local
governments (Y. Liu, 1993). It was a territorial decentralization to let higher education
institutions serve local economic development needs. The Chinese central government
tried to make a more flexible higher education system, but it failed to fit into the
political and social context after the Great Leap Forward failed (Hayhoe & Zha,
2006).

The Cultural Revolution could be seen as another round of decentralization since all
national institutions were transferred under the control of local governments (Hayhoe
& Zha, 2006). It was chaos that no university could ever run normally since the local
government had never paid attention to teaching or research. Then, after 1976, all
these priorities were reversed while the nationally unified entrance examination for
higher education, standardized enrollment and job assignment plans, unified curricula,
and systematized rules and regulations were all restored (Hayhoe & Zha, 2006).

The several rounds of centralization and decentralization efforts before the 1980s
show the specialty in Chinese higher education. The Chinese government applied
different strategies in different periods to better fit the concurrent economic
development needs. Different from what happened in the western world, the
economic factor was never the key factor affecting Chinese government
policy-making, but politics played the main role.

After the Cultural Revolution, along with the shift to the market economy and the
growth of diverse elements of economy, China needed huge manpower to meet the
needs of rapid development. Thus, the pure state control model in higher education
faced challenges (Hayhoe & Zha, 2006).

25

2.1.3.3 Decentralization in higher education after the 1980s

This round of decentralization is different from the abovementioned rounds. It to a
large extent changed the administration of the higher education system. The reform of
administrative system has focused on regulating the relationship between the central
and local governments and the relationship between government and higher education
institutions (J. Hu, 2006).

Relationship between government and higher education institutions

The Chinese government has released a series of policies over the last twenty years to
implement decentralization in higher education (R. Yang, Vidovich, & Currie, 2007).
As part of the national economic reforms started in the 1980s, local authorities have
been allowed to retain much of their income for local development. At the same time,
the size of higher education has increased continuously. When the central government
could not afford the financial burden of the fast expanding higher education system, it
invited local government to share the responsibility (Hayhoe & Zha, 2006; R. Yang,
et al., 2007). In 1993, the Outline for Educational Reform and Development in China
proposed that higher education institutions should be managed at two levels national
and provincial with the main responsibility being at the provincial level. In 1995,
more effective coordination in a number of areas was promulgated in a government
document, Some Opinions on Deeping Higher Education System Reform (Y. Zhou,
2001). Meanwhile, the central government shifted the power to local governments to
deal with policy-making and planning concerning local higher education development
(J. Hu, 2006). All these policies promoted collaboration between the central and local
governments as well as higher education institutions (J. Hu, 2006).

The diversification of funding sources has brought fundamental changes to the

Chinese higher education system. The funding from the market reinforces the market
force which exerts significant influence on the nature and direction of higher
26

education. The government changed the mechanism of the government control model,
and legislative regulations guaranteed some kind of institutional autonomy which
allows an individual institution to manage its own affairs (S. Hu, 2003).

By implementing a series of reform, the simple, relatively pure state-control structure

has been replaced by the complex mixed state-control and state-supervision structure
to fit in the more complex social-economic context in nowadays China. Seemingly,
the central government granted greater power to local governments and higher
education institutions. In fact, this decentralization intended to transmit more
administrative responsibility than power from the central level to local levels and to
higher education institutions.

Decentralization could be a solution to release the financial burden of higher

education because it transmits conflicts and problems from a higher level to a lower
one (Karlsen, 2000). In China, the central government adopted this strategy to pass
conflicts and difficulties to lower governments and higher education institutions. Now
it is the universities responsibility to finance themselves, so they have obtained some
compensation from the government institutional autonomy.

Institutional autonomy

The Western value of university autonomy clearly has some influence on Chinese
higher education, but autonomy in China usually means something different than the
concept in the Western world. In western literature, autonomy as independence is used
to emphasize universities avoiding external interference. For many years, scholars
found that the core value of western style autonomy could not fit in the Chinese
context. Finally, they found that Chinese knowledge traditions are more suited to a
notion of autonomy as self-mastery rather than to autonomy as freedom from
government intervention (p.88) (Hayhoe & Liu, 2010).
27

In China, autonomy (zizhu) is often seen as self-mastery, which allows universities to

act upon their own and respond to social needs within the framework of government
policies (Hayhoe, 1989b, 1999). The universities should support the country, so then
universities are given the power to take the responsibility to develop their own visions
and ideas (Hayhoe & Zhong, 2001). The nature of university autonomy in China
means the delegation of powers from the government to universities and colleges in
order to stimulate them into taking initiatives for development (Zhong, 1997). In 1993
the Chinese government changed the law, giving Chinese universities legal person
status. Since then, Chinese universities have increasingly experienced autonomy in
certain selected aspects such as funding, student recruitment, curriculum, and
international activities (Hayhoe & Liu, 2010).

Under the influence of marketization and decentralization in the higher education

sector, the autonomy of Chinese higher education institutions has been increased in
the form of government tending to manage universities through legislation, funding,
planning, provision of information, advice, and other necessary administrative means
(Ngok, 2006). In a study regarding university autonomy in Tsinghua University, the
researcher found that the university has the power to protect itself from government
intervention in some areas (Pan, 2009). Within the framework of government policies,
the university can make its own decisions to respond to social changes and meet
social needs.

A series of policy documents issued between 1985 and 1999 tended to grant more
autonomy to Chinese universities and bring market elements into their management
and operations (Hayhoe & Zha, 2006). In most regular universities, presidents hold
the responsibility for the formulation of policies and long-term goals and development
plans (Ngok, 2006). However, the government holds the right to appoint university
presidents. By this means the government could still regulate and guide institutions to
serve the needs of the party and the country. In 1998, the Higher Education Law
defined universities autonomy and status as legal entities (Chinese Central
28

Government, 1999).

The expansion of higher education has caused the increase in size of higher education
institutions. The old university-department structure could not fit the needs of internal
administration. The new university-faculty/school-department model has been applied
to most universities (Zeng, 1997). Institutions gradually shifted some management
power to the faculty/school level while shifting the financial responsibility at the same
time. Individual school/faculty should be responsible for its long term planning and
should fundraise accordingly (S. Hu, 2003). Deans in individual faculties are
responsible for making long-term plans for the development of the faculties. Faculties
thus enjoy autonomy and power in matters relating to teaching and research,
personnel, and resource allocation (Mok, 1997a).

It seems that universities have been granted more autonomy than before, but the
administrative relationship between governments and institutions does not have a
substantial change because universities are still treated as the appendix of the state (J.
Hu, 2006; Ngok, 2006; Pan, 2003). The unchanged, or even strengthened,
administrative relation would undoubtedly affect the independent management of
higher education institutions in the market economy system and perhaps contradict
the articles on the decision-making power of higher education institutions in the
Higher Education Law (J. Hu, 2006). Furthermore, all the policy documents have
never restricted the power of the state, and the government still holds the power to
manage, direct, and punish higher education institutions (Hayhoe & Zha, 2006; Pan,
2003).

Different from the response in western countries, institutional autonomy is not always
welcomed by Chinese higher education institutions. With regard to institutional
autonomy, universities make decisions on their own while taking responsibility for
their decisions (Zhong, 1997). Some universities encounter critical problems if they
cannot adapt to the transformation healthily.
29

2.1.4

Summary

From current literature, it could be found that many higher education systems in the
world are going through the centralization/decentralization struggle. In the continuum
of state control and state supervision model as two ends, every country moves back
and forth to find the best-fit position to best serve the country. The diversification of
the funding sources for higher education has become the rationale of changing the
relationship between government and universities (J. Hu, 2006).

In typical state-supervising systems, the relationship between government and higher

education institutions basically remains unchanged although the government enhances
its supervision function through evaluation policies. The main purpose is to increase
accountability and respond to the needs of the general public. The autonomy
possessed by institutions still protects institutions from direct interference from
external forces.

The changes of traditional state-control systems are relatively radical. The

governments in many such countries have gradually loosened the direct control on
higher education institutions while adding more responsibilities to them. The biggest
challenge is the financial crisis for most institutions. The autonomy comes with costs.

The context of decentralization reform is critical and each country adopts its own
strategy to implement the change. For instance, typical continental systems in France
and Germany went different ways in implementing the decentralization policy.
However, these reforms have some common features. First, the government has
loosened the direct control of higher education and given more freedom and power to
these institutions. Second, the changes have always been accompanied by budget cuts
from the government. Governments tend to force higher education institutions to bear
more responsibility to support themselves. Third, the purposes of the reform are
various, such as reducing financial burden, increasing accountability, increasing
30

efficiency, etc.

As the government has shifted more decision making power to institutions, the
institutions have been challenged by bearing the responsibility of managing
themselves. The governance of universities has been changed as has the internal
power structure of institutions. Furthermore, universities have been put forward to
face the external world, no longer with the protection from government. University
administrators have to learn to deal with various internal and external stakeholders
and forces. As Clark said, it is always a matter of fit to balance among alternative
forms for effective governance (Clark, 1983a).

There is a great deal of literature on the issues of new relationships between

government and higher education institutions as well as on university governance and
autonomy. From the literature, we could conclude that most countries are walking on
the road towards the destination of universities having more autonomy and increasing
accountability and efficiency. Research has been done in both developed and
developing countries and found a similar pattern of changes, although the rationale for
doing so may be different.

From this literature, it can be concluded that decentralization is an appropriate

solution for many problems with various higher education systems. Giving power to
lower units could increase accountability, efficiency, and effectiveness. However,
most studies have neglected the possible need for centralized control to ensure quality
and equality. Lack of the holistic view might produce other types of problems and
hinder the development of higher education systems. This may be especially critical
in developing countries where the current higher education development situations are
unbalanced.

In China, the decentralization reform of the Chinese higher education system has
changed the relationship between central and local governments and the relationship
31

between government and universities. The old state-planning and state-control model
have been gradually changed to more flexible and market-oriented models. The
central government changed the role of controller and manager to coordinator and
monitor. It tends to manage the higher education system through policies and
regulation rather than direct administrative commands and control. Several laws and
regulations have been issued in the past three decades to set the framework for higher
education institutions to operate.

The newly established system mainly relies on local governments to finance and
manage higher education institutions. Therefore, higher education institutions are
required to respond to the needs of local economic development and meet labor
market demands. Along with the emergence of fee-paying students, students and their
families have become a very important sponsor of Chinese higher education. Their
inquiry of increasing accountability, quality, and efficiency has become an important
rationale to deepen the decentralization reform. Universities have to develop their
strategic plans to meet the requirements from various external forces and make
changes based on their context.

The new policy framework has provided more autonomy to universities than at any
time in the past, while also challenging them to take more responsibility for social
development. Like it or not, Chinese universities have been given more power and
responsibility. Even the lower levels within institutions enjoy greater autonomy in
administration. The new university-faculty-department structure has become popular
in Chinese universities and the newly established faculty level is bearing most of the
daily administrative duties.

The decentralization reform in China has some common features with changes in
other parts of the world. The rationale and purpose of the reform are more or less
similar to other developing countries. The general track of changes is also similar to
others. However, the social, economic, and cultural contexts have decided that the
32

reform in China is different in many aspects.

Chinese universities were established to serve the country right from the beginning.
The purpose of the university has been different from that in western countries.
Therefore, the role of government in the higher education system is different. The
government is not only the funder of higher education, but also the consumer of the
service. The governments needs and inquiries are important to higher education
institutions. Even though the relationship between the government and higher
education has become loose, the goal of higher education, which is serving the
country, has not been modified much. Universities should consider countries needs as
the highest priority.

Chinese academics view the purpose of higher education differently from their
colleagues in western countries. Western ideas of university autonomy have been
imported to China for a century, but the understanding of autonomy has never been
closed to the concept in the west. Institutional autonomy in China does not mean
independence from government intervention. In the Nationalist Party arena,
academics were given limited freedom under the highest priority of serving the
country. After 1949, the freedom was reduced to serving the country only. Since the
decentralization reform in the 1980s, the higher education institutions have given
more power to self-regulate. But this freedom has come with the condition that the
universities should serve the needs of countries construction.

The Chinese government has loosened the direct control of higher education, but the
monitoring of the system is not yet well developed. The development of higher
education systems as well as institutions is in fact in a chaotic situation without much
regulation and direction. The government is learning how to monitor but not directly
control the system and the institutions are learning to make use of their autonomy to
sustain their development.
33

At the institutional level, the universities tend to obtain more power, as well as budget,
from the government through negotiation and bargaining. They keep testing the
bottom-line of the government and move back and forth. The policy framework in
China has not been perfected and has left plenty of space for operation and
negotiation. From this point of view, the freedom that Chinese universities possess is
much greater than what has been defined and regulated by policy documents. As Pan
(2009) described the semi-independence of Tsinghua University, the degree of
independence really depends on whether or how much the universities fight for their
autonomy.

Extended to the heartland of universities, academic units (faculties, departments,

research institutes, or other types of units) possess even greater freedom than before.
Considering their specific disciplinary features, they may possess much more freedom
than people think. When regulations reach the bottom units of universities, they have
to be treated flexibly to cope with these special features. The real situation is
underestimated and needs further investigation. In China, university administration
holds the control of academic units by appointing the heads of these units and
evaluating the units regularly. However, some people believe that academic units have
the freedom and room to deal with the control and evaluation by persuading,
influencing, or even manipulating internal/external forces and interest groups.

The relationship between government and institutions and the relationship between
institutions and their internal academic units are more complex than those mentioned
in existing literature. The relationship is dynamic and the changes of relationship
depend on many factors, such as the power strength of each party, the political or
economic situation, or even the personality of leadership. When analyzing
government-institutional relationships or autonomy, context must be comprehensively
taken into consideration.

34

2.2 Marketization
The limit of the resources for the state to support the sustainable development of
higher education has been acknowledged during the past several decades. Central
control of higher education systems has become less prominent while the support
from market forces has increased (Valimaa, 1999). Marketization of education has
become a worldwide phenomenon (Kwong, 2000; Meek, 2000; Williams, 1997).
Market solutions have been increasingly found in social policy as well as in education
policy (Gewirtz, Ball, & Bowe, 1995; Mok, 2000a). When the market meets
education, they produce a new phenomenon which has brought deep changes to the
existing education systems.
2.2.1

Concepts

In this section, three related definitions will be introduced: marketization, academic

capitalism and managerialism. They are all commonly used in discourses of market
influence on higher education and closely related some common issues, such as the
market influence or market mechanism. However, they are different concepts
covering different areas.

Marketization

Chen, Wu, and Xie (2000) described marketization as "a process where the market
mechanism in an economy plays an increasingly importation role in resource
allocation, the economy relies on market mechanisms, and the market system evolves
from generation, growth to mature." They gave two types of marketization in the
history: the transformation from primitive economy to market economy, and the
transformation from central-planned economy to market economy. In the second form
of marketization, the governments direct intervention to economic activities and the
planning mechanism becomes weaker while spontaneous market adjusting becomes
more and more important (Z. Chen, et al., 2000).
35

Holcomb (1993) describes in his education marketing concept that the traditional
concept of school, which is a place providing common welfare, needs to be changed
to marketplaces which provide services with students learning outcomes being the
products, parents and students as consumers, and school staff becoming the sellers.

Kwong (2000) identifies that marketization in education refers to the adoption of free
market practices in running schools, including approaches such as cutting production
costs, abandoning goods not in demand, producing only popular products, and
advertising products to increase sales and the profit margin.

According to Yin and Gordon (1994), marketization is defined as a process that

education becomes a commodity provided by competitive suppliers, educational
services are priced, and access to them depends on consumer calculations and the
ability to pay (p.218). Marketization of higher education can therefore be briefly
defined as the planning and managing of the exchange relations of higher education
sectors with its various markets for survival and success (Q. Yin & Gordon, 1994).

Academic capitalism

The academic capitalism theory comes with the development of a new economy and
may be used to explain the process of higher education institutions integrating into the
new economy. It sees people, including faculty, staff, and students, using various
internal and external resources to create new blocks of knowledge linking higher
education institutions with the new economy (Slaughter & Rhoades, 2004).

From the second half of the twentieth century, universities and faculty have gradually
moved towards marketization as academics have become much like all other
professions (Brint, 1994; Slaughter & Rhoades, 1990). The globalization process in
the 1980s accelerated the process and changed the pattern of professional work.
36

Universities have been treated as organizations in other social sectors.

In a global economy, business and enterprises push government to invest more

resources to encourage and enhance innovation in order to keep them competitive in
the world market more successfully (Jessop, 1993). They also give pressure to the
government to support commercial research and development in both universities and
national research institutes or laboratories. By working together, they can deliver
competitive products and services to the global market (Slaughter, 1990; Slaughter &
Rhoades, 1996).

The massification of higher education intensified the difficult position of higher

education institutions. When more and more students entered university campuses, the
funds from government decreased sharply. In order to maintain the expanding
resources, universities had to compete for external money which was tightly
connected to commercial and applied research. The fiscal crisis forced higher
education to restructure and allow academic units to obtain resources from the market.
These units are more likely to generate external revenue through research grants or
contracts. Furthermore, governments tend to apply a conditional financial mechanism
to encourage institutions and faculty to put more effort into research and education
related to market. Therefore, universities and faculty actively collaborated with
government and industry to promote commercial innovation.

According to Slaughter and Leslie (1997), academic capital means institutional and
professorial market or market-like efforts to secure external moneys (p.209). In order
to maintain or expand external resources, faculty had to compete increasingly for
external dollars that were tied to market-related research, which was referred to
variously as applied, commercial, strategic, and targeted research, whether these
moneys were in the form of research grants and contracts, service contracts,
partnership with industry and government, technology transfer, or the recruitment of
more and higher fee-paying students. (Slaughter & Leslie, 1997)
37

The concept of academic capitalism can be used to describe the contradictory reality
of public research universities. Faculty and professional staff are expanding their
human capital stocks in competitive situations. They are academics acting as
capitalists in the public sector, similar to those industrial capitalists. Academic
capitalists are state-subsidized entrepreneurs, but they are also subsidized from the
same sources and for the same reasons as industrial capitalists due to the nature of the
research they are conducting.

Academic capital is a form of human capital possessed by academics. It is extremely

important to compete successfully in the new global economy powered by science and
technology. The individual, the university, the enterprise, and the society can benefit
from their specialized knowledge and skills through their work.

Managerialism

From the late nineteenth century, managerialism has been considered an influential
ideological movement in most modern industrial societies (Deem, Hillyard, & Reed,
2007; Enteman, 1993; Grey, 1999; Parker, 2002). It involves a framework of values
and beliefs regarding social arrangement and resource distribution and provides the
guideline and justification for practice (Townley, 2002; Trowler, 2010). These
practices help managers improve efficiency and effectiveness, respond to market
demands, and control employees behaviors.

There have generally been three forms of managerialism developed since the
twentieth century in OECD countries. The first form of managerialism, the
neo-corporatist managerialism, emerged from the WWI period and reached its peak in
the 1960s and 1970s (Middlemass, 1979; P. Williamson, 1989). Neo-corporatist
managerialism is an unstable combination of several economic policies and political
ideologies. It supports the interests and benefits of producer/provider classes and
38

related interest groups. Therefore, as a style of institutional governance and

organizational management, producer-led neo-corporatist managerialism was difficult
to sustain and lost its legitimacy in an increasingly complex conflict between
endogenous and exogenous changes (Clarke, 2004).

The second form of managerialism, neoliberal managerialism, emerged from the late
1970s.

The

essential

anti-provider/pro-consumer,

ideological
and

principles

are

anti-state/pro-market,

anti-bureaucracy/pro-network

and

generate

accordant norms and organizational logic. It believes in free markets and regards
private business enterprise as universal and infallible solutions to the governmental
and organizational problems in advanced capitalist societies (Frank, 2000; Korten,
1995; Rose, 1999). The implementation of market mechanisms and disciplines in
public services would drive towards strategic effectiveness and operational efficiency
(Du Gay, 2000; Osborne & Gaebler, 1993).

The third form of managerialism, neo-technocratic managerialism, emerged in the late

1990s. It has produced an ideological shift on public services provision and
management that moves away from some of the core elements of neoliberal
managerialism (Fergusson, 2000; J. Newman, 2001, 2002). The neo-technocratic
managerialism has redefined the policy priorities, organizational forms, and
managerial practices in public services by emphasizing personalization, customization,
localization, co-production, empowerment, etc. (Leadbeater, 2003).

Corporatist-led managerialism embraced a service provider-driven ideology and

adopted a bureau-professionalism form of governance, so the design, delivery, and
development of public services was largely in the hands of the professionals
(Clarke & Newman, 1997). On the contrary, the new managerialism, both neoliberal
and neo-technocratic forms, entails and intensifies market forces, performance
measurement and control, and consumer populism (Clarke, Gewirtz, & McLaughlin,
2000). It enhances cultural power, increases political rationality for the market, and
39

diminishes professional autonomy and control (Deem, et al., 2007).

New managerialism represents a framework of values and beliefs and a set of

practices associated with the framework. Some of the key values, beliefs, and
practices relevant to higher education could be listed as following (Clarke, et al., 2000;
Deem & Brehony, 2005; Kirkpatrick & Lucio, 1995; Le Grand & Bartlett, 1993;
Trowler, 2001, 2010): oriented to consumer and market but not producer;
emphasizing individualism; responsibility and budget shifting from centre to
periphery under careful monitoring; necessary strategic planning of changes; strong
public accountability; undermined professional autonomy; knowledge and learning
becoming commodity; academic capitalism in research.

Many people believe that markets are valued because they offered the best way of
allocating resources, providing incentives, and stimulating growth (Middleton, 2000).
The motivation for adopting a market mechanism is mainly based on the propositions
of finance, efficiency, accountability, and equity.

Finance
For the last several decades, fiscal decline in the higher education sector has
been extensive and universities in many countries have suffered budget cuts
(Cameron & Smart, 1998; Leydesdorff & Etzkowitz, 1997). Universities have to
turn to private and external sources for cost-sharing and cost-recovery (Bray,
1998; Johnstone, 1999; Meek & Wood, 1997; Welch, 1997; Williams, 1995).
Therefore, the states role of the sole provider of higher education has changed
(Cameron & Smart, 1998; Meek & Wood, 1997). The cost burden of financing
higher education has been increasingly shifted to the non-state sectors, especially
to parents and students (Johnstone, 1993).

More and more people believe that while higher education can benefit the whole
society, university graduates also gain both substantial financial and
40

non-economical benefits from their higher education (Boyer, 1993; Cameron &
Smart, 1998; Haplern, 1997; Welch, 1997; Whitty & Power, 2000). Therefore,
students should share the cost by paying fees (Woodhall, 1992).

Moreover, fee-paying is a good way to avoid the abuse of higher education

(Johnstone, 1993; Psacharopoulos, 1993). When a fee is charged, people tend to
be more thoughtful about their future career before enrollment and they are more
motivated to study hard and complete courses on time (Psacharopoulos, 1993).
Besides, fee-paying pushes higher education institutions to stay competitive.
Otherwise, students who are required to pay fees will choose other institutions to
enter (World Bank, 1994).

Efficiency
Even if it is still an argument, many people believe that increased cost-recovery
is a more efficient way of financing higher education (Glennerster, Falkingham,
& Barr, 1995; Haplern, 1997; Psacharopoulos, 1993). Compared to supplying
academic services directly or subsidizing institutions, the efficiency is higher if
the government buys the services from higher education providers or subsidized
students (Middleton, 2000; Williams, 1995). Furthermore, rigid centralized
planning systems are no longer suitable to catch up with the rapid development
of technology while competition and monitoring functions of market can
guarantee effectiveness and efficiency (Ball, 1990; Williams, 1997).

Accountability
The accountability of higher education has attracted more attention from the
public. Universities are now increasingly seen as economic units and the
relationship between universities and society has focused on reflexivity and
accountability (Valimaa, 1999). It is believed that the highly competitive
education marketplace can provide higher accountability because a university is
accountable when it meets the expectations and needs of its stakeholders
41

(Kwong, 2000; Ravich, 1999). Under the pressure of the market, performance
indicators can be extensively used to ensure accountability as well as efficiency
(Woodhall, 1992).

Equity
More and more people favor markets in higher education since they think that
choice and competition in the market system is more equitable (Cameron &
Smart, 1998; Gewirtz, et al., 1995; D. Halpern, 1997; S. Halpern, 1969; Welch,
1998; Williams, 1995; Woodhall, 1992). The equity comes from the belief that
people who gain higher education have higher earnings than those who are not
college graduates. Therefore, higher education should be financed by those
graduates themselves and not general taxpayers (Miao, 1997; Psacharopoulos,
1993). Students or their families should make contributions towards the costs of
obtaining the benefits based on both efficiency and equity. By releasing
government from the heavy burden of higher education, the state can allocate
limited resources to other more urgent needs and the rate of return should be
higher (Woodhall, 1988).
2.2.2

Marketization of higher education around the world

After World War II, higher education has moved from elite education to mass
education and become increasingly standardized and universalized (Dai, 2000).
However, the massification of higher education gradually becomes a heavy financial
burden to governments (Dai, 2000; Williams, 1997). In order to release the financial
burden and increase the efficiency, many countries started deregulation in higher
education systems by granting more autonomy to higher education institutions and
introducing a market mechanism into higher education (Dai, 2000; Dill, 1997; Dill &
Sporn, 1995; Williams, 1995).

While higher education is undergoing marketization, important changes have been

42

observed in the way that the higher education system is organized, controlled,
financed, and administrated. The concept of considering a university as a social
institution has changed to a mixture of institution, enterprise, and agency (Balderston,
1995; R. Yang, 2000).
2.2.2.1 Diversity of funding
Different countries have gone through different paths to diversify funding schemes. In
the U.S., state governments have carried great financial burden since the 1970s due to
the federal student assistance policies and the result of global economic competition.
The governments have then turned to a high tuition-high aid model of financing
public sector higher education. Governments have given aid to students but not to
institutions, so students have become consumers in the higher education marketplace
(Dill, 1997). This has led to increased competition between public and private
institutions. Students tuition fees have become one of the major sources of
institutions income. Besides tuition fees, universities have also received financial aid
from both federal and state governments which accounts for about 40% of their
income. Meanwhile, institutions have received funds from donations and the
cooperation with enterprises or commercial bodies by providing consultant services,
research, and staff training (Dai, 2000; Dill, 1997; Qiang, 1995).

The British government launched a series of reforms to reduce public expenditure in

higher education between 1979 and 1997. It removed all public subsidies for
non-European students, so universities became aggressive in recruiting foreign
students. The government also reduced funding and grants for higher education, so
higher education institutions had to respond by either reducing student enrollment to
maintain the high quality, or recruiting as many students as possible to compete for
resources. Both responses were driven by the market mechanism. The British
government continued to reduce general funds and increase competitions for
government money for specific initiatives in the mid 1980s. In 1985, the government
43

allowed the institutions to retain any external income and to receive some matching
funds from the government. This started the first explicit move towards commercial
marketization in British higher education. Commercial income from industry and
commerce rose rapidly. In 1988 and 1992, the Education Reform Act of Parliament
and Further and Higher Education Act transformed and evolved the higher education
system into a fully market-oriented system (Williams, 1997).

In France, the government took absolute control of higher education institutions. Most
funding of higher education came from the government, including the salaries of
teachers and administrators and money for buildings and facilities. However, this
situation has changed since the late 1980s when the government wanted to change the
relationship between university and government through negotiations and contracts
(Dai, 2000; Musselin, 2004). Meanwhile, municipal government and state-enterprises
were invited to join the management of higher education by the sharing of
expenditures and institutions which were supposed to improve efficiency accordingly
(Dai, 2000; Musselin, 2004). Collaboration with industry and business bodies has also
been encouraged by the government and universities have been forced to seek their
own positions in the market (Dai, 2000).

Under the current fiscal pressure, higher education institutions have to find alternative
funding for survival and development. It is then understandable that higher education
institutions turn to other social sectors for support. Furthermore, higher education
institutions have become more involved in community development and provide
services to the community and society when more parties besides the government
become their sponsors.
2.2.2.2 Decentralization of administrative management
The decentralization of administrative management covers two levels of devolution:
from the state to the institution, and within an institution, from the top management to
44

departmental level. In a highly competitive environment, responsiveness is crucial for

survival and development. Therefore, higher education institutions must respond
quickly and decisively in order to take advantage of market opportunities. In order to
stay dynamic and respond fast in competition, institutions must increase the level of
autonomy and the degree of freedom which determines the degree of effectiveness
and efficiency (Clark, 1995).

Market-oriented higher education needs a strong corporate style of management at the

institutional level and institutions should have more flexibility to determine their
goals and missions, courses to be offered, and areas of research to be undertaken
(Meek & Wood, 1997). At the institutional level, a similar trend of decentralization of
administrative management is found (Clark, 1997; Meek & Wood, 1997). By
devolution of administrative and financial responsibility to faculties, each faculty is
treated as a separate cost center. The management responsibilities of deans and
department heads has been increased and more power is consolidated for the lower
level of management (Apple, 1999). This process is obvious in traditional
state-control model countries. But in state-supervision systems, it is a different
situation in which the whole system remains unchanged.
2.2.2.3 Shift from institution-centered to student-centered
In a marketized education system, students become important sponsors of higher
education, so their needs must be considered as one of the priorities. Therefore,
faculty is under increasing pressure to treat students as customers and their
expectations are increasingly addressed (Clark, 1995; Fairclough, 1993; Kwong, 2000;
Siu & Wilson, 1995). Since students needs are closely connected to the labor market
demand, which is determined by economic development, the external social and
economic environment determines what disciplines and subjects are to be offered (S.
V. Scott, 1999).

45

Teaching methods become more learner-centered. Commercial principles, but not

educational values, become the principles in curriculum design. Courses are more
flexible in both delivery mode and structured to facilitate career prospects (Meek,
2000). Traditional subjects and departmental boundaries become vague and change
gradually (Welch, 1997). The differences of market demands cause inclination to
selected disciplines, and the unbalanced investment in different disciplines has
brought challenges to some specialized programs (K. M. Cheng, 1999; Clark, 1997;
Colclough, 1997).
2.2.2.4 Tension between internal market mechanism and non-profit academic value
In recent years, the concept of internal market or quasi-markets has been
introduced to create market pressures to enhance the effective and efficient delivery of
public services (Williams, 1997). This shift towards quasi-markets in public funding
has heavily affected the internal management of higher education institutions. The
bureaucratic control has been reinforced under the influence of marketization, so both
bureaucratic control and market features are increased. These controls are concerned
mainly with increased accountability for the use of public funds and liability to
external quality monitoring (Meek, 2000; Slaughter & Rhoades, 2004).

Although the market provides important incentives for internal efficiency, it fails to
provide the full measure of efficiency rightly desired by government stakeholders
(Massy, 2004). Universities are not completely driven by profits. Academic prestige
remains important. In this sense, universities are both profit maximizers and prestige
maximizers, in terms of their social weight (their positional value) and in terms of
their academic qualities (Marginson & Considine, 2000).
2.2.2.5 Increasing pressure for faculty members
Faculty members are now experiencing relatively heavy workloads and increasing
demands for accountability since staff accountability and productivity have been
46

increasingly emphasized in the education marketplace (Cantor, 1998; R. I. Miller,

1999; S. V. Scott, 1999). Quality assurance systems such as staff and student
evaluations have been implemented to ensure productivity and accountability even
though there is no widely agreed conclusion on the reliability and validity of these
kinds of evaluations (Comm & Mathaisel, 1998).

Besides their teaching duties, faculty members are also required to cooperate with
industry to get funds from external sources in order to become independent from the
central funding (Welch, 1997). Under the market-oriented climate, departments,
faculties, and universities which cannot meet the criteria of accountability and
efficiency are increasingly under threat of marginalization or even dissolution (Welch,
1997; Y. Zhou, 1998).
2.2.2.6 Tension between teaching effectiveness and research productivity
The balance of teaching and research has been broken. Faculty members are under the
pressure of getting research fund from external world, so faculty members are forced
to do more research. Universities tend to value faculty based on research productivity,
but this evaluation system encourages the improvement of technology-based
productivity only. Career paths have been mapped primarily by research output (S. V.
Scott, 1999). Students right of having high quality teaching is sacrificed that fewer
funds are now being devoted to instruction (Massy, 2004; Slaughter & Leslie, 1997).
Many faculty members are becoming alienated as their knowledge is increasingly
treated as a commodity that can be bought and sold (Arbor, 1993; Meek, 2000).
2.2.2.7 Shift of research orientation from basic to applied side
The emphasis of research has shifted from the basic to the applied side (Brown &
Cligent, 2000; J. Currie, 1998; Meek, 2000). Through government grants and
contracts, the orientation of research has been significantly influenced. The
orientation of state funded research has gradually turned toward commercially
47

relevant (Slaughter & Rhoades, 2004). Representatives from industry have gotten
involved with various grant committees to influence the allocation of research grants
and contracts. The government strategically invested more into research projects
which have commercial or economic development payoffs. (Feldman, Feller, Ailes, &
Roessner, 2002).

The main driving force behind this shift is sources of research funding, e.g. industrial
sectors, enterprises, and the governments. However, it is the market, not enterprises,
determining the direction of research (Brown & Cligent, 2000; Buchbinder, 1993; Fan,
1999; Welch, 1998). It is getting clearer that commercialization of scholarship is the
key factor in obtaining funding (Brown & Cligent, 2000; Fan, 1999). The objectives
of higher education have changed from producing and transmitting knowledge as a
social good for humans well-being to producing knowledge as a market good, a
sellable commodity (Meek, 2000).
2.2.2.8 Outsourcing of services
While running universities with market mechanism, services required to operate
universities smoothly are directly related to the effective and efficient use of funding.
Investments in most high cost supporting services have been cut and most of these
services are increasingly outsourced to private companies which offer the lowest bid
(McNay, 1995; Meek, 2000; Meek & Wood, 1997; Williams, 1997).
2.2.2.9 Academic capitalism at the department level
Academic departments are expected to increasingly orient themselves towards
activities and markets to generate revenues (Whalen, 1991). Within universities, some
academic units (such as science and engineering departments) are characterized as
productive units to generate revenue and subsidize other units which do not gain extra
money (Gumport, 1993). As the operating organs of higher education institutions,
departments have been observed to change towards market-oriented in academic
48

activities. Entrepreneurial culture has reached the core of higher education (Clark,
1998). Academic capitalism has reached the department level and influenced teaching
and research activities broadly.

Departments face increasing fiscal pressures, including declining government support,

shifting priorities (research vs. teaching; pure vs. applied, etc.), or increased
competition in resource allocation externally and internally. As universities receive
fewer funds from various levels of government, departments face internal fiscal
pressures accordingly (Slaughter & Rhoades, 2004). The market process in internal
resources allocation has been adopted and has made the process very competitive.
Therefore, departments are under pressure to find external funds to supplement the
gap. According to certain research, nearly two thirds of department heads in U.S.
research universities reported that it is necessary for them to generate revenue in order
to compensate for the gap between government funds and actual expenditures (Leslie,
Rhoades, & Oaxaca, 1999).

Universities have set up different kinds of internal mechanisms to manage budgetary

incentive systems (Slaughter & Rhoades, 2004). However, not all disciplines can
generate revenue from the external world. For example, disciplines such as arts and
social science lack the ability to attract external investors. As the result, science and
engineering departments generally have to bear the major responsibility of raising
funds. The relationship between departments and their external and internal
economies to a large extent decide the pattern of how departments respond to fiscal
pressures (Slaughter & Rhoades, 2004). Some emphasize increasing research funds
from the government while some partner with corporations.

Research entrepreneurism

Research universities have put forth great effort in competing for research funds from
various levels of government and governmental agencies. Departments as the
49

heartland of higher education institutions reacted actively to this change (Slaughter &
Rhoades, 2004). University administrators encourage departments efforts to compete
for government research grants and contracts since these funds are long-term, stable,
and with high prestige. Although more and more governmental funds are applied
oriented and commercial oriented, faculty are still fond of these funds and give them
very high priority. They think receiving state funded research grants and contracts is
the key to gaining research prestige and value this at the top of all types of external
funding (Slaughter & Rhoades, 2004).

University administrators now increasingly pay attention to entrepreneurial research

markets, such as working directly with corporations, creation of research parks, etc.
(Slaughter & Rhoades, 2004). Traditionally, collaboration between individual
academics and businesses in entrepreneurial research has been well developed for
decades, but most of this was in the form of consulting and only very few academics
got involved (Slaughter & Rhoades, 2004). The mismatch of research interests and
geographical locations made this type of collaboration not very common in previous
decades before the wide application of modern communication technology.

However, faculty members are not active in entrepreneurial research. Usually, only
new junior faculty members are interested in doing research to meet the needs of
industry. Departments do not tend to strategically recruit faculty members who are
interested or motivated in applied or entrepreneurial research. Although university
presidents have passed clear messages to departments that they should move towards
entrepreneurial research markets, department heads do not encourage faculty
members to do so (Slaughter & Rhoades, 2004). On the contrary, faculty who are
doing applied research often receive warnings from senior faculty members about the
uncertainty and unreliability of funding from industry.

Generally, department heads and most faculty members prefer state funded research
grants and contracts far more than private or entrepreneurial research funds (Slaughter
50

& Rhoades, 2004). This is a strategic choice and motivated by the current higher
education prestige system. Furthermore, the ability to get state grants and contracts is
crucial to successfully gaining private or entrepreneurial funds (Slaughter & Rhoades,
2004). Without a strong background of doing research funded by governments, it is
not easy to succeed in commercial research markets.

Educational entrepreneurism

Unlike the resistance to entrepreneurial research, academic departments are more

willing to generate new revenue in the education realm (Slaughter & Rhoades, 2004).
Departments are competing for student enrollment in order to generate more revenue
by collecting more tuition. Many universities have implemented an incentive
mechanism which is closely related to students credit-hours, so competition for
students attraction has increasingly related to internal resources allocation. This is
especially true in undergraduate education markets where departments are more
efficiently competing in certain areas to generate great amounts of credit hours. In the
case that the number of students cannot increase largely, the increase of credit hour
productivity has been emphasized by university administrators as well as department
heads.

According to Slaughter and Rhoades (2004), the efforts towards educational

entrepreneurism to produce more external resources can be basically divided into
various categories. First, some departments reorganize their curricula or develop new
programs to increase the number of majors and undergraduate credit-hour productivity.
By doing this, they might be able to attract more students to take more courses.
Usually, these courses are employment oriented and practical oriented, targeting a
certain employment market, or fit into a new economy. Second, more summer
programs and courses are offered to generate quick money. These programs and
courses are short and intensive, and reorganized from existing programs, so the
workload of faculty and staff is sharply decreased.
51

Thirdly, departments are active in designing and providing more professional masters
programs. These types of degree programs are specially designed to meet the needs of
a new economy. By targeting certain industries or professions, these programs attract
potential students who have already worked in these areas. These programs are easy
to develop and deliver because they are modified from existing programs. The
development of these programs is quite market driven. These programs are also labor
efficient because they can be taught by part-time or adjunct faculty. Since these
programs are very focused on needs of industry or professions, it is relatively easy for
students to get financial support from their employers. Therefore, even if the tuition is
relatively high, these kinds of programs are still welcomed by both employers and
employees. This change represents a significant reorientation towards external
markets and revenue generation. However, the quality of these programs is not as
promising as the degree programs targeting prestige regime. These programs are
viewed as cash cows for generating external and quick payoffs for departments.

Another reason is some departments are involved with fundraising in order to get
enterprises to sponsor undergraduate education. Usually industry is willing to support
activities that enhance classroom instruction, laboratories, and extra-curricular
activities which are related to their needs. Sometimes, departments go directly to the
private sector for equipment and money. These funds are usually not for
entrepreneurial research but for educational entrepreneurial activities. In most cases,
alumni are valuable sponsors in supporting educational activities. More and more
departments have set up their own fundraising offices which are responsible for
regularly hosting activities to raise money for research and education purposes. Lastly,
some departments might be capable of generating revenue by sending students to
industry. They act as employment agencies to help employers recruit qualified
employees.

However, the implementation of academic capitalism has encountered strategic

52

resistance from faculty members and mid-level administrators. Even though

departments constantly perceive external challenges and threats, they still resist the
process of stepping to an entrepreneurial direction (Slaughter & Rhoades, 2004). They
actively compete for state research grants and contracts, but they do not prefer
cooperating with the private sector in either research or education. Among the reasons
for not doing entrepreneurial research and education, the most important one is the
attitude of valuing basic science the most. Due to this reason, departments easily
ignore the opportunity and benefits of entrepreneurism (Slaughter & Rhoades, 2004).
Sometimes, they may argue that their disciplines are not closely connected to industry
or they are not competitive in the private research market. Sometimes, they complain
that they are at a geographical disadvantage being located far from business or
industrial centers, ignoring the fact that new technology has made distance less of a
problem for business nowadays.

Basically, people are not happy with the reality that they are under pressure and
competition to seek new resources from non-traditional sources, especially from
private sectors. They wish to return to the old days when the government supported
everything they needed without conditions. Even department heads are angry about
the pressure from the government, public, and university administrators to generate
external money and provide services under public supervision. They do not want to
change the focus of research. Instead, they would like to look for research that is more
prestigious than applied research.

Good knowledge regime, the value rooted in the public, is still the core value and
insisted on by most faculty members (Slaughter & Rhoades, 2004). They believe the
mission of higher education is to provide liberal education to citizens. They disdain
anything related to private, entrepreneurial research markets, such as productivity or
revenue generation. They think doing entrepreneurial research is a disaster to
academics and hinders the development of new knowledge. Under this circumstance,
faculty members passively resist any initiative of moving towards entrepreneurism.
53

Even though they do get funding to support basic research and higher degree
education, they tend to forget or overlook the reality that state research grants and
contracts have already become more applied and aligned with the market. They
adhere to the value of basic or pure research which gives them freedom and autonomy
to control their research agenda and direction (Slaughter & Rhoades, 2004).
2.2.3

Marketization of Chinese higher education

In China, the shift from a planned economy to a socialist market economy in the
1980s has brought significant changes to economic, social, and political aspects of
Chinese society (Mok, 2000a; Wong & Mok, 1995). Higher education is affected by
the march of market forces and the influence is far beyond the economy (Julius, 1997;
Kwong, 2000; Mok, 1996, 1997b, 1998, 2000a, 2000b; Williams, Liu, & Shi, 1997; Q.
Yin & Gordon, 1994).

Under the socialist planned economy, the purpose of higher education was to serve
political purposes and higher education was strictly under the sole governance,
provision, and regulation of the state (Lewin, Little, Xu, & Zheng, 1994). The
situation has changed gradually along with the economic reform. Many indicators
have clearly suggested that China's higher education has been going through a process
of marketization (Mok, 2000a).

The marketization of Chinese higher education has almost all abovementioned

characteristics of a similar process happening in other parts of the world. These
phenomena have been widely observed in other places and investigated by many
researchers. However, the development of any higher education system is
context-related. Due to the special social, political, and economic context of Chinese
higher education, the marketization of this system has some special features.

54

2.2.3.1 Diversifying higher education funding

Before the early 1980s, higher education was free of charge to students and higher
education institutions received their funding exclusively from the state government
(Min & Chen, 1994; Wang & Zhou, 1991). However, the size of Chinese higher
education has expanded dramatically from the late 1980s and exceeded the capacity of
government. As a result, institutions have encountered increasing financial constraints.
Even though local governments later became one of the main sources to fund higher
education, the funding was still not enough to support higher education due to its
rapid expansion (Hayhoe & Zha, 2006). The central government had to encourage
higher education institutions to raise funds through non-governmental channels
(Kanamori & Zhao, 2004).

Charging tuition fees is one way to release financial difficulty. Additionally,

institutions are allowed to generate income from other sources, such as university-run
enterprises, commissioned training for enterprises, research and consultancy, and
donations (Hayhoe & Zha, 2006).

Emergence of fee-paying students

Before the 1980s, the state set the quota of students and bore almost all the
expenditures of running higher education institutions (K. M. Cheng, 1998; Hayhoe,
1999; Q. Yin & Gordon, 1994). Non-state-financed students appeared from the early
1980s (Q. Yin & Gordon, 1994). Commissioned students were enrolled based on
contracts with future employers and were expected to work for these employers who
paid for their education. Self-supported students paid their tuition themselves and
should find their own jobs after graduation (Lewin, et al., 1994). In 1992 and 1993,
the Ministry issued policies allowing universities to increase the percentage of two
kinds of fee-paying students and provide financial aid to students with financial
difficulties (Q. Yin & Gordon, 1994).
55

The government wanted to diversify funding sources to meet the demands of the
expansion of higher education (C. Chen, Ma, & Huang, 1989; Q. Yin & Gordon,
1994). Under this circumstance, implementing fee-charging for university students
was mainly to lessen the burden on the government and to shift the costs of higher
education towards the students and their families (K. M. Cheng, 1997; Tsang, 1994).

Establishment of private higher education institutions

The private higher education emerged in the early 1980s, triggered by restraints
placed on recruiting fee-paying students. The establishment of new types of higher
education institutions was to compensate for the shortage of public higher education
to educate more students in order to meet the demands of economic development (J.
Lin, Zhang, Gao, & Liu, 2005).

These institutions are funded and operated by individuals or social groups (Kwong,
1997). Sometimes, public institutions with difficulties in finance or management
might also be transformed into private institutions with new managerial mechanisms
and funded by non-governmental resources (Pan & Law, 2006). For a period of time,
some public universities also set up private colleges as their affiliated organizations
which are treated as independent legal bodies (Pan & Law, 2006).

Private higher education institutions usually get no funding from various levels of
government, so they very much enjoy the autonomy to operate themselves. The
government approves their establishment, accredits their programs, and assesses their
quality (J. Lin, et al., 2005). Private higher education institutions put students
interests and needs as the highest priority in curriculum design (Pan & Law, 2006).
The biggest concern on private higher education is the quality of education.

Partnership with industry

56

In order to attract more financial support from non-governmental sources, higher

education institutions are encouraged to collaborate with other social sectors,
including industry. The most common form of cooperation is higher education
institutions undertaking projects paid by commercial sectors (Q. Yin & Gordon, 1994).
The funds may come as research funds or project contracts. Universities, as well as
faculty members, prefer this kind of cooperation because of its low risk. Even if the
projects fail, universities and faculty can still get paid. If faculty members possess any
patents or exclusive technology, they may consider selling them to business
enterprises. Technological transfer is another important form of partnership between
higher education institutions and industry, although the rate of transferring scientific
outcomes to economic return is much lower than that in developed countries (Q. Yin
& Gordon, 1994).

Chinese universities also market their services to both commercial and public sectors
by setting up college-run industries (Q. Yin & Gordon, 1994). Some university-run
enterprises have been listed in the public market and may be separated from their
mother universities. Even schools or departments can establish these kinds of
affiliated companies to generate revenue to subsidize their operations.

Different from their colleagues in western countries, faculty members in Chinese

universities are actively involved in marketing scientific and technological research
outcomes (Q. Yin & Gordon, 1994). Although this statement lacks firm support from
empirical studies, it has been observed widely in China.
2.2.3.2 Internal market mechanism
Influenced by market force, the structure and management of Chinese higher
education institutions has been changed. In order to improve the efficiency of
management,

the

old

university/department

structure

was

replaced

by
57

university/faculty/department structure. The decentralization reform has made higher

education institutions transfer some decision-making power from the institutional
level to the faculty and departmental level. They started to learn how to take care of
their development themselves. Institutions responsibilities have thus changed from a
controller and caretaker to a monitor with functions like supervision, guidance, ,
service, assistance, and reviewing (Q. Yin & Gordon, 1994).

A flexible personnel system has been created by establishing evaluation procedures

based on quality monitoring systems (Q. Yin & Gordon, 1994). Permanent tenure has
disappeared and academics and staff are contracted and should go through various
performances assessed for retaining their positions. Academic promotion has also
been subjected to market influences and revenue generation from research has
become a very important indicator in assessment. Faculties and departments have
learned to use recruitment policies to adjust the direction of development and respond
to public interests and market demands.

The remuneration system has become more dynamic. A double-track system has been
adopted and staffs income has been heavily influenced by the market (Q. Yin &
Gordon, 1994). In recent years, a more flexible and diversified remuneration system
has been adopted in Chinese higher education, such as double-track, a fixed annual
salary system, and hourly wages. Faculty and staffs work is under supervision and
evaluation and the result of a performance assessment affects their income
accordingly.

The managerialism has been introduced to Chinese universities, but the

implementation of managerialism is not popular due to many practical reasons.
Chinese higher education institutions are not ready to adopt such a practice system.
Chinese universities are still managed by people rather than regulations and laws.
Therefore, leadership is extremely important in institutional development.
58

2.2.3.3 Market influence on curricula

Under the pressure of increasing the employment rate of new graduates, higher
education institutions tend to make their curricula respond more directly to market
needs. And the curricula are adjusted at any time according to different needs in
different periods of time (Q. Yin & Gordon, 1994). Students choose their specialties
based on their expectation of future rewards and benefits (Williams, et al., 1997).
Market influences have also brought ever-increasing emphasis on the practical and
utilitarian aspects of knowledge. Teaching content and methods are also influenced by
market needs.

However, compared to universities in western countries, Chinese universities have not

moved from institution-centered to student-centered yet. Although students pay
tuition for their education, their influence on institutions is still very limited. One
reason may be that tuition accounts for only a small part of overall funds needed for
an institution. Another reason may be that both higher education institutions and
students still hold the traditional view of the role of university and student.
2.2.3.4 Tensions between teaching and research
In a traditional Chinese research system, professional research institutes bear the
responsibility of doing research. Higher education institutions have been the place to
educate and train students. In 1986, the establishment of the National Natural Science
Foundation of China gave opportunities to Chinese universities to compete for
research funding with traditional research institutes (N. C. Liu, 2007). Since then,
many Chinese top universities have paid much attention to research. Under the
pressure of producing more academic papers or research outputs, professors have
spent more time on research than teaching. The quality of education has dropped
quickly and many students and parents have complained about the lack of qualified
teachers to teach undergraduate students. The Ministry of Education therefore
regulated the time senior faculty members should spend in teaching (N. C. Liu, 2007).
59

However, the new regulation could only guarantee the time but not the quality of
teaching.
2.2.4

Summary

Marketization is changing many aspects of higher education (Kwong, 2000). Higher

education is no longer a common good for everyone. New characteristics of higher
education have been emphasized, such as practicalities, utilitarian aspects of
knowledge, and meeting customer demands. Business practices have become
acceptable with efficiency and cost-cutting as the goals. The key factor behind
marketization is the need to raise funds through multiple sources to cover financial
shortage.

The adoption of new managerialism has changed the structure of higher education
institutions and administrative and financial management. Structural re-organizations
that facilitate the efficient operation in the institutions are implemented. Realizing the
values in market, higher education institutions generally adopt and promote a
customer-orientation to the entire institution. Academic programs and activities that
meet the needs of the society are offered. Research is observed to be more
application-oriented and market-oriented. To contain costs, auxiliary services are shed
or outsourced.

The implementation of marketization reflects increasing interference from external

forces and the shrinking of academic and institutional autonomy. In order to increase
accountability, efficiency, and effectiveness, organizational structures are modified
and working processes are carefully calculated and optimized. Organizational goals
are given the highest priority while individuals rights and freedom are suppressed.
Faculty and staff members are considered employees who need to take designated
duties and perform them well. They are under increasing pressure to publish academic
papers because their performance is under assessment from professional managers
60

rather than academic experts. Therefore, the resistance encountered during the process
of marketization was significant.

However, market forces do not necessarily produce positive results (Kwong, 2000;
Mok, 2000a; Q. Yin & Gordon, 1994). Many challenges and tensions have been
created on the way towards marketization of higher education. People in higher
education need to deal with problems with sustainable development of market-like
higher education and try to maximize the positive effects of marketization while
minimizing its negative side-effects (Q. Yin & Gordon, 1994).

The marketization reform in Chinese higher education has been launched for about
three decades and has brought many changes to the system. The diversification of the
funding source for higher education institutions has become the motivation for
relation changes between government and universities (J. Hu, 2006). The central
government would share financial and administrative responsibilities with local
governments, higher education institutions, students and their families, and other
social sectors. The power shift to local government and institutions, charging tuition
fees, and emergence of private institutions are some important indicators of changes.
It seems that the degree of marketization in Chinese higher education has reached a
certain level in which the influence of the market can be observed in almost every
aspect of a higher education system.

However, not all universities and colleges are willing to go for marketization changes.
Although central and local governments have cut budgets for higher education to a
relatively low level, universities are still heavily relying on government funds for
survival. The resources for Chinese universities are very limited, so the competition in
resource allocation has always been fierce. Compared to the competition for
government budgets, the competition for funds from other sectors is even more
difficult. Institutions in well-developed regions (e.g. coastal areas) are capable of
getting funds from the market due to their geographic locations close to industrial
61

centers, strong academic performances, and traditional connections with industry.

Universities in less-developed areas are not able to create connections with industry
and find it difficult to get financial support from industry or other social sectors.

The old state-planning higher education system was used to meet the needs of
national development. Nowadays, the new system still serves the same purpose
although the approaches to reach the goals have changed. Now the markets needs are
the main factors in determining the development of higher education, such as the size
of the higher education system, programs, curricula, teaching and research, etc. The
government no longer controls higher education institutions through administrative
commands, but through regulations and monitoring. The structure of higher education
institutions has gradually changed and the power structure has also changed
accordingly. Academic units have been given more power and freedom to manage
themselves in order to respond quickly to environmental changes.

Chinese universities and academics have always believed that the purpose of higher
education is serving the country. The economic reform and development in three
decades has created a reality that market mechanism has been widely adopted in many
sectors in China. Chinese people have reached an agreement that market mechanism
works to improve productivity, performance, and effectiveness. However, the attitude
of faculty and staff towards marketization of higher education is still unclear and
diversified. The implementation of marketization has encountered resistance in many
institutions, too.

It is remarkable that institutions in developed regions or with high academic

performance are more likely to welcome the changes towards market, and those in
less-developed areas or with low academic performance are against the trend of
marketization. Generally speaking, the degree of marketization in Chinese higher
education is still relatively low.
62

However, if we go deep inside academic units in higher education institutions, the

situation might be different. The ongoing economic reform in the country has strong
and deep influence on individuals. Their thoughts and behaviors have been embedded
with the market mark and all these affect their relationships with their units and
institutions. Considering the informal structure and culture of universities, the
marketization degree might be much higher than the conclusion drawn from previous
studies.
2.3 Organizations and Organization Theories
Higher education institutions can be viewed as complex organizations operating in a
diverse and ever-changing environment with shifting values, varying states of
economic prosperity, and obscure permutations of political power (p.2) (Bess & Dee,
2008). Modern universities have shown significant features of typical organizations as
those in other social sectors. Therefore, when studying universities and their internal
components, organizational theories are critical to their description and analysis.

Organizations are social units. Under different assumptions and analytical frameworks,
organizations can be viewed differently. For examples, organizations can be viewed as
social systems, negotiated orders, structures of power and domination, or symbolic
constructions (Reed, 1992). Any organization theory can be used to analyze
institutional structures and processes that constitute the foundations of modern society
(Giddens, 1987). Systems theory is among those which can be adopted to
appropriately explain higher education organizations.

Systems theory provides broad and general analysis and prediction on both
organizations and individuals although it has its own limits due to its root on positivist
theories (Burrell & Morgan, 1979). A system is a set of interrelated components that
are interactive and interdependent (Hall & Fagen, 1980). The components keep a
certain structure to maintain its functions. The relationship between components can
63

be loosely coupled or tightly connected. The system has boundaries to separate it from
its environment which is more complex and differentiated (Luhmann, 1995).

Due to the diversity and complexity of organizations, the definitions of organization

vary. Most definitions try to describe the features of organizations that distinguish
them from other social forms. According to Scott (2003), organizations can be defined
from three different perspectives: the rational system perspective, the natural system
perspective, and the open system perspective.
2.3.1

Three perspectives

It is important to understand different perspectives to view organizations. The

perspective frames the standpoint and view to investigate a studied organization.
These perspectives need to be understood based on their historical roots and the
underlying analytical features. Three perspectives will be introduced here: rational,
natural, and open system perspectives.
2.3.1.1 A rational system perspective
Organizations are collectivities oriented to the pursuit of relatively specific goals and
exhibiting relatively highly formalized social structures(p.27) (W. R. Scott, 2003).
From this perspective, organizations are designed to perform specific tasks and reach
certain goals. The goals and the structure of organizations are the most important
components of any organization. As goals are specified, they provide unambiguous
criteria for decision making and the choosing of alternative solutions and activities.
Formalization structure, on the other hand, can make behavior more predictable by
standardizing and regulating it (Simon, 1997).

This perspective represents a set of theories which are related to each other but
distinctive, as well. There are several important contributors representing the major
development of the theories. They are: Taylors scientific management, Fayols
64

administrative theory, Webers theory of bureaucracy, and Simons theory of

administrative behavior. Their work, especially Webers authority and bureaucracy
theory, has contributed heavily to the development of organizational theories.

Although these theorists analyzed organizations in different levels, they share a

common general argument: structure is a fundamental vehicle by which
organizations achieve bounded rationality (p.54) (Thompson, 1967). They believe
that rationality is based on structure. The behavior of organization participants is
ignored. It is assumed that individuals behave rationally because they have limited
choice or alternatives in a well-designed structure or process.

The great emphasis of the rational system perspective is control, which determines
participants behavior by various measures in order to achieve specified goals.
Rational analysts forget the concepts of rationality for the perspective is limited. The
individual participants characteristics are not considered. They ignore the irrational
features of social conduct (Blau, 1956).
2.3.1.2 A natural system perspective
From a natural system perspective, organizations are collectivities whose participants
are pursuing multiple interests, both disparate and common, but who recognize the
value of perpetuating the organization as an important resource (p.28) (W. R. Scott,
2003). The informal structure is more influential than formal structure when guiding
participants behaviors. This perspective emphasizes the goal complexity and informal
structure. It admits the complexity of participants behaviors and pays more attention
to the interconnection between the normative and behavior structures of organizations
and the emergence of informal structure.

The natural system perspective covers a number of diverse approaches sharing some
common general features: Mayos human relations school, Barnards conception of
65

cooperative systems, Selznicks institutional approach, and Parsons AGIL model.

Natural system theorists do not deny the importance of formal structural features in
organizations, but they draw more attention to human behavior and features of social
collectivities. They insist that the normative structure is overshadowed by a more
generic system and process shared by other social collectives (W. R. Scott, 2003).

The natural system perspective also concentrates on the internal structure and
arrangement of organizations, but it focuses more on human relation groups. When
the goals are specified, they are often undermined or distorted by pressures, such as
survival. Like a rational system emphasizes organizational structure, natural system
focuses on behavior structure. Although some researchers mentioned environment in
natural organizational studies, they basically viewed environment as the enemy.

Both rational systems and natural system perspectives view an organization as a close
system, focusing on internal structural arrangements and their influence on
participants (W. R. Scott, 2003). However, other theorists argued that organizations
must provide inducements to their participants in order to compete with other
organizations (Barnard, 1938). Barnard roughly pointed out the importance of
environment.
2.3.1.3 An open system perspective
From this perspective, organizations are not closed systems separated from their
environment. They are actually open systems constantly exchanging resources and
interacting with the outside and this interchange is essential to the system (Buckley,
1967). Connections between organizations and the outside are more critical than the
connections between organization components. From this point of view,
organizations are congeries of interdependent flows and activities linking shifting
coalitions of participants embedded in wider material-resource and institutional
environments (p.29) (W. R. Scott, 2003).
66

The open system perspective does not pay much attention to either formal or informal
structure, but views the organization as a system of interdependent activities, either
loosely coupled or tightly connected. If the organization wants to persist, it must keep
motivating all these activities. Furthermore, organization participants have multiple
loyalties and identities, and their status depends on the negotiation with the
organization to which they belong (W. R. Scott, 2003).

The open system perspective was developed later than the aforementioned two views,
but it has changed the concept of organizations and become widely accepted. The
major theories in the open system perspective include the system design approach,
contingency theory, and Weicks social psychological model organizing. They are in
favor of more interactive definitions and studies of organizational changes when the
environment has been changed. The cultural-cognitive dimension brings great
attention to information flows and sense-making activities (W. R. Scott, 2003).
2.3.1.4 Combining the perspectives
Each of the above mentioned perspectives has its significance and targets certain
features of organizations, so all of them are valuable and can be used to conduct
organizational research according to the nature of the study. A lot of efforts have been
made to combine and reconcile these perspectives. Some important attempts of
integration include: Etzionis structuralist model, Lawrence and Lorschs contingency
model, and Thompsons levels model. All these efforts contain valuable insights and
help to illustrate some aspects of organizations.

Scott also proposed his own theoretical model --- Scotts layered model to create a
new time line of four phases in the development of organizational theory by layering
the three perspectives (W. R. Scott, 2003). He argued that both the rational and natural
perspectives share the closed system assumption. The open system perspective
67

challenges the closed system assumption, but it does not supplant the rational or
natural perspectives. Therefore, the open system model can be combined with both
rational and natural perspectives (W. R. Scott, 2003).
Perspectives

Closed system
Open system

Assumption model

Rational
Closed-Rational system models

Natural
Closed-Natural system models

Theories:
Taylors scientific management
Fayols administrative theory
Webers theory of bureaucracy
Simons theory of administrative
behavior
Open-Rational system models
Theories:
Simons bounded rationality
Contingency theory
Comparative structural analysis
Transaction cost analysis
Knowledge-based theories

Theories:
Mayos human relations school
Barnards conception of cooperative
systems
Open-Natural system models
Theories:
Weicks model of organizing
Sociotechnical systems
Organizational ecology
Resource dependence
Institutional theory

Table 2.1 Scotts Layered Model (R. W. Scott, 1998)

Based on different assumptions, the rational, natural, and open system perspectives
offer comparative paradigms to analyze organizations. Their combinations can be
adopted to explain more complex organizations. They are applicable to various levels
and types of organizations. For instance, the rational system is more suitable to the
technical level; the natural perspective is more applicable to the managerial level; and
the open system theory is more suited to the academic level.

Closed-rational system models

All the theories of the closed-rational system model view organizations as the tools to
achieve certain preset goals and ignore the connection between organizations and their
68

environment (W. R. Scott, 2003). They emphasize scientific management and

bureaucracy in the closed system logic. Typical theories include Taylors scientific
management (Taylor, 1911), Simons decision making (Simon, 1997), Webers
bureaucratic theory (Weber, 1968 trans), and Fayols administrative theory (Fayol,
1949 trans).

Closed-natural system models

The closed-natural system theories view organizations as more complex and flexible
with diffusing and conflicting goals and members having multiple interests (W. R.
Scott, 2003). Informal structure and its impact on formal structure have been
discussed. However, all these are considered internal management of organizations
without any link to the external environment. The representative theories include
Whytes human relations (Whyte, 1959), Barnards cooperative systems (Barnard,
1938), Mayos human relations (Mayo, 1945), and Gouldners conflict models
(Gouldner, 1954).

Open-rational system models

The open-rational system models are still based on a rational system, but they see
organizations as open systems. Several rational system theories were reviewed and
add open system concerns.

Bounded rationality revisited (March & Simon, 1958): This is the result of
reviewing Simons theory of decision making by adding the variety of challenges
caused by tasks and environments.
Contingency theory reviewed (Lawrence & Lorsch, 1967): The theory assumes
that organizations should adapt their structures to their environmental
requirements, and environmental influence on organizations structures and
performance is important.
69

 Comparative structural analysis (Woodward, 1965): This method is used to

collect system data of a large number of organizations and deal with a large
variety of variables mainly focusing on size, technology, and uncertainty.
Transaction cost analysis (O. E. Williamson, 1975): It is an analysis method
focusing on the costs of entering into transactions between persons and the
transactions crossing boundaries.

Open-natural system models

The open-natural system models are based on a natural system, but they put great
emphasis on the importance of environment which influences organizations
behaviors, structures, and life chance.

Weicks model of organizing revisited (Weick, 1969): It involves evolutionary

thinking: trial, error, learning, and sense making. He thinks that natural selection
is not necessary for improvement.
Sociotechnical systems (E. J. Miller & Rice, 1967): This approach emphasizes
that organizational goals should best match between technical and social
components. These two systems follow different laws and the relationship
between them is a coupling of dissimilarity.
Organizational ecology (Hannan & Freeman, 1977): It applies evolutionary
arguments to organizational processes. Organizations have various forms and
keep changing. Adaptation and selection are the processes to differentiate
organizations for survival.
Resource dependence (Pfeffer & Salancik, 1978): Organizations need to
exchange with outer worlds as a way of survival. They need to get resources from
the environment and the need for external resources creates the dependency
between the organization and external units. The importance and the scarcity of
these resources determines the nature of the dependency. Organizations are active
in deciding their fate rather than passively waiting for the natural selection
70

process.
Institutional theory (Meyer & Rowan, 1977; Selznick, 1949): It agrees that
organizations are open systems strongly influenced by the external environment,
but the social constructed belief and rule systems also hold powerful control over
organizations. Various internal and external forces provide increasing collections
of beliefs and rules to facilitate the growth of organizations.

2.3.2

Organizational study in Chinese higher education

In China, organizational theories have been widely used in the management field.
Typical organizations under study are business firms or public administration
departments. Organizational research is rarely adopted in research on higher education.
Most existing studies are policy analysis at various levels, i.e. central/local
government, institutional, and individual levels. The research on organizational
development at all levels is limited. Among limited organizational development
research, the number of studies adopting organizational theories is even less.

In China, researchers are not encouraged to study universities other than their own
institutions. Institutional research in China began in the 1980s when some universities
established institutes/centers of higher education. The main purpose of setting up
these centers was to study the problems in institutional operation. However, since
universities did not have the power to manage themselves, the development of these
centers was very slow and limited. In 1995, institutional study was first introduced to
China by a paper introducing the history of institutional research in the United States
and was promoted by several other scholars (X. Cheng & Zhou, 1995; X. Liu & Zhao,
2002). From then on, institutional research has been formally accepted as a major
method to study higher education institutions.

There are several characteristics of institutional research in Chinese higher education:

71

self-study, management, consultancy, and applied (X. Liu, 2008). First, it is a

self-study. Chinese universities are becoming bigger, more complex, multi-functional,
and multi-responsive, so they need huge amounts of information and special
knowledge to manage (Zhao, 2005). Moreover, the context of each institution is
different and every university is unique. When studying a university, researchers
should refer to the specific context and culture. Therefore, it is advantageous to study
a university through insiders rather than outsiders. Besides, several other reasons may
also contribute to the situation. First, it is difficult to get internal data which are
crucial for any organizational study. Second, universities do not welcome outsiders to
study their institutions. Deep investigation in universities may touch some sensitive
issues which university leaders do not want others to know. Third, Chinese
universities do not have the pressure to understand their status due to their lack of
sense of competition and legitimacy. Most universities are government owned public
institutions. Under the pressure of a large student body, these universities will stay
alive anyway.

Therefore, universities are encouraged to conduct an institutional study themselves.

Most Chinese universities set up their own departments or research institutes to do
analysis on themselves. Usually, this type of research is action research. The purpose
is to find out the problems which may hinder the healthy development of the
universities, and work out appropriate solutions to solve these problems. For instance,
the university I studied does not have faculty or a department specifically for
education, but it has a Research Institute of Higher Education. Such research units
perform research to provide supportive information for making universities long term
strategic plans.

Foreign scholars recently collaborated with Chinese researchers to conduct

institutional research on Chinese universities. For example, Professor Hayhoe and her
colleagues (Hayhoe, Li, Lin, & Zha, 2011) have done a project to investigate how
several Chinese universities deal with diversification under the pressure of mass
72

higher education. Several universities were analyzed to see how these universities
took advantage of their strengths and developed accordant strategies. The research did
not adopt typical organizational theories. Rather, they applied the concept of an
entrepreneurial university instead. Several other researchers have done similar
research on other Chinese universities, but few of them adopted organizational
theories to explain their research findings.
2.4 Theoretical Framework
In the literature review, we could find that both decentralization and marketization
have affected the development of higher education institutions although the effects
might be different in different contexts. In China, under such influence, universities
have changed dynamically due to their internal conditions and external environment.
In this section, I will first give the theoretical model of how the unit changed to
respond to external forces. Afterwards, I will describe the analytical framework I used
to process my data.
2.4.1

Theoretical model of SSEs change

According to the literature reviewed in the above sections, the researched academic
unit changed under the influence mainly from three forces: government, market, and
the university. The relationship of the unit and these forces could be demonstrated as
following.

73

University

Administration

Institution

Resources

Market

Policies

Government

Teaching
Research

SSE
Autonomous

Figure 2.2

Dependent

The theoretical framework of the study

Government

The government has the ultimate influence on the development of the unit. The
Ministry of Education is the direct superior of the university. Although the ministry
has delegated some degree of autonomy to the university in academic and managerial
affairs, the nature of the relationship between them has not changed. As a unit in the
university, the School of Software Engineering (SSE) in University A received
indirect influence from the ministry.

As one of the national pilot software engineering schools, SSE is also under the
direction of the Ministry of Education (MoE). The ministry issued documents and
policies to guide the development of these schools. The influence of the MoE could
be observed in several aspects of the management of the school, such as teaching,
research, and administration. Therefore, SSE is under dual-direction of the MoE and
the university. Most of the time, the requirements from both are aligned with each
other while sometimes SSE has to deal with some conflicts.
74

There are some other central ministries playing important roles, such as the Ministry
of Science and Technology, the Ministry of Information Industry, and the Ministry of
Commerce. They made the policies to promote the development of high-tech industry
in China. They also worked together with the Ministry of Education to make the
decision to establish the national pilot software engineering schools. They have never
directed the work in these schools, but any important changes in their policies and
regulations would affect these schools by influencing industry and market first. The
influence from these ministries and other central government departments to software
engineering schools is indirect but important.

Market

Market has a powerful influence on SSEs development. First, the market provides the
most needed resources to the school. Companies provided financial and human
resources to support the teaching and administration of the school. Second, the market
offers the most important employment opportunity to the school. One of the
fundamental requirements of the school is to educate students to meet market
demands, so the changes of market demands greatly shape the direction in which the
school is heading. Third, the market acts as a model of operation to help the school
increase its efficiency and accountability. Therefore, SSE always maintains a very
close relationship with the market.

The university

As an academic unit of the university, SSE should follow all the regulations and meet
the requirements of the university, like other faculties. As a national pilot software
engineering school which receives some special policies, SSE also gets some special
treatments from the university. The policies of the university influence the
development of SSE directly. Implementation of the universitys policies might cause
75

tension. When the university helps the school solve problems, it sometimes makes
changes to the existing system. Therefore, the changes in SSE may also initiate the
changes in the university. The relationship between the university and SSE is
bidirectional. Sometimes the requirements of the university are conflicting with the
requirements of the Ministry of Education.

Other faculties in the university also contribute to the development of the school. SSE
closely works with some schools (usually in related disciplines) in curriculum design,
joint research projects, and joint student training programs. As a newly established
unit, SSE needs to learn from old faculties to improve itself. As a pilot of educational
reform, SSEs experience of adopting new methods and regulations could benefit
other faculties. Meanwhile, other faculties are competitors, competing for resources
and students.

Under the joint influence of three external forces, the school has been forced to move
back and forth towards either autonomy or dependence. The influence could be
observed in teaching, research, or administration and the despondence the school has
made could also be discovered. Through the results of these changes, it is possible to
analyze how the school responded to the external pressures and expectations.
2.4.2

Analytical theories

In this study, external influence produced by decentralization and marketization is the

main focus of analysis. How the studied academic unit adapted to its environment is
the emphasis. Therefore, the open system perspective is definitely the appropriate
choice to analyze the research. Moreover, peoples conceptions and reactions to
organizational changes are also taken into account when analyzing decision making
and policy implementation. From this point of view, a natural perspective can help to
deal with the relationship between the organization and its participants. To integrate
both views, the open-natural system approach is the most appropriate for my study.
76

The combination of resource dependence and institutional theories is embraced to

explain

the

development

of

the

studied

academic

unit

in

dynamic

social/economic/political environment. The resource dependence theory can be used

to deal with external forces while a neo-institutional theory is adopted to explain
internal correspondence to external changes. The combination of these two theories
gives a logical framework to explain the organizational development.
2.4.2.1 Neo-institutional theory
Neo-institutionalism is an approach to do social analysis on organizational behaviors.
In this theory, institutions are defined as regulatory structures and legitimizing
processes within or among organizations, i.e. governmental agencies, families, market,
or professions (W. R. Scott, 1987). Institutional constituents, who put pressures and
expectations on organizations, include state, professions, interest groups, and public
opinions.

The neo-institutional perspective looks at organizations as operating in an

environment dominated by rules, requirements, understandings, and taken-for-granted
assumptions about what constitutes appropriate or acceptable organizational forms
and behavior (Gornitzka, 1999; Oliver, 1997; W. R. Scott, 1987). It emphasizes that
the critical condition for organizational survival is conformity to an organizational
environment. When an organization wants to make changes, it changes in the context
of taken-for-granted norms and beliefs. As Oliver pointed out, organizations make
rational choices based on their social context (Oliver, 1997).

In the neo-institutional theory, organizational structure and actions include mainly

three isomorphic mechanisms: coercive (political power and legitimacy), mimetic
(modeling, patterning, and uncertainty), and normative (professionalization and
socialization) (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983). It focuses on the reproduction or
77

imitation of organizational structures, activities, and routines in response to state

pressures, the expectations of professions, or collective norms of the institutional
environment (p.155)

(Oliver, 1991).

Neo-institutional theory considers that organizations attempt to gain legitimacy and

stability (Oliver, 1991). Neo-institutionalists explain organizational changes by
emphasizing shared social processes indicated by widely agreed social norms and
rules which give invisible pressures to organizations to pursue institutional prestige,
or other widely accepted social values.
2.4.2.2 Resource dependence theory
The resource dependence theory emphasizes the interaction between the organization
and its external environment (W. R. Scott, 2003). The survival of an organization is
dependent on the resources it can get from its environment. This perspective is rooted
in the open system framework and believes that in order to study organizations
behaviors and structures, people must understand the context where the organizations
are located (W. R. Scott, 2003). Basically, it denies the idea that organizations are
self-directed and autonomous in pursuing their destiny without the interference from
their social context (Gornitzka, 1999).

According to Pfeffer and Salancik (1978), resource dependence theory is based on the
assumption that internal members behaviors can be by studying external agents
actions. It emphasizes the analysis of the context of the organization. The party
controlling the resources has the power to affect an organizations internal
decision-making.

The theory assumes that organizations have continuously fight for autonomy and are
under external control and restrictions discretely (Gornitzka, 1999; Pfeffer & Salancik,
1978). Therefore, the improvement of organizations is not always controlled by
78

internal members because their behaviors are constrained by external forces and
resources. However, organizations responses to their environment are not always
passive or automatic. They may be responding to the environmental demands actively
and volitionally (Gornitzka, 1999).

When studying an organization, the internal behaviors of organizational members are

understood clearly only by reference to the actions of external agents (Slaughter &
Leslie, 1997). However, organizations may not only depend on the external
environment for resources; they may also adopt strategies to change the environment
in which the resources are located (Oliver, 1991; Pfeffer & Salancik, 1978). Slaughter
and Leslie also pointed out that the changes in funding and resource dependence steer
the changes in higher education, especially the rise of higher education (Slaughter &
Leslie, 1997).
2.4.2.3 Combination of institutional and resource dependence theories
Both institutional and resource dependence theories provide explanations on why and
how organizations respond to their environments. The neo-institutional theory
highlights the importance of internal institutions, reproduction of structures, and how
organizations adapt to norms and beliefs in their environment. The resource
dependence perspective focuses on external inter-dependencies and flow of resources.
These two theories share some common assumptions which can make them work
together to explain organizational changes in both internal and external perspectives.

In 1985, Tolbert conducted research to investigate the differences in administration

between public and private higher education institutions. She concluded that these two
theories are not antagonistic. In fact, they can provide a more holistic picture of the
studied case. She pointed out that the central premise of this approach is that
dependency relationships can, over time, become socially defined as appropriate and
legitimate (Tolbert, 1985).
79

Oliver further developed the idea and gave theoretical explanations of the
convergence and divergence of these two theories. She pointed out that both
institutional and resource dependence theories share some common assumptions in
both context and motives (Oliver, 1991). In context, they all believe that organizations
are constrained by external pressures; their environments are connected and collective,
and organizations must respond to external demands and expectations in order to
survive; while for motives, the two theories agree that organizations try to gain
stability and legitimacy and they are interest-driven (Oliver, 1991).

Explanatory
Factor

Context of
Organizational
Behavior

Divergent Foci
Convergent Assumptions

Institutional environment

Task environment

Non-choice behavior

Active choice behavior

Organizational
environments are collective
and interconnected

Conforming to collective
norms and beliefs

Coping
interdependencies

Invisible pressures

Visible pressures

Organizational
survival
depends on responsiveness
to external demands and
expectations

Isomorphism

Adaptation

Adherence to rules and

norms

Management of scarce
resources

Organizational
persistence

Reduction of uncertainty

Habit and convention

Power and influence

Social worthiness

Resource mobilization

Conformity to external
criteria
Interests
institutionally
defined

Control
of
external
criteria
Interests political and
calculative
Noncompliance
self-serving

Organizations
legitimacy

seek

Organizations are interest

driven

Table 2.2

Resource Dependence
Perspective

Organizational choice is
constrained by multiple
external pressures

Organizations seek stability

and predictability
Motives of
Organizational
Behavior

Institutional Perspective

Compliance self-serving

with

Comparison of institutional and resource dependence perspectives

(From Strategic Responses to Institutional Processes by C. Oliver, 1991, Academy of

Management Review 16(1) p.147)

In 1999, Gornitzka adopted Olivers approach in a study on organizational change in

higher education under government policies. He thought that institutionalism
80

describes the internal power and control while the resource dependence focuses on
external dependencies and control (Gornitzka, 1999). Gornitzka claims this
integration approach is critical to understand the process of environment influence
of both internal and external factors (Gornitzka, 1999).

Kirby-Harris modified Olivers model and in 2003 studied how a young university
responds to government policies He applied the resource dependence theory to
explain the economically rational manner to external economic influence while
adopting institutionalism to understand the normatively rational manner to external
social influences (p.358) (Kirby-Harris, 2003).

In my study, the two theories are used together to explain why and how the academic
unit changed under the influence of internal and external stakeholders. Olivers model
has created the overall analytical framework which could accommodate my study.

The internal decentralization process has changed the relationship between the unit
and the university. The unit has gained more autonomy to manage itself. The survival
of the unit heavily relied on how many resources it could obtain. The unit was
actively interacting with environmental forces, such as government, the university,
industry, and market. The resource dependence perspective can be adopted to explain
how organizations are externally controlled and determined by the dependence on
external resources and organizational changes must be understood by looking at
how organizations perceive their environments and how they act to control and avoid
dependencies in order to maintain organizational discretion and autonomy of action
(Gornitzka, 1999).

On the other hand, the unit is also under the influence of marketization. A market
mechanism has been implemented on the unit and affected many aspects of its
decision-making as well as routine work. However, the unit is still a part of the
university and under influence of the universitys culture, norms, and values. Even the
81

structure and working procedures of the unit were copied from the university. The
institutional perspective is focusing on the cognitive and normative elements in the
environment that shape organizational action (Gornitzka, 1999). When organizations
change, they follow the norms, taken-for-granted values, and beliefs of their
environments.

In my study, an academic unit was delegated more self-administrative autonomy than

other regular units. At the same time, it was put under the pressure of marketization. It
was encouraged to adopt a market mechanism and make use of resources in the
market to stay alive. It was required to improve education quality which was
evaluated by the employment rate of its graduates. Both decentralization and
marketization are contexts, as well as components, of the environment. What I would
like to investigate is how the unit responded to such pressure through closely
watching its organizational changes.
2.5 Summary
In this chapter, related literature has been reviewed to build the theoretical foundation
of the research and draw the theoretical framework to guide the research procedure.
Three sets of literature, decentralization, marketization, and organizational theories,
are analyzed and the connections and relations among them are described.

Many

higher

education

systems

in

the

world

are

going

through

the

centralization/decentralization struggle. The changes of traditional state-control

systems are relatively radical. The governments in many such countries have
gradually loosened the direct control on higher education institutions while adding
more responsibilities to them. The biggest challenge is the financial crisis for most
institutions. The context of decentralization reform is critical and each country adopts
its own strategy to implement the change. As the government shifts more decision
making power to institutions, the institutions are challenged by bearing the
82

responsibility to manage themselves. The governance of universities has been

changed, as well. The internal power structure of institutions has then been changed
accordingly. Universities need to face the external world without the protection from
the government anymore.

The adoption of new managerialism has also changed the structure of higher
education institutions and administrative and financial management. Structural
re-organizations that facilitate the efficient operation in the institution are
implemented. The implementation of marketization reflects increasing interference
from external forces and the shrinking of academic and institutional autonomy.

In China, the decentralization reform of the higher education system has changed the
relationship between central and local governments and the relationship between
government and universities. The old state-planning and state-control models have
been gradually changed to the more flexible and market models. The central
government changed the roles of controller and manager to coordinator and monitor
and tends to manage the higher education system through policies and regulation
rather than direct administrative commands and control. The new policy framework
has provided more autonomy to universities than at any time in the past, while also
challenging them to take more responsibility for social development. The
marketization reform in Chinese higher education has been launched for about three
decades and has brought many changes to the system. The diversification of the
funding source for higher education institutions has become the motivation of relation
changes between government and universities.

In the history of Chinese higher education, there have been several rounds of
decentralization. The first several rounds before the 1990s were not involved in any
market influence. The government wanted to improve the efficiency of managing
higher education, so most universities had been transferred from central government
to local governments. Although the power of decision making was shifted from a
83

higher level to a lower level, the nature of complete state-control had not been
changed.

However, the decentralization reform started in the 1980s was different. The
government not only shifted power from central to local, but also delegated power
from government to institutions. The nature of tight state-control had changed to
loosen state-control. The rationale was to reduce financial burden and increase the
efficiency of administration of higher education and higher education institutions.
Market mechanism was introduced to solve the problems. Therefore, decentralization
and marketization have connected this time.

After reviewing a considerable amount of literature, we could find that most existing
literature related to decentralization and marketization sits at the national level and
institutional level. Literature regarding decentralization mostly focuses on the
relationship between governments and higher education systems or institutions under
the influence of global and national political and economic development. The research
on marketization has reached national, institutional, and individual levels. The
research on institutional management mostly focused on the top executives. The
management at lower levels, including mid-level, has been neglected and
under-researched.

However, the mid-level connects the top-level to the operational units and it is crucial
to implement institutional strategies and reach organizational goals successfully
(Floyd & Wooldridge, 1994, 1997). It is the level that gathers, synthesizes, and
supplies information upwards in an organization. At the same time, it is the level that
interprets and tailors strategic decisions downwards and makes use of their resources
to create ideas and opportunities linked to organizational strategies (Balogun, 2003).
It has been researched that the performance of organizations is heavily influenced by
the performance at the middle rather than the top (G. Currie & Procter, 2005). The
middle level also holds the position and power to protect their own interests and
84

initiatives and becomes an obstacle to organizational change (Balogun, 2003).

In either state-control or state-supervision model countries, researchers have started to

study how mid-level academic units adapt to institutional and external changes and
the possible influence and outcomes of their activities on the development of higher
education institutions (Bolton, 2000; Boyko & Jones, 2010; Bright & Richards, 2001;
de Zilwa, 2010a; Gmelch, 2004; Harman, 2002; Krahenbuhl, 2004; Meek,
Goedegebuure, & De Boer, 2010; Santiago, Carvalho, Amaral, & Meek, 2006;
Sotirakou, 2004; Trowler, 2010; Wolverton, Gmelch, Montez, & Nies, 2001). From
their studies, we could find that academic units are moving towards new
manegerialism and entrepreneurialism. Academics are resisting the changes caused by
this movement, but government and university leaders are promoting professional
managers in mid-level management.

What has happened in Chinese higher education? Before the decentralization policy
was adopted, faculties were passive policy implementers with no power to make
decisions for their development. So they did not need to respond to social or
economic changes. They were then treated as an appendix of the university deserving
no attention. While the decentralization reform goes deeper, university hands over
some administrative power with financial responsibility to mid-level academic units.
Now these units possess the power and capability to make strategic plans for its
development and implement them. They become active responders to social and
economic changes. But how the units make use of their power and the new
relationship between university and faculty is still under investigation. In fact, rarely
could we find relevant literature in this area.

Working with decentralization, the marketization reform has exposed mid-level

academic units to the external environment, directly interacting with external forces
and stakeholders. The adoption of market mechanism in internal administration and
the orientation towards market in teaching and research all indicate that the new
85

managerialism has been introduced to Chinese higher education institutions. However,

how the academic units cope with such changes to ensure their legitimacy and
facilitate their development deserves further investigation.

Therefore, I decided to accommodate my research at the mid-level academic units.

Under the influence and pressure of decentralization and marketization, academic
units have to make internal decisions to actively respond to environmental changes
within external policy frameworks. The unit, as an organization, would change
according to these internal decisions and external policies. Although the results of one
case study cannot be used to generate universal theories, the findings and conclusions
of this study would definitely enrich an existing knowledge base and give descriptions
and explanations to some rarely touched phenomena.

86

Chapter Three Methodology

The research methodology defines the nature of the research, the content of the
research, the way to proceed with the research, how to measure the progress, and how
to present the results. In this chapter, the above mentioned contents are described and
organized into the following four sections: the research design, data collection, data
analysis, and some methodological considerations.
3.1 Research Design
There are many ways of performing social science research. Each of these is based on
different research strategies rooted in different sociological theories, follows its own
logic to collect and analyze evidence, and has its own strengths and weaknesses
(Neuman, 2000; R. K. Yin, 2003). These strategies are not mutually exclusive, but
with overlap among them. The selection of a specific strategy is based on the nature
of the study and the emphasis of the researchs perspective.

The research purpose decides what methods to be used to conduct the research. The
purpose of this study is to investigate how an academic unit in a Chinese research
university interacts with its environment and makes changes accordingly. There are
several main forces affecting the development of the studied school and causing
organizational changes to meet their demands. By influencing certain aspects of
school operation, these forces make the school change to the direction jointly decided
by them. Therefore, the study is an institutional research for a holistic and deep
understanding of how the unit changed to respond to demands from its environment in
current rapidly changing social/economic/political contexts.

The research focuses on the processes, contexts, and often contradictory relationships
between the unit and its environment. For instance, how the industry affected the
87

curriculum design and how the university influenced the research policy in the school
have been investigated in detail. Furthermore, the study was context-bound and
context made a great contribution to the development of the school. Based on these
features, case study is an appropriate method to do the research.
3.1.1

Rationale to adopt the case study approach

In this study, an academic unit in a Chinese university is viewed and investigated as

an open-natural organizational system. Both internal and external factors influencing
its development are included in analysis. All faculty and staff members and some
selected students in the unit are considered participants in the research. The boundary
of the organization is naturally defined and relatively clear. Based on these features,
the case study method was chosen as the tool to conduct a deeply and holistic
investigation.

Basically, case study is an in-depth study of a complex social phenomenon in its

real-life context within a limited time scale (Bell, 1999). Yin (1994) defines case
study as an empirical inquiry that investigates a contemporary phenomenon within
its real-life context, especially when the boundaries between phenomenon and context
are not clearly evident(p.10). The common interest of different definitions of case
study is that it should cover contextual conditions highly relevant to the phenomenon
to be studied. This study investigated SSEs changes in an institutional and
social/economic context and the context was bound to the school. If the context was
separated from the case, it would not be able to answer the research questions.

Compared to other methods which can also explain or explore social phenomena, a
case study allows researchers to gain the holistic and meaningful understanding of the
characteristics, processes, or relations of a unit, such as an individual or an
organization (Merriam, 2001; R. K. Yin, 2003). In this study, I did not cover
everything in the school. Instead, I selected the most important aspects which have
88

been well-defined and fully discussed in existing literature. Nevertheless, I believed

that I could uncover the truth through carefully investigating these aspects and have a
full understanding of the case.

Both a qualitative and quantitative study could adopt the case study strategy since
case studies can employ various methods. Because I wanted to have a deep
understanding of the school, I finally selected qualitative methods to conduct the
research. I adopted more than one way to collect information. The conclusion of a
study would be more persuasive if it relied on multiple sources of evidence for
converging triangulation, and would benefit from the existing theoretical propositions
to guide data collection and analysis (Hamel, Dufour, & Fortin, 1993; Merriam, 2001;
R. K. Yin, 1994).

When to use case study as the strategy to conduct research lies on some conditions:
the type of research questions, the degree of focus on contemporary or historical
events, or the extent of control over the investigated events (R. K. Yin, 2003). First,
the research questions should fall into the 5W (who, what, where, how, and why)
scheme and mainly focus on the how and why (Hedrick, Bickman, & Rog, 1993).
My research questions were regarding the what and how and the research focus
was on how the school changed. Secondly, the case study approach is preferred in
examining contemporary events rather than historical events. I studied a participant of
a nation-wide experiment initiated by the government in 2001. I studied the short
history of the school, but the experiment itself was a concurrent event rather than a
historical event. Third, the case study is suitable to investigate the phenomenon that
cannot be manipulated. This selected case was situated in a specific institutional and
cultural context, in which I, as the researcher, was unable to influence the process of
its development. In sum, the case study strategy is appropriate to answer the how or
why questions focusing on a contemporary individual, group, organization, or
phenomenon within some real-life context where the relevant behaviors cannot be
manipulated (Stake, 1995; R. K. Yin, 1994).
89

This study is to investigate how an academic unit responded to governmental and

institutional policies and survived under the pressure of marketization and
decentralization. The context was changing very fast, so the timing is crucial to the
research. This study would investigate a concurrent phenomenon in Chinese higher
education development. Based on all these conditions, it is appropriate to choose the
case study approach to conduct the research.

In this study, in order to get a holistic understanding of the unit, data from various
sources are needed. Although some statistical data gained from interviews or
document reviews are used to offer compensative support and triangulation, the study
mainly adopted qualitative data collection methods, such as document review,
interview, and focus group discussion.

However, the case study method has its own disadvantages and has been attacked by
many researchers. Some common concerns are the lack of rigor and weak
generalization. The measures to cope with these problems will be described in the
later section in this chapter.
3.1.2

Criteria to select the case

Case study is the study of the particularity and complexity of a single case, coming
to understand its activity within important circumstances (Stake, 1995). Therefore,
the case is expected to meet researchers special interests and catch the complexity. In
this study, the selection of the case is based on researchers interests and ability to
access information, the needs for answering research questions, and the diversity and
complexity of information derived from the case.

First, the selected case is an unusual one which can provide rich information and
implication. In 2001, the government established 36 national pilot software
90

engineering schools in 36 national key universities as an experiment. The Ministry of

Education directly guided the establishment and development of these schools. These
schools were given special policies and encouraged to be innovative in teaching and
administration. These schools have been experiencing continuous changes and a large
amount of conflict was observed in the process. Stake (1995) noted that unusual cases
might help even more to illustrate matters which are overlooked in typical cases. In
this sense, these special and unusual schools are excellent cases to study Chinese
higher education development and reform. The tension and conflicts have been
maximized, so richness and complexity of information can make the research
outcome more persuasive and solid.

Second, the case is quite representative and among the best in the experiment group.
In 2006, the Ministry of Education conducted the final assessment of all these 36
schools. The committee of this evaluation consisted of officials from the MoE, experts
from IT industry and all the deans of these 36 schools. Finally, there were nine
schools totally passing every aspect of the assessment and it was reasonable to choose
the case from them. The case I selected was listed in the first group. It has the most
common characteristics of these school as well as some significant special features.
By studying this case, I could answer all the research questions and make appropriate
conclusions.

The third reason to choose the case was that I was familiar with the university and the
school and had the convenience of access to internal documents and key informants.
Researchers deep understanding of circumstances is a very important criterion to
select the case. The understanding would help to design the research, determine the
methods, and analyze data (Stake, 1995; R. K. Yin, 1984/1989). As a former insider, I
have the convenience of access to people and documents. Meanwhile, the deep
understanding of the case helps me to determine the key informants to talk with and
which critical documents to review. Their cooperation can determine the success of
the study to a large extent. However, the insider perspective would definitely create
91

bias, so how to deal with this insider bias is an issue to be discussed in the later
section.

Finally, its being a start-up school has given me additional advantages to plan the
research. It was relatively easier to understand the original conception of the unit, and
translate the conception into an institutional entity within the specific institutional
conditions. Furthermore, it is also possible to reveal major features, debates, and
changes of the case in the short space of the dissertation. Specifically, the time frame
of this research covers from its establishment in 2001 to the time when I started my
main study field work in 2008.
3.1.3

Aspects to investigate

The development of a faculty can be revealed via various features, such as teaching,
research, finance, curricula, programs, personnel systems, remuneration systems,
international cooperation, industry cooperation, etc. The establishment of the school
represents the collaboration of government, higher education institutions, and industry
under the influence and pressure of marketization and decentralization. The
legitimacy of the school has been challenged right from the beginning. Therefore,
investigating its establishment and legitimacy of existence could review the
interaction of various internal/external forces.

Furthermore, by reviewing relevant literature, it can be found that decentralization

and marketization mostly affect several aspects of higher education institutions:
administration, teaching, and research. So it is reasonable to include these three
aspects into the study.

The decentralization reform has changed the relationship between the school and the
university, as well as their power structure and process. Specifically, the school was
established under special policies which gave it higher freedom and autonomy. It was
92

anticipated to make innovative changes to the administrative system, so the

management of the school is worth investigation. Finance, personnel, leadership, and
student affairs are the main aspects studied in this research to trace the route of
institutional changes.

The implementation of a market mechanism has also brought changes to

administration systems, teaching, and research. The marketized administration system
is supposed to be more efficient. The teaching is considered a revenue-generating
activity and research has changed to applied and market-driven. Particularly, the
studied unit was designed as a teaching-oriented school. Studying the changes on
teaching, and tension between teaching and research, could reveal many important
factors affecting the development and changes of the school. The changes have shown
the attitudes and reactions of the school in dealing with external pressures.

By studying these issues, we could best reveal the tensions and relationships in the
short history of the case and understand the forces causing changes or conflicts, as
well as the interaction between the unit and external forces. These areas are not
mutually exclusive, but they could illustrate the issues from different perspectives,
supporting each other. Meanwhile, using different data collection methods to get
information from different resources could triangulate each other and increase the
validity of the research.
3.2 Data Collection
The nature of the study and the research questions determine what information to
collect and how it should be collected. The government policy and institutional
regulation create a framework for the researched school to operate under, so policy
and regulation documents are necessary to review in the research. Talking to faculty,
staff members, and students and understanding their thoughts and feelings is critical
to understanding how people in the unit perceive and react to external forces, how
93

they interpret and implement policies, and how they make decisions in response to
external environment changes.

I spent two months conducting field work in three cities. Before the main study, I also
did a preliminary field study in Shanghai to collect background information. The
collected information was helpful for deciding the participants of the main study and
designing the questions to be used. Basically, three major methods are adopted to
collect data: document review, individual interview, and focus group discussion. Since
the research involved human beings, I obtained ethical approval from the university
before starting data collection. (Please see appendix i - iv for the consent forms for
both individual interviews and focus group discussions.)
3.2.1

Document review

In almost every study, researchers need to examine documents, such as newspapers,

letters, administrative documents, annual reports, correspondence, agendas, minutes
of meetings, etc. (Stake, 1995). There are many advantages to using documents: stable,
unobtrusive, exact (written evidence), thoughtful data, broad coverage, etc. (Creswell,
1994; R. K. Yin, 2003) Therefore, a systematic search for relevant documents is an
important part of the data collection process. The most important use of documents is
to corroborate evidence obtained from other sources, such as interviews, discussions,
or observations (R. K. Yin, 1994).

Document analysis in this study is used to get background information and to support
and triangulate information obtained from individual and group interviews. The
following documents have been analyzed:

Public documents issued by the Ministry of Education and several other central
ministries related to the development of national pilot software engineering
schools: These policy documents help to understand the relationship between the
94

unit and the government. In fact, these documents set the policy framework and
national context in which the school operates.
Internal administrative documents of the university related to all academic units:
These documents demonstrate the governance style of the university and
administrative relationship between the university and all academic units. These
documents describe the institutional context of the school.
Internal administrative documents of the university specifically related to the
studied unit: These documents define the special relationship between the unit
and the university.
Internal documents of the school related to administration, teaching, and research:
These documents help constitute the internal context of the school and define the
relationship among various internal players.

These documents are very helpful in understanding the relationship between the unit
and its environment and stakeholders. Nevertheless, the information obtained from
these documents needs to be supported by data from other sources to provide concrete
explanations of the case.

However, when using these kinds of documents in research, author bias needs to be
taken into consideration (R. K. Yin, 1994). For example, documents written for some
specific purpose sometimes contain unmitigated truths. In this study, the final formal
evaluation report from the Ministry of Education contains large amounts of
information. However, the purpose of this report is to demonstrate the success of this
experiment, so some data, judgments, or conclusions may not be appropriate to use to
support the arguments in this study due to their intentional bias. Therefore, it is very
important to always keep in mind identifying these conditions to avoid misleading
through documentary evidence (R. K. Yin, 1994, 2003).

95

3.2.2

Individual interview

The interview is one of the most important information sources in qualitative research,
as well as in this case study. Basically, interviews are guided conversations and
involve a sharing of experience from people whose insights, feelings, and cooperation
are essential to reveal subjective meanings (Neuman, 1994; R. K. Yin, 2003).
Interviews can be very flexible or very rigid. Based on their flexibility, they can be
divided into several types: open-ended interview, close-ended interview, and
semi-structured interview.

The most commonly used interview is the open-ended or unstructured interview

which means researchers give as little interference as possible during the conversation.
Researchers ask informants for the facts of a matter or their opinions about events,
and then let the conversations flow (R. K. Yin, 1994, 2003). The unstructured
interview is especially useful when the researcher talks to key informants who could
not only provide insight of a matter but also suggest sources of corroboratory
evidence and even initiate the access to such source (R. K. Yin, 1994).

In a structured interview, researchers ask informants a pre-determined set of questions

following designed interview schedules (R. K. Yin, 2003). The questions could be
either open-ended or close-ended. A structured interview can provide uniform
information and guarantee some degree of comparability. Semi-structured interviews
mix the features of structured and unstructured interviews. Researchers have some
kind of control over the flow of conversation, but leave room for informants to freely
report their feelings and opinions.

In this study, both unstructured and semi-structured interviews are adopted. During
the field work for the preliminary study, I found that many faculty members were
completely lost during the interviews if they were allowed to freely express their
thoughts. The efficiency of interviews was very low and it was time consuming to
96

extract useful data out of interview transcripts. Therefore, I decided to adopt both
open-ended and semi-structured interviews in the main study.

In the main study, open-ended, in-depth interviews were used to get crucial
information from key informants. The key informants are those who are eligible to
make internal decisions in the school or who have strong influence on the internal
decision making process. Semi-structured interviews were used to interview other
informants. Under intentional guidance, these informants freely expressed their
feelings and opinions on pre-designed topics (Please see appendix v - viii for the
questions for individual interviews).

Regarding the participants of interviews, I did not invite all faculty and staff. In the
preliminary study, I interviewed all faculty and staff members in the school. In the
main study, some faculty and staff were given up due to either the very limited
information they could provide or their unwillingness or unavailability to participate
in the study. Ultimately, about half of the faculty and staff were included in the
interviews. I also interviewed several alumni, people from industry, and a faculty
member from a partner foreign university.

There were a total of 39 people interviewed in the main study. They represented all
groups in the school. The information collected from outsiders was mainly used to
triangulate the data received from insiders.

Leadership members: 7 persons

Faculty members: 14 persons
Staff members: 4 persons
Staff outside the school: 2 persons
Alumni: 9 persons

Interviews were conducted in three cities: Shanghai, Beijing, and Hong Kong (Please
97

see appendix ix for the schedule of individual interviews). The main site was in
Shanghai where the university is located. Usually, I interviewed school leaders,
faculty, and staff on campus. Alumni were interviewed either in their working places
or on campus. I visited the University Cooperation Departments of both major
cooperating companies located in Beijing and interviewed their staff. I also
interviewed alumni working for several multinational companies in Beijing. As
examples of internationally employable graduates of SSE, I interviewed two alumni
who were working in Hong Kong.

I encountered problems when I did some of the interviews. When I interviewed

faculty members, they tended to lead the conversations to what they were familiar
with, such as their disciplinary knowledge or their courses. They were very bound to
their work. Although I tried to lead the talk back to the pre-set questions, they kept
returning to their work or their achievements. One possible reason is that they focused
on their work only and were proud of their achievements, paying little attention to
other affairs. Or maybe they did not want to touch certain topics which they thought
were sensitive or inappropriate.

A member of the former leadership refused to answer questions on my list. Instead, he

freely expressed his opinions on the development of the school and the lessons he
learned from his experience. His views deeply touched the structural problems with
the current Chinese higher education mechanism and conflicts between the innovative
school and the conservative university system. However, these opinions did not fit in
with the preset themes of the study. Therefore, I created a new section to
accommodate these ideas.

Several interviewees asked me to turn off my recorder when they mentioned some
sensitive issues. Basically, these issues are related to their comments on current
leadership or important policies in the school and the university. They did not want
their talk to be mentioned in the dissertation either. In this case, I took their opinions
98

as background information to help me understand the situation.

Interviews could offer the most important and richest information for the research.
However, the interviews are verbal reports with invalidity problems, such as bias,
poor recall, and poor or inaccurate articulation (R. K. Yin, 1994). Therefore,
triangulation should always be considered as the way to corroborate interview data to
increase the validity.
3.2.3

Focus group discussion

Beck, Trombetta, and Share (1986) described the focus group as an informal
discussion among selected individuals about specific topics relevant to the situation at
hand(p.73). The intention of a focus group discussion is to let people spark off one
another, suggesting dimensions and nuances of the original problem that any one
individual might not have thought of (Rubin & Rubin, 1995). Focus group
discussion can be very stimulating for participants and they can elaborate on each
others opinions to generate richer information (Fontana & Frey, 2002).

In this study, a focus group discussion was used to interview current students. It has
been observed and accepted that Chinese college students are too shy to express their
opinions in public or in front of their teachers. Even though I had left the school
before this study started, the students still respected me as their teacher. When I tried
to interview students individually, they were too nervous to speak freely. The
interview looked like a questionnaire collection. After reviewing some literature on
conducting qualitative research on Chinese college students, I decided to change the
methods in the main study. Grouping students together can reduce their nervousness
and encourage them to interact with each other and spark ideas during the interviews.
Therefore, focus group discussion can be seen as an appropriate tool to understand
Chinese students true feelings and opinions.

99

The format of the questions in the focus group discussion could range from structured
to unstructured, depending on the research agenda (Morgan, 2002). Usually, social
science researchers tend to allow more spontaneous group interactions and
participants can freely express their opinions. The moderator is not a controller but a
facilitator who is minimally involved in the discussion (Bloor, Frankland, Thomas, &
Robson, 2001). If the discussion touches some areas of particular interest, the
moderator may encourage participants to explore the topic further (Marvasti, 2004;
Merton, Fiske, & Kendall, 1990).

In this study, semi-structured questions were used to guide the direction of the
discussion (Please see appendix viii for the questions for focus group discussions). I
did not intend to control the conversation. The students were very energetic and full of
unpredictable ideas, so sometimes their minds jumped too fast without any pattern. In
order to improve the quality and efficiency of the interview, I had to give some
guidance when necessary. Meanwhile, using semi-structured questions can give a
degree of comparability while using discussion data to support or triangulate issues.

Interviewed students were in two groups: current undergraduate students and current
graduate students (Please see appendix x for the schedule of focus group discussions).
All the current graduate students were former undergraduate students in the school, so
they had a thorough understanding of the school, including administration, teaching,
and research. The selection of current students in each group depended on teachers
nominations and students availability. When I contacted students, I tried to get
students from different groups: both male and female students; academic records in
school ranging from good to bad.

However, the focus group discussion is not perfect. Some challenges were
encountered during the field work, such as one or several students dominating the
discussion and the distortion of answering sensitive topics in the presence of others.
The possibility of the moderator manipulating the discussion is another risk of doing a
100

focus group discussion. Therefore, triangulation is needed to avoid bias and

misleading when interpreting these data.
3.3 Data Analysis
Data analysis usually involves processes such as examining, categorizing, tabulating,
or using evidence to address propositions (R. K. Yin, 1994). In this study, data were
collected through document review, interviews, and discussion, so mainly qualitative
data are processed. Qualitative data are typically in the form of words containing rich
descriptions of situations and an understanding of their underlying meanings (Babbie,
2001; Miles & Huberman, 1994). Since words are much more complex than numbers
and usually have ambiguous meanings, the analysis of qualitative data is a great
challenge to many researchers (Tutty, Rothery, & Guinnell Jr., 1996).

Three aspects of the school operation were investigated: teaching, research, and
administration. Information was from documents, interviews, or discussions. All
non-text data were transformed into text form first before doing any further
processing. Since interviews and group discussions were recorded into audio files,
these data were all transcribed into text files. The interviews and discussion were
conducted in Chinese, so the text files are also in Chinese. The data were analyzed in
Chinese, but the products of analysis were in English. The content that was cited in
the dissertation was also translated into English.

Based on the theoretical framework of this study, two main organizational theories are
used to guide the analysis of data. The resource dependence theory emphasizes the
interaction between the organization and its external environment, and the survival of
an organization depends on the resources it can get from its environment (W. R. Scott,
2003). The theory denies the idea that organizations are self-directed and autonomous
in pursuing their destiny without the interference from their social contexts (Gornitzka,
1999). On the contrary, neo-institutional theory emphasizes what constitutes
101

appropriate or acceptable organizational forms and behavior (Gornitzka, 1999; Oliver,

1997; W. R. Scott, 1987). It emphasizes that the critical condition for organizational
survival is to conform to an organizational environment which is dominated by rules,
requirements,

understandings,

and

taken-for-granted

assumptions.

When

organizations make changes, it changes in the context of taken-for-granted norms and

beliefs.

According to Yin (1994), theoretical propositions can be used to organize the entire
case study and to define alternative explanations. In this study, the resource
dependence theory and the neo-institutional theory are both embraced to provide
theoretical propositions to guide the data analysis process. The former theory is
mainly for understanding interaction between the organization and its environment,
while the latter one can be used to comprehend internal factors affecting the
organizational changes.

Basically, qualitative data analysis is to sift, sort, and organize the masses of
information acquired during data collection in order to find the themes and make
reasonable interpretations addressing the research questions (Tutty, et al., 1996).
Sometimes, further data collection is needed after analyzing the data collected from
the previous collection. Therefore, it is very common to move back and forth between
initial and later interviews, identifying units of meaning, coding, and interpreting the
data during the whole process (Tutty, et al., 1996).

When analyzing collected data, I did not use any computer software. All transcribed
text documents (including policy and regulation documents, and text of interviews
and focus group discussions) were repeatedly read and key meaning words were
found. The study was regarding decentralization, marketization, and organizational
changes. After reviewing relevant literature, the aspects of investigation were decided
and some important key words emerged. Typical key words include market,
university, government, relationship, collaboration/cooperation, industry,
102

change, etc.

Based on these key words, texts were categorized into several themes within three
broad topics: administration, teaching, and research. The topics were concluded from
the literature review. Since most interviews were semi-structured, the content of the
interviews generally stayed relevant to the themes. All the categories were carefully
considered and compared to find the ones which were most relevant to the topics and
were then organized. There was one topic frequently mentioned by informants, but it
did not fit in any of the three categories. It was related to the destiny of the school,
from its establishment to its possible end. I discussed this with several key informants
and they all thought this was a very important part of the school. It is not only the
context, but also the force to make changes. After careful consideration, I decided to
accommodate issues related to this topic in a separate section. There were several
other minor categories that did not fit in the four topics, such as gender, students
learning experiences, and students career development. These contents were given up
in this dissertation and left for future study.

Finally, all the categorized contents were described in a logical way and interpreted
using the theoretical framework which was summarized from the literature. The
interpretation and explanation were then used to build the foundation for the final
conclusion.
3.4 Methodological Considerations
Besides the issues related to research design and data collection and analysis, there are
several other considerations regarding the methodology adopted in this study.
3.4.1

Insider issue

Qualitative methods were originally used to understand cultures different from the
one with which researchers were familiar, so capturing insiders perspectives had not
103

been a concern for a long time (Bartunek & Louis, 1996). However, the importance of
understanding a phenomenon from participants perspectives has been identified and
emphasized in recent years (Gubrium, 1988; Merriam, 2001).

Insiders usually have different views and findings from outside researchers and these
differences have significant implications for the quality of knowledge gained from the
research (Bartunek & Louis, 1996). Actually, these differences are based on their
different interests on the settings. Insiders tend to view the setting as a source of better
consequences, such as career security, self-esteem, social affiliation, fulfillment, or
challenge, while outsiders typically experience the setting temporarily for a known
period of time with no personal benefit. Therefore, outsiders are likely to be more
objective and have more influence over public interpretations of the settings and
events (Bartunek & Louis, 1996).

The advantage of the researcher-as-an-insider is that the researcher is familiar with the
background and assumptions that are usually unspoken and difficult for outsiders to
understand. Without a sound familiarity with the background knowledge, qualitative
research runs the risk of impoverishment and misinterpretation (Bartunek & Louis,
1996). The disadvantage of being an insider is that the researcher may be deeply
embedded in the commonsensical though unarticulated understandings (Van
Maanen, 1988) as the persons being researched. So researchers might be restricted in
the range and kinds of things that they can observe and understand (McCracken,
1988).

I was a faculty member in the school and quit the job when I started my doctoral study.
As a former insider, I maintained several advantages in this research. First, I have a
better understanding of the background knowledge which reduces the risk of
misinterpretation. Second, I could easily access real data. The informants tended to
provide idealized and generalized information to outsiders since they were worried
that some negative comments may damage the image of the school and university.
104

However, informants are more willing to talk in depth with people who are familiar
with and know their world (Rubin, 1995). Moreover, it is extremely difficult for
outsiders to obtain sensitive data. As a former insider and having sent out a clear
message of not returning to the school in the future, it was easier to persuade
informants to tell their true feelings and opinions.

However, I, as a former insider, also experienced the danger of bias. I share some
common understandings with informants, so this understanding might obstruct my
views and make me insensitive to certain issues. Insiders may take many things for
granted, not thinking about the reasons behind them, and may ignore the possibilities
that these things may interest outsiders and are valuable to the research. I realized this
when I interviewed faculty and staff during my exploring study. Meanwhile, I got
involved in some decision-making processes when I worked in the school, so it is
difficult for me to keep an objective stance while analyzing these decisions.

Fortunately, the longer I am away from the school, the better I am able to keep a
critical distance from the researched and see familiar data in unfamiliar ways
(McCracken, 1988). During the data analysis process, I always intentionally held an
objective view when analyzing the events and issues from an outsiders stance and
corroborated personal opinions with data from other sources. It would be impossible
to be completely objective, but at least I had adopted necessary measures to avoid bias
as much as possible.
3.4.2

Triangulation

Triangulation refers to the use of more than one approach to conduct research in order
to enhance confidence in the findings (Denzin, 1970). It may also be defined as the
use of two or more sources of data or methods of data collection which can add to the
richness and complexity of human behavior by studying it from more than one
standpoint (Cohen & Manion, 1994). For instance, in my study, both multiple
105

resources and multiple methods were adopted to support each other. Interviews were
used to collect opinions from faculty and staff while focus group discussions were
used to get feedback from students. In a case study, triangulation is highly
recommended because it allows researchers to address a broader range of issues (R. K.
Yin, 2003).

Moreover, exclusive reliance on one method may cause bias or distort researchers
pictures of the particular slice of reality which they are investigating. This was
significant when I interviewed school leadership and faculty regarding research.
School leaders thought that the school has provided much support to help faculty
obtain research funds or contracts. However, faculty members insisted that the school
has not given any help for applying research funds or projects. They thought they
have done the work completely by themselves. The opinions from these two groups
were completely against each other. It is obvious that I would be biased if I received
data from only one source. Therefore, it is important for researchers to be confident
that the data they generate are not simply artifacts of one specific method of collection
(N. Lin, 1976).

Some methodologists often tend to apply a particular method because they are
familiar with this method or they believe their method is superior to all others (Smith,
1975). The use of triangular techniques may help to overcome the problem of
method-boundedness. Each method has its strengths and weakness, so the adoption
of a certain method relies on the purpose of the study and the nature of the research
questions. In my study, a case study method was chosen because it best served my
research purpose and was appropriate to answer my research questions. Nevertheless,
I admitted that other research methods could also be used to conduct the research and
reach different conclusions.

According to Denzin and Flick, five types of triangulation could be recognized in

most social science research (Denzin, 1989; Flick, 1998).
106

 Data triangulation: make use of a variety of data sources in a study

Method triangulation: use multiple methods to study the same problem
Investigator triangulation: involves more than one researcher or investigator in the
research
Theory triangulation: rely on different theoretical perspectives to interpret or
explain the collected data
Analysis triangulation: crosscheck the same data in different periods to see if the
same findings are acquired or different researchers analyze the same data at the
same time

In this study, data triangulation was employed to construct validity. To ensure data
triangulation, different data sources are used to collect information relevant to the
same event. School leaders, faculty and staff members, students, and some outsiders
were invited to participate in the study to provide their opinions. They reported their
feelings and thinking from their standpoints. In fact, analyzing the reasons behind the
differences or even contradictions among their opinions could help to create a holistic
picture of the phenomenon. Meanwhile, various kinds of documents issued by the
government, the university, and the school are revealed to support any conclusion
drawing from interviews or discussions.
3.4.3

Reliability and Validity

Compared to the quantitative research, qualitative research is more sensitive to the

contexts since it aims to acquire an adequate and accurate in-depth understanding of
the researched phenomenon, rather than the generalization of results (Wiersma, 2000;
R. K. Yin, 1994). Reliability and validity are two important criteria commonly used in
social science research to judge whether the procedures of data collection are properly
designed and carried out, as well as to determine the quality of the data (Seliger &
Shohamy, 1989; R. K. Yin, 1994).
107

Reliability

Reliability demonstrates whether the research design of a study can be repeated with
the same results, given the same subjects to study (R. K. Yin, 1994). The goal is to
minimize the errors and biases in the study. However, in a qualitative study, the
uniqueness of a study within a specific context actually impedes the possibility of
replicating it exactly in another context (Creswell, 1994). In some extreme cases of
doing research in historical or concurrent phenomena or events, repeating these
studies is absolutely impossible. As the alternative, having clear central assumptions,
detailed protocols of data collection, or statements of biases and values of the
researcher may enhance the possibility to replicate the study in another setting
(Creswell, 1994; R. K. Yin, 1984/1989).

The studied unit was a participant of a national experiment, so it operated in a special

context designed for specific purposes. The specific characteristics of the context and
the strong influence of the context to the researched unit were significant, so the
major concern on reliability in this study was related to methodology rather than the
possibility of replicating the research to another context. In this study, necessary
measures were adopted to ensure some degree of reliability.

First, the theoretical framework was created to present the central assumptions of the
study, guide the analysis of data, and construct conclusions. Reviewed literature has
built the direction of data collection and decided the aspects to investigate. Among
many aspects of the school, I mainly focused on teaching, research, and
administration because these aspects have been popularly mentioned in existing
literature in this field. And the theoretical framework guided the data analysis. Two
organizational theories were used to analyze collected information in three aspects.
Non-relevant data were eliminated to ensure the direction of analysis.
108

Secondly, the data collection practices, especially the interviews and focus group
discussions, were under detailed plans and guidelines to make sure the process was
valid and as reliable as possible. During the exploring study, I had collected some
background information to prepare for the main study on site. Before the field work, I
had prepared interview and discussion questions which were highly relevant to
research questions and approved by my supervisor and the advisory panel. On the
field trip to the site of the study, I tried to prepare relevant materials before each
interview and discussion in order to let interviews and discussions flow smoothly. The
processes of interviews and discussion were also planned in advance and moderated
in progress.

These measures might not be able to prevent all possible deviations from the right
track. At the least, they could increase the level of reliability that the conclusions of
the study were produced on a solid basis. Having adopted such a measure could also
give me more confidence to defend my study.

Validity

There are generally three types of validity: construct validity, internal validity, and
external validity (Kidder & Judd, 1986).

Construct validity concerns whether correct operational measures are established

for the concepts under study. This is critical to case studies to develop a
sufficiently operational set of measures for data collection (R. K. Yin, 1994).
Internal validity is used to establish a causal relationship. It is usually relevant to
quantitative research and refers to the degree to which a causal relationship
between variables is justified in the study (Johnson & Christensen, 2000; Yin,
1994).
External validity deals with whether the findings are generalizable. It could be
enhanced by providing rich and thick descriptions of the cases and situations
109

under study; by describing the typicality of the target phenomenon or cases;

and/or by using multiple case studies (Merriam, 2001).

This study is a qualitative case study which is context-bounded. According to the

nature of this study, construct validity and external validity are two major concerns. In
qualitative research, internal validity is not relevant to causal relationships. Instead, it
needs other alternative measures to achieve. In order to ensure different types of
validity, several methods were applied to increase the validity of the study.

Construct validity problems could be reduced by the use of multiple sources of

evidence, sorting evidence or letting key informants to review the draft (R. K. Yin,
1994). In this study, the construct validity could be ensured by using as many data
sources as possible and applying triangulation in the data collection procedure. Like
mentioned in the triangulation section, the use of a multiple data source could reduce
the possibility of bias in research. The theoretical framework helped to create
connections among parts of data and discussion. By these means, the construct
validity could be enhanced.

Internal validity is more relevant to quantitative research rather than qualitative study.
My study is a qualitative case study, so internal validity is not a great concern.
According to Merriam, Miles and Huberman, internal validity can be addressed by
determining the accuracy of the information and whether it matches reality (Merriam,
1988; Miles & Huberman, 1994).

In this study, using different methods to collect data from various sources could
testify whether the data were consistent with each other and thus increase the
possibility of matching the collected information with reality. For instance, regarding
the relationship between teachers and students, the interview data collected from
teachers may be different from those collected from students. The policy reviewed
from documents may vary from those interpreted by individuals in the school.
110

Therefore, having data from different sources is critical to ensuring the validity of the
research.

The external validity is a critical issue for any case study. Usually when people
mention generalizability, they refer to statistical generalization that generalizes
universal conclusions by studying selected samples. However, case studies rely on
analytical generalization. By comparing the empirical results of studied cases with
previously developed theories, existing theories could be expanded and generalized
(R. K. Yin, 1994). These two kinds of generalization serve different purposes. In this
study, an academic unit is considered a case.

The purpose of the study is not to generalize conclusions suitable for all similar
academic units in Chinese universities, and it is unnecessary to do so. Instead, the
research focused on the special context of the case and the influence of the context.
The study was context-bounded and the conclusion of the study may not be valid
when separated from the context. Therefore, the goal of the study is to enrich the
existing theories. This purpose determines that analytical generalization, not statistical
generalization, is the key factor. Therefore, to analyze data and interpret findings
following sound theoretical frameworks could enhance the external validity of the
study.
3.5 Summary
This research is a qualitative single case study to investigate how an academic unit of
a Chinese research university interacted with its environment under the influence of
decentralization and marketization. The academic unit is viewed and investigated as
an open-natural organizational system. Both internal and external factors influencing
its development are included in the analysis. All the members of the unit are
considered participants of the research. The selection of the case is based on the
researchers interests and capability of accessing information, the need for answering
111

research questions, and the diversity and complexity of information derived from the
case.

Based on a literature review, four aspects of the unit had been selected to explore:
establishment, teaching, research, and administration. These issues could best reveal
the tensions and relationships in the history of the case. The forces caused changes or
conflicts and the interaction between the unit and internal/external forces can be
understood. These areas are not mutually exclusive, but they could illustrate the issues
from different perspectives, supporting each other.

The theoretical framework concluded from literature contributes to the design of the
research. Two main organizational theories are used to guide the analysis of data. One
is the resource dependence theory which is rooted in a positivist perspective and the
other is the neo-institutional theory based on the assumptions of the constructivist
perspective. Therefore, both positivist and social constructivist perspectives are
adopted to collect and analyze the data.

This research is a qualitative study. Three major methods are adopted in data
collection: document review, individual interview, and focus group discussion. Using
different data collection methods to get information from different resources could
triangulate each other and increase the validity of the research. The collected data
were analyzed through repeated reading, categorizing, and theme-finding. Then the
cleaned information was organized under the structure derived from the theoretical
framework.

Several methods were used to ensure the objectivity, reliability, and validity. As a
former insider who has a close connection to the case, I have tried to keep a critical
distance from the case, intentionally avoiding bias when analyzing data, and
corroborating personal opinions with data from other sources. Both data and method
triangulation are employed to construct validity and different data sources are used to
112

collect information relevant to the same event. Well-defined theoretical frameworks

and well-designed working procedures also helped to increase the reliability and
validity of the study.

113

Chapter Four Research Context

In this chapter, the research context will be introduced, including the institutional
context and the disciplinary context. The introduction of University A gives the
environment, both structural and cultural, where the unit is situated. It is followed by
the description of characteristics of the software engineering education which strongly
influence the development of the unit, especially in teaching and research.
4.1 Institutional Context
According to the theoretical framework, the development of the studied academic unit
was heavily influenced by the formal and informal structure of the university. The
formal institutions created the structural and regulatory framework that the unit must
follow and abide. The informal culture built the unobservable atmosphere which also
pulls the unit to conform to the existing system.

In this section, I will first briefly introduce the history of the university. It is followed
by the description of the organizational structure and organizational culture.
4.1.1

Brief history

University A could be seen the not only proof of the centrality of its role in German
cultural activity in China, but also a reflection of the whole history of Sino-German
relations(p.91) (Meek, Goedegebuure, Santiago, & Carvalho, 2010b). In 1907,
University A was established in the Shanghai French Concession by Germans as a
medical college to train medical doctors. The college started to offer engineering
programs in 1912. Before World War I, the college was run following a typical
German university style and academic culture. The medium of instruction was
German and German textbooks were used. By the beginning of 1917, the college had
enrolled more than 400 students and held a faculty of more than 50, most of whom
114

were German. The college was managed by a committee consisted of German

engineers and doctors and possessed high degree of autonomy (Meek, Goedegebuure,
et al., 2010b).

When the First World War started, the colleges legal status was challenged since it
was the property of Germany. The French Concession forced the dismissal of the
college to prevent it from serving the German government and manufacturing
weapons. The Chinese Nationalist government then took over control and replaced the
rector and board members with Chinese. The university was then managed by the
committee of Chinese members only and financed by Chinese government (Meek,
Goedegebuure, et al., 2010b). In 1927, the Ministry of Education renamed the college
as National University A due to its contribution to national construction and the
influence of its alumni.

During the Second World War, the university was forced to move more than 11,000
km from Shanghai to many different cities until it finally settled in a small village in
the Sichuang province. It stayed there for six years until the end of the war in 1945.
By the end of 1948, the university had become a comprehensive university, having
five faculties (medical, engineering, science, arts, and law), sixteen departments, and
nine affiliated hospitals, factories, and schools. Even Germans were less and less
involved in administration, the German tradition continued (Meek, Goedegebuure, et
al., 2010b).

After the CCP took over power, University A had gone through the same nationwide
reorganizing in 1952 as other Chinese universities. Many schools or departments,
such as medical, measurement, arts, law, mathematics, physics, chemistry, animal and
plant, mechanical engineering, electrical engineering, and naval engineering, were
merged into other universities. At the same time, the university merged several
departments related to architecture, civil engineering, bridge, railway, and
transportation from other universities. After the reorganization, the university had
115

become a school focusing on civil engineering, having five departments: railway and
road, water supply and sewerage, structure, architecture, and measurement. In 1960,
the university re-established the science department and re-organized all the majors
into seven departments: civil engineering, urban planning, bridge and road,
construction materials, electrical and mechanical, measurement, and science. In 1960,
it enrolled nearly 7,000 students and became one of the key universities under direct
supervision of the Ministry of Education (D. Yang, 2007).

In 1978, approved by the state government, University A resumed the connection with
Germany. At the same time, the university leadership decided to re-build the
university to a comprehensive university with the help from West Germany. In 1979,
University A established links with several German universities. The German Center,
German Hospital, and Sino-German College were set up on campus (Hayhoe, 1989a).

In 1978, the university started to establish several new departments covering various
disciplines. By 2007, it offered 82 undergraduate programs in different disciplines and
had basically completed the transmission from an engineering university to a
comprehensive university. As a university that had established a reputation for its
research, it was one of the first group universities authorized by the China State
Council to establish graduate schools. Now the university is a member of both 211
project and 985 project. Nowadays, University A has become a research-oriented
university with research capability and engineering achievements at the top of
Chinese universities, especially in architecture, urban planning, civil engineering,
marine science, material science, and automotive fields (D. Yang, 2007).

After several rounds of amalgamations, University A had occupied five campuses

located in different areas of the city. The main campus located in the center of the city
accommodates most faculties. The main campus has developed for more than half a
century, so it is well constructed and equipped. The north and south campuses are near
to the main campus, so they are integrated into the community of the main campus.
116

The west campus is far away from the main campus but is still located at the border of
the city center. It used to host several small faculties, but it has been abandoned by the
university and has been leased to several private colleges (D. Yang, 2007).

The university built a completely new campus on the border of the city near the
automotive manufacturing center. This campus is well designed, very spacious, and
well-equipped. However, it is very far from the city center, away from the social
network of the universitys main body. At the moment, 10 faculties which are
considered relevant to automobile manufacturing have been sent to this new campus.
To compensate these faculties, the university allocates more space to them in the new
campus. In order to accommodate students dissatisfied with being sent to the
countryside and separated from the main student society, the students of these
faculties spend half of their study time on the new campus and the other half on the
main campus.

The university has enrolled more than 57,000 full-time and part-time students and
employs about 6,400 faculty and staff. All full-time students live on campus. Student
residences located on all campuses are managed by the university. In every faculty,
the student affairs office is responsible for student management. Students are carefully
taken care of, from study life to public and personal life. The university provides
students with services covering food, health, safety, sports, entertainment, etc.
4.1.2

Organizational structure

As many other Chinese universities, University A adopted a hierarchical

administrative structure.

117

Figure 4.1 The administrative structure of the university

(Simplified from the figure from universitys website)

The university board is a new component in the administrative structure of Chinese

universities (Zhang, Sun, & Tian, 2003). University As board was established in 2007.
It is responsible for making strategic plans and very important decisions about the
direction in which the university should go. The board members have included
Chinese and Germans and they are either appointed by the government or invited by
the university leaders. Chinese board members are government officials, university
leaders, professionals, and business leaders. German board members are former
German government officials and senior administrators or faculty members of
German universities.

The university president and vice presidents are directly appointed by the Ministry of
Education. Candidates may come from the university or from outside. The
government once went further. In 1995, the university president was elected by all
faculty, staff and students and was finally approved by the Ministry of Education. She
was the first elected university president in China since 1949. Until recently,
presidents had been appointed by the central government. The university has a very
118

strong tie with Germany and created a tradition that all the presidents should have
some kind of link with German speaking countries. This tradition became necessary
after the university re-established the University Board. Since some board members
are German, the candidates should be accepted by both Chinese and German board
members and should be able to work with other Germans harmoniously.

After a series of reforms on decentralization, the government has transferred much

administrative power to higher education institutions (Mok, 2003). Like many
Chinese universities, University A takes care of its development in most aspects, such
as finance, personnel (other than university presidents), teaching, research, services,
etc. The university is responsible for making its own strategic plan and implementing
this plan accordingly.

However, some important decisions must go through the ministry. For example, if the
university wants to set up a new faculty, it should get approval from the ministry. The
university makes its own development plan, but it should send the plan to the ministry
for approval. As a global trend, the Chinese government has also reduced direct
investments on higher education. The government gives a certain amount of
subsidiary to full-time college students, but the funds cannot cover the cost of
education. Therefore, universities need to generate extra income to make up the cost.

University A has 29 faculties/schools/colleges ( xueyuan). Under each

faculty/school, there are departments ( xi). Various research institutes and centers
are managed by faculties or departments. Although the university has worked very
hard to expand its disciplinary coverage over the decades, the academic structure of
the university is still unbalanced. Science and engineering faculties are much stronger
and larger than non-science/engineering faculties.

119

Sciences and Engineering

Others

College of Architecture and Urban Planning

College of Foreign Languages

College of Civil Engineering

College of Law

College of Mechanical Engineering

School of Political Science and International

Relations

School of Economics and Management

School of Liberal Arts

College of Environmental Science and Engineering

College of Communication and Arts

School of Electronics and Information

Film School

College of Material Science and Engineering

Women's College

College of Transportation Engineering

International School

College of Software Engineering

School of Marxism

Faculty of Sciences
College of Automotive Engineering
College of Aerospace Engineering and Applied Mechanics
School of Ocean and Earth Science
College of Life Science and Technology
Medical School
School of Stomatology
Sino-German College
Sino-German College of Applied Sciences
Sino-French College of Engineering and Management
Sino-Italian College

Table 4.1 The list of faculties and schools in the university

(Source: universitys website)

Deans are appointed by the university. Theoretically, deans are responsible for all the
affairs in their own schools or faculties. The heads of departments or research
institutes are nominated by deans and approved by the university. They are
responsible for the administration of their departments or centers. The power of deans
sometimes can be very strong. In some faculties that are academically strong or have
large student bodies, deans may be able to influence or even to manipulate university
policies. Even the appointment of deans or vice deans in these faculties could be
maneuvered or heavily influenced by existing faculty leaders.

Non-academic units provide services to academic units. They are libraries, archive
centers, university presses, logistic groups, training centers, etc. Affiliating units
include several hospitals, primary schools, and secondary schools. The university also
established several research institutes which either involve more than two faculties, or
120

work in the areas that no existing faculties cover, such as the Institute of Higher
Education Research.

Administrative departments, such as finance, personnel, registrar, student affairs,

international cooperation, and science/technology, are very powerful in the university
since they are managing and monitoring all academic and non-academic units. The
heads of these departments are all appointed by the university presidents. Most
administrative departments have branches in academic or non-academic units. For
example, in each faculty, the registrar office reports to both the dean and the head of
the registrar department in the university. Some departments are centrally controlled
by the university, such as the financial department. Faculties may have the power to
manage their financial affairs, but all the financial transactions have to go through the
finance department of the university.

The Chinese Communist Party has its representatives in all Chinese universities
(Hayhoe, 1989b). At the university level, there is one party secretary and several vice
party secretaries. There are also standing bodies responsible for party affairs, such as
the party committee, organization department, and propaganda department. According
to the laws, the party secretarys power is over the power of university presidents.
However, the situations are different in different universities. In University A, due to
historical reasons, the party secretary does have more power than the president in
decision-making.

In every faculty, there is also a party secretary. Some large faculties may have vice
party secretaries. Some party secretaries are faculty members while some are not.
Sometimes, the dean is the party secretary. However, this has become rare because of
the trend of separating party affairs from administrative affairs. It is very common that
the party secretaries in faculties are not the ones to make final decisions. Usually they
are not involved in teaching and research, but they monitor the operation of the units.
Their routine work may include party affairs, the youth league, student affairs, the
121

union, etc.

In China, university administrators are equivalent to government officials (Hayhoe,

1989b). They can be promoted or have parallel transfers to government positions.
This is true in University A, too. For example, there was one president being
promoted as the minister of a central government department; a second university
president was appointed as the Vice Minister of Education. Administrators in faculty
or department levels are also transferable to government positions.

The structure of University A is a centralized hierarchical form. This is typical in

Chinese state-owned organizations. The decision-making style is originated from
Leninist democratic centralism. The democratic aspect describes the freedom of
members to discuss and debate matters of policies and directions while the centralism
means that all members are expected to uphold the decision once it is made by
majority vote. Nowadays, the application has been modified so that the vote action
has been eliminated.

At different levels, leading teams make major decisions and take corresponding
responsibilities. Most of the time, other people can express their opinions before the
decisions are made and send their feedback after the decisions are implemented.
Sometimes, they may get notified only after the decisions have been made. The
involvement of faculty and staff in decision making is limited. Generally speaking,
students are excluded from decision making procedures. However, in some cases,
students and their parents can affect decision making through government and media.

Since faculty, staff, and students are excluded from major decision making processes,
they are not paying attention to the development and the future of the university.
Furthermore, Chinese people do not like to express their ideas in public, so they prefer
an informal communication channel to convey their opinions. Therefore, the general
public in the university seems unconcerned with issues not related to their daily lives
122

and personal benefits. They are passive in participating in activities and events
organized by the university or faculties.
4.1.3

Organizational environment

University A is a prestigious and key university with a long history, so students,

faculty and staff are all very proud members of the community. Traditionally,
University A is very strong in architecture, civil engineering, and urban planning, but
it has grown stronger in some other fields, such as materials, marine science,
automotive engineering, and transportation engineering (D. Yang, 2007). People who
are working or studying in these faculties are generally very satisfied with their
positions and proud of their achievements. People who work or study in other
faculties may not have the same feelings.

Working in a university with a very strong engineering background, people pay more
attention to the achievements in engineering projects rather than pure theoretical
research outcomes. Research outcomes mainly focus on technological innovation
rather than theoretical innovation. The style of the university is precise and practical.
When people are proud of the achievements they reached in engineering fields, they
also feel unconfident in their achievements on research in a pure science.

Similar to the situation in other Chinese universities, the income and welfare of
faculty and staff in University A is comparatively low (Min & Chen, 1994). Many
people take on extra jobs, such as contract projects, tutoring, or running their own
businesses, to get enough income to support their families. In this case, faculty
members in engineering faculties take advantage of doing research or projects to
make extra money. Generally speaking, people who are working in those traditionally
strong faculties have a better financial status.

Even though the income of university employees is low, the mobility of faculty and
123

staff is still quite low. Compared with employees in government and business sectors,
people in the universities enjoy a relatively free, and even leisurely, working
atmosphere and working style. The degree of marketization is not as severe as that in
other social sectors (Mok, 1997a). Faculty members are especially still well respected
for their knowledge and competence, and their social status is relatively high.

The relationship between teachers and students has changed since the late 1980s, but
teachers still manage students in many aspects (Zheng, 2004). Students are well taken
care of by the university staff in terms of their daily lives. They all live on campus and
are usually arranged by disciplines and grades. According to the regulations from the
government, students are not allowed to stay off-campus during weekdays. The
university is responsible for providing all necessary living goods on campus.

University A started as a medical and engineering college, so the concept of

engineering has been deeply embedded in the spirit of the university (Hayhoe, 1989a;
Meek, Goedegebuure, et al., 2010b). Although the university has tried to extend to
other fields, such as arts, social sciences, and humanities, the university still has its
roots in science and engineering traditions. The universitys development has been
heavily influenced by Germans who are famous for their conservativeness,
preciseness, and rigidness. Furthermore, the Chinese university preferred that their
best graduates stay and become faculty members. After many years of inbreeding, the
tradition of conservativeness, preciseness, and rigidness has been created and
reinforced.

As a result, University A has become a relatively conservative university. Before

releasing any new policies, the university leadership tends to first examine whether
these policies may cause negative outcomes. When chatting with a key informant, he
told a story about university presidents attitude towards innovation in university
administration. The university leaders prefer observing similar experiments in other
universities first and judging whether to make such changes in the university. This
124

way of thinking and working is rather safe and reduces the risk of leading the
university in the wrong direction. However, it has missed many chances to include the
university among the most prestigious Chinese universities in such a fast changing
environment.

Within the university, the culture is also rather conservative. The existing system has
developed for many years and people know the procedures and outcomes of
transactions. Many alumni work in the university, so the peoples inertia is
accumulating. Any effort to make changes to existing systems costs many resources,
adds workloads, and infracts on someones authority. Therefore, people tend to resist
any change to the current system. They know the changes may sometimes produce
good outcomes, but they are afraid of the possibility of failure and the feeling of
losing control.

Due to the conservative characteristics of the university, the universitys rank has
declined continuously for these years. The university ranking may not be the best
indicator to judge the quality of education, but it does indicate if the university
follows the trend. Furthermore, the ranking heavily affects student recruitment.
Students and parents use university rankings as the index to make decisions about
which university to attend. The decrease in university ranking hinders the chance of
recruiting the best students in the national college entrance examinations.

The internal administrative regulations also present the conservative characteristics of

the university. The administrative departments resist changes initiated from the
bottom, i.e. faculties and department. People prefer keeping the existing system stable
and controlled. Innovation and reform to internal administrative systems is very
difficult. Without forces from the outside, such as the Ministry of Education or the
municipal government, faculties or departments can rarely push the university to
make changes.
125

Technical bureaucracy is the dominating way of thinking in University A. Most

university presidents have science or engineering backgrounds so leaders prefer
making decisions following scientific rules. Basically, they seek clearer views of the
university and a better understanding of the strengths and weaknesses. In order to
predict the possible outcomes of any change, university leadership pays attention to
references from outside, follows successful experiments, and tries to avoid risks as
much as possible.

The university structure and climate build a platform for the development of the
studied unit. As an academic unit in University A, it is impossible for the studied
school to avoid the influence and pressure from the university even if it has been
authorized to reform its administrative system. Understanding the institutional context
can help interpret the conflicts and the reasons for change in the development of the
researched unit.
4.1.4

Brief summary

The university has a history of more than a hundred years and it is among the oldest
Chinese modern universities. Both formal and informal structures have been well
established and a regulative framework has been firmly set up. It is extremely difficult
to make changes or break any existing rules in such an old and firm system. The
university is directly under supervision of the Ministry of Education, so its operation
and development is heavily influenced and closely monitored by the government. The
relationship between the institution and government is close and complex while the
interaction and communication between them is frequent and dynamic.

The centralized structure and decision making mechanism decides that the university
is top-down controlled by university leadership. The administrative orders flow from
the top to the end units of the structure. Therefore, the bureaucratic structure is firm
and rigid, with very limited flexibility. Making any change to the existing bureaucratic
126

system will cause resistance and bottom-up reforms are less likely to succeed.

The university started from a medical and engineering college and was reconstructed
as a university focusing on civil engineering for several decades, so the university is
fundamentally engineering oriented. The nature of engineering has produced the
ideology of pragmatism and utilitarianism among university members. The spirit of
scientific thinking has been deeply embedded into peoples minds among faculty, staff,
and students.

Meanwhile, the university was reorganized as an engineering university to meet the

national demands in the 1950s. Since then, the university has become heavily
unbalanced in disciplinary composition. The experience of detaching most
departments to other universities makes the university more eager to expand its size
through merging and establishing more schools and departments. The university
leaders also want to fix the unbalanced disciplines by expanding.

The university was founded and run by Germans for many years, so the university
was heavily influenced by Germans conservative thinking and style of working. Most
university leaders have some kind of experience studying or working in Germany and
some university board members are German, so the German conservative style has
been reinforced in leadership as well as in routine work. Moreover, the university has
a close connection with German higher education institutions. Faculty, staff, and
student exchanges with German institutions are common and frequent, so the whole
university has been exposed to a conservative environment.

The rank of the university in the national ranking system has been decreasing since
university ranking was first employed in China. One reason is that the university is
engineering-oriented which emphasizes a practical application rather than a
theoretical discovery. The amount of publication in key international and national
journals cannot compete with other prestigious universities. Another important reason
127

is the university is severely unbalanced. Several disciplines rank at the top while
others are in very low positions. Therefore, the university implements the policy
emphasizing more on research performance and publication. At the same time, the
university has been keen to improve the capability of weak disciplines and establish
disciplines in newly emerged fields.

The university runs several campuses and it is very costly to maintain. Since students
are distributed into several places which are far from each other, it is not easy to build
a united student culture and identity. Meanwhile, faculty and staff have to spend much
time commuting between campuses, so they spend less time on their job, teaching,
research, and administration.

In summation, all aforementioned features and events have created a strong

conservative and bureaucratic environment within the university. The control of the
system is top-down and centralized. University leadership has the absolute power to
control the university and the decisions made at the top level are easier to implement
than bottom-up ones. The academic units in the university are heavily affected by this
environment and inherit many features from the university. As described in many
existing literatures, making any changes in such an environment is difficult. Although
there is some degree of diversity within the system, the pressure of conformity is
strong and steady.
4.2 Disciplinary Context
Software engineering used to be one of the branches of computer science and became
a separate discipline in the late 1990s. However, the development of software
engineering education in China was different from that in developed countries. It was
heavily influenced by the government as well as the demands from industry and
market.

128

4.2.1

Development of software engineering education in the world

Along with the invention of the modern computer, computer science has become an
important field of study. At the beginning, computers were mainly used to do
calculations. Computer science was mainly about the hardware and system software,
such as languages, compiling systems, operating systems, etc. Although many
universities had established computer science departments, the curricula had not been
standardized before the 1960s (Bagert, 2000).

In the 1960s, since computers were increasingly used in other areas, such as business
management, a new branch of computing education appeared. Information System (IS)
has gradually become an important part of business programs. Although IS focuses on
different aspects of computer applications, it shares many common concepts and
foundations with computer science (Bagert, 2000). Therefore, IS programs generally
are similar to CS programs in teaching content.

By the end of the 1960s, the ACM Curriculum 68 was set by the ACM (Association
for Computing Machinery) Curriculum Committee. Very soon, most universities
adopted this standard as the core of their computer science and information system
programs. During the whole 1970s, computing curricula were considerably uniform.
The ACM Curriculum 68 became a standard for the whole world. It set the structure
and core courses for almost all the computer science programs worldwide. ACM
Curriculum 68 was replaced by ACM Curriculum 78 in 1979 as the core of both CS
and IS programs (Bagert, 2000). When Chinese universities started to offer computer
science programs in the 1980s, they adopted the same standards as most universities
did all over the world.

However, since the late 1970s, computing education programs have been going
through the diversification process. IS curricula gradually became more similar to
other business programs and developed their own set of software courses. ACM and
129

the Data Processing Management Association (DPMA) released IS undergraduate

curriculum models in 1973 (Cougar, 1973) and 1981 (Adams & Athey, 1981),
respectively.

In the late 1970s, the computer engineering (CpE) programs were also being formed.
Those programs were often formed in Electrical Engineering (EE) departments
(usually CS was under Science). However, Computer Science was still the
predominant computing discipline in academia by the end of the 1970s (Bagert,
2000).

Later on, the computing education field was significantly fragmented. The most
popular computing program has been Computer Science, but almost all engineering
faculties offer computer engineering programs in electrical engineering departments.
In the 1990s, ACM/IEEE-CS (Association for Computing Machinery/Institute of
Electrical and Electronic Engineers Computer Society) constructed the Computing
Curricula 91 (Tucker et al., 1990) trying to provide a common core for both Computer
Science and Computer Engineering. However, most departments ignored Curricula 91
while developing their own computer engineering programs and made CpE programs
more derivative of EE (Bagert, 2000).

At present, computer science, computer engineering, and information systems

programs are usually in different academic departments and often in different colleges
(arts and science, engineering, and business, respectively). They also work
independently of each other. Duplication of effort and competition for students and
resources among programs is also common among these programs (Bagert, 2000).

There were no software engineering (SE) degree programs in the world before the
1990s. The rationale behind the thought of splitting computer science and software
engineering was the concern on the quality of software. When the size of software
became bigger than the workload of one person or a small team, how to coordinate a
130

big team while sticking with the quality requirements became a crucial challenge for
software professionals. They needed a systematical, standardized, and quantified
process to develop software and control the quality (McConnell, 2004). This meant
applying an engineering concept to software development.

It was the debate of licensing software engineers that strained the tensions between
computer scientists and software engineers. Software engineers believed that
certification was valuable and licensing was inevitable, while computer scientists
thought certification was not necessary for degree programs and licensing might
conflict with a rapidly changing field in which standards are changing frequently.
Therefore, software engineers requested significant changes in the curriculum for
professional software engineers. As the debate became fierce, they wanted to split off
from computer science, form a separated academic discipline, and operate new degree
programs (Denning, 2000).

Different from other disciplines, masters degree programs in SE were developed

before undergraduate programs. The motivation behind the establishing of SE
masters degree programs was to narrow down the range of knowledge to learn and
make the programs more focused and customer-oriented. When these masters degree
programs were getting popular and welcomed by students and employers,
undergraduate SE programs appeared by the end of the 1990s.

It seems that software engineering should belong to engineering according to its title,
but there is a wide difference between SE and all other engineering disciplines due to
the nonphysical nature of software. Therefore, the best solution might be software
engineering being a joint effort between CS and engineering (Denning, Brandin, &
McCracken, 1989).

The pervasive spread of software into more and more areas of daily life has triggered
the software crisis on quality, reliability, and efficiency. International bodies call for
131

new and improved training for computing professionals, while some engineering
associations questioned the professional standing of software engineers (Ryan, Boehm,
& Eakin, 1996). Therefore, some accreditation organizations have started to make
guidelines for software engineering programs and have begun to license professional
engineers in software engineering (Bagert, 2000).

The separation of software engineering has a great impact on computer science

programs because these programs are used to produce the most software for
professionals. Therefore, SE and CS programs are competing for many of the same
students. Furthermore, the emergence of software engineering would affect the types
of jobs for which CS students are hired after graduation and this has affected all
computing curricula (Bagert, 2000).
4.2.2

Software engineering education in China

In China, computer science programs started in the 1980s (D. Yang, El Saddik, &
Georganas, 2002). Usually it covered both hardware and software even though they
may have had different titles. Before the 1990s, computer software development was
still underdeveloped in China due to the lack of application of software products.
Software education was also limited to teaching simple programming language and
fundamental concepts without any real application.

In Western countries, the emergence of software engineering education is the result of

an academic evolution, but the appearance of software engineering education in China
was pushed by government policies. In 2000, the Chinese government promulgated a
document to promote the development of technological innovation and high-tech
industry (The State Council of China, 2000). The rapid growth of the software
industry triggered the development of software education.

132

4.2.2.1 Development of software industry in China

The software industry boom in China has been ongoing since the early 21st century.
In 1998, China contributed only less than 1% of the global IT market. The annual
revenue was about RMB 32.5 billion. The export of software products was very
limited, less than 100 million U.S. dollars (China Software Industry Association,
2004).

In August 1999, the Chinese government promulgated The Decision on the

Enhancement of the Development of Technology Innovation and Industrialization of
High-tech. The document brought an opportunity to the IT industry, including the
software industry. In 2001, a more focused and detailed policy was adopted to
promote the development of the software industry and integrated circuit industry.
Many favorable financial and managerial policies and regulations were implemented
to stimulate the development of software and IC industry. By the end of 2006, the
annual revenue of the software industry reached RMB 480 billion and export was
more than USD 1 billion. China ranked fourth in the world and contributed 8.7% of
the worlds software industry (ChinaLabs, 2006).

In about twenty years, Chinas software industry jumped from almost zero to an
important provider to the world software market. Chinas software industry
experienced a great leap and this leap has pushed the development of Chinese
software education and stimulated the reform to many aspects of it.
4.2.2.2 Software education in China
In China, there are various kinds of software professional training providers,
including higher education institutions, technical schools, training centers and
enterprises, etc. Among these, higher education institutions are the main providers.
Three-fourths of present software professionals are graduates from higher education
institutions (China Software Industry Association, 2004).
133

Higher education institutions

There are more than 1,000 universities and colleges offering software related degree
programs, such as Computer Science Application programs, Computer Software
programs, and Software Engineering programs, etc. (China Software Industry
Association, 2004). The expansion of higher education has created the opportunity for
universities to recruit more students, and the booming of IT industry attracts a lot of
students to enter (El Saddik, Yang, & Georganas, 2003). Students graduating from
these programs have already formed the largest part of the software profession at 80%
(China Software Industry Association, 2004).

In 2001, the Ministry of Education set up 36 national pilot software engineering

schools in 36 national key universities. These schools are the models of reform on
existing software professional education systems. Since then, many software
engineering schools have been established across the country to meet the increasing
demands of the industry (China Software Industry Association, 2004).

Vocational training agencies

The number of vocational training agencies is increasing, but they rarely offer
software development programs (China Software Industry Association, 2004). Usually,
they provide training programs like computer application, usage of application
software tools, technical support, etc. Many training centers also offer courses for
various professional certifications, such as certificates from Microsoft, Cisco, and
IBM. Many foreign training agencies are allowed to open branches or establish
partnerships with Chinese organizations.

Technical schools and vocational high schools

134

These schools belong to a secondary education system which is training junior

software technical workers. Most graduates from these schools work as junior
program coders or web page writers, etc. Usually they do not have sound theoretical
knowledge on program design and development. They could work in teams to do
routine and repetitive work which needs less knowledge but is time-consuming.

Company-run certification training

This type of training is jointly run by universities and IT companies. For instance, the
joint training program run by Shandong University and IBM and the program run by
Beihang University and Sybase are tailored to meet the demands of certain companies
or certain fields. The courses are focused on practical skills instead of theoretical
knowledge (China Software Industry Association, 2004).

The size of software education systems in China is big and continuously undergoing
changes (El Saddik, et al., 2003). There are few standards to regulate these
educational institutions and agencies, so the development and quality of software
education varies. The competition among institutions is severe.
4.2.2.3 Characteristics of software higher education in China
As the main provider of software professionals, degree programs in higher education
institutions have critical influence on the development of the software industry in
China (China Software Industry Association, 2004). Software engineering is a new
major in Chinese universities and is not well-developed. Compared to the software
education systems in other countries, especially developed countries, Chinese
software higher education has its own special features.

Special history of the development of software engineering education

135

In many developed countries, the emergence of software engineering education was

the joint result of the development of the computer science field and the demand of
industry. In China, the requirement of national development triggered the emergence
of software engineering education. The development of IT industry, the computer
science education, and software engineering education are almost developed on a
parallel (D. Yang, et al., 2002).

Fast expansion of students and a relatively shortage of resources

The size of the student body majoring in software engineering increases very rapidly
due to the quick increased demand from the industry. However, the resources for this
rapid expansion have not grown accordingly. Teaching staff, teaching materials, and
facilities are all underdeveloped.

The special purpose to set up software engineering departments/faculties

Although software engineering has emerged over the last twenty years in developed
countries, it is not very popular to set up separated software engineering
departments/faculties in western universities. In China, many universities have set up
software engineering departments or schools due to the favorable policies from the
Chinese government. They see this as an opportunity to generate extra revenue, obtain
more resources, and increase university reputation.

Overlapping in curricula of CS and SE

Most software engineering programs offer similar courses and use similar materials as
computer science programs. The Ministry of Education has not given any clear
guidelines on how to design software engineering programs, so most universities
borrow most contents from existing computer science programs (China Software
Industry Association, 2004). The two programs are largely overlapped and it is a
136

waste of financial and human resources. This has also confused students and the
general public.

Quality assurance mechanism

The history of software engineering education is very short, so the quality assurance
mechanism is not well established. Since the Ministry of Education does not have the
mechanism or guidance to monitor the teaching process, every university has its own
mechanism to control the quality. In fact, many universities adopt the same criteria as
the traditional computer science programs. The quick expansion of the student body
has created difficulties in training qualified students with limited resources. Therefore,
the quality of education has become the main concern for the government, institutions,
and students (China Software Industry Association, 2004).
4.2.3

Brief summary

The characteristics of the discipline also have significant influence on the

development of the school, from the establishment through the whole development
process. The software engineering curriculum is internationally standardized and the
labor market for SE graduates is globalized. Therefore, the software engineering
education is heavily influenced by international development of the discipline and the
market.

Software engineering is a new discipline all over the world. The development of
software engineering education in most developed countries is the result of academia
evolution, so the development of SE education has its roots and foundation. The
development is stable and progresses step by step. However, the emergence of
software engineering education in China was to meet the needs of national
construction. It expanded very fast in order to fit in the quick expansion of IT industry.
Therefore, the emergence of SE education is mainly a political initiative and the
137

development of the field also depends on government support, policy, and finances.

Software engineering is closely connected to the new economy and evolves very
quickly. The field expands fast and changes quickly. Therefore, SE curricula need to
be updated frequently. Teaching content and teaching methods are changing often and
teachers have to update their knowledge frequently. The cost of keeping the program
up-to-date and welcomed by industry is relatively high.

In order to compete with other countries, the Chinese government encourages

investment in IT industry and software engineering education. Therefore, incentive
policies and regulations have been made to stimulate the development of the industry
as well as the education. The fast developed industry has created huge and urgent
demands for software professionals. When the higher education system could not
meet the need, market played increasingly important roles in the training of SE talents.
The booming of the software engineering education is highly related to the prosperity
of the industry.

However, due to the lack of regulations on the field, the development of software
engineering education is out of control. The quality of education depends on each
institution without public or professional monitoring. The involvement of industry has
made the situation even more complex. When the size of software engineering
reached a certain level, governments intervention became necessary. The launch of
the experiment of national pilot software engineering schools was one of the means to
guide the development of SE education.

The influence of the discipline and industry is mainly task-oriented. The school has
the power to choose whatever strategy is suitable for its development. It makes active
choices. The interaction between the school and industry is the process to gain needed
resources for a schools survival. The school is established to meet market demands,
so it has to adapt to the demands and respond to expectations from the market. In this
138

sense, the market pushes the school to better align to its direction.
4.3 Summary
In this chapter, some background information has been introduced for better
understanding of the research setting. As mentioned by Oliver (1991), organizational
choice is constrained by multiple external pressures and its survival depends on
responsiveness to external demands and expectations. The university and the market
construct the dynamic and complex environment of the researched unit.

On the one hand, SSE is an academic unit in the university, so its development was
restricted by the institutional environment of the university. This can be well
explained by the neo-institutional theory (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983; Meyer &
Rowan, 1977; W. R. Scott & Meyer, 1983). As a unit in the university, SSE inherited
many characteristics, both structural and cultural, from the university. Fundamentally,
it was isomorphic to other similar academic units in the university. Although SSE bore
the responsibility of making changes to the university system, it was also under
invisible pressure to conform to collective norms and beliefs shared by all units and
all people within the university. The adherence to rules and norms might be a
non-choice behavior. According to the theory, the school will gradually become more
similar to other academic units in the university in order to stay stable and gain
legitimacy.

On the other hand, SSE is a separate unit which has its own goals and ability to
manage itself. It was also heavily affected by its disciplinary context and market. Its
ability to maintain its independence can be well explained by the resource dependence
theory (Pfeffer, 1982; Pfeffer & Salancik, 1978). SSE was given the autonomy to
manage its operation and to plan its development. Therefore, it could make active
choices to cope with an interdependent environment and manage needed resources.
The characteristics of the discipline and the industry decided that the school could
139

cooperate with the market to obtain necessary resources for survival without
exclusively depending on its university. The software industry is innovative and fast
changing, so the school is under pressure to make changes, accordingly. In fact, the
schools survival was also under visible pressure to adapt to its external environment.

Therefore, the institutional and disciplinary context has built a complex and
interdependent environment of the studied academic unit. First, the university and
market are interconnected. The establishment of the school is the result of the
collaboration of the university and the market. Second, the university and market
work on the school collectively. When the school makes decisions, it needs to
consider whether the decisions fit in the existing regulations or whether the school can
get needed resources to implement the decisions. Therefore, its choices are
constrained by multiple external pressures.

When analyzing the case, we need to carefully consider the influence of the context
and the interaction between the unit and its environment. The schools survival
heavily depends on how it responds to external demands and expectations.

140

Chapter Five Establishment and Destiny

The establishment of national software engineering schools was the result of
negotiation between the government and market, so their legitimacy and destiny has
been doubted and challenged since the very beginning. In this chapter, the rationale of
establishing national pilot software engineering schools will be given. It is followed
by why and how SSE was set up and the possible destiny that SSE has been
struggling for since it was established.
5.1 The Experiment of National Pilot SE Schools
In 2000, when Premier ZHU Rongji visited India, he was impressed by the
achievement of the Indian software industry, especially the software outsourcing
industry. When he came back, he inquired with related ministries seeking the
possibility of China competing with India in the software industry. In June of 2000,
the State Department promulgated the 18th document of the year 2000 regarding the
policies encouraging the development of software industry and the IC (Integrated
Circuit) industry (State Council, 2000). In this document, the seventh chapter is
regarding education in related fields and attracting talents. The government wanted all
levels of educational institutions to set up and expand software related programs. The
document also mentioned that national key universities should actively participate in
the establishment of software education programs.

A year later in July of 2001, the Ministry of Education promulgated a document

regarding the experiment of national pilot software engineering schools (Ministry of
Education, 2001b). In this document, the ministry gave details on basic requirements,
incentive policies, criteria of selection, and the application procedure. In December of
2001, the Ministry of Education and the State Planning Commission together
promulgated a document repeatedly to encourage all universities to apply for
141

participation in this experiment (Ministry of Education, 2001a).

Besides the aforementioned driving event and policies, the experiment was also
launched under certain public pressure of increasing the capability and employability
of college graduates. In traditional faculties in public universities, faculty members
clung to doing research or contract projects for the purposes of publishing papers for
promotion and reputation, or generating revenue. Very few teachers paid attention to
teaching. Students needs were completely neglected. Employers complained that
university graduates were unable to fulfill job duties and needed much pre/post
training. They thought that this was a waste of money and time. The quality of
education had become a serious concern for students, employers, and the general
public. One of the suggested solutions was to give students practical training before
they entered the labor market. Therefore, the government wanted to create an
experimental program which was teaching-oriented and practical-oriented.

According to government documents, the national pilot software engineering schools

should be able to achieve the following basic requirements (Ministry of Education,
2001b):

Market-oriented and practical-oriented: The purpose of this experiment was to

meet market demands and train professionals with practical knowledge and skills.
Innovation in curriculum design: The schools should make their curricula
up-to-date, practical and market-oriented, adopt new teaching methods, and cover
some practical soft skills such as interpersonal skills and problem-solving.
Internationalization: Because software engineering curricula are highly
internationalized and standardized, software engineering schools should make
their programs internationalized.
Self-support financial management: Given a few favorable policies, these schools
should be able to survive without any extra financial support from either the
ministry or their mother universities.
142

 Flexible administration system: These schools were given the privilege to adopt
more flexible financial and personnel systems which are tailored for their needs
but still within the administrative frameworks of their universities.

The Ministry of Education set up an office to coordinate all affairs related to this
experiment project, monitor the operation, and review the progress frequently. A joint
dean assembly was set up and deans or senior administrators met regularly to
exchange ideas and practice. The ministry also sent staff to attend the meeting to
collect opinions and suggestions.

Regarding the operation of such schools, the ministry gave a three-principle guideline
(Ministry of Education, 2001b).

Socialization of logistics: Schools should outsource as many non-academic

services as possible to simplify the formal structure and reduce the cost of
operation.
Professionalization of instruction: Schools should build a professional teaching
team focusing on teaching in order to improve teaching quality.
Entrepreneurial operation: Schools should implement a market mechanism and
operate like commercial organizations.

The first principle was clear and relatively easy to achieve. Most Chinese universities
had already outsourced a large portion of their non-academic service to external
service providers. To achieve the second one, universities needed to build and
maintain a team of instructors. This actually tested the flexibility of the current
personnel system. The last principle was the most controversial, ambiguous, and
difficult one to achieve.

The ministry did not give clear instructions on how to make a school entrepreneurial.
Instead, it left room for these schools to develop their strategies based on their
143

understanding and conditions. According the interview of a key informant, the

implementation of these schools could be categorized into five different operational
models:

1.

Become an independent school, completely separated from its mother university.

2.

Be a university faculty completely run by companies, the university charging a

fee for its brand.

3.

Be a university faculty and collaborate with one or more companies, each party
holding a certain share of the school.

4.

Be a university faculty, get a loan from its university to operate

semi-independently, and pay it back afterwards.

5.

Be a normal traditional university faculty and do nothing more.

Most schools chose model 5, i.e. the SE schools in Tsinghua University, Fudan
University, and Hunan University, etc. The typical example of the first model is the
SE school in Peking University. The SE school in East China Normal University
represents model 3 and the SE school in the University of Electronic Science and
Technology in China represents model 2. Others, including the studied case, belong to
model 4.

The experiments of models 2 and 3 have been proven to fail since schools adopted
these two models could not continue. The schools which adopted these two models
had to return to either model 4 or model 5. Schools who adopted the other three
models are still alive and keeping their way of operation, although the situations of
these schools may vary. Generally, the experiment has shown that the effort of
inviting business firms as investors to higher education under the current mechanism
was impractical.

Many universities submitted applications to participate in the experiment. Thirty-six

were selected based on their application documents, academic capabilities, and
144

geographical locations. The University A was one of them.

5.2 Establishment of SSE
In 2001, University A submitted the application to set up a software engineering
school under the new policy. The Computer Science Department initiated the
application and the university leadership supported it. The motivation for the
university to join the campaign was clear.

First, the university wanted to improve its reputation in computing related disciplines
among national key universities. The computer science program of the university was
relatively weak and the university wanted to catch up. However, it was difficult
because it needed time to build up a reputation and accumulate accomplishments. The
software engineering was relatively new to all Chinese universities, so every
university was at a similar starting point. Now the university gained a chance to
compete with others from the same starting line.

Second, the university itself was strongly engineering oriented, so the nature of the
new school did not collide with the mission of the university. The new school could
expand the universitys disciplinary spectrum. The success of the school could add
more weight to a universitys disciplinary strength and increase the reputation and
rank of the university.

Thirdly, the university also worried about the decline of teaching quality. University
administrators wanted to partake in the experiment in order to make changes to
current teaching strategies. The positive outcomes of this experiment might be
extended to other faculties while the negative results could warn the others not to
repeat the mistakes. Besides, the new school could be used to test the possibility of
reforming an existing administrative mechanism.

145

Finally, under the new policies, the new school could charge higher tuition which
could be used to subsidize a regular computer science program. It could be used to
improve the welfare of faculty and staff in the department. The initial plan was to
make use of the existing faculty to teach in the new school. The faculty size of the
Computer Science Department was big. How to improve a facultys welfare to attract
and retain faculty members has always been a challenge for department leadership.

A member of the first leadership who was involved in the application of the program
recalled:

It was a big step. I remembered that we had a meeting of university leadership

(regarding this). At that time, the president was there and the party secretary was
there, too. We decided the missions of the software engineering school. The first
was a reform experiment of Chinese higher education. We could explore new
models to educate students. It was the universitys experiment, too. Its a trial.
Second, this could increase university status in this discipline among Chinese
universities. Its an improvement. The position was clear in the university. (The
university) let the school make changes, make structural changes. (Informant 1)

The application was approved by the Ministry of Education and the SSE was founded
by the end of 2001. The university leadership abandoned the original plan of making
use of existing faculty. Instead, a complete new and separate school was set up and a
new leadership was appointed. The members of the first leadership were selected
within the universities, either from the computer science department or from other
schools. Besides the policies from the ministry, the university also gave some
favorable policies to the school, e.g. RMB 7,800,000 no-interest loan, relatively
flexible financial and personnel management, and exemption from a university
evaluation for three years, etc.

SSE was set up as one of 29 faculties in the university. The basic structure was mainly
146

replicated from the typical structure of other faculties in the university. It adopted a
flat structure without any departments. The university invited a member of the
Chinese Academy of Science as the honorary dean. The dean did not participate in the
routine administration of the school, but he would be consulted whenever the school
made important decisions which might influence the schools development. The daily
work was directed by the standing vice dean with assistance from vice deans and
other senior administrators.

The school had started to recruit undergraduate and masters students in 2002. It
accepted many registered undergraduate students transferred from other faculties
within the university. They were first-year and second-year students who had strong
interests in the software engineering field. In September 2002, the school also
recruited fresh undergraduate and graduate students from those who passed the
national college entrance examination and national graduate entrance examination. In
total, in the first year of its operation, it admitted four groups of students: year-1,
year-2, and year-3 undergraduate students, and year-1 graduate students. The year-2
and year-3 students were transferred from other faculties and most of them did not
take specialized courses in the software programs. The school designed different
curricula for these groups of students, respectively.

The student body size kept increasing in the first several years and then stayed at the
level the school could afford. Now the school admits 240 undergraduate students and
about 50 graduate students each year. All the undergraduate students are in the same
program, full-time four-year bachelor program on software engineering. The school
offers different programs in the masters degree level: 2.5-year full-time masters
degree in applied science, 2.5-year full-time masters degree in software engineering,
and 3-year part-time masters degree in software engineering.

The school was first located on the west campus which is far from the main campus.
Students felt alienated from the main university community. So the school negotiated
147

with the university and reached an agreement that all undergraduate and graduate
students would spend half of their study time on the main campus while they spent the
other half on the remote campus. Faculty members would need to commute between
two campuses to teach. In 2004, the school moved to a newly built remote campus
which is located on the outskirts of the city, even further from the center. After the
school moved to the remote area, its working space was expanded and physical
conditions (e.g. buildings, facilities, equipment, etc.) were improved.
5.3 Destiny
The national pilot software engineering schools were established as an experiment to
test new policies and new methods (El Saddik, Yang, & Georganas, 2007). Nobody,
including officials in the Ministry of Education, can predict the future of these schools.
They might be preserved, dismissed, or merged with other faculties. Their fortune
depends on the attitude of the ministry as well as their mother universities. However,
the performance and attitude of these schools may also affect their destiny.

In the first several years, the dean assembly was held monthly and the ministry sent
senior officials to attend the meeting and collect data and opinions (El Saddik, et al.,
2007). Relevant measures were issued upon discussion with deans and experts in the
field. As time went by, the ministry sent only junior officials to participate in meetings,
and opinions and questions raised in the meeting no longer received responses. After
2008, the ministry had basically given up the project. Very few documents and
regulations were issued regarding national pilot software engineering schools
afterwards. The ministry had even set up a strong competitor by loosening the control
on recruiting part-time MSE (Master of Software Engineering) students. Since most
SE schools live on the revenue generated from part-time MSE programs, even a
partial loss of market share might be fatal to these SE schools.

In 2003, the ministry did a mid-term assessment to evaluate the progress of the
148

experiment (El Saddik, et al., 2007). All 36 schools were assessed and a report was
produced. Some problems were raised during the assessment. The ministry released
several new documents trying to solve the problems. In 2006, the ministry organized
the final full-scale evaluation (El Saddik, et al., 2007). The evaluation committee
consisted of deans of all SE schools, experts from IT industry, and officials from the
ministry. They visited all the schools, checked document and records, and talked to
faculty, staff, and students. The result was announced in 2007. Some schools passed
with excellence and they were awarded bonuses and the privilege of keeping the
pilot title and the favorable policies for a few more years. Some just passed with no
reward and lost their status as experimental schools. Some schools failed the
assessment and had to be evaluated again a year later.

After the final evaluation, the period of experiment had expired. All these schools had
to return back to the normal systems. No school was dismissed, but some universities
started to consider the possibility of merging their SE school with other similar
schools within the same universities. The main consideration was that the repeated
investment and internal competition for resources could increase the cost of running
two similar programs in one university.

The experiment of national pilot SE schools has brought some changes to the existing
higher education system (El Saddik, et al., 2007). It brought peoples attention to
market needs which emphasize practical knowledge and skills. These changes had
happened somewhere else in the Chinese higher education system, but the bottom-up
changes take much longer to reach the top level and be extended to the whole system.
The experiment of national pilot SE schools was initiated from the top and wide
spread nationwide, remarkably shortening the time to achieve the goals and covering
wider ranges. Participating universities also benefited from the experiment because
two programs (CS + SE) definitely obtained more resources and produced more
graduates than one program.
149

The results of the experiment, either success or failure, have shown a structural defect.
The designer and the planner of the reform was the ministry, and the implementers of
the reform were faculties, bypassing the universities which were the actual managers
of the faculties. The university would not take any credit if the reform was successful
and would not bear responsibility if the experiment failed. The interests of the
ministry and the universities might vary. The outcomes of this government-initiated
reform might not be the ones that the universities pursued. Only if the reform was
promoted by universities would the universities pay attention to it and try to facilitate
it.

To the MoE, its policies reduced power when going through the university to reach
the faculties and the impact of the policies would be affected. To these universities,
the reform, which was initiated by the MoE and implemented by their faculties, was
like their superior interfering with their internal affairs, damaging their authority and
autonomy. To the faculties, they were under dual-direction from two superiors who
may have had diverse goals, so their development was full of ambiguity and
uncertainty. In sum, from the structure of the reform, the possibility of the
experiments success was relatively low.

SSEs situation was slightly better. The university leadership did not have the
consideration of merging SSE with other units. SSE had an excellent performance in
the final evaluation conducted in 2006. It ranked number 5 among all 36 schools. Its
rank and reputation in the software engineering system had been much higher than
that of the computer science program in its ranking system. Its ranking helped to
improve the universitys reputation in computing related fields.

Additionally, the university noticed that the employment rate of SSE graduates was
among the top in the university. This meant that SSEs students were easier to sell
in the labor market than students from some other disciplines. The university
leadership then expected that SSE could enroll more students each year. However, the
150

cost of running the SSE undergraduate program was much higher than the tuition
collected from undergraduate students. The school, in fact, used the tuition collected
from part-time MSE programs to subsidize the undergraduate program. If the size of
MSE programs stayed the same, the school could not afford a larger undergraduate
program. If the size of MSE programs decreased, the school would have difficulties
holding the current size of the undergraduate student body.

SSE is strong in teaching, but teaching cannot improve SSEs status (in the
university). Within current higher education mechanisms, if you do not have
research outputs, a teaching-oriented school will become a unit like the network
college which is mainly for the purpose of revenue generation. Everyone looks
down on you. (Informant 6)

Many changes SSE had made in teaching and administration were not unique. SSEs
advantage was that it was not very difficult to make changes. Because SSE was a
small and newly established school, the cost of making changes was much lower than
a big and mature faculty like SEI. The conflicts and resistance it faced were also less
than that faced by mature faculties. For instance, the SEI wants to review their
curricula more frequently, i.e. once a year. Faculty members are against the idea
because they do not want to invest much time and energy in preparation of new
courses. Staff members prefer not doing so because they do not want to do much more
calculation, coordination, and paperwork. Students opinions are not under
consideration because their feedback does not have influence on leadership, faculty,
or staff. Then, why should people bother doing such work against everyone?

When the history of SSE becomes longer and the structure and processes are well
established, the cost of making changes will increase. Nowadays, if SSE wants to
make critical changes, leadership needs to consider the flexibility of the established
structure and balance the interests of existing faculty and staff. Basically, making
major changes to todays SSE is no longer easy. SSE had lost its flexibility of making
151

changes when its structure got rigid and bureaucratic.

At the beginning, the school did make some radical changes. However, the
university leadership changed. The new leadership has different opinions on the
missions of SSE. The directors of university departments all changed their
attitudes towards SSEs operation. Much coordination was needed during the
process. I think the most important problem with SSE was that it could not break
the mechanism of Chinese higher education. If the school cannot break it, the
school cannot go further. Because the autonomy and flexibility has been reduced
in these years, I feel that the school has returned to the normal system of the
university. (Informant 1)

SSE people have very complex feelings regarding being treated as a special school in
the university. When it was new and given special treatment in the school
administration, people enjoyed the benefits while worrying about the reputation in the
university. The university did lower academic standards when it assessed SSE, so SSE
people felt the discrimination from other people and other units. When it became a
regular school being equally treated as all others, SSE people thought that all
constraints to regular faculties had been killing its innovation and specialty.

As the school is getting older, it is also getting less special. People now think it is
a normal school. This is ironic. On the one hand, we attempted to become a
normal school. We dont want to be a second tier, special, rising, and transitory
school. On the other hand, when the school becomes normal, it has to be restricted
by the regulations valid for all normal schools, such as faculty and recruitment,
promotion and remuneration system, etc. Why could SSE attract excellent faculty
and staff before? Because it provided a better salary and benefits than the ones
offered by the university. But now, the operational costs increased, but the
increase in salary was not significant. The advantages (of working in SSE) are
getting fewer. (Informant 6)
152

As a semi-self-supported school, SSE gained more autonomy. However, no matter

how special it was, it had to be treated as all other academic units in the university.
People have seen the conflict between self-support and university evaluation.

Self-support is fine as long as the government gives more policies. For the
university, if the school is truly self-supported, the school should have more
autonomy. Especially the evaluation system should not follow the old way.
(Informant 18)

Without the favorable policies, SSEs advantages have become fewer. With the annual
enrollment of 240 undergraduate students, SSE could be set as a department under the
School of Electronics and Information (SEI), SSEs strongest competitor within the
university. SEI has five departments (Control Science and Engineering, Computer
Science and Technology, Information and Communication Engineering, Electrical
Engineering, Electronic Science and Technology) and several national key research
centers. It enrolls more than 5,000 students and offers programs from bachelor to
doctoral degrees. It owns 320 faculty members among which are 50 full professors.
The deans of SSE and SEI have made some compromise to reach an agreement of
collaboration and temporary balance. However, with a supreme disciplinary strength,
the CS department possesses much stronger control over SSE in the collaboration.

Everybody sees the convergence. Why? The computer science program is

changing, too. It changes to our way. Yes. They learned from our training style and
made changes accordingly. When these two programs reach the same level, the
SSE has no legitimacy to exist. It might become a branch in the computer science
program. It is the trend (SSE) is a trial, an innovation. Then everyone learned
and all went in the same direction Then its mission will be ended. It returns
to the normal system. (Informant 4)
153

Considering the improvement in graduates employment rates, SSE was a success in

the first several years. Its programs met the urgent needs of Chinese IT industry for
mid-level software engineering professionals. China needs to train many such talents
if it wants to compete with India in the software outsourcing market. The operation of
SE schools has quickly provided needed talents to meet the human resource demand.
Furthermore, the introduction of software engineering programs has stimulated
current computer science programs by competing with them for students,
teaching/research resources, and the job market. Computer science programs then
have to make changes accordingly. The holistic capacity and strength of Chinese IT
education has been increased.

From the view of promoting employment, SSE is successful. It meets the demand
for lower to middle level IT professionals in Chinas market. This is aligning to
the national economic development strategy. China wants to become an important
source of software or software outsourcing industry and to compete with India. So
the gap between supply and need should be bridged in a short period of time.
Moreover, I think the greatest success of SSE is to stimulate the development of
the computer science program. We made them feel they are in crisis and they have
a strong competitor. From this point of view, we are successful. (Informant 6)

Many people believe that the mission of SSE has been completed. The mission to
stimulate the computer science program has been successful. The CS program in the
university has made significant changes moving towards the SE model. The
reputation of computing science of the university has increased. However, its mission
on reforming the existing administrative mechanism has failed. Although SSE has
made some procedural changes, the current system is so powerful that SSEs tiny push
made little progress. When the reform touched some bottom-lines of current
mechanisms and challenged the tolerance of the existing system, the school could not
proceed further.
154

When interviewing faculty and staff in SSE, most of them believed that the school
would be merged into the SEI in the future. They worried about when and how the
school would be terminated. Nevertheless, they commented positively on SSEs
experiment for these years. The former standing vice dean said:

(Our) task of exploration has finished. That is, we dont go this way. Our higher
education still follows the original path to go. This is true, definitely. For so many
years, there were many reform trials in many areas in China. Many of them
succeeded. The only one left un-touched is Chinese higher education. Never
changed. It is still very planned-economical. This is the grand environment which
decided the future destiny of the software engineering school. Thats true.
(Informant 1)

However, the school also put forth great effort to increase its importance to the
university. When interviewing members of school leadership, they also expressed their
will to make the school alive for a longer time and to become a permanent academic
unit in the university structure.

All roads lead to Rome. It is very possible. In fact, software engineering is under the
umbrella of computer science in many universities. As an administrative unit, the
university decides. The policy from the Ministry of Education has the period of valid
time, so the future is really depending on its development. If the school is still as
small as it is today, the university may merge it with others for efficient or economic
reasons if we become stronger and have some disciplinary direction jointly
developed with other disciplines, other schools may not be able to eat us up If
we are strong enough, even if we are merged with others, we can still keep our
independence and autonomy. There were cases like this. (Informant 5)

The school is facing big challenges to stay alive and independent. Its ability to survive
almost equals its ability to adapt to its environment.
155

5.4 Summary
In this chapter, the background, policies, and rationales to establish national pilot
software engineering schools have been given. All these factors also formed part of
the context in which the studied school was situated. The establishment of national
pilot SE schools was the governments response to market demands and public
inquiries. It was a political task at the beginning and strongly promoted by central
government. It was to serve the needs of national economic construction.

The experiment was a planned change to the current higher education system and
centrally controlled by the government. These SE schools had been endowed with
hopes as well as pressures to make changes to part of the solid and powerful Chinese
higher education system. The implementation of this experiment was not following
normal procedures or regular styles. The government expected that these SE schools
could find another way out of the swamp of decreasing quality and increasing
criticism.

In the selected case, what the government and the university expected of the school
was to make changes to the current style of teaching and the existing managerial
system. Their expectation has always been the motivation for SSE to resist the strong
force of assimilation to the regular environment. The changes it has made to teaching,
research, and administration were the efforts of the school to meet the expectations
from external forces (government + university) and to prove its worthiness of
retaining. Although the school was not given many resources from its superiors, it still
managed to obtain resources from other sources, including the market, to support its
operation and fulfill its obligation.

The expectation from the external environment and the legitimacy of existence are the
most crucial incentives for members in SSE to keep making changes and to fight for a
chance to retain. However, the schools reform is restrained by regulatory boundaries
156

drawn by the government and the university. The institutional framework set by the
government and university has already drawn the boundaries which the school cannot
cross.

Nevertheless, the school made use of its connection with its two superiors to negotiate
with them in order to gain more space to operate. Besides the resources obtained from
the government and university, the school also actively sought support from the
market. It understood its advantages of having potential human resources needed by
industry, and negotiated with industry to get benefits and support.

On the one hand, as the participants of an experimental project, the sustainability of

these schools was at risk at the very beginning. External parties have not had the
expectation that the experiment programs would stay longer. When the tasks attached
to it are finished, it is quite possible the schools will disappear, either being dismissed
or being merged. On the other hand, there has always been the possibility of retaining
SSE if it performs well and makes significant contributions to the university. For so
many years what SSE has struggled for is the legitimacy of existence and the
opportunity and space to stay.

157

Chapter Six Administration

In this chapter, the issues regarding administration will be discussed, from the
structure of the school to the internal management of the school. Issues cover
leadership, finance, personnel, and student affairs management.
6.1 The Structure of SSE
SSE is a faculty of the University A. It has a relatively flat structure with no
department in it. The basic administrative structure was duplicated from the university
structure. Several offices are compulsory in the school because they are the branches
of correspondent administrative departments at the university level, and several
self-defined offices were set up according to its own needs.

Figure 6.1

The structure of the School of Software Engineering

(Source: Self-evaluation report submitted to the Ministry of education (de Zilwa, 2010b))

The registrar is responsible for providing support to the teaching of undergraduate and
full-time graduate programs. It is the branch of the university registrar department and
takes care of undergraduate admissions, enrollment, and teaching management. It also
takes care of full-time graduate programs which are monitored by the graduate school.
158

The office reports to the university registrar department, the graduate school, and the
vice dean (teaching) of the school.

MSE (Master of Software Engineering) programs are critical for a schools survival,
so the school pays great attention to them. In order to ensure the smooth operation of
these programs, the school set up the MSE admin office and put all the work related
to MSE under a special arrangement. The office takes care of all affairs related to
MSE programs, such as project development, student admission, teaching
management, and student management.

SSE is a teaching-oriented school, so its working focus has always been on teaching.
The teaching affairs office is specially set up by the school for overseeing teaching
affairs of all undergraduate or graduate, full-time or part-time programs. Especially, it
monitors the curriculum development, quality of teaching, and collaboration with
industry. The vice dean (teaching) acts as the director of the office.

The general office takes charge of several types of administrative work: finance,
personnel, and logistics. Most of the time, it acts as the hub of administrative work
between the school and the university. Anything needed to go to university
departments is collected by the general office and passed to correspondent
departments. Later on, the results are distributed to faculty and staff members by the
general office. It also provides secretarial support to deans. Centralizing all
administrative duties together in one office at the faculty level is a typical setting.

The student affairs office, the Youth League, and Student Union branches are working
together to serve students. They take care of students studies and livelihood on
campus. Since all full-time undergraduate and graduate students live on campus,
taking care of them is time and energy consuming. Usually students are divided into
classes and each class has a student monitor and a staff class advisor. Every staff
member should advise at least 2-3 classes. These monitors and advisors act as the
159

bridge between students and the school. Students can report problems to the school
which can closely monitor students situations.

The international cooperation office is responsible for developing and maintaining

collaboration with foreign universities. The office was set up in 2004 after the
mid-term assessment from MoE. The school leadership realized the homogenization
of all SE schools, so they thought that SSE needed to develop one or several special
characteristics to win the competition. After reviewing the profiles of SSE and its
competitors, they decided to highlight the internationalization of the school. The
office was then established to mainly focus on the attempt to make the school
internationalized. Internal policies which encourage internationalization were also
issued and implemented. Now, the school has established cooperation with several
foreign universities on student exchange, faculty exchange, and joint degree programs.
The office is also involved in the internationalization effort in the school, such as
promoting bilingual teaching and international knowledge exchange activities.

Faculty members are divided into three research groups based on their research
specialties. Faculty members in the same research group share a spacious office in
order to facilitate exchanging ideas or forming research teams. However, since
teachers teaching loads are very heavy and some teachers prefer staying in their
research labs, only a few teachers spend most of their time in their office. The
interaction among faculty members is very limited.

Research activities are initiated and organized by faculty members. They make use of
their personal resources to get projects and form research teams voluntarily. The
school does not provide much help in searching for commercial contract projects, but
it offers help in applying for governmental research funds. A vice dean is responsible
for coordinating research activities among faculty members and supportive staff.

The facility office is responsible for the purchase, installation, and maintenance of all
160

the equipment, hardware, and software platforms. According to the schools

development plan, the office makes plans for facility expansion and upgrading.
Technicians in the office also work as laboratory managers and tutors of experimental
classes. The schools website and BBS are also managed by the facility office.

The IBM technology center is sponsored by IBM and offers a specialty direction in
the undergraduate curriculum, Service Science. IBM was one of the representatives
which facilitated the experiment of SE schools. It has connections with many national
SE schools. It wanted to promote the application of its mainframe technology, so it
decided to set up several IBM mainframe technology centers in Chinese universities.
Since mainframe computers are so expensive that no Chinese university could afford
to buy one, the company lent several systems to selected universities and provided
system maintenance. Many universities joined the competition for IBM technology
centers and SSE was among them. SSE invested much time and human resources to
prepare for the evaluation. Finally, it was chosen as one of the schools to hold the
center. Besides offering courses and training to SSE students, the center also provides
training and out-sourcing services to other universities and enterprises in the eastern
China region. Through the collaboration with these universities and enterprises, SSE
could better promote its graduates and attract research funds.

The structure of the school is flat, so coordinating work among members can be
complex. Faculty members are engaged in heavy teaching or research work while
staff is bound to time-consuming routine work. It seems that all members are doing
their own jobs without knowing what is happening in the school or what other people
are doing. The loose connection among school members makes it difficult to create
strong affiliations to the school. Especially, staff and faculty offices are located in
different wings of the building which leads to the difficulty in communication
between faculty and staff.

The structure of the school has not changed much in these years, but the working
161

procedure has been changed to meet the changing demands. The number of staff
members has increased steadily and a middle layer of management has been gradually
formed. They work as coordinators among various parts of the school and handle
information exchanges between the leadership and individual faculty and staff. They
are bearing increasingly important responsibilities as managers. The running of the
school is closer to the operation of a business firm.
6.2 Leadership
The dean of SSE is an honorary position which has been given to a member of the
China Science Academy. He is not involved in the routine administrative work, but he
gives guidance for the development of the school. He is one of the advocators in
promoting the establishment of software engineering schools. He is a senior
researcher in computer architecture, but he emphasizes the importance of educating
engineering students with practical skills. He agrees to the idea that the computer
science program is to educate scientists while the software engineering program is to
train engineers.

The actual leadership of SSE includes vice deans and party secretaries. The number of
leadership members varies and each of them has his/her own responsibilities. The
allocation of duties is discussed and decided among leadership. The leadership reports
to a vice president of the university, who takes charge of the school.

School leaders are all appointed by the university and the term of assignment is
usually four years. Some of them are promoted within the school and some are
transferred from other faculties. The selection of dean candidates is not open and
needs to go through the organization department of the university CCP committee.
Before they take the duty, the university usually announces the duty for a month
within the university for objection. If there is no objection within the time, the
selected candidate will officially take up the appointment.
162

Although the structure of the school is flat, the decision-making style is centralized
and top-down. The decision-making structure in SSE is mainly duplicated from the
university and it is very popular in Chinese government and state-owned
organizations. It originated from Leninist democratic centralism. The democratic
aspect describes the freedom of members to discuss and debate matters of policy and
direction while the centralism means that all members are expected to support the
decision once it is made by majority vote. The application in the school has been
modified so that the voting has been eliminated.

Whenever there is a need to make a decision, the leaders first consider the possible
responses of external forces, such as the government, the university, and the industry.
Then internal factors are considered, such as faculty, staff, and students. Direct and
indirect benefits and cost are also measured. After the leaders create several
alternatives based on their understanding of external and internal conditions, their
personal knowledge and experience, and the judgment of the benefit/cost calculation,
they ask for opinions from school members formally or informally. Some opinions are
given more weight while others are not, depending on the type of decisions to be
made. The leaders take all opinions into consideration, but ultimately it is up to the
leaders to make the final decisions and choose from the alternatives. After the
decision has been made, everyone should implement it even if someone disagrees
with it. During the process of implementation, modification is usually needed to
ensure the outcome is as good and anticipated as possible.

The leadership bears the responsibility of making final decisions after asking for
others opinions. In the case of academic affairs, faculty members are included in
discussions. However, most communication is in private and informal. Even though
the school holds regular faculty meetings, people prefer keeping silent in the meetings
and communicating with leaders afterwards. Students are basically absent from the
decision making structure, but their opinions, especially alumnis suggestions, are
163

under serious consideration.

The first generation of leadership of SSE consisted of a standing vice dean who was
also the party secretary, another vice dean, and a vice party secretary. They were all
transferred from other faculties within the university. The two vice deans were
computer scientists and the vice party secretary came from another engineering
discipline. The duties of each of them can be described as follows.

Figure 6.2

The duty assignment of SSEs first generation of leadership

(Source: created based on field work)

During their term, the school was new and small, so the theme of their leadership was
open and flexible. The communication with faculty and staff was mostly face to face.
The exchange of ideas with students was mainly through the BBS system and on-line,
but many students also preferred talking to leaders face-to-face. Every month, the
leadership chaired meetings of all faculty and staff to report on the progress of the
schools development and to look for suggestions and opinions. It was not common to
see debating or discussion on controversial issues in the meeting. People preferred
discussing such topics afterwards in private. By any means, the communication
channel was relatively short, clear, and smooth.

At the very beginning when the school lacked teachers, school leaders taught courses.
164

Afterwards, most of the time, vice deans and the vice party secretary did not teach, do
research, or supervise graduate students. Basically, they gave up their academic
careers, and their sacrifice guaranteed some degree of equality when dealing with
disputes and making decisions on resource allocation in teaching and research.

When the school was small and a regulation system had not been fully established,
this style of leadership had shown very high flexibility, efficiency, and effectiveness.
They made the most important decisions based on their understanding of the
conditions and environment and the feedback they got from faculty, staff, and students.
The atmosphere in the school was open, flexible, informal, casual, and light.

However, while the school matured and grew, the disadvantages of this flexible
system gradually arose. The absence of necessary regulations and over-emphasis on
self-discipline caused management to fall into troubles. Many decisions were made
quickly but lacked careful study on the external environment and internal needs.
People, especially faculty members, worked at their own wills without regulatory
constraints. Unfairness caused by leaders personal preferences led to severe
contradictions in resource allocation and conflicts were then arisen among different
interest groups. Finally, as the result of internal struggles and external pressures
caused by severe faulty decisions, the leadership was dismissed, with two vice deans
leaving the university and the vice party secretary being transferred to another school.

The second generation of leadership was formed at the appointment from the
university. Two vice deans and the vice party secretary were promoted within the
school while the party secretary was transferred from another school. This time, the
power of administration and party had been divided. According to the regulations
from the government, the party secretary is the one to make final decisions. However,
since the party secretary is from another field, he does not get involved very much in
the schools daily administration except party affairs. The administrative power has
been centralized to the standing vice dean.
165

Figure 6.3

The duty assignment of SSEs second generation of leadership

(Source: created based on field work)

The new leadership started its work from perfecting the existing regulatory system.
They preferred that the school be run by regulations rather than people. They hired a
team of staff to investigate the working procedures of all offices and make regulations
to standardize the processes of routine work. It was believed that a perfect system of
regulations could greatly reduce the possibility of making mistakes. It is obvious that
they have learned lessons from their predecessors.

The school also set up several committees to formalize the processes of dealing with
academic affairs, such as curriculum design, degree assessment, faculty promotion,
etc. Senior faculty members are invited to sit in on these committees. However, these
committees do not meet frequently and most decisions are still made by leadership
only.

The standardization of working procedures may reduce the possibility of making

mistakes, but it also increases working steps and time costs, and reduces the flexibility
and efficiency. Faculty members have complained that it takes longer time to get
everything approved and many things they could do before are not allowed now. On
166

the other hand, because more people are involved in every transaction, it is also
believed that the efficiency is decreased while the possibility of making mistakes is
likely increased. The students also complained that they were receiving less friendly
treatment than before since their requests were often rejected following the new
regulations. They are now given less tolerance than before when they make mistakes.
The whole school is under the pressure of getting familiar with the new system.
6.3 Finance
Finance is the fundamental issue for every organization. As a self-supported school,
the ways to generate income are critical for its survival. The government and
university did not offer much financial support, but they gave favorable policies
which could help the school generate revenue from other sources.

When the school was first established, the school obtained some loans from the
university.

When the school was first founded, we needed to pay for the infrastructure and
facility. The university lent some money to us. It was in the preparation stage,
so we did not have tuition fees to collect we needed to build a platform
and purchased a teaching facility and equipment. So we borrowed money from
the university. We borrowed 7.81 million and used it in several years, until we
moved to the new campus. (Informant 4)

Later on, the school began to admit full-time and part-time students, generate regular
income, and incur expenses.
6.3.1

Revenue

The most important income for SSE is the tuition collected from students. The tuition
level was decided by the school and approved by the university, the MoE, and the
167

municipal government. SSE referred to other pilot SE schools and decided the tuition
of RMB 45,000 for four years. In the first two years, students are charged RMB 6,500
per year and in the last two years the tuition is RMB 16,000 per year. On average,
each student pays RMB 11,250 per year. SSEs tuition for undergraduate students is
almost double the tuition of regular undergraduate students in other programs. The
tuition for graduate students is RMB 6,000 per year and it is the same as the graduates
in other faculties.

The MoE gives an allowance of RMB 6,600 per year to each full-time student who
registered in the universities directly under the MoE. The students in SSE are
qualified to get the allowance, but the university keeps this allowance as the cost of
SSE using public facilities and services, such as the library, student residences, sports
facilities, etc. Therefore, SSE can only get the tuition paid by students. When the
school was founded, the university and SSE negotiated and signed the agreement of
the allocation of tuition and allowance. In 2008, the agreement was re-negotiated and
re-signed and the allocation proportion has been changed.

When the school was first established, it was very small The main source of
revenue was tuition collected from undergraduate students The government
also gave an allowance which was 6,600 per person per year, but we gave this to the
university, because we need to use some public resources, such as the library, sport
facilities, public classrooms, canteens, and other public facilities. The school, it
could collect 45,000 in four years, 11,250 per year. (Informant 4)

Even though the school charges higher tuition, the amount still cannot cover the cost
of running the program as well as the school. Therefore, the critical point for its
survival depends on another important income: the tuition from part-time MSE
programs. The MoE allows all national pilot SE schools to recruit part-time MSE
students who are fresh college graduates and in-service employees nationwide and the
schools can decide the tuition themselves. In SSE, all MSE programs are tailored to fit
168

in special needs of certain groups of students. Typically it takes three years to finish
the program and the school charges RMB 32,000 per student for the whole program.

The MSE programs have a special allocation scheme: 25% to the university, 25% as
development foundation, and 50% as cost and salary. So we used part of the 50% of
the income to pay teachers. The rest was used to increase peoples welfare and give
bonuses to excellent faculty or staff. We started this in 2005. Before that, the size of
the program was very small. From the second half of 2005, we started to develop it.
(Informant 4)

SSE set up an office, MSE admin office, to take care of the admission and operation
of all MSE programs. One of the vice deans takes charge of this. The operation of
MSE programs is very market-oriented. Usually the school needs to find partners in
some cities to provide space and a facility for teaching, recruit students, and manage
the teaching. The school then gives part of the tuition collected from students to these
partners. The allocation of tuition needs to be negotiated case by case for each
program. Since almost all of these programs are operated in other cities, the school
needs to send out teachers to these cities to teach and evaluate courses. Each student is
assigned a supervisor to guide their dissertation writing.

The most difficult task is to recruit students, so finding a good partner can largely
decide whether the program can succeed. The school has to make use of any social
networks of everyone in the school to hunt partners and projects. Since all the national
pilot SE schools can do the same thing, the nationwide competition for potential
students among these schools has always been fierce. The level of tuition, brand of
universities, quality of teaching, and the future employment opportunity have become
the key considerations affecting students choices.

Recently, due to the increasing competition in MSE student recruitment, the tuition
income from MSE programs has decreased steadily. The school has to find other ways
169

to generate revenue. Lately, the school has re-negotiated with the university regarding
the allocation of tuition and allowance for full-time students. The new policy is the
school gets 80% of both tuition and allowance and the university gets the remaining
20%. Thus, considering the student numbers, the school can get at least two million
more yuan (RMB 2,000,000) each year. This can temporarily compensate for the loss
in MSE programs.

Income from research and contract projects has been very limited. The school is
basically teaching-oriented, so its research capacity is weak. Among the limited
income generated from research and projects, 26% is charged by the university as an
administrative fee which is kept by the university. Another 25% is also collected by
the university as SSEs development fund which can only be used to purchase
facilities. In order to encourage faculty to do research, the school did not charge any
fees on research projects. The research team members keep the rest of the research
income. In total, the school gets nothing from research projects. In 2008, the school
adopted a new research policy so that research teams should bear the cost of
occupying office space and equipment. Nevertheless, the income generated from
research has still been very limited.

The income from research is nothing. Yes, the school charges very little, several
percent only. If the project size is one million, the school gets dozens of thousands
while the school gets hundreds of thousands if the project size reaches ten million.
Its useless. Moreover, it is extremely difficult to get projects reaching ten million.
Furthermore, if we could enter the third 985 project in the university, the university
will give us money from the 985 project. This was what we fought for now It is
important to get a big part of the fund. We dont want a bigger part. What we want
is to become part of the project. If we can get several million each year to build our
technical platform, we can save our money for platform construction and invest it to
do other things, such as recruiting more or better faculty. (Informant 4)
170

Types of revenue

Programs

Tuition
Research

grants

Amount

Undergraduate

11,000

Students

Post-graduate

16,000

Students

&

Very little, almost

negligible

contract projects
Revenue from affiliate

Unstable and

business & other sources

very little

Table 6.1

Source

(/person/year)

Government, business
Business

Revenue composition (Source: Internal document)

The school collaborated with others to set up an affiliated company. Besides

generating income, the school also made this company the internship base for students.
The company mainly provided professional training and occasionally carried contract
projects. However, the financial situation of the company had never been healthy. It
occupied a considerable amount of human and financial resources. Most faculty and
staff complained about this. Finally, the company made a serious mistake when
recruiting students for its training programs and received strong pressure from the
general public and government. This mistake also caused the resignation of the whole
leadership in 2007. The company was terminated in 2008.

The school cooperated with some companies to provide financial support to teaching
and research. Some companies preferred to donate hardware or software to establish
laboratories or student technology clubs. For instance, Microsoft was extremely
interested in sponsoring courseware development and textbook writing. Apple created
the Apple Student Technology Club which has published several technical books and
produced some software products. Apple has also sponsored students to attend the
annual global Apple Developer Conference held in San Francisco every year. In 2008,
the companies paid 21 students to attend the conference. IBM helped the school to
establish the IBM technology center which serves students in SSE as well as other
universities in eastern China.
171

Some enterprises, such as Citi Group, Intel, and Oracle, were fond of sponsoring
training or educational activities. Every year, these companies organize and sponsor
national or international contests or competitions. These companies also sponsor
professional training and certification. Students were encouraged to take courses and
examinations for certification and the cost would be refunded after they passed the
exams or got the certificates.

There were some companies working with the school in research. Usually, several
faculty members worked together and contracted research projects for these
companies. For example, Bayer sponsored several contracted projects to test some
prototypes in the field. IBM also outsourced several prototype development projects
to the school.

Basically, the funds from industry had clear purposes and were under close
monitoring from investors. The financial support was often accompanied with
technical support, mainly focusing on teaching or research. Rarely could the money
go to administrative purposes, however, the school may have been able to use it in
other ways than it was originally intended.

However, the collaboration with industry has the risk of lowering the quality of
education and influencing the direction of development. The school has to balance the
gains and losses and treat the relationship carefully. The standing vice dean said:

Universities should have a clear mind. All cooperation comes with cost. In a
different stage of development, you should adopt different strategies. When we
had nothing to exchange, we had to contribute more to the cooperation if we
wanted to get any partners. When we become stronger, the situation will become
the opposite. How to manage the transition depends on the university. That is,
even if there was unfair cooperation before, you should consider carefully how
172

to proceed in order to get out of it in the future. For instance, if you are very
weak in some areas which are very cutting-edged, it is reasonable to do more in
the cooperation, because you dont have chips to bargain with. However, when
you build up a team and become stronger in an area, like our VR team, you can
say NO to many companies. You can choose the partners. This is a normal
transition. (Informant 3)

The school also tried to develop other sources for support, such as government and
other social sectors. It was difficult and the support was not stable, but it gave the
school some degree of redundancy to face financial crises.

Regarding the sources of funding, the number one is tuition fee. Second is
the tuition from professional degree programs, MES programs. Then we
could search funding from special foundations in the university. The next is
government projects. The last is the effort to get funding from other social
sectors. We can try all these means. But we did only the first two because
we lacked the capability to try the later three ways. (Informant 4)
6.3.2

Expenditure

The largest part of expense is salary and welfare for faculty and staff. In order to
attract high quality faculty, the school has set up higher wage levels than the average
wage level of the university. Additionally, the school regularly invited experts from
industry to give lectures and their pay is even higher than that of faculty members. In
order to provide good service to faculty and students, the school also needs to hire
more staff members than other faculties. All these factors have led to the result that
the biggest portion of expense went to wages and welfare.

The faculty size has not changed much since the school was set up. But the size of
staff has increased rapidly in recent years. The new leadership decided to build up a
173

staff team to standardize and quantize the working process. The goal was to improve
the efficiency and quality of service to faculty and students. As one of the results, the
school hired many staff members to fit in the positions brought by the segmentation of
the working process. Therefore, the cost of human resources has increased sharply
and the operation costs increased accordingly.

The cost for fixed assets also occupies a big part of the expenditure. At the initial
stage when the school needed to purchase large amounts of necessary equipment, the
expense on fixed assets was much higher than the expenses on all other parts. Since
the school charges higher tuition, it must provide high quality facilities and learning
environments to students. The average facility occupied per person is much higher
and the interval of hardware and software upgrading is much shorter than university
average levels. Therefore, the school has to invest more funds in equipment and
relative services.

The cost of research has increasingly become an important composition of

expenditure in recent years. Since research teams did not pay for the resources they
used, the school has to bear the cost. Moreover, the university also charges fees for
use of the school, such as office space, electricity, water, etc. There are some other
expenses, such as the cost for administrative work, teaching activities, and student
activities. But these consist of only a small part of the expenditure.

The expense on administration includes rent, utilities, stationary, and costs for various
activities and events. After the school moved to the new campus and upgraded
equipment, the cost of utilities and rent increased rapidly. In order to promote the
school to industry and the international academic community, the school sent people
to actively participate in various academic and technical conferences or other kinds of
events and activities. The school also sponsors teachers career improvement and
further studies. All these activities are costly and have the risk of producing no
reward.
174

The expense of student affairs covers the operation costs of the student union, Youth
League, student technology clubs, and various student activity organizations. In order
to create a culture of promoting practical skills and technologies, the school
frequently organizes seminars, competitions, and contests. The student union and
Youth League also host entertainment events to enrich students livelihood on campus.

Basically the school has successfully kept a balance of income and expenditure for
many years although the process was very difficult and painful. Following is the
financial summary sheet for four years, from 2002 to 2005.

Items

Revenue

2002

2003

2004

2005

Tuition (Under.)

2,551,500

5,128,000

6,010,000

8,053,700

Tuition (Grad.)

1,556,000

3,934,000

5,124,000

7,049,000

Research

170,000

360,000

980,000

Others

3,308,000

160,000

4,107,500

9,232,000

14,802,000

16,242,700

884,000

2,128,200

2,270,432

568,759

2,592,100

2,820,320

3,371,636

3,051,089

1,898,200

4,376,500

1,159,100

Admin.

925,000

1,623,300

859,800

2,415,770

Student

28,800

396,000

977,600

1,057,800

119,000

252,000

736,000

133,300

532,400

1,816,901

2,332,300

4,706,948

8,045,000

13,231,321

13,343,038

-599,448

1,187,000

1,570,679

2,899,662

Sub-total
To university
Wage & welfare
Fixed asset
Expenditure

Research
Others
Sub-total
Balance

Table 6.2

Financial summary sheet of SSE (2002 2005)

(Source: Self-evaluation report submitted to the Ministry of Education in 2006(de Zilwa,

2010b))

The school has managed to keep a healthy financial balance. In the first several years,
due to the increasing size of MSE programs, the financial status was steady and good.
Beginning in 2006, as the income from MSE programs went down and the size of
175

faculty and staff increased, the school encountered financial difficulties. In 2008, the
school first recorded a loss of RMB 2,000,000.

When the school was established, it received a no-interest loan of $7.8 million from
the university. After five years, the university wanted the school to amortize the loan.
Furthermore, the university is under the process of establishing a new policy that all
faculties should pay property management fees for their office spaces. All these
measures would definitely make SSEs financial status even worse. If the school
wants to retain its legitimacy and be independent, it needs to find more sources of
income and cut expenditures sharply.
6.3.2

Financial management

SSE is a semi-self-supported school, but it does not have the right to manage its
financial affairs. The school strictly follows the financial management regulations of
the university. The school does not have any accountant or cashier on site. It opens
several accounts in the universitys financial department through which all monetary
transactions are made. The university set different categories and sub-categories of
expenses and they cannot be misplaced. For example, the fund for purchasing
equipment cannot be used to pay salary and student expenses cannot be misplaced
into administrative costs.

Finance is managed by the university. Everything is controlled by the university.

Every year, we make a budget and submit to the university. We make a budget
based on experience, data from prior years, and personnel information. The
university approves the budget. When we use money, we need to abide by all the
regulations from the university and government. Under such conditions, the
school can use the money freely It is called income and expense are two line,
and internal cost control (). When we receive money,
the money goes through the university. When we expend money, the money also
176

goes through the university. (Informant 4)

All expenses in the school should be checked by the staff in the general office before
going to the standing vice dean for approval. There are fixed categories for expenses
in the university system. SSE as an experimental unit used to have limited privileges
to create more categories for its expenses. The school has created some new projects
to deal with new services or activities, so the number of categories of expenses has
increased accordingly.

The school has some special usage of funds, such as the extra part of salary and
expenses on international collaboration. The school must send reports to the
university in advance. After getting approved, the school can get needed funds from
the financial department. As long as the schools operation does not exceed the
universitys regulatory framework, its financial status can be guaranteed and it can
gain limited freedom. To some extent, the school used to have a little more flexible
financial regulatory system.

The school has some flexibility as to the expense of staffs wages. This means the
school can have big costs and wage levels. You can spend on administrative fees.
You can also give bonuses to encourage. As long as you report everything and
everything is within the regulation, we can say that we have the power to decide
how to spend money. (Informant 4)

The school, as well as the university, has learned lessons from the operation since its
establishment. The financial management was one of the issues having many conflicts.
The school has bargained and re-negotiated with the university regarding several
financial issues and tried to gain the most benefits to enforce its ability to sustain.

When negotiated with the university, there are many skills in it. Like other
national pilot software engineering schools, everyone is different.. We are
177

running a university but not a business firm. We can become financially

independent but not self-supported. We need to negotiate with the university.
(Informant 5)

6.4 Personnel
Talents are the most precious asset of an academic organization. The recruitment,
remuneration, and appraisal systems contribute largely to the sustainable development
of the school. SSE was specially treated in personnel management by the university. It
adopted a more flexible system than the one adopted by the university. The school has
the freedom to decide the size of faculty and staff, and to make its own remuneration
regulations.
6.4.1

Recruitment

As an experiment faculty, SSE adopted a more flexible personnel system in order to

attract and retain high quality faculty and staff. Usually, the size of faculty and staff is
restricted by the size of the student body and the university has set the percentage.
However, SSE has the autonomy to decide its faculty and staff size.

Faculty recruitment

Considering the size of the student body, the size of the faculty in SSE is relatively
small, although the university does not set a faculty quota for SSE. Due to the
difficulty of recruiting qualified teachers and the financial restraint, the faculty size
has stayed at a low level.

Before 2004, the school had enjoyed a favorable policy given by the university that
the school could lower the requirement of faculty candidates education levels. There
were practical reasons for this exemption. SSE urgently needed some faculty
178

members who have sound working experience in IT industry. However, most doctoral
degree holders stay in higher education institutions or research institutes after
graduation. Rarely do they choose to work in business sectors. So, very few
candidates who hold a doctoral degree have sound working experience in industry.
Even if there are some qualified candidates, the school could not afford their salaries.
Therefore, the school had to sacrifice academic standards for practical experience.

At the beginning, we didnt have any teachers. All teachers were invited from
other places. When we made curricula, we looked for teachers in many
places Now, the school has a group of teachers already. The industry is
changing, the demands and requirements from industry are changing accordingly,
and new directions are emerging. If we change our curricula according to these
changes, we need to recruit a new group of teachers. Then how about the existing
faculty members if they are not appropriate (to teach new courses)? Fire them?
Not easy. So what the school can do now is let as many teachers as possible teach
some courses and ensure they can live on the income. So, we have to sacrifice our
curricula. (Informant 6)

When the schools three-year exemption period expired, the school had to apply the
same standard recruitment criteria as other faculties. A doctoral degree is the basic and
essential education level for faculty members. For those who do not have a doctoral
degree and were recruited before 2004, the school would keep them without
discrimination. However, if they want to move upwards in their academic career, they
must get a doctoral degree. The school encourages them to enroll in part-time doctoral
programs. If they choose to enroll in full-time programs in other places, the school
would keep their positions until they graduate and return to the school.

The school had the autonomy to recruit faculty. Several years ago, the school
recruited some faculty members with only (a masters degree), but now everyone
should have a doctoral degree. For masters degree holders, they have more
179

flexibility. However, the problem was we did not have a system to support. What I
mean is the academic promotion for these people. The university does not
consider their special situation of being recruited to a teaching-oriented school
under special treatment. It does not have a systematic solution to solve problems
and provide support to these faculty members. Since they were recruited in a
teaching-oriented school, (we) treated them at a lower standard. But they have to
compete with others under the same standards (in promotion). What they can do is
be forced to fool the system. (Informant 6)

Besides working experience, the school also pays special interest to PhDs who get
their degrees from overseas universities, specifically in developed countries. The
school offers some courses in English, so it has been thirsty for faculty members who
can teach in English. Furthermore, overseas trained PhDs usually have better research
capabilities which are gradually needed as the school decides to slowly move away
from pure teaching-oriented and towards the combination of teaching and research.

When screening faculty candidates, the school also pays attention to their research
interests. Their research direction should fit into the teaching and research profiles of
the school. With limited resources, the school can only support carefully selected
research directions. It is advantageous to have new members joining existing research
teams and enhance the current research capacity. Additionally, the school prefers
candidates with good interpersonal abilities and willingness to collaborate with
industry. Those who want to do pure theoretical research are not the best choice for
SSE.

For current faculty members, the school is relatively generous in sending them for
professional training or academic improvement. Almost all faculty members have
been sent abroad as visiting scholars or exchange faculty members at the schools cost.
The major purposes of these activities are improving English language efficiency and
building academic networks. Definitely, candidates who already have working
180

experience and research accomplishments are mostly welcome by the school.

Due to the difficulty of finding qualified teachers, the school posts recruitment
advertisements throughout the year on its website or other media. It also makes use of
current teachers social networks to attract good candidates. The final employment of
faculty members should be approved by the university. The university rarely rejects
the request from the school.

However, the recruitment of faculty has always been a challenge to the school. The
university gave some degree of autonomy to hire people, but the freedom is
constrained by many regulations. A school leader complained:

It is a problem with the mechanism as to whether to allow you to break something

in order to retain good faculty In the university, faculty is most important at
any time. If you do not have good faculty, you cannot educate good students. Good
teaching produces good students. If the financial policy cannot favor faculty
recruitment, it (good teaching) cannot be reached. (Informant 1)

Staff recruitment

Different from the small faculty size, the size of staff in SSE is relatively big. In order
to provide good services to faculty and students, the school set up many
administrative positions which traditionally did not exist at the faculty level. These
posts are designed based on needs, but the efficiency is seriously considered. The
workload of staff members is considerably heavy compared to staff positions in other
faculties.

The university set a quota for permanent staff positions based on student numbers. In
SSE, only a few staff members are permanent employees. The school created many
positions based on its own special needs, so the number of non-permanent staff is
181

bigger. Non-permanent staff is contracted employees who formally belong to a

personnel outsourcing company. This company is selected by the university and all
contracted staff in the university belong to this company. When the school has a
position to fill, it posts advertising on media or its website and then selects from
applicants. The chosen candidate will be formally accepted by the personnel
outsourcing company and is sent to SSE to work. Compared to the faculty, the
mobility of staff is relatively high even though the school seldom dismisses staff.
6.4.2

Remuneration

SSEs remuneration system is different from that of the university because the school
modified the system according to its special characteristics. The university set the roof
of the salary and the school can make decisions about other affairs as long as they fall
within the ranges set by the university The regulations for faculty and staff are
different, too.

Faculty members are all permanent contract employees of the university, but they are
divided into two groups. Some faculty members, usually senior members, adopt an
annual salary system. Their annual salary is negotiated with their employment
contracts. Their duties are listed on the contracts and their salary is fixed every month
no matter how much teaching or research work they do. After a certain period of time
(one to three years), they need to re-negotiate their contract and wages with the school.
Usually, key faculty members are in this track and the total income of these people is
higher than the average.

Other faculty members follow the universitys remuneration system. Their salary
consists of three parts: fixed salary + subsidiaries + teaching allowance. The first two
parts are fixed for the year and the last part changes each semester. The fixed salary is
calculated based on the educational level, academic ranking, and the length of service.
Subsidiaries may come from one or several sources in the following categories:
182

administrative positions, special achievements, or other reasons. The teaching

allowance is calculated by multiplying teaching hours with hourly pay. The hourly
salary is different, depending on class size, instruction language, the times of the
course having been taught, and teachers academic rankings. For example, if a teacher
teaches the same course in different languages, the hourly pay of these two sessions is
different: the pay of the English session is much higher than that of the Chinese
session. If the teacher teaches the same course several times, the pay of the first time
is higher than the later ones. These faculty members need to renew their contracts
with the school every three or five years, too, but their wages remain in the same
track.

If faculty members are involved in research projects, they can keep the income
generated from these projects. The research income is not stable and the amount
varies depending on the nature and the size of the projects. Usually, commercial
projects make more income while pure theoretical research produces more
publications. The income from research does not count as a part of their regular wage,
so it becomes teachers extra and flexible income.

In general, the wage level in SSE is considerably higher than that of other faculties.
For instance, the average hourly teaching allowance is RMB 150 and the pay in the
computer science department is about RMB 60. The hourly pay in some departments,
like math, is even lower at RMB 20. However, wage levels in SSE are much lower
than that in the IT industry. For example, a young faculty member made about RMB
50,000 per year when he worked in SSE. This salary was definitely not enough for a
young man planning to have a family. Later on, he moved to a famous multinational
company with the annual salary of about RMB 400,000. With the current wage levels,
it is difficult for the school to retain good faculty and even harder to recruit new
teachers.

The school is located in a remote area and it takes a long time to commute from the
183

city to the campus. In order to encourage faculty to go to their offices frequently, the
school gives subsidiaries to faculty and staff on a daily basis for coming to the office.
The school set up a system to keep a record of attendance for distribution of the
subsidiaries. The standard is RMB 50 per day and it contributes to an important part
of the faculty and staffs monthly salary. It is especially attractive to faculty members
who mainly teach but do not do research.

The wage system for staff is simpler. The salary is decided based on the staffs
positions. The school has calculated the workload of all administrative positions and
decided the wages. So the person taking a certain position is given the corresponding
salary. The remuneration system for staff is quite different from that of the university.
It is completely following the market mechanism.

The remuneration system in SSE is different from that of the university. The school
decides the levels of wages and the items and amounts of subsidiaries. The school
then uses financial measures to influence faculty and staffs working focuses. The
high teaching allowance makes faculty members pay more attention to teaching, while
the retaining of research income can be used to encourage more faculty members to
do research. The school makes use of the market mechanism to adjust to the
allocation of human resources.
6.4.3

Appraisal system

The school has adopted an appraisal system similar to ones used by other faculties or
schools in the university. By the end of each year, all faculty and staff should go
through evaluations, including the self-evaluation and the evaluation from
supervisors.

Faculty members are usually evaluated in several aspects: teaching, research, and
services. To assess teaching performance, faculty members need to go through a
184

self-evaluation and be evaluated by students if they teach any course in that period.
The research performance is judged by publications and the research fund or contract
revenue. Some faculty members bear administrative responsibilities, so they also need
to be evaluated for these duties. For staff members, they are evaluated by their
performances for their administrative duties and the evaluation also includes
self-evaluation and judgment from their supervisors.

It mainly depends on the position of each faculty member. If you are recruited to
do research, the evaluation requirements for research are higher. If you are
admitted for teaching, teaching (is more important in evaluation). The contract
consists of three parts. One is teaching workload. The second is research outputs,
such as projects, papers, or books. The third part is administrative duties,
including international cooperation or others. The contracts of all teachers include
such three components we want to have criteria for evaluation. Otherwise,
evaluation is useless. If you do not have any requirements, it is nonsense to do any
evaluations. (Informant 7)

The evaluation mechanism has been adopted for many years, but the outcomes of
such evaluations have not been observed. It has become routine work that people have
to do every year without any significant effect. The result of the evaluation does not
affect peoples daily work or important events, such as change of wages or
promotions. Many people think that it has become a symbol of bureaucracy in the
university.

According to students, they think that the results of their evaluations on teachers
teaching performances do not have any influence on future course assignments. Most
of them will not do the on-line evaluation because they think it is a waste of time.
They cannot avoid the in-class assessment in the last teaching session of each
semester, so they just tick every good or excellent without any further thinking.
185

I think there is no use at all... The online evaluation is just an investigation I

heard that teachers can see the comments. Just a rumor. So I dare not say anything
bad Either not doing the evaluation or ticking good only I feel that this
(evaluation) has no influence on teachers or courses. (Informants 41, 42, 43, 44)

To faculty members, the results of evaluations have little influence, as well. The
teaching evaluation usually does not indicate anything. Even if the results of the
evaluations are not good, it is very difficult to make changes. Since teachers have
their own research fields and the teaching load for each teacher is heavy, it is difficult
to find replacements. Administrators do not have much room in assigning teaching
work to teachers. Occasionally, if the teaching of a lecturer is really unacceptable,
students go to the deans directly and firmly ask for a replacement. In this case, the
teacher will be replaced. This has happened very few times in the history of the school.
Even in this case, the evaluation results do not affect teachers careers very much.
Usually, they would be assigned duties other than teaching.

SSE is teaching-oriented and emphasizes teaching. Some faculty members declared

their preferences for teaching when they were recruited. The school respects teachers
choices of whether to do research or what kind of research to do. Research capability
and outcomes are not important indicators of evaluation. Even the promotion of
academics (lecturer -> associate professor -> professor) is not based on the results of
annual evaluations. Therefore, the evaluations on research do not make any sense to
faculty members.

The promotion of academics is completely controlled by the university. The university

has a committee to evaluate whether faculty members are qualified to go upwards in
their academic career ladders. The most important criteria for promotion are
publications and revenue generated from research projects. In each level (lecturer,
associate professor, or professor), there are corresponding requirements for the
number of publications in certain levels of international or national journals and the
186

amount of financial income generated from research. The school is responsible for
collecting application materials and providing relevant documents to support the
applications.

Some faculty members who do not want to do research find their opportunities to
move upwards in the academic ranking system lessening. This is harmful to retaining
skilled instructors. After discussions with university leadership, the school has tried to
develop a new system which divides teachers into teaching tracks and research tracks.
Each of them adopts different criteria to judge academic performance. They have
referred to the similar systems in foreign universities and tried to localize them. But
they have not succeeded yet because radical changes need to be made to the current
personnel system in the university.

For staff members, the result of annual evaluations makes a little sense to temporary
employees, but it is definitely not as important as their superiors personal judgments.
Sometimes, senior administrators may refer to the results of evaluations as the
rationale to solve disputes. For permanent staff or contract employees who have
worked in the university for a long time, the annual evaluation is just routine without
any influence.

In order to fix the problem, the school has worked on the project that divides faculty
into different tracks, each of which has different requirements.

The new president allowed us to make a new evaluation system to fit the specialty
of the school. We can have a separate evaluation committee, and produce different
criteria and rules. For SSE, the most important task is teaching. According to
university requirements, every faculty member should teach at least 270 hours per
academic year. Of course, we will evaluate this workload in three or five years so
that the total teaching time in these years should reach a certain level of hours
Research, administrative duties, or community services can be converted into
187

teaching hours and counted as teaching workload. (Informant 5)

In summation, the annual evaluation of faculty and staff is more or less routine work
assigned by the university. The leadership mainly makes decisions on promotions or
transfers based on their understanding of school members and feedback from people.
For faculty members, their career promotions are controlled by the university but not
the school, so they pay more attention to the regulations at the university level. The
school has more influence on staff and faculty members when considering academic
improvement.
6.5 Student Affairs
In China, student affairs can also be called student management. Parents send their
children to universities and expect universities to take good care of their children.
Bearing such a responsibility, the government and universities give the highest
priority to student management. In order to protect students and better manage their
lives, students are required to live on campus during their study periods. Universities
have the responsibilities of providing housing, medical care, and sports and
entertainment facilities, besides facilities and services for study.

Taking care of a huge amount of students and making them satisfied is complex and
hard work. In fact, most complaints collected by the MoE regarding higher education
are related to student management. In order to avoid disputes or troubles, student
management staff usually follows national instructions carefully and strictly. As a
result, it seems that student management in all universities looks identical.
6.5.1

Student management regulations

When students register in the SSE, they are divided into classes. Each class is
assigned a class advisor who is responsible for taking care of the class for the whole
study period. The students in each class elect a class monitor as the coordinator
188

between students and the school. The election of monitor usually is very democratic
with every student having one vote. The monitor can be re-elected during the study
period. Monitors report to their class advisors as well as the staff in the student affairs
office.

Students are assigned dormitories. Usually students in the same school live together.
In each dormitory, students elect a dorm chief who reports to the residence advisor of
each building. The residences are managed by the university, separated from the class
system managed by the individual school or faculty.

When students first register in the university, they receive a handbook which contains
a given set of rules regulating their study and living on campus. When they register in
the school, they are given a detailed curriculum valid for their study period. Since
SSE modifies curricula once a year, students need to pay attention to the version of
their curriculum. The student affairs office has its own website to publish news and
notices. Students are required to pay attention to the on-line notice board. Class
advisors and monitors also help disseminate important messages to students.

The student union is a student-run organization. It has several sections with different
roles. For instance, the academic section organizes activities related to study; the
entertainment section hosts art performances; and the external relations section looks
for sponsors, etc. The science and technology section maintains dozens of student
technology clubs sponsored by companies. They organize technical activities
regularly to encourage students to learn new technology and skills. The school gives
some financial support to the student union, but their outlay for important events
basically comes from external sponsors.

If the student union can be described as a non-governmental organization, the Youth

League branch can be called a governmental organization. The Youth League is also a
student organization, but it is directed by the Youth League and CCP branches. It also
189

organizes various kinds of activities among students. Typically, students who want to
become party members actively participate in the activities organized by the Youth
League.

Students from low-income families can apply for financial support from the
government or the university. They can also apply for student loans and pay them
back after they graduate. Some of them can get on-campus jobs to compensate for
their living costs. For example, they can work part-time as teaching assistants or clerk
assistants. Some of these positions are sponsored by the university and the other
positions are supported by the school.
6.5.2

The relationships

In SSE, students are charged higher tuition, so they have some special expectations.
Basically, they want better teachers, better facilities, and better services. The school
leadership, faculty, and staff also realize this. The first leadership advocated that
faculty and staff should give high priority to students needs.

Relationship between students and faculty

Unlike other faculties where teachers and students do not know each other, students
and teachers in SSE are much closer. Teachers usually reserve a certain amount of
time for students each week to answer their questions. This habit of giving office
hours to students was started by faculty members returning from overseas and
advocated by the leadership.

Many courses have projects at the end of the semester. Students need to spend time
discussing their projects with lecturers. Later on, they should demonstrate and defend
their projects in front of teachers and classmates. These communications enhance the
relationship between students and faculty members.
190

Faculty members usually open special sections for their courses on the schools BBS.
Students can ask questions online and exchange ideas with teachers and classmates.
BBS builds a platform for students and teachers to exchange ideas freely. Many
students comment on teachers teaching and even make jokes about teachers, most of
which are friendly. The school also employs a TA system. According to the size of
classes, teachers are assigned a certain number of teaching assistants who help
prepare lessons, provide tutoring, or collect assignments. Some senior students can
even join research teams and do projects under the direction of faculty members.

In general, the relationship between students and faculty is more or less equal and
friendly. This has not changed much since the school started. Students still respect
teachers and feel the gap between them, but the gap is not wide and is easy to cross if
students want to do so. An alumnus commented:

I think our school was democratic. Maybe because it is located in Shanghai. I felt
the atmosphere in school at that time was good. Everyday we could see our advisor.
Whenever we wanted to see our teachers we could see them in their offices. Not
like other schools, (students) can only see advisors once in a semester and there
was not communication. I think our school has done well. At least we knew our
advisor and were familiar with her. Our school is flat and it was good. The
communication was smooth. I think our school has done really good. (Informant
32)

Nevertheless, students may have different interests from the teachers expectations.
This has become more serious in recent years.

What students consider is different from what the school, teachers, and companies
think. In fact, there is a big gap between them. Teachers and companies think they
want to do something good to students, but students (think differently). There is a
191

mismatch between them. (Informant 27)

Relationship between students and the school

Since the school charges a higher tuition fee than many other schools, the school
leaders always emphasize that the school should offer better services to students. The
rationale behind this is the idea that students are customers who consume education.
They require better service if they pay a higher price. This is the principle of the
market mechanism. Furthermore, students are the most precious asset of the school
since their future decides the future of the school. The school needs students to build
up its reputation.

Not all students consider themselves as customers, but they do have higher
expectations than their counterparts in other faculties. They have friends in other
faculties, so they do comparisons between them. They feel the differences from staffs
attitudes and from the speed and results of their feedback or complaints.

It is true that we have higher expectations, but it is not based on tuition fees. This
may be based on the different characteristics of two programs (SE & CS). SSE is
more practical and technology-oriented. The most critical thing for college students
is employment. Computer science is more theoretical. When looking for jobs,
companies prefer practice more than theories. If you have strong practical skills,
you can easily get jobs. So, from the view of expectations, we prefer
practical-oriented learning. It is practical. (Informant 44)

The school used to have a simple mechanism to handle students inquiries. The first
one who answered a student followed up the whole case from the beginning to the end.
Students needed to face a few staff members and get feedback from these people.
These people managed to solve problems through the help of other faculty or staff
members. The communication channel between students and the school was very
192

clear to avoid ambiguity or misunderstanding.

Faculty and staff are required to access BBS frequently to know students feedback on
teaching and teachers, and to answer students questions. BBS is extremely useful
when students have negative feedback about the schools policies, facultys teaching,
or staffs work. Deans and office directors pay close attention to students opinions on
BBS. Sometimes they just watch while sometimes they take action to solve problems.

Nevertheless, students influence on internal management is still limited. One former

student commented:

Generally speaking, the influence is not big. But, if compared to other schools, it is
much better In other schools, students can say nothing about it. You dont
know how the work is done, so how can you say anything on it In SSE, at least
you know you have some degree of influence on the school. For example, when we
reported problems to the school, we knew some changes may happen. The
communication with deans is frequent. Basically, we students roughly know the
situation in the school. We also know how far the school would go Students
opinions would be considered, especially regarding employment or collaboration
with industry. We have some influence on these issues, because these activities need
our cooperation But our influence in teaching arrangements is less. Anyway, it
is better than other schools. The final decisions are made at the top for sure, but we
are factors to be considered. (Informant 31)

However, some staff thinks that students in SSE are spoiled. Students always go for
the easiest way --- getting help from teachers. Gradually they have lost the ability to
independently solve their problems. There is also some staff who complain that
students often ask for extra help beyond the staffs ability and authority. Staff get
confused between the system and students requests. They think the school should not
treat college students as kindergarteners. Students should learn to face and solve
193

problems themselves, or at least try to before going to teachers for help.

The second leadership formalized the regulatory system by standardizing work

procedures and segmentation of job duties. All staff members have their clearly stated
duties and they do only the jobs within their duties. From then on, they no longer take
care of students problems from the beginning to the end. Students need to go through
several steps and find the one/ones to help them. It is a complex situation. Faculty has
no opinion on this change and staff welcomes this change. But students do not like the
change and they become more conservative after several times of frustration.

From the interviews of students and alumni, it can be seen that students have
sensitively noticed and complained about the change. They did not mention any
specific person or reason, but current students did express their regret of not studying
in SSE several years ago. The relationship between students and the school has
changed dynamically. The structure and internal policies influence the relationships.
6.5.3

Employment consultancy

The education in SSE is market-oriented and meeting market demands is one of its
fundamental purposes. In order to achieve this goal, the school pays close attention to
the development trend of the job market, noticing the demands of employers. Besides
equipping students with knowledge and skills needed for the labor market, the school
also offers training and consultancy for finding internships and jobs. The school sets
up an office under the student affairs office to specially deal with employment affairs.
This office not only provides employment consultancy to students, but also actively
builds networks in industry to expand employment opportunities for students.

The staff in this office are responsible for establishing collaboration with companies
on student internships and employment, maintaining the relationship with enterprises,
distributing employment information, keeping track of interns, getting feedback from
194

students and companies, and organizing events and activities regarding employment,
etc. Staff in the office is familiar with employment policies of various levels of
government and within the university. They are also familiar with all senior students
and partner companies. The feedback they get not only helps future students get jobs,
but also helps the school modify curricula and courses.

For example, now many companies need students who are familiar with .NET. We
did not offer this course before because it was too simple. Students could learn by
themselves. But later on, so many companies wanted such students and required
that students should be able to work right away. So we opened a course in .NET.
The course is an elective, but it was helpful. I think the most helpful courses are
those jointly offered (with companies). For instance, the joint course, Data
Warehouse, which we offered jointly with eBay, was the one. Every time when
companies came to recruit students, they just picked up several from those (who
have taken the courses). (Informant 27)

The employment rate of fresh graduates is an important indicator of the schools

performance. The school maintains good and close relationships with many IT
companies and gets recruitment requirements from their human resources departments.
The staff in the student affairs office then manages to create training programs for
students to meet the requirements. The range of training is wide, including technical
and skill needs, skills of taking examinations and interviews, how to wear clothing
and make-up properly, etc. The ultimate purpose is to successfully sell graduates to
employers after they graduate from the school.

The direction was employment. Everyone should go to work right away I

thought it was good for most students to go close to industry since most students
want

to

get

hired

after

graduation.

Basically,

most

students

are

engineering-oriented. It might be a problem that fewer excellent students could be

found if courses are less theoretical. Well, frankly, it is difficult to design a
195

mechanism to select. To the Chinese, every mechanism has its own advantages
and disadvantages. (Informant 32)

This is a fundamental change to the current student management system, from

managing students to serving students. Before, staff members in the student
management office were very rigid and passive, waiting for employers to come or
allowing students to look for jobs on their own; staff felt selling students to employers
was a business monopoly. Now, however, school staff actively goes beyond campus to
seek employers, understand their needs, and provide them with what they want.

Most students gave very positive comments on the schools work in preparing them
for future careers. However, there are also some students complaining that the school
gives students only limited choices in employment. In a four-year course of study,
they are pushed harshly to become professionals in the IT field, never considering the
possibility that some students may want to become researchers or non-technical staff.
6.6 Preliminary discussion
This chapter covers several aspects of administration in SSE. The motivation to
establish national pilot software engineering schools determined the fundamental
goals of these schools. The government has given favorable policies to these schools
and encouraged them to be innovative in administration and teaching. The University
A has also given flexible policies and exemption periods to SSE to incubate its
development.

The school is self-supported financially. Finance is the critical factor to consider in the
higher education reform in many countries (Dai, 2000; Williams, 1997). By
encouraging academic units to be financially independent, the government and
universities would release part of financial burden and increase efficiency. This
process has happened since 1980s in China (Kwong, 2000; Mok, 1996, 1997b, 2000a;
196

Q. Yin & Gordon, 1994).

Decentralization of administration has been adopted in many higher education

institutions (Clark, 1995). SSE was granted certain power to manage itself, so it tried
to make some changes on the financial and personnel systems within the regulatory
frameworks of the university. However, under current frameworks, such minor
changes do not make big differences. The structure of finance systems determines the
mechanism of the personnel system. The personnel system determines what kind of
faculty to recruit. The quality of faculty determines the quality and content of
curricula. Finally, the quality of curricula determines the quality of students, and then
determines the destiny of the school.

In SSE, the most important resources are funding and human resources (faculty, staff,
and students). SSEs revenue mostly comes from tuition and this influences the school
to put emphasis on teaching. The government and industry have common demands for
talents with practical knowledge, skills, and attitude, so the school made practical
curricula, adopted practical teaching methods, and trained students with all needed
practical skills and attitudes. However, these measures might violate the long accepted
academic perceptions of university teaching.

Finance

Financial stability is essential to any organizations to sustain itself (Bess & Dee,
2008). The school started with a loose financial policy given by the government and
the university. It has tried to gain financial independence in order to gain more
autonomy in other affairs. To diversity funding is one of the important strategies
worldwide for higher education institutions to develop (Dai, 2000; Dill, 1997; Qiang,
1995). However, as the government abandoned the experiment and the school had to
return to solely depending on the university, its ability to manipulate its environment
has reduced. The school still has a certain degree of autonomy, but the use of
197

autonomy should be within a universitys regulatory framework. It seems that most

regulations manage how the school spends its money but not how the school makes
money. However, the ability and ways of generating income are also restricted by the
freedom of spending money.

The financial status has changed continuously. In the first five years, the financial
status had gone through a high rise to the peak. Afterwards, it got worse in general.
Income has decreased due to the loss of market shares of MSE programs. The deficit
caused by the undergraduate program needs to be compensated by the revenue
generated from MSE programs. The expansion of undergraduate programs is
restrained by the profit produced from MSE programs. On the other hand, the
expenditure has increased. The size of faculty increases slowly, but the salary and
welfare of faculty has increased steadily. The number of staff has increased sharply
because the school wanted to standardize a working procedure and improve the
quality of service. Moreover, the end of favorable policies they were used to as a
newly founded school intensifies the difficulty. The university wants the school to
settle the loan and pay more administrative fees. In sum, the finances of the school
have encountered problems which are difficult to solve.

The school did not wait for the situation to get worse. It re-negotiated with the
university regarding the allocation of tuition fees and student allowances. The new
signed agreement would produce more income to release a large part of the financial
pain of the school. It has prepared for the shrinking of MSE programs and tried to find
alternative income sources.

Some ways of generating revenue are largely market-oriented and may be against
some traditional academic value. Recently, autonomy, control and accountability have
become concerns for general public. The government and universities have already
realized the conflicts and concerns and a trend of re-centralization has been observed.
Therefore, complete marketization in financial management in higher education is
198

difficult. The university can accept only partial marketization in financial

management.

Personnel

The school adopted special personnel policies in its initial stages. Market mechanism
has been imported in personnel management, like Yin and Gorden (1994) mentioned.
This privilege was given by the ministry and the university. This special policy helped
the school to overcome the difficulty of recruiting needed faculty in a short period.
But it produced some problems for future personnel management.

When the school returned back to its normal system, it encountered increasing
difficulties in recruiting qualified faculty, especially those who have working
experience in industry. This has caused a severe shortage of qualified teachers which
has hurt daily teaching and research. Most newly recruited faculty members are
doctoral degree holders without working experience in industry. Their joining has
made the school move towards traditional research-oriented schools.

The remuneration system is flexible. As a semi-self-supported school, the school

received fewer restraints on the remuneration system from the university. However,
the university set the top-line of salary and the line is not very attractive to quality
faculty candidates. Furthermore, the schools ability to pay a high salary has been
limited by its financial capability. As a result, the school has lost its attraction to high
quality faculty candidates.

The effectiveness of appraisal system is limited and in doubt. The evaluation of the
university and school are more or less a format without any real application. The
results of evaluations do not have any implications in reality. Faculty, staff, and
students all know the truth, so they do not take evaluations seriously.
199

Although the school planned to adopt a more market-oriented personnel system, some
crucial barriers in current system could not be overcomed. This trend has been noticed
by many scholars already (Q. Yin & Gordon, 1994). Generally, the school has only
limited autonomy in personnel management. The school used to have a little bit more
freedom in its early stages under the special treatment from the government. However,
the autonomy reduced as the degree of specialty decreased. From this sense, the
school learned to keep consistent with other faculties in the university. The power of
conformity is extremely strong to pull the school closer to the current system.

Student management

In order to avoid disputes, the student management system strictly follows university
regulations. However, the school tried to make the management more humanized.
One of the significant changes of marketization of higher education is the shift from
institution-centered to student-centered (K. M. Cheng, 1999; Fairclough, 1993;
Kwong, 2000; S. V. Scott, 1999; Siu & Wilson, 1995). The relationship between
students and the school is closer and nicer. The rationale is that the students in SSE
pay a higher tuition fee. They are treated as consumers of SSEs services. The slogan
of student affairs work was serve students rather than manage students. However,
the idea that students are customers is against the traditional relationship between
students and schools. So the implementation of serve students encountered barriers
from both staff and students.

The relationship between students and the school has been dynamic, moving back and
forth. When the school spoils students, students are more aggressive and free to
express their ideas. Students influence on internal decision making is bigger. On the
contrary, if the school becomes tough, students retreat backwards and become quiet
and conservative. Then their influence on decision making becomes less.

Students influence on the schools internal affairs is invisible and informal. They are
200

not formal participants of the decision making process or a part of the power structure,
but they show their power through others, i.e. faculty and staff. They used to have a
strong influence on the schools development, but they lost their power when the
school moved towards a regular school in the university.

Structure

The structure of the school has basically remained stable for these years. Its
construction was based on the universitys requests and fit in academic traditions. The
unchanged structure guarantees a certain degree of stability, sustainability, and
connection. Meanwhile, adopting a typical structure in the university ensures the
acceptance from the university and other schools. It also reduces the resistance caused
by radical changes. The decentralization of administration has given academic units
freedom to change structure based on their needs (Meek & Wood, 1997).

In order to serve some special needs of the school, the school has added some
functional offices to the existing structure. These new offices mainly serve schools
special needs, such as dealing with fast-changing market needs or promoting
internationalization. The fine tuning is mainly practical and functional and does not
bring structural changes to the current system. Because these newly added offices do
not have superiors at the university level, they are under complete control of the
school and serve the school only.

As the direct superior of the school, the university has important influence on SSE.
The university sets the regulatory structure for the school and takes control of
finances and personnel affairs. The autonomy that SSE enjoys is given by the
university. How to maintain a good relationship with the university and maximize the
right of decision making is a challenge to the school. The schools routine working
procedure is replicated from the university. While replicating structure and procedures,
the school also imported institutional norms and values from the university.
201

In regards to structure, there are not many differences between SSE and other
traditional academic units. This helps the school to gain support from the university
and other schools. The barriers and resistance have been reduced to a minimum. The
conformity to existing systems facilitates the schools interaction with the university.

Leadership

The decentralization reform has given the power of making strategic decisions to
academic units (Clark, 1995), but it has not changed the style of leading mechanism.
The school is managed by people but not regulations. The defect of regulations gave
more room and flexibility for people to manipulate internal and external affairs. At the
initial stage, a strong and powerful leadership increased the efficiency and
effectiveness of making decisions and changes. Since leaders make decisions based
on their knowledge and understanding of situations, the risk of making mistakes is
high. The lack of a monitoring mechanism enhanced the risk of making mistakes.
Therefore, this kind of leadership was no longer appropriate for a growing matured
school.

The second leadership learned lessons from the failure of the first and tried to build up
a fine regulatory system to avoid the possibility of making mistakes. The
standardization of working procedures and segmentation of the working process has
been implemented to achieve these goals. However, these measures have also reduced
the efficiency and effectiveness. Meanwhile, these measures caused the increase of
staff size, adding more financial burden to the school. Bureaucracy has become
visible and hindered the schools innovation and fast response to environmental
changes.

To summarize the above ideas, the school has moved towards traditional academic
units in the university. It is the result of compromising with the existing administrative
202

system and the compulsory need for survival in such an institutional environment.
The schools specialty has decreased and it has become homogenized. As a result, the
legitimacy of the schools existence is in danger.

The autonomy has been decreased under the formal and informal pressure from the
university. By appointing new leadership, the university tightly controlled where the
school should go and how to go. A trend of re-centralization has occurred. The
implementation of an internal market mechanism in administration is still in progress,
but the degree of marketization has been reduced. The marketization has reached the
end points of the school, but it is very shallow without touching the core of the
schools operation.

With the lack of a monitoring mechanism on the school, the university cannot release
tight control on the school in order to avoid making serious mistakes. Therefore, the
implementation of marketization is at the surface level. The nature of the schools
operation is unchanged. However, the power of leadership has been enhanced. Faculty,
staff, and students are managed. The democratic atmosphere and academic freedom is
limited.

Even though the university tightened the control on the schools financial
management, the monitoring of the system is still imperfect. The defects in financial
management have caused severe problems in SSE and damaged the healthy
development of the school. The resignation of the first leadership was the result of the
inefficient monitoring of the schools financial management.

The legitimacy of SSEs existence depends on the acknowledgement from the

university and the market. To obtain acceptance from the university, the school has to
conform to the institutional standards even though SSE was established to make
changes. The informal pressure of conformity is not clear, but the informal influence
of institutionalization has always been around. The school did not passively follow
203

the rules. In fact, it actively reacted to the universitys pressure of conformity and
tried to make changes to the existing system. Although the changes were trivial, the
school obtained more room to keep its direction of development as much as possible.

The degree of freedom in financial and personnel systems represents the core of
autonomy given to the school. But they are still constrained by the regulatory
framework of the university. The university loosens or tightens the control of SSE
according to the universitys needs and the negotiation between the school, the
university, and the government. Nevertheless, the school has attempted to obtain a
more beneficial position in the bargain in order to get a more comfortable space to
survive and develop.
6.7 Summary
In this chapter, I described the structure of SSE, leadership, and how the school
operates in administrative affairs, including finance, personnel and student affairs.
As the participant of a pilot experimental project, the school was inspired and
motivated by the expectation and requirements from the government and its mother
university. Increasing accountability, teaching quality, effectiveness and efficiency
was used as the principle to manage the school. With the favorable policies given by
the government and its university, the school was encouraged to be innovative in
administration.

Compared to other traditional academic units, SSE adopts a flatter structure which
was thought more efficient. In order to accomplish some uncommon goals, the school
set up extra structural parts which are not aligning with the structure of the university.
However, the change to typical structure was not significant, mainly focusing on
procedures and functions. Nevertheless, these minor changes might be seen as a sign
that academic units have learned to make use of their autonomy to serve their needs
and universities are willing to grant certain power of making structural changes to
204

academic units.

The change of leadership could be seen as the signal and trend of retuning to
traditional style of decision making and school management. The first generation of
leadership bore clear market sign, so meeting market demands has the highest priority
in their decision making and routine work. The second generation of leadership is
more oriented to traditional academic values although market need is still a very
important factor to consider when making decisions.

To any academic unit, funding and human resources are the most important resources.
The school was encouraged to be more flexible and aggressive to seek funding from
external sponsors and was given more freedom to use its funds. In order to obtain
more resources, the school tried to make changes to the financial system, personnel
system and student affairs system. All the changes have to be operated within the
regulation framework of the university. However, under the current framework, such
minor changes do not make significant difference.

As the direct superior of the school, the university has very important influence on
SSE. The university appoints schools leadership, sets the regulatory structure for the
school, and takes control of finance and personnel affairs. The autonomy that SSE
enjoys is given by the university. How to maintain a good relationship with the
university and maximize the right of making decision is a challenge to the school.

The school also needs to get resources from market and to sell its students to the
market. The school relies on market in many areas: to get information and improve its
specialty and reputation; to know the most updated development in technology and
the most needed skills for employment; to hire experts from industry to teach; etc.
Therefore, market also plays a very important role in the operation of the school.

Therefore, the sustainability of the school heavily depends on the acknowledgement

205

from the university and the market. In order to obtain acceptance from the university
and the market, the school has to make compromise to these two influential parties.
Nevertheless, the school did not passively yield to external forces. In fact, it actively
reacted to universitys pressure of conformity and market demands for more flexibility.
It has tried to make changes to existing system to serve its needs. Although the
changes were trivial, the school got more room to keep its direction of development as
much as possible.

206

Chapter Seven Teaching and Research

SSE is a teaching-oriented school in a research-intensive university. The Ministry of
Education requires SSE to focus on teaching and the university evaluates its faculties
mainly based on research. How to deal with these superiors while protecting its own
interests is a challenge. In this chapter, the author will describe how the school dealt
with issues regarding teaching and research.
7.1 Teaching
Being teaching-oriented was the fundamental requirement to all national pilot SE
schools from the government (Ministry of Education, 2001b). Moreover, there were
also personal, emotional reasons to promote teaching in the school. When chatting
with members of the first leadership, I had been told the stories repeatedly. They are
alumni graduated from the computer science program and have worked in the
university for many years. They clearly knew the problems of current computer
science education. The curricula were out of date and rarely reviewed. Teachers did
not pay attention to teaching. Teachers still used the textbooks written many years ago,
taught in the way they taught 20 years ago, and students had to learn by themselves.
The relationship between teachers and students was so loose that many students had
never met their deans or department heads in their four years of study. Staff did not
take care of students very well and students were strictly managed by regulations
without any flexibility or humanity. Therefore, these school leaders wanted to create a
place with a different teaching and learning culture.
7.1.1

Program development

SSE enrolls students in the following several programs: full-time undergraduate,

full-time Master of Applied Science, full-time Master of Software Engineering, and
part-time Master of Software Engineering. The full-time undergraduate program
207

recruits students who have passed the national college entrance examination. These
students pay higher tuition fees than regular students. The study period of these
students is normally four years. It could be extended to a maximum of six years. The
curriculum for each year is different since it is under annual revision to ensure it is
up-to-date.

Undergraduate students all live on campus and the university provides learning and
living environments on campus. According to their curricula, each student needs to
get 170 credits (taking around 40 courses) in order to earn their degrees. The school
provides necessary facilities and supports, such as classrooms, teaching staff,
supporting staff, etc. Since they live on campus, the university provides
accommodations, sports and entertainment facilities, medical services, and other
supportive services. The school pays for these services. Therefore, the cost of running
a full-time undergraduate program is so high that it cannot be covered by the tuition
fee paid by students.

From the interview of a senior administrator, we know that the university wants the
school to increase the number of undergraduate students because SSE graduates are
welcomed by the labor market. However, the school refuses to do so since it cannot
afford a larger student body with the current revenue generated from all sources.

The two full-time graduate programs recruit students who have passed the national
graduate entrance examination. These students pay the same regular tuition fees as
other full-time graduate students in the university. The study period is two and a half
years. The curricula for these two programs are relatively stable without radical
changes from when the school was established.

Full-time graduate students also live on campus and occupy space and equipment for
study and living. The school offers necessary facilities and support for their studies.
Full-time graduate students take fewer courses (six courses in total) and spend more
208

time on their thesis writing. Each student is assigned a supervisor to help with their
writing. Each faculty member is usually allocated 10 students. Considering the
resources they used, they are more cost-efficient than undergraduate students.

The part-time MSE programs recruit students who passed the entrance exams
organized by the school. These students also pay the same regular tuition fees as
students in the full-time graduate programs. The study period is three years. All
part-time students live off-campus. Only a few students live in the same city as the
university. Students come to the school to take courses during weekends or nights.
The school offers computer centers and other labs to support teaching and learning,
although very few students really make use of these opportunities.

The operation of part-time MSE programs is completely marketized. Most MSE

programs are tailored to meet special needs. For instance, the school cooperated with
the Ministry of Public Security and designed a special MSE program for police
officers. Students came from all over the country. In the first two years, students came
to SSE twice a year to take courses, each time for two months. The rest of the time,
they studied independently. At the end of the study period, they came to the school for
an oral defense.

Most part-time MSE programs are offered in other cities. The school established
collaboration with educational organizations in these cities and created programs for
certain purposes and targeted certain groups of potential students. The local partners
provided space and needed equipment for teaching. SSE sent faculty members to
these cities to teach. Students went to local classrooms several times in each semester.
The classes were always scheduled on weekends and were as intensive as possible in
order to reduce the cost of travel. The school gave a certain portion of the tuition fee
to its partners. The proportion was negotiated individually in each case.

The part-time MSE programs could make a profit if the collected tuition fee covered
209

teachers salaries, travel costs, and partners commissions. Therefore, the number of
students in each teaching unit had to exceed a certain level and the ability to recruit
enough students determined the possibility of success. In order to recruit more
students, the school had to find good partners and make full use of the universitys
reputation and resources.

All national pilot software engineering schools are allowed to recruit part-time MSE
students country-wide, so the competition for students has always been fierce. SSE
has made great efforts to keep a level number of students. At the time of the study the
school had about one thousand part-time MSE students enrolled. As the pool of
potential students who might want to take MSE programs has gotten smaller after
several years of operation, the income generated from these programs has steadily
decreased.
7.1.2

Curriculum Development

The Ministry of Education allowed pilot SE schools to design their own curricula,
distinguished from that of traditional computer science programs. The emphasis was
to be placed more on practical knowledge and international communication skills.
Each school tried to create its own specialty in curriculum design since it was critical
to compete for students and resources. University A gave the right of curriculum
development to the school while keeping the right of revising and modifying the
curricula.

In 2002, SSE started to recruit students. Some were existing students in other faculties
in the university and some were freshmen who just passed the national college
examination and national graduate entrance examination. In September of 2002, there
was a total of four grades of students enrolled in the program.

Undergraduate program
210

Grade 00: students were recruited from sophomores and started to study in
SSE from their third year.

Grade 01: students were recruited from freshmen and started to study in SSE
from their second year.

Grade 02: students were recruited from new high school graduates who took
the national college examination and passed the score-line of the university.

Graduate program

Grade 02: students were recruited from college graduates who took the
national college examination and passed the score-line of the university.

The curricula for three undergraduate grades were similar since they were designed
under the same guidelines and by the same group of people. But they were different
since the students were different and the goals of these three groups were different,
too. The curricula for the undergraduate programs, grades 00 and 01, were specially
designed for students to finish the program in a shorter time. The curriculum for the
undergraduate program, grade 02 was the first full undergraduate program.
7.1.2.1 Curriculum design
Basically, the school adopted the structure of national recommended curriculum for
computer science. Then it was adjusted under the guidelines of ACM and IEEE
standards for software engineering programs. These international standards could
guarantee some degree of international standard of employability. It also referred to
similar programs in CMU (Carnegie Mellon University) and MIT (Massachusetts
Institute of Technology) to make the program up-to-date and welcomed by industry.
Besides the non-disciplinary courses required by the government and the university,
the school took advantage of the freedom given by the government policy to make the
curriculum better to serve the industry.

The curriculum for a full-time graduate program basically follows the principles of
211

national curriculum for similar programs. It has not changed much since it was
founded. Its development did not take much time and consideration. The curricula for
part-time MSE programs were completely tailored to meet the special needs of each
group.

The principles of curriculum design

According to the requirements from the Ministry of Education, the curricula of

national pilot SE schools needed to follow several principles: practical,
internationalized, and market-oriented. Each school could interpret the principles in
its own way and implement them. Based on its conditions, SSE interpreted the
principles in the following ways.

Practical
The national pilot SE schools were considered experiments of reform on curricula and
pedagogy. The reason behind the reform was to solve the problem of mismatch
between the knowledge taught in universities and industrial needs. According to the
feedback from employers who hired computer science graduates, most students were
not employable due to their lack of professional knowledge, skills, and attitudes. This
mismatch severely harms Chinas ability to compete in international IT industry.
Therefore, one of the requirements for all the national pilot SE schools was to develop
the curriculum that met the demands of industry. The graduates from these schools
had to be able to quickly merge into the work track in the business world with
professional knowledge, skills, and attitude. This requirement, in fact, made the
debate of theoretical vs. practical more vigorous.

In the elite higher education era, traditional computer science departments provided
mainly theoretical training to students. The goal of education was to train future
scientists for advanced study or research. Academic staff usually had sound
knowledge and experience with theoretical work. They believed that sound theoretical
212

and abstract knowledge was the key to future improvement and broadened the range
of employment. Students were required to learn many courses on theoretical
knowledge while practical skills were ignored. It was well accepted that after a period
of time of practical work, students who had mastered basic theoretical knowledge
could easily master the knowledge and skills required by their employers.

For many years, employers had to offer pre-post training to new college graduates in
order to make them able to work. However, the fast development of IT industry in the
late 1990s had made the competition fierce and companies tended to lower costs by
eliminating trainings. While training was important to employees, employers did not
see it the same way and it was on the list to be cut first. Corporations changed their
requirements of recruitment and favored those who needed less pre-post training. So,
the need for graduates who had already possessed knowledge and skills for work
emerged and increased very quickly when China joined the software outsourcing
market.

Furthermore, alone with the massification of higher education, college students had
become less valued by industry. They were mainly required to do practical work. Very
few graduates were able to get jobs in research or advanced study. The expectation for
college students had been changed by employers, students, and parents. Students and
their parents wanted them to learn the knowledge and skills that would be useful for
their job hunting. It had become more and more difficult for fresh college graduates to
get anticipated jobs. The employment rate of fresh graduates had become a very
important factor when students and their parents chose universities and disciplines to
enter.

While industry and students turned to the needs of practical knowledge and skills,
computer science programs still produced graduates with much theoretical knowledge
and fewer practical skills. By the end of the 1990s, the pressure for reform on
curricula triggered the establishment of national pilot software engineering schools to
213

try new ways of educating software professionals. As the result, the curricula in all
national pilot software engineering schools were very practical-oriented.

Internationalized
The software engineering industry had been internationally standardized. From this
point of view, software engineering education was also internationally standardized.
In order to educate internationally employable students, the curricula had to be
designed as internationalized.

In China, the traditional computer science curricula had stayed unchanged for many
years because the basic and fundamental knowledge of the discipline had not changed
much. The textbooks used in the computer science programs were mostly written by
Chinese scholars many years ago and had been considered as classic. However, even
fundamental knowledge needs to be attached with new implications and applications.
Therefore, the reform of curriculum promoted the use of up-to-date textbooks
popularly used in the field.

Considering the possibility that many graduates would work in an international

working environment in the future, the foreign language efficiency was also part of
the internationalization. Having good English language efficiency and international
awareness was necessary.

Market-oriented
The central idea of market-oriented was educating students with knowledge and skills
needed by the labor market. One of the features of the software industry was
fast-changing. Technologies were changing as well as the market share of various
techniques. So the demands of human resources from industry were also
fast-changing, accordingly. The school had to pay close attention to recent
developments of industry. It also needed the ability to forecast the trends due to the
latency of four-year education. Therefore, the design of curricula had to target a
214

specific portion of the market to meet its needs. When the demand changed, the
school had to either stick with the market and change accordingly or switch to another
part of the market.

The design of curricula

The school made the curricula based on the requirements from the government and
the resources it possessed at that time.

The requirements from the ministry were quite clear which was educating practical
talents. What we considered most was the demands from society. What kind of
software engineering or computer professional was most wanted by the society?
What were the knowledge structure and skill spectrum of such talents? Then we put
our emphasis on these issues. So the curricula we made were different from those
designed by the computer science programs. (Informant 4)

To make the curricula internationalized, SSE learned from foreign universities, mainly
American universities. The similar programs in MIT and CMU were two models for
curriculum design. Basically CMUs program was closest to the anticipated program
of SSE. The structure of the programs and the orders of courses were mostly coming
from CMU. Meanwhile, MITs Open Courseware gave much help to develop SSEs
and guided the teaching of many courses.

Besides, industry played a very important role in curriculum design. With the
exception of basic subject courses, most subject courses were developed with the joint
effort between the school and industry. The deans and faculty members went to
companies or invited experts from industry to give advice and recommendations on
what courses should be included in the curricula and what should be taught in each
course. The collaboration was significant in the initial phase.
215

When we first designed curricula, we set up a teaching committee which included a

few faculty members and many people from other social sectors. CTO from famous
IT companies, IT education experts, members of national science academies,
educators, and experts were also included. We also invited some from overseas,
about 15 of them, to give opinions and advice on how to educate students and what
kind of students they needed. (Informant 4)

Some companies actively got involved in curriculum development. From the titles of
some courses people could easily find the specific companies behind them. People in
SSE commented that the school and companies had created a win-win cooperation
relationship. The school made use of the knowledge and expertise of companies while
these companies used the school as a platform to promote their products and
technology and reserve talented students as future employees. A newly established
school lacked teachers to teach certain courses, so many companies were willing to
lend their experts to teach part-time at the school. These part-time lecturers also acted
as the agents between the school and the industry, specifically some multinational
companies, and enhanced the collaboration between them.

Faculty members were also involved in curriculum development and their expertise
was the critical factor influencing the workable curriculum. Since most of them were
recruited from industry and had sound experience working in this field, their opinions
were seriously considered by the faculty leaders. Basically, they all developed some
courses with which they were familiar and had the knowledge, experience, and
capability to teach. Most faculty members had a positive view on curricula.

I feel the curriculum in SSE is quite complete. Besides software as emphasis,

hardware knowledge has also been systematically taught basically it is
good

the

course

in

software

is

more

practical-oriented

and

engineering-oriented. (Informant 12)

216

The organization of the curriculum

The number of credits for acquiring a bachelors degree is 172, among which 84% of
the credits come from compulsory courses or projects. These courses have been
arranged into a very tight schedule in order for students to finish it in four years.
Students have been allowed to take courses not in the curriculum, but credits they
receive from these courses cannot be counted as valid for graduation requirements.
The flexibility is limited and future career opportunities for students are narrow.

Category

Sub-category
Basic Courses

Public Basic Courses

General

Specialized

Subject

Courses

Compulsory

Elective

49
Education

Courses
Basic Subject Courses

Credits

Total
49

12

16

Basic Subject Courses

37

37

Laboratory experiments

10

10

Specialized

Subject

Courses
Laboratory experiments

16

12

12

Labor & Military Training

Internship & Thesis

20

20

Total

144

Table 7.1

28

172

Distribution of credits for undergraduate program

(Source: the curriculum of undergraduate program of grade 2002)

Compulsory courses have included political and moral education courses, general
education courses, cross-disciplinary courses, basic subjective courses, and
specialized subject courses. The university has required that every undergraduate
student take basic and general education courses. Cross-disciplinary courses have
been offered by other faculties covering social sciences, humanities, economics, and
management. Students need to obtain at least 12 credits from a set of courses in all
three groups.

Basic subject courses are platform-free in that they are general theoretical courses
217

introducing general knowledge in the discipline. Several popular programming

languages have been included in this category since they are considered the tools for
further study. Compulsory specialized subject courses have also been platform-free
and have introduced common knowledge in various directions of the discipline.

Elective courses are organized in groups from which students can select according to
their interests and future career plans. Basically, students focus on one specific group
while taking some additional courses in other groups as complimentary.

Six groups are classified by the roles in software development: software

project management, software architecture design, software implementation,
network and system administration, database management, and software
enterprise management
Four groups are classified by the type of applications: embedded software,
multi-media software, network communication software, and industry
application software
Two groups are classified by the countries for outsourcing: German software
development and Japanese software development

There are more than 40 elective courses listed in the curriculum from which each
student should take courses for 16 credits only. Most courses on the list have never
been offered because no faculty member can teach such courses. According to the
former vice dean, the reason to put them on the list was to make the curriculum look
attractive and rich.

Many elective courses are platform-oriented in that a specific software tool or

platform was chosen to study and use in the course. For example, the Large Scale
Database System course used Oracle as the platform to introduce the fundamentals of
a large scale relationship database. The UNIX Programming course adopted SUNs
product. Sometimes, even from the title of a course, it is easy to figure out the
218

company behind it. For instance, the Windows Programming course clearly told the
existence of Microsoft, and the J2EE Architecture and Programming course indicated
the contributions of IBM.

The school has allowed students to substitute some elective courses with selected
professional certificates from several famous IT companies, such as Microsoft, IBM,
Oracle, Cisco, etc. There is a table showing the conversion from these certificates to
certain elective courses. Most students have actively participated in the training of
particular technical certificate examinations because they think these certificates will
help their job hunting in the future. However, they have not welcomed the commercial
promotion of some companies end products to students. Some students pointed out
the disadvantages of closely working with industry. One student said:

When we encounter the procedure in university and know the process of

engineering, we are then getting framed. If we do not (work with industry), we
may have plenty of thoughts about how to do the job. Working closely with
companies makes students minds entrepreneurial, standardized, and procedural.
Everything is following enterprise procedure, step by step. (Informant 32)

Internships have consisted of a very important part of the curriculum and have been
mandatory for all students. Usually internships last 6-10 months and students are
required to work full-time in companies. Students get the opportunity to work in the
real world and gain precious experience while the companies are able to screen
students through practical work at a very low cost. Therefore, it has been highly
welcomed by both students and companies. However, since students spend almost a
year in their internships, their time spent on major studies has been shortened.
Students workloads for the first three years become heavier.

However, there have also been many problems with these curricula. For instance, the
curricula have not given clear guidance to students on what directions they should go.
219

The order of taking courses has not been clear because prerequisites have not been
mentioned at all. The absence of prerequisites has caused difficulties for many
students when taking courses which, in fact, needed prerequisite courses. The number
of courses in one direction has not been enough to get sufficient credits, so students
have had to take courses in other directions. And course arrangement has also troubled
many students. One student said:

I notice the timing in this semester. For example, the Software Testing course is
very important for looking for a job because it represents the fundamental skills in
one direction. According to the schedule, we should take the course this term, but
we need to look for an internship this term as well before we finish the course.
Nobody knows what to do. We havent learned all the necessary knowledge and
skills, so how do we get jobs? Even if we get a job, there will be problems when
we work. And there are many very good courses offered this term, but we are too
busy looking for jobs, not having time and energy to take the courses. What a pity!
(Informant 42)

Since English is the working language in the IT field, students have had to improve
their abilities to the level that they can understand technical documents. Besides,
students need to improve their oral English for future communication in the
workplace. Therefore, English language has been given a very high priority in the
curricula. Besides the contact hours required by the university, the school has given
extra compulsory credits to English oral communication courses.

However, teachers have raised some questions regarding current curricula, especially
those designed in the early years. These curricula were designed under a tight
schedule, so they were not systematically and carefully considered, leaving many
troubles. There were too many listed courses without clear themes; course order was
not correctly defined; theoretical courses were not enough, etc. The school has made
some changes and will continue to make more. However, some people may have had
220

different opinions.

I think tertiary education should be the model of the master brings you in and you
need to do it yourself () . Even though we make many
changes, such as increasing the number of credits or giving more assignments,
students dont have consensus in this. Only when they go to work and realize the
importance of Discrete Mathematics and Data Structure, they will start to reflect
that their theoretical foundation is not solid. When they are in the university as
students, they dont realize this problem. For instance, students hate Advanced
Mathematics and think it is useless. After they graduate, they find that it is
necessary for them to go further in their careers. (Informant 26)

Among teachers, there has been a mainstream of thought about teaching equipping
students with practical skills for the labor market. This idea was advocated by the
former vice dean. What he emphasized was the ability to get a job after graduation.
Teachers were required to highlight the knowledge and skills of doing practical jobs
in teaching. It was also highly recommended to associate teachers to include working
experiences with class content to give students a real sense of working in reality. Even
though the idea was slightly changed after the vice dean left the school, the
atmosphere in the school among both students and teachers had been firmly
established to treasure practical skills and overlook theoretical knowledge.

I think it is good that the school put the highest priority on students employment
and it is oriented by the labor market. It is critical. The software engineering school
should put it as the first priority. Now the school continues this way, like before, to
adjust course arrangements according to the labor market and students
employment situations. Anyway, basic courses and basic subjective courses will
not be affected since they are basic and fundamental features of the discipline. The
major change will be on the subjective courses for senior students. (Informant 15)
221

The general values promoted

SSE has emphasized technology, skills, and experience. Through the whole period of
study, students have been immersed in the environment which values technical
performance the most. One of the famous articles on the schools BBS was written by
the vice dean who advocated the courses of rice bowl. He listed some courses
closely related to popular technologies which would be helpful for students to find
their first jobs. All these courses were skill-based and taught using the method
learning by doing. Learning these courses and getting a good mark could guarantee
students, to some extent, employment with several big IT companies.

Some alumni who have had successful careers working in famous multi-national IT
companies, such as Microsoft, IBM, HP, etc., and are technically strong are mentioned
frequently to inspire students to study hard. Whenever there are technical seminars,
students have been motivated to go. Student technical clubs were set up jointly by the
school and some companies to promote their specific products or technologies.
Students have been encouraged to join the clubs or to participate in activities
organized by these clubs. Some clubs have been very successful and set up as models
in the university and promoted to other universities across the country.

The school has also conditionally accepted scholarships from industry to attract
students to learn specific techniques. Attending various kinds of national or
international contests is highly recommended. Both the school and future employers
treasure the experience of attending international or national technological contests.
This kind of experience can even adds bonuses to the graduate entrance examination.

The whole culture in the school advocates technical skills and experience while
overlooking other academic interests. An alumna recalled:
222

I think our school lacked courses in humanity. I hadnt read several books in the
arts I chose poem appreciation and calligraphy appreciation in general
education, and one in psychology. These were something I was interested in and I
got good scores in these courses I really enjoyed taking these kinds of
courses, much happier than taking our subject courses. Our subject courses were
too many. Cannot catch up! (Informant 27)

Among students, they have competed for higher grades in subjective courses and
course projects, numbers of lines of code, qualifications to participate in technical
contests, numbers of professional certifications, opportunities to enter famous IT
companies, better positions in IT companies, and higher salaries for first jobs.
7.1.2.2 Curriculum changes
According to the universitys regulation, curricula was to be reviewed every four
years. This regulation was made many years ago when curricula changed infrequently.
Every four years, the registrar office reminds faculties to review their curricula and
report any changes they have made. However, in the fast changing new economy,
knowledge updates quickly. SSE has to make frequent changes to catch up with the
changes happening in industry and the labor market.

Balance between practical and theoretical

The first curriculum for undergraduate programs was very market-oriented.
Specifically, it was closely related to some technology providers, such as Microsoft,
IBM, SUN, etc. Even from the titles of some courses, it was easy to find out the
companies behind them. Here are some examples of these kinds of courses.

Windows Programming (Microsoft)

Unix Programming (SUN)

J2EE Architecture and Programming (IBM)

223

.NET Architecture and Programming (Microsoft)

Cisco Networking Technology (Cisco)

SQL Server Database (Microsoft)

Oracle Database (Oracle)

DB2 Database (IBM)

(Source: the curriculum of undergraduate program of grade 2002)

Some courses were so titled because they were using some very popular technologies
in industry. If students mastered these technologies or tools, they could easily get jobs.
In this case, the curriculum makers had to keep watching the most up-to-date
technological innovations in the field and make changes to curricula accordingly. At
the same time, they had to pay attention to the trends in the labor market and found
out the most wanted skills from employers. Therefore, for several years, the school
had to update curricula frequently, at least once a year.

Some courses were so titled because they were sponsored by enterprises. Some
companies were very keen to work closely with universities. They wanted to promote
their technologies among college students. They needed talents who could make use
of their technology skillfully. Compared to on-the-job training for existing
professionals, college students were more willing to completely accept new
knowledge. Moreover, to some extent, students were brain-washed by taking these
courses. When students completely accepted some concepts and technologies, they
became potential purchasers and promoters of these technologies and products.

The school also needed these companies. First, the school needed technical support
from these companies. Even though some academic staff had the experience of
working in industry, it was impossible for them to skillfully use all these technologies
and tools. They needed help from certain companies. The help could have been in the
form of free software or devices, joint lecturers, or training for staff and faculty
members. Second, the school needed financial support. It had been very difficult to
224

get funds to support curriculum development in China. So universities had to turn to

industry. Some companies were fond of supporting curriculum development based on
their technologies or platforms. For example, Microsoft provided funds continuously
for several years to develop the course Windows Programming and finally made
this course a national classic course which was promoted to other universities. Thirdly,
students needed the brand name of certain companies. When they started job seeking,
the transcripts could tell what technologies and skills they already possessed. This
meant students were ready to work with very little training.

Therefore, the initial curriculum was the result of negotiation among three parties:
industry, the school, and students. People in SSE thought that it was a win-win
collaboration. The outcome of this curriculum had been considered significant. The
employment rate for first time graduates was 100% and the average wage of these
students was very high compared to students in other faculties.

In interviews, students have highly valued the cooperation between SSE and industry.
First, they have believed that the cooperation gave them opportunities to get
internships as well as job positions. Second, they have agreed that lecturers from
companies brought practical knowledge to courses and let students understand the
work processes in the real world. Third, they have thought the cooperation with
industry pushed the school to be more practical and efficient in teaching and
administration. They accepted the fact that many multinational companies had been
involved with curriculum design and course teaching. They have also acknowledged
the joint lecturers invited from enterprises since they could bring new practical
knowledge and skills.

I think the teachers in the university have solid theoretical knowledge and
educational theories. They know how to teach students, such as where to stop and
where to emphasize, etc. Their knowledge is very important for students future
development and understanding of the nature of applications. So they are good to
225

teach basic courses. However, if these teachers teach practical application courses,
I dont think they can tell anything useful. Basically, they just follow the textbooks.
The application courses should be taught by people from industry since they can
improve students productivity directly. It is good to combine these two. (Informant
31)

However, as time went on, the disadvantages of this kind of curricula emerged. First,
the possibility for students to work in other fields had been sharply reduced. Since
students became more focused on one profession when they were in the school, they
were not well prepared for careers in other fields. According to the statistical data,
about 90 percent of graduates work as programmers and testers in both IT or non-IT
companies. Very few students could get jobs not related to programming.

Second, the dependence on industry in curriculum design had interfered with the
schools normal teaching arrangement. In an interview, a staff member in the teaching
affairs office complained that the scheduling of external lecturers teaching was
extremely difficult due to the conflicts between their schedules and the schools
timetable. Usually these courses are scheduled for the evening and consolidated into a
few weeks to finish. This increases students workloads and interferes with other
courses.

(We changed) based on social needs. Every year, we adjust according to the
feedback we get. We assigned a staff member to do this. He communicated with
students, CTO, and HR staff in companies and let them know us better. At that
time, we cooperated with a company to jointly develop a disciplinary direction,
Data Mining. We also worked with a French company to develop (courses). I
think it is good. (Informant 4)

Third, students potential for career improvement had been limited. The total credits
were fixed, so current students spent less time and paid less attention to theoretical
226

study than if they had taken more practical courses. However, after they worked in
industry for a period of time, for example, three years, they found that they were
behind those who graduated from traditional computer science programs and
possessed sound theoretical knowledge. Practical skills did help them find their first
jobs but hindered their ability to go further in their careers. The feedback from alumni
confirmed the problem.

I think our school has implemented the learning by doing very well. Every
course was designed with a project. But I found that from a students point of view,
we were too tired to deal with all these projects. We couldnt fully understand each
project. I think it may be good to add more theoretical courses. We have the strong
ability to do practical work, but we lack a theoretical foundation. And this may
hinder our long term career development. (Informant 27)

Fourth, the international collaboration between the school and foreign higher
education institutions brought changes to curricula. The school had set up
international student exchange programs with partner foreign universities in Europe
and North America. In order to transfer credits between two different systems, the
curricula and syllabuses need to be reviewed by foreign partners. During this process,
the school makes changes to curricula in order to meet the international standards and
qualifications.

Due to all these reasons, the school has started to put more emphasis on theoretical
knowledge when reviewing its curricula. The curricula have been reviewed annually
and this trend of curriculum change has been clearly observed. For instance, the
number of courses with specific technology in the title has decreased sharply. The
number of compulsory courses focusing on basic theories has increased.

Generally, the school had been trying to change the image of vocational training
organization in the university. Even though the school has still emphasized the
227

learning of practical skills of engineering, it has realized that it should also offer a
standard undergraduate level education to students and make them capable of working
in various kinds of positions. The significant change has been to add several courses
in mathematics and algorithms. The acquisition of more basic knowledge would
broaden students future career paths and increase the potential of self-improvement
and career promotion.

Joint-disciplinary collaboration

In 2004, the university wanted to promote cross-disciplinary collaboration in teaching.

SSE and the Department of Mathematics were tied together to provide joint programs.
After discussing possibilities for a short period of time, the two units decided to
provide a joint program called Strong-math SE class. This program recruited from
current students in SSE and the math department. Students did not change their
identity of attachment, but they took courses from both units. This curriculum
included more math courses than the regular SE curriculum and more SE courses than
the regular math curriculum. The program was initiated by the university as an
example of cross-disciplinary collaboration. The original consideration was to educate
software engineering professionals with solid math foundations and train
mathematicians with strong software programming skills. Both units participated in
curriculum design and routine management.

The Math department got a fund to create a teaching base The university
thought SSE was flexible and might be the best partner to work with the Math
department So they came to us. We felt that our students foundations in math
were too weak and this would hinder their future development Its easy to get
a job. But after several years, students are still skilled code writers, without the
ability to create and develop. By that time, you will find you need theoretical
knowledge like math to support you. So we hope to combine the two. (Informant
6)
228

In 2008, the school started another cross-disciplinary program in animation

development. This time, the school worked with the School of Communication and
Arts (SCA). The motivation to launch this program was the need from the labor
market for professionals in animation production. The curriculum was mainly tailored
from CMUs similar program with modifications due to human resource restrictions.
Having learned the lesson from the joint program with the math department, the
school changed the model of collaboration. SCA only participated in curriculum
design and taught certain courses. It did not get involved in routine administration of
the joint program.

Other reasons to make changes to curricula

The mobility of faculty members has also contributed to the change of curricula.
Some teachers have left without replacement, then their courses may have been
removed from the curricula. Some new teachers have brought new knowledge and
developed new courses. The mobility of teachers has sometimes even caused the
development of new programs. For example, the joining of a professor in graphical
computing initiated the joint new program between the school and the School of
Communication and Arts on electronic media production.

Alumnis feedback has also been valued at the school. The school has regularly
contacted alumni and hosted events in order to get opinions and feedback. These
alumni have worked in various sectors for several years, so they have a good sense of
the effectiveness of the knowledge and skills they learned in the school. Their
opinions have had an important influence on the curriculum review each year.

Each time SSE wants to make changes to curricula, the school needs to submit an
application report to the registrar department because this breaks the rule of reviewing
curricula every four years. The registrar office complained about SSEs non-regular
229

changes to curricula. Later on, the school received support from university leadership
and finally made the operation routinized. Nowadays, SSE usually makes trivial
changes to existing curricula every year and makes radical changes whenever it is
necessary.
7.1.2.3 Curriculum implementation
The design of curricula reflects the mission of the school and teachers understanding
of the discipline and industry. Then, the implementation of curricula represents the
actual realization of the ideas. School leadership, faculty, and staff take it seriously
and work hard to achieve pre-set teaching goals.

Basically, the curricula for the regular software engineering programs have been
carried out carefully and correctly, but not completely. Faculty members spend much
time preparing lessons, giving lectures, and marking assignments and course projects.
The staffs efforts in supporting faculty and students is formative and gains appraisal
from both. The outcomes, graduates employment rates and average wages, had
shown to be satisfactory in the first several years.

From the interviews of staff in several multi-national IT companies, we could clearly

see that these multinational companies actively participate in teaching activities.
Several courses have been taught or jointly taught by experts from these companies.
They have also sponsored courseware development and provided software and
hardware to facilitate teaching. For instance, IBM sponsored a set of mainframe
computers and helped to develop a full major on mainframe computing. They trained
teachers, provided textbooks, helped maintain facilities, equipment, and devices, as
well as computer software systems, and subsidized students to get related certificates.
Microsoft helped to develop several courses and sponsored the development of
courseware. Several courses sponsored by Microsoft had been certified by the
Ministry of Education as national classic courses which had been promoted to other
230

universities.

Software engineering schools are famous for their collaboration with industry, so
many enterprises prefer working with them. However, if these companies are mainly
for product promotion but not education or training, the school will not start the
cooperation. SSE tightened the control on cooperation with industry.

If an enterprise wants to jointly develop a course, it needs to send the application to

the schools committee on teaching guidance for approval. The committee will
check if the course fits in the current curricula and decide whether to approve the
application. The school has learned to protect its teaching quality through
regulations. (Informant 3)

However, due to limited human resources, not all the courses listed on the curricula
have been offered. Students have limited choices to pick up a direction of study even
if the curricula give other directions. The career path for graduates is relatively narrow.
Most of them work as program developers, testers, or technical supports. Rarely can
graduates get jobs in non-IT industry or non-IT positions. The school has been
dedicated to recruiting qualified faculty members and offering more courses to
students, but the progress has not been satisfactory.

The curricula have been under revision every year. Feedback from faculty members
and students has been collected formally or informally through various channels.
Experts from industry have also been invited to give advice on curriculum review. In
the first several years, the curricula had been modified frequently. Beginning in 2006,
the curricula had become relatively stable and only minor changes had been made in
the following years.

The cross-disciplinary collaboration was not successful. The joint program with the
Math department was terminated not long after it began. It stopped recruiting students
231

in 2006 and students who were already admitted continued until they graduated from
the university. The reasons for termination were the uncertainty of students
employment opportunities and the unpleasant or troublesome administrative
cooperation.

From mathematicians points of view, students should learn all necessary math
courses in order to keep consistency. From software engineers points of view,
students need to learn only general math. Finally, the outcome was not the one we
expected. After two years, when the evaluation was done, the Math department did
not want to continue, so the program was terminated. (Informant 6)

This joint program was started under the administrative order from the university and
terminated due to the bad relationship between partners. The program had not gone
through any feasibility analysis or final evaluation. The beginning and termination of
the program was sudden, unexpected, and lacked serious consideration.
7.1.3

Pedagogical Development

Since the pilot software engineering schools were expected to be teaching-oriented,

the Ministry of Education encouraged all the pilot software engineering schools to
adopt new teaching methods to improve teaching quality. Besides traditional lecturing,
learning by doing and problem-based learning have been put into practice in most
software engineering schools, including SSE.

Besides learning knowledge, students have been required to master practical skills,
such as programming, testing, analysis, etc. They have also been recommended to
become familiar with popular tools and application software. The selection of tools
and software has been heavily influenced by certain powerful IT companies due to
their dominance in the market. For example, tools and software from Microsoft, IBM,
and Oracle have been greatly emphasized so that every student should take at least
232

one course focusing on one of the technologies from these companies.

The language of instruction has been mainly Chinese, while some courses have been
bilingual or taught in English. It has been very common that teachers made
PowerPoint slides in English and gave lectures in Chinese. Most textbooks for subject
courses are in English. The popular use of English in teaching is due to the
characteristics of the discipline. Software engineering is a heavily internationalized
area. English is the working language and most technical documents are written in
English only.

The school has also regularly offered courses jointly developed with companies.
Some courses have been welcomed by students since these courses have been taught
by experienced experts who could teach cutting-edge technologies and knowledge.
Some courses have not been popular among students but have been required by
companies that wanted to promote their products or technology. It was the trade-off
for their sponsorships on courses, laboratories, or projects.
7.1.3.1 Teaching method
Lecturing has been the main method of teaching. The difference has been the change
of place, from normal lecture classrooms to computer labs. Due to the characteristics
of the discipline, many courses have involved practice during lectures, so computer
labs have become the most commonly used places for teaching. Students have also
spent a lot of time in computer labs after class working on assignments and projects.
Computers and the Internet have become essential tools for teaching and learning.

However, the disadvantages of teaching in computer labs have been noticed. Students
have been easily distracted from listening to the lecturers instruction by surfing on
the Internet. Lecturers have heavily depended on multimedia tools and ignored the
teaching content. It has been very common to observe in class the lecturer talking and
233

operating on his/her computer while students were working on their own computers
doing something else. The school has implemented some measures to change the
situation. For example, when teachers designed courses, they avoided abusing
computer labs: use computer labs only when necessary, block Internet access when
giving lectures in computer labs, and leave an Intranet connection only.

Learning by doing has become a very popular method of teaching in computing

education. It started in the U.S.A. and gradually became accepted by others all over
the world. In Chinese traditional computer science programs, lecturing has been the
major teaching method and assessment has mainly been a written test evaluating
whether students understood and remembered the knowledge given by the lecturers.
By adopting the learning by doing approach, teachers have changed the way they
teach and assess.

The teaching method of learning by doing has also been valued by students. The
course projects have usually been team work, so students have had the opportunity to
work with other fellow students. When they gained experience in design and
programming, they also learned team spirit and the skills to deal with interpersonal
relationships. Moreover, the course projects they did at school finally became part of
their working experience on their resumes when they applied for jobs.

When companies interview students, they do not care what courses students have
learnt. In their mind, most courses are useless in practice, so they do not care. What
they are concerned with is the project experience. I know many students have not
done any projects besides their thesis projects. But the students in SSE, especially
the ones in our grade, have done dozens of projects, from the bottom layer to the
application layer. So we are very competitive in job hunting. (Informant 31)

Students abilities to do practical work have been emphasized and projects have been
included in teaching and evaluation. Problem-based learning has also been associated
234

with this method. Projects to solve real problems have been applied to courses to let
students understand the complexities and limitations of real problems. At the same
time, students have learned to work in teams and have adopted engineering concepts
to their projects.

Adopting this new method has required faculty to have more knowledge and skills.
They have needed to have working experience in related fields in order to design
projects suitable for students. Faculty members who have had sound experience in
industry have been mostly welcomed by students since they could well combine
theories with practical applications. Course projects have needed to be carefully
designed and the evaluation has been a challenge. Basically, teachers with working
experience have taught better than those who have not had much experience.

The school has tried to make some changes to some of these issues. Faculty members
have been encouraged to work together to design joint projects for several relevant
courses. This could reduce students workloads while giving them the sense of
integrity. However, not all courses have been suitable to combine with others and not
all teachers have been willing to invest time to develop new projects.

When I asked students opinions on learning by doing in interviews, all of them

commented on it positively. Students were fond of having course projects for several
reasons. First, they could gain experience with doing the project and understand the
work flow in the field. Second, some joint course projects helped them to connect
several courses together and have a deeper understanding of relevant courses. Third,
when they started job hunting, their experience with doing projects in school gave
them advantages when competing with other fresh graduates who did not have any
experience. Therefore, this method has been promoted since the school was
established.

However, problems with this method have also been observed. First, the
235

implementation of course projects added more workload to students. It was very

common to see students working overnight in labs to finish required projects at the
end of each semester. Many students complained that when there were several
projects due at the end of the semester, they had to work extremely hard to get them
done. Sometimes, they had to cheat in order to finish them for the due date. Second, to
keep a variety of projects was a challenge for faculty. Even for an experienced faculty
member, it was difficult to design different projects every year. When the project
database was running out, students could cheat by copying former students
assignments. Third, since the courses projects were all team work, it was difficult to
differentiate the role of each student. Sometimes, some group members got good
scores because they had good team members, not because they worked hard. In fact,
the issues of fairness of assessments and free-rides in projects have become big
concerns for the school. One student complained:

Courses were arranged too tightly. Our days were full of courses When I
recalled my student life, I found that I attended too few social activities. The
schedule was completely full. Like when I was in the first year, every day we had
eight classes so our time to meet students in other faculties was very little.
This is a weakness because our minds were restricted. (Informant 32)

They hoped that teachers could cooperate in project design to avoid repeated work
and wasting students time and energy. Students also reported that faculty members
did not communicate with each other well and focused only on their own courses,
lacking the spirit of integrity of discipline knowledge.

Definitely, no teaching method is perfect. Learning by doing has weaknesses as

well as strengths. One student commented:

There was a theme in every class: learning by doing. We learned and understood
knowledge taught in a class through doing a course project. So we learned many
236

(programming) languages and many development tools. By doing many projects,

we understood the software development process. I want to say some
disadvantages. I see I learned a lot of things in four years, but everything was
coarse. What I learned was wide but shallow. At last we just did something
working as assemblers. We didnt have our own thoughts, just to finish the job,
through some technologies. It was not deep enough. This is what I felt in four years.
(Informant 45)

7.1.3.2 Language efficiency

Internationalization is the MoEs requirement for all the national pilot SE schools.
How to realize internationalization was not clearly stated in the policy document.
Each school had its own interpretation and implementation. Most schools realized this
in two ways: emphasizing foreign language efficiency and collaborating with foreign
universities and corporations. In SSE, these two measures had been implemented.

English is the working language in IT industry. Since SSE is located in Shanghai

where many multinational corporations established their Chinese headquarters,
English has been considered as the most important foreign language in SSE. Besides
the English courses offered by the university, the school has also offered some courses
in oral communication and technical writing.

The textbooks used in most specialized courses have been in English. Basically,
instructors prefer original classic textbooks imported from the U.S. since the quality
of translated textbooks in computer science is terribly low. This may be due to the fast
development of the field and quick updating of textbooks. If students cannot
understand the English-written textbooks, they can use the translated version in
Chinese. Additionally, due to the fast change of technology, textbooks are not the only
source of knowledge. Instructors have often had some complementary materials
which are written in English only. Sometimes, online help documents can be used.
237

These documents are written in English, too.

Using original textbooks in English has been the common choice for most teachers.
Besides agreeing that these textbooks are well written, they also think the textbooks
are up-to-date and can bring new technologies and teaching methods.

It follows the trend of technology development. Most changes are not initiated
from inside but from outside, overseas. The textbook I used before is a textbook
well-known around the world. When the author published the new version, he
distributed emails to teachers like us mentioning what new materials he had added
to the new book and recommendations on how to use it. He even sent me the
PowerPoint slides. Excellent! So I stick with this new textbook and add new
technology into my lessons. I think it is valuable. (Informant 15)

English has also been emphasized through extra-curricular activities. English

presentation contests, English Salon, English Night, and other kinds of activities to
promote the study of English have been organized regularly and frequently. Various
competitions and contests sponsored by companies also give chances to students to
practice their English communication skills. For example, every year, Citigroup
organizes a nationwide competition on financial project design. The final stage is
always the presentations and defense of students projects. The language used in
presentations and defense is English.

The school has offered some subject courses in English. The school has established
international student exchange programs with some European universities, so some
foreign students have come to study in SSE as exchange students. None of them can
understand courses in Chinese, so the school has had to offer some courses in English.
These courses have been open to SSE students and exchange students. Instructors
have given lectures in English and students have done assignments and evaluations in
English.
238

However, teaching in pure English has brought the problem of some students being
unable to understand what teachers teach in class. A faculty member said in an
interview:

Teaching in English is a two-edge sword. For students good in English, it is an

advantage. For students not good at English, it is a disadvantage. Thats it.
(Informant 15)

In fact, even for students who are good in English, the use of English as the
instructional language still has hindered their understanding of course content. To
solve the problem, the school has provided parallel Chinese sessions which are
exactly the same as the English ones. So some students have been able to register in a
Chinese session or go to both sessions.

When companies have come to campus to recruit interns or employees, they have
emphasized language efficiency, as well. The written tests and interviews have all
been conducted in English. Most seminars given by external experts have been in
English. Even some inspirational activities have been hosted in English. The school
has often invited alumni to share their experiences with current students. All alumni
have emphasized the importance of foreign language efficiency.

However, the radical pursuit of teaching in English may not be as good as people wish.
In SSE, the effort in improving the number of courses taught in English has become a
show for various kinds of evaluations and presentations. The data seems good, but the
quality of learning has been ignored by the school. Just like a faculty member
criticized:

I personally think it is ridiculous teaching courses in English in the first

year think about those from remote cities and the accent our teachers
239

have Teaching in English, first, the timing is important. You cannot neglect
students diverse needs and English levels. Then the courses. For important
courses, you need to think about students ability to understand. The quality is
important. You cant sacrifice teaching quality for English. Third, there should be
appropriate teachers. When we choose teachers to teach in English, we cannot
overlook their levels of oral English or their ability to use English. It doesnt
work. (Informant 6)

Students attitudes to teaching in English have been very controversial. On the one
hand, they think this could improve their English language efficiency which would be
critical for their future careers. On the other hand, they think English as the instruction
language has hindered their understanding of class content. They have had to do extra
work after class, such as reading Chinese textbooks or asking their classmates for help.
Some students who have not been good at English could fail the course. Some
teachers English levels have not been good enough to teach in English which has
impacted the quality of their teaching.

Due to the fast development of software outsourcing to Japan, the school has also
included Japanese study in the curriculum as an elective course. Usually this course
has been scheduled in the summer and interested students have stayed during the
summer holiday to take the course. More than half of the students have chosen to take
this course. Though they may not work in Japan or Japanese companies in the future,
they have all thought that learning the language and understanding Japanese culture
would help their future careers.
7.1.3.3 Evaluation
Both undergraduate and graduate programs have been under assessment of the
university as well as the Ministry of Education. It has been a nationwide assessment
of undergraduate teaching and all the public universities have been required to
240

undertake this every five years. Each university under investigation has had to do the
self-evaluation first. In each university, all the faculties have needed to prepare
required documentation and fill in required forms. Once the university

has

completed the first round assessment, the results and supportive documentation are
then handed in to the ministry. When the ministry has double-checked the results
several faculties are randomly chosen to complete detailed checks. The results of the
evaluation may have an effect on the universities reputations and perhaps future
student recruitment.

The University A has had a full-size internal assessment on every faculty or school
every four years. This evaluation has covered several aspects: teaching, research, and
administration. All faculties have needed to prepare related documents to support their
self-evaluation results and wait for the detailed audit from the administrative
departments of the university. The results of the evaluation may have affected the
allocation of internal resources and the promotion of deans and department heads.

Within the university, the registrar department and graduate school have held various
kinds of evaluations on teaching, too. They may have sent out staff to do classroom
observations and judge the performances of teachers instruction on a regular basis.
The classroom observation has been randomly arranged and teachers and staff in
faculties will not have received advanced notice. If teachers have made serious
mistakes, like coming late to class, the university makes a public announcement
regarding the penalties.

Students have needed to fill in on-line evaluation forms at the end of each semester on
teachers performances and the quality of courses. This has not been compulsory, so
the effectiveness of this evaluation has been doubtful.

Faculty members have all agreed that teaching is important, but the idea of how to
improve the quality of teaching has been relatively vague. Preparing lessons has been
241

time and energy-consuming, but it has been difficult to quantize this. Basically, it has
depended on each teacher to decide how far to go.

Teaching is time-consuming if you teach the same course several times, you
remember the material. Then you can save time if you follow the old way every
time There is another way to do it. You invest more time and energy on
pedagogical research Im interested in it and feel there are a lot of things to
do in teaching However, many teachers dont want to do so. Its not worth
doing this because there is no difference from doing less. Its really up to
individual teachers. (Informant 12)

7.1.4

Regulations regarding teaching

The regulations regarding teaching are made to ensure the appropriate operation of
teaching activities. These mainly include regulations on teaching arrangement and
quality assurance.
7.1.4.1 Teaching arrangement
The registrar office has been responsible for the arrangement of teaching for full-time
students and the MSE admin office has taken charge of the teaching affairs of all
part-time MSE programs. They have followed the curricula to arrange class schedules.
Graduate students have needed to take only six courses within two years, so the
arrangement has not a problem. The arrangement for undergraduate programs has
needed much attention.

Due to the limited human resources, the school has not offered many choices in
course selection. Students workloads have been very heavy. They have needed to
complete 150 credits in three years, which meant they have had to take at least seven
courses each semester. The registrar office has needed to make a timetable for each
grade and the timetable needed to avoid time clash as much as possible.
242

By the end of each semester, faculty members have been given notices on what
courses they will teach the next semester. Then they have needed to submit reports on
the syllabi and possible time slots they can teach. The registrar office has gathered all
the information and made timetables for all grades. Staff and faculty might have
needed to negotiate on schedules several times to work out the best solutions.

Usually, the vice dean (teaching) has discussed with teachers individually their
teaching workload. According to the regulation of the university, every teacher has
had to teach at least one course each year. In SSE, the student-teacher ratio has been
very high, so each teacher has had to teach at least two courses per year on average.
The teachers who have done less research have needed to undertake more teaching. In
principle, each teacher cannot have taught more than two courses in one semester.

Regarding the credit management, students have needed to finish required credits
before they could get degrees. The maximum study period has been six years, but
most students have finished the program in four years. The registrar office has taken
charge of the affairs related to credit management, under the supervision of the
registrar department of the university. The credit management system had been
designed many years prior and the flexibility of the system had been low.

When the school started the international student exchange program, the credit
transfer had become a barrier for outgoing exchange students. The existing credit
system had not allowed students to transfer the credits they had taken in foreign
universities back to the universitys credit system. Students had to give up the credits
they received in overseas universities and retake required courses at the university.
SSEs staff in the international office and registrar office had argued with the registrar
department many times and reported the problem to the university leadership.
Considering that the university was promoting international cooperation, university
leadership finally supported SSE. SSE negotiated with the registrar department and
243

worked out a new regulation on credit management for exchange students. The new
system has been open to all academic units in the university. From this point of view,
the school has made changes to the university system.

In fact, this is a bottom-up change. A problem found in a school has caused the
modification to the existing system It can be said that we affected the
university... Yes, we affected both the university and the Ministry of Education.
Now the ministry has promoted our model to the whole country. (Informants 25 &
26)

7.1.4.2 Quality assurance mechanism

SSE has adopted a similar teaching evaluation system to that of the university.
However, the school has applied it with more flexibility.

Before the semester

How to teach a course and what to teach is decided by the teacher on duty. But their
actions are also under inspection from the school as well as the university. All
teachers have needed to submit their syllabi and textbooks in advance. The vice dean
for teaching and the staff in the teaching affairs office check the materials and keep a
record for reference. Teachers also need to keep their lesson plans for random
checking.

During the semester

Class observation is the main method to control the quality of teaching. Deans and
staff in the teaching affairs office alternatively go to classrooms to conduct
observations. They not only pay attention to teachers teaching, but also notice
students behaviors. Moreover, students are encouraged to give feedback on teaching.
244

Students may give feedback face to face or through other channels, such as BBS or
emails. Their feedback is seriously taken into account. Whenever there is any severe
problem with teaching, the school needs to react quickly. If the teacher does not teach
well, deans usually first communicate with him/her and try to help them solve the
problems. If the problem persists or cannot be solved in a short period, the teacher
may be replaced during the semester. If the problem is with students, staff in the
student affairs office should be invited to work together and try to find the solution.

After the semester

If the course is offered by SSE, students are required to fill out an evaluation form
commenting on the courses and the lecturer. The evaluation is anonymous and
teachers receive the results of the evaluations in the following semester. If the course
is offered by the university, students are required to fill out an on-line evaluation form
commenting on the course and the lecturer. This evaluation is not compulsory and
most students have not participated in this.

Theoretically, these measures can guarantee some degree of teaching quality. In fact,
the effectiveness of these measures is doubtful. The teaching quality heavily depends
on teachers self-discipline while the evaluation depends on school leaders whether to
make use of all the feedback and opinions from the various evaluations. The
evaluation results do not have much effect on teachers financial income or personnel
promotions because the two systems are separated. From the data collected on the
field trip, I would say that people do not take these measures seriously.
7.2 Research
Initially, SSE had not had any plan of doing research for several reasons. First, it had
been required by the Ministry of Education that pilot software engineering schools
should be teaching-oriented. They had been encouraged to focus on teaching only,
245

leaving research to traditional computer science departments. Second, as a newly

established school with very limited resources, SSE had had to put all resources into
teaching in order to quickly establish the reputation of good quality teaching. Finally,
the faculty size and the research capability of faculty members had hindered the
possibility of doing research. Most faculty members at that time were engineers rather
than researchers. Therefore, research had not become the goal of the school for
several years.

Since the university had given SSE a three-year exemption of doing internal
evaluations, SSE gained a period of time to focus on teaching only, leaving research
as faculty members personal choices and interests. School administrators had not
paid attention to research progress, but they had given as much support as possible to
those who did research and encouraged them to get their work published.
7.2.1

Rationale to do research

After talking to many people in SSE, including faculty, staff and students, I noticed
that there had been consensus around the point that doing research was necessary for
an academic unit in a research university. Research performance is a very important
indicator in the internal evaluation system. The research performance had also
determined the status of the unit among all academic units in the university. Everyone
in SSE had understood the importance and benefits of being a member of a strong
faculty which had powerful influence on the university.

Research could have improved SSEs status in the university. The university is a
research university and research had been the utmost goal for every faculty. People
tended to look down on units with weak research capacity. SSE had invested most of
its resources into teaching and good teaching had become SSEs most significant
characteristic. However, when SSEs teaching improved, its status in the university
did not increase accordingly. It was an embarrassing situation. Although the university
246

leadership did not push SSE to do research, the school had to move towards research
under the hidden pressure from the informal system.

When the three-year exemption expired, the school needed to be evaluated by the
same criteria as other academic units. The evaluation mechanism greatly emphasized
research outcomes. Considering SSEs research capacity, it would definitely have
stayed at the bottom of the ranking list. Neither leadership nor teachers and students
wanted to see such a result. They could not change the environment, so they had to
change themselves to adapt to the environment.

Moreover, the school has needed research outcomes to show its competence and
reputation in many occasions. When recruiting students and faculty, meeting partners,
or attracting sponsors, the school has needed to show not only the quality of teaching,
but also the capability of doing research. Research competence has been considered as
the most important indicator for universities as well as faculties worldwide.

Research performance has also been important to individual faculty members. The
academic evaluation mechanism has been based on research outputs and research
revenue, so anyone who has wanted to go upwards on his/her career ladder has
needed to have a strong research profile. Giving academic promotion opportunities to
faculty members has been critical to retaining a quality faculty team. According to the
universitys academic ranking system, research has been the deterministic factor in
assessment. If faculty members did no research, they could not get publications and
research funding. To ensure the equity, the university has insisted on using the same
standards to evaluate faculty members in SSE, so faculty members in SSE had to
yield to the universitys requirements of doing research.

Furthermore, it has been believed that research could benefit teaching and improve its
quality. Teachers could include their research in their teaching and make instruction
more interesting and relevant to practical work. In the software engineering field,
247

knowledge and technology changes very fast, so teachers have had to update their
knowledge frequently. By doing research, teachers have had to learn new knowledge
and apply the knowledge to practical projects. For teachers who have not had working
experience in industry, doing research has given them the opportunity to learn
practical knowledge and skills which they could use in their teaching. For teachers
who have worked in industry, their knowledge has become out-of-date very quickly.
Doing research could refresh their knowledge base and add new content to their
teaching. When instructors teach in class, they could combine theoretical knowledge
with practical skills and help students to better understand class content.

Engineering projects and research benefit teaching very much. If you have projects,
then you can let your students participate in them. If you give students a
completely fake project, students do not like to do it because it is meaningless. By
doing practical projects, teachers can improve their performance and then improve
teaching quality. Generally speaking, it is okay to say research promotes teaching.
(Informant 12)

Finally, research could benefit both faculty members and students. Faculty members
could generate extra income from research projects. Although the wage level of
faculty members in SSE has been higher than the average wage level in the university,
faculty members have still needed to make extra money if they want to live a decent
life in the city. The income from teaching and other routine work has been fixed and
could have much room for improvement. Therefore, doing research projects has
become the best solution to solve the problem.

Students have benefited from their teachers research, as well. Junior students have
learned practical knowledge in class from their teachers experiences with doing
research and senior students have joined research project teams and gained real
working experience. Students from low-income families have received financial
support from the projects in which they participated. In the current Chinese higher
248

education system, financial support for students with financial difficulties has not
covered all students who need it. So, many students from low-income families have
had to work part-time. Compared to the jobs which are not relevant to their study,
students have prefered working in research projects which allowed them to make
money while learning practical skills.

However, there has been very little communication between faculty and students
regarding research. Most students have not known what kind of research faculty
members were doing. Teachers have rarely mentioned their research in class. Only a
small number of students have participated in research projects, most of which were
graduate students. Students have agreed that doing research could enrich teaching.
They have enjoyed teachers use of projects as practical examples to demonstrate
related theories. The combination of teaching and research could improve the quality
of teaching. But the reality is that very few teachers have done so. Most teachers have
never talked about their research in class or included their research with their teaching.
There have been some students complaining that some teachers invested too much
time doing research, leaving teaching unattended.

Very few teachers introduce their research projects to us or mention the technology
used I feel teachers are often too busy doing projects, and put teaching
aside (I) feel they do not combine these two. No connection. Research is
research. Teaching is teaching. Do both, but no relation I think combing these
two can improve teaching quality. (Informant 42, 43, & 44)

All in all, under both internal and external pressure, doing research has become
inevitable due to various reasons. However, the school has not wanted to change to a
traditional school which focused more on research than teaching. Teaching has still
been the main focus of the school.

249

7.2.2

Strategies to do research

Due to above mentioned reasons, both school administrators and faculty members had
reached the consensus that research would be done when the teaching system matured
and ran smoothly. However, the decision of doing research was easy to make while
the implementation of the decision was difficult.

SSE has had a strong competitor, the computer science (CS) department, within the
university. These two units have enrolled similar numbers of students, but the number
of faculty members of the CS department has been three times bigger than that of SSE.
Faculty members in the CS department have had much more time to do research.
Meanwhile, most teachers in the CS department have been well-trained researchers
and have had sound experience in doing research. The research achievement and
reputation have been built up both in academic communities as well as in industry. If
SSE had wanted to do similar research as the CS department, it would definitely have
been disadvantaged in the competition for recourses and market.

When faculty members began to do research, the school leaders and faculty members
had reached an agreement. Faculty members could do whatever types of projects they
could get. The primary purpose of doing research at this stage had been to accumulate
experience and reputation. It was even better if the research projects could generate
extra income for teachers and bring internships or employment opportunities for
students. These goals had set up the theme of doing research in SSE for many years
until the school made up a strategic plan for research in 2008.

Usually deans spent more time trying to get vertical projects while other people
focused on getting horizontal projects. Vertical projects are those funded by the
government, while horizontal projects are sponsored by the market. The school also
helped faculty members build up research teams. The dean gave seminars to young
faculty on how to write research proposals and the efficient way to apply for research
250

funds from various channels in national, provincial, or municipal levels.

The strategy was quite successful. The school soon got several vertical research
projects and horizontal contract projects. Many faculty members were involved in
these projects. The school also recruited several new faculty members to fill the
positions lacking in the research teams. The experience and outcomes of these
projects built up the reputation of doing research and contract projects within the
university as well as in the research market.

After the three-year exemption, the school faced continuingpressure from the
university to do research. At the same time, the special policy of recruiting faculty had
expired. This meant the school could no longer recruit faculty without doctoral
degrees. The disadvantage of this policy was that it was more difficult to recruit
people with working experience. The advantage was the research capacity of the
school had been unintentionally enhanced. The late-coming faculty members were all
well-trained researchers.

Only a few faculty members have prefered doing pure theoretical research since the
time span is long and the financial reward is limited. Most faculty members have
expected to get financial rewards as quickly as possible. Publication has not been the
main consideration, although teachers have wished they could produce some
publications from their projects. However, this has not be easy for faculty working
with industry because they have been restrained by IP protocols. Generally, for-profit
contract projects have been the preference of most faculty members.

Several faculty members, most of whom received their research training abroad, have
been engaged in theoretical research. The dean has set up a scholarship to encourage
young faculty members to apply for vertical research projects and publish their
research. The school has also set up a fund to sponsor young people to kick off their
first research projects.
251

Some faculty members have teamed together to do contract projects which may not
have involved any knowledge production. The major purpose of doing contract
projects has been generating revenue and building up reputation. Most of these people
have been educated in China and have had some working experience in industry. Most
contract projects have not produced any publication, patent, or invention but have
brought financial benefit to faculty members. Some graduate students have also gotten
involved in these projects.

School leaders have hoped that some faculty members could do theoretical research
and produce publications for evaluations. They have clearly known that eliminating
for-profit contract projects has been impossible, although these projects could not
bring research productivity to the school. Cross-disciplinary research projects have
been highly recommended since these projects have touched more than one field and
it has been easy to produce academic papers which counted as publications of the
school.

In 2008, the school made its first strategic plan for doing research. It carefully chose
several fields to develop its research profile. The one field that most faculty members
worked in and had accumulated much experience of doing research was
engineering-oriented which had a wide application in industry. The school also chose
two other fields which were new in China. The school closely cooperated with a
foreign partner university to develop one direction and worked with a famous
multinational company to develop another. None of these three fields was the major
research field of the computer science department. The school had made a choice to
avoid competition between two similar programs, prevent repeated investment of
resources, and expand the research spectrum of the university. This plan received
strong support from university leadership.

The school has also found an appropriate position for SSEs research in the university
252

structure, like the current standing vice dean mentions:

Like many software engineering schools overseas, we want to be the middleware

in the university ... Software engineering and the software engineering school is
located in the junction of disciplines, so we can cooperate with any discipline if we
have enough resources. But now we can work with some strong disciplines .
We can go deeper or stay as a middleware. We dont care about the nature of the
joint projects and where they are from We help you to finish. After that, we
can participate in industrialization or not depending on clients demands.
(Informant 3)

SSE has already launched the process to implement the new strategic research plan.
The collaboration with the foreign university has moved to the transplant of theories,
tools, and methods. The prototype system and systematic plans designed for several
government agencies has been created and cooperation agreements have been signed.
Now they are working on the promotion of such a prototype to industry. School
leaders have anticipated a long process and a lot of effort, but they believe it is the
right path to make the school stay significant among all faculties in the university.

The school has not wanted to switch to a research-oriented faculty. Teaching was, is,
and would always be the most important task of the school. It had just wanted to
gradually increase the contribution of research to a reasonable portion and make both
the university and faculty members feel satisfied and comfortable.

I think research itself is not the criterion to define traditional schools because
research has several levels. Theoretical research is one level while practical
research is another. Regarding faculty members research projects, if they are
practical projects, they offer good opportunities to students to get practical
experience. Basically, the school will not focus on doing basic theoretical research.
In my personal opinion, I dont think doing research will make the school become
253

a traditional school. (Informant 7)

7.2.3

Regulations regarding research

The Ministry of Education has preferred that all the pilot SE schools only teach.
However, considering the fact that all these schools have belonged to
research-intensive universities, the ministry has had to negotiate with these
universities to balance teaching and research. Finally, these universities have all
agreed to give some exemption of doing research to these schools for a period of time.

The resources for a newly established school have been very limited, so the allocation
of resources between teaching and research has been handled carefully. Financially,
SSEs most important income has come from students tuition fees, so it has been very
reasonable to emphasize teaching. Personally, most recruited faculty members have
been those who have had sound working experience which helped them to teach well,
but they have lacked the capability and training to do research. Moreover, the teaching
load for each teacher has been so heavy that it was almost impossible for them to
spare time to do research. In sum, the school had not intended to invest in research at
the beginning. The school put most of its limited resources in teaching and wanted to
create a good reputation in either its quality or the career opportunities for students.

Financial regulation

The university has charged an administration fee to any income generated from
research projects. For horizontal projects, the university has charged 26% and the
percentage for vertical projects has been 13%. Vertical projects have been the projects
sponsored by state/provincial/municipal government and usually have involved
theoretical research or advanced technological innovation. The National Natural
Science Foundation and 863 projects are typical vertical projects. Horizontal projects
are those sponsored by industry or other non-government sectors. At the university
254

level, the Department of Science and Technology has taken charge of research affairs.
And all the monetary transactions have gone through the Department of Finance and
Accounting.

In addition, each faculty or school has charged a certain administration fee on

research projects conducted by their faculty members. This has usually been to cover
the costs of resources and services, such as space, facilities, electricity, technical
support, administrative staffing, etc. The percentage has usually been decided by each
faculty. Sometimes, it has also depended on the size and nature of the projects. The
rest of the research income has belonged to research teams. They have had the right to
allocate the money to cover all kinds of cost, such as materials, facilities, travel costs,
publications, conferences, and subsidiaries for team members, including faculty,
students and staff, etc.

In the first several years, SSE did not charge any administration fee on any research or
contract project. Firstly, the number of research projects was very small. The revenue
and the cost of research projects were almost negligible. Second, the school wanted to
encourage faculty members to do research. Leaders understood that the school would
be finally evaluated by a regular evaluation system and research was the most
important indicator of the system. Therefore, school leaders wanted to cultivate
research capability among faculty members. Thirdly, the school had enough office
space and facilities to support such a limited number of research projects. Therefore,
research activities were completely self-regulated by research teams in this period of
time.

After several years of cultivation, the number of research projects reached a certain
level, even though the revenue generated from research was still little. The number of
faculty members and students involved in research projects also increased. The
shortage of space and facilities appeared and the competition for resources started.
This situation forced school leaders to think about making rules to regulate research
255

activities.

In the new research regulatory system, the school still has not charged any
administration fee, but research teams have had to bear part of the cost for space,
facilities, and electricity. According to the project size, the school has supported a
certain number of facility sets (office space, a desk, and a computer) for free. If the
teams have needed more space and facilities than that, they have had to pay 50% of
the running costs of extra space and facilities.

Since the school had been under increasing financial pressure, leaders decided to put
research income on the list of revenue generation, even if the revenue from research
was still trivial compared to the tuition collected from undergraduate and graduate
programs. The purpose of the new regulation was to avoid abuse of space and
facilities, and unnecessary competition for students. This policy was made by a group
of senior administrators with consultation of faculty and staff members. It
encountered resistance from faculty, but it was supported by both leaders and staff
members. After several rounds of discussions about the percentage to be charged, it
became a formal policy in the school.

In interviews, many faculty members were not satisfied with the current policy. They
thought the school administrators were shortsighted to make such regulations. The
implementation of new research policies would bring more problems, extra work, and
inconvenience. Teachers incentives for doing research would be impeded. Charging
costs for space and facilities would hinder the facultys passion for doing research.

In China, it is extremely difficult to allow the general public to understand the

importance of respecting intellectual property and paying for the use of software. As a
result, software projects have been low priced and the margin of projects in software
development has been extremely low. Before the new policy, project teams could
make a reasonable profit from projects to subsidize both faculty members and
256

students. After the new policy was implemented, the profit gained from research
projects decreased sharply. Many faculty members thought that investing so much
time and energy in research projects was not worthwhile. It might have been more
cost efficient to teach more courses instead of doing research.

Personnel regulations

In SSE, the size of faculty body has been small and the number of faculty who do
research has been even smaller. Since many faculty members have not had the interest
or capacity to do research, the school has not applied any compulsory workload of
research to faculty members. Basically, doing research has been a personal choice.
This policy has not changed since the establishment of the school.

The school has had its own internal appraisal mechanism. By the end of each
academic year, faculty and staff have needed to fill out evaluation forms on their
teaching, research, and administration. Research has been counted as part of the job
duty and workload, but it has not been compulsory.

Currently, there is more faculty teaching since the number of faculty is small and
the history of the school is short. Therefore, the time spent in teaching is more than
time spent in research. Most faculty positions are teaching positions. Very few
people are in research positions. Very few! Therefore, from this point of view, the
percentage of teaching is still heavier than research now. But gradually there will
be someone investing more effort in research. (Informant 7)

However, if faculty members have wanted to get promoted to higher academic ranks
(from lecturer to associate professor to professor), they have needed to go through the
evaluation held by the universitys academic committee. The standard has been the
same as in the university that publications and research revenue have been the most
important indicators. In this sense, the school has not helped its faculty members to
257

bypass the requirements on research. Therefore, the school has actually encouraged
teachers to do research for their personal improvement.

The university just issued a new policy regarding academic promotion. About
teaching, it only mentioned the workload of teaching each one should finish
There is not a quantized requirement for teaching. However, about papers and
projects, there are very firm requirements. No exemptions. (Informant 15)

In recent years, research capacity has become an important criterion when the school
recruits new faculty members. The latest recruited faculty members have all been
required to bear some duties of doing research and have been evaluated partly based
on their research performance. The school has slightly started to put some pressure on
those who are capable of doing research. The school has also intentionally looked for
faculty members who have worked in certain fields and grouped them together to
form research teams. It has been difficult to change the fact that the faculty size is
small, so the school has tried to put limited human resources into several carefully
selected fields. This might have been the most efficient way to use the schools
limited human resources.

Supports and services

In order to facilitate the research endeavor of faculty members, the school provided
various supports. The first one was the technical support to research projects. The
technicians in the facility office were bearing the duty to support all research projects.
The school had tried its best to provide the equipment research teams needed. Most
research teams did not need special equipment besides computers and desks, but some
research projects might have included special devices. For example, the graphics
research center needed graphic generating devices which were expensive and
complicated. In this case, the cost of the facility was mostly covered by the projects
undertaken in the center.
258

How to get projects or research funding had been a challenge. As a newly established
school, it did not have much success or achievement in research or contract projects.
The school leaders made use of their social networks to get research funds. Since
university senior or middle-level administrators were considered as government
official equivalents, they had many chances to know government officials in key
positions. The friendly relationship (guanxi) between them helped school leaders to
get research projects from governments or their agencies.

Project seeking is like this. Whenever we have chance, we try to get projects. This
is for everyone because this is not the main source of projects in the school. Project
seeking mainly relies on individuals. We dont have a clear direction yet. We dont
have strong teams either. So it seems everyone works on his/her own
Therefore, there is no specific person to work on project-seeking at the moment.
(Informant 7)

Sometimes, research funding may have come from cross-disciplinary collaboration.

Usually these kinds of projects came from other faculties or from the top, the
university. SSE may have been responsible for one or several modules in the whole
project. School leaders usually acted as the mediators and coordinators. The
university highly recommended cross-disciplinary cooperation in teaching or research.
However, cross-disciplinary research projects were not popular because of the
complex internal coordinating work. Some research teams in SSE were able to get
sub-contracts from research teams in other faculties because the nature of software
engineering was a tool to implement ideas and designs.

After the school accumulated experience and gained some reputation in the research
market, the school quit from project seeking. Now it was the faculty members
responsibility to look for projects or apply for research funding. However, faculty
members had different views. From their points of view, the school did not provide
259

much help to them to get research funds. They thought they were making use of their
own social networks to get research projects. They paid attention to various research
funding committees or foundations. They formed research teams and wrote research
proposals without the help and coordination from the school. They built up
connections with researchers in other institutions, either in China or outside China,
and created opportunities for further research collaboration. All the communication
happened among faculty members.

However, the less flexible administration increased the human resources cost of doing
projects. The school used to have several staff members who provided required
research services to faculty members. The school tried to encourage teachers to do
research by providing convenient services and simplifying working procedures. After
the new policies were implemented, these services were assigned to several offices. It
was the result of bureaucratic development. Now, teachers had to go through a long
process by going to different offices and getting approval from different
administrators. It was time consuming and definitely increased the complexity and
decreased the efficiency and flexibility.
7.2.4

Orientation of research

Not all the faculty members want to do research. In fact, about half of the current
faculty members do not get involved in any kind of research. The research projects
conducted in SSE were mainly practical and engineering oriented. They can be
categorized into the following types.

Pure theoretical research

Pure theoretical research can produce publications and reputation. At the time of the
study, there was only one faculty member doing this kind of research. This female
faculty member received her doctoral degree from a European university. She had
260

successfully received research funding from the National Natural Science Foundation.
It was a small project with very little funds, but the success of application assured the
quality of the research proposal. The school considered this as a great success and was
willing to give as much support as possible.

To managers, another advantage of doing pure theoretical research is the minimum

need for physical facilities. In SSE, the researcher worked alone because no other
faculty members worked in the same area. It was difficult to find any collaborator in
the CS department because of the competitive relationship between SSE and CS. Like
the researcher mentioned in the interview, she felt lonely and helpless. The lack of
communication with the academic community has damaged her innovation. The
typical research outcomes of this type of research project are papers published in
international journals and conferences. These publications are very important in order
for the school to pass the internal assessment within the university.

Mixed theoretical and practical research

Several faculty members were working in teams to do research projects mixing

theoretical knowledge and practical needs. This team was working in the digital
graphic field, a typical area promoting the mixture of practice and theories. The team
leader received his doctoral degree from an overseas university and started this
research lab after he joined the school. He was a very successful researcher as well as
a business man. He had done good research in the field and was good at promoting his
research to industry. He was able to get research funds from both government
agencies and corporations. The papers produced from this research group touched
both theoretical and practical issues. The revenue generated from these projects was
the top in the school.

This type of research had been highly promoted by the school and welcomed by
faculty members. It could generate considerable revenue and produce research
261

publications at the same time. However, it was extremely difficult to recruit qualified
leaders who could lead the conduction of such projects. They needed to possess the
knowledge, capability, and interest to do theoretical and practical research and have
good interpersonal and marketing skills.

Contracted projects

There were two types of contracted projects: to develop prototypes or to develop

products. The school prefered developing prototypes for corporations while some
faculty members prefered developing products. Developing prototypes usually
involved some innovative technologies and application of some new knowledge in the
field. Therefore, it was possible to produce publications and contribute to research
productivity. However, the financial benefit from this kind of projects was not very
significant and the research workload, such as literature review, was quite heavy and
time-consuming.

On the contrary, developing products involved very little new knowledge or

technology but often generated a lot of income, so many faculty members were
willing to go for this kind of contract. Developing products was considered to be the
repetition of simple laboring work. However, these contracted projects were easy to
get, easy to conduct, and likely to generate significant financial benefits. To the school,
this kind of contracted project had very little positive influence. Usually no
publication was produced and sometimes the school could get into trouble or even
lawsuits if teachers could not deal well with clients.

The orientation of research could be described as a pyramid. Most people conducted

contracted projects that were practical oriented and produced very little research
outcomes. Some faculty members were undertaking mixed theoretical and practical
research, producing publications as well as financial income. Very few people worked
in pure scientific research that produced mostly publications while finance was not a
262

main consideration. The school prefered the upper two types of research and invested
resources to support them. But most faculty members prefered the bottom type of
research projects and paid great attention to financial income rather than publications.

Figure 7.1

Research pyramid (number of faculty who do certain kinds of research)

According to the data collected from the interviews of faculty members, it could be
found that their perceptions of research were different due to where they received
their highest degrees and whether they had non-academic working experience.
Basically, those who got their doctoral degrees from overseas universities prefer doing
theoretical research or mixed theoretical and practical research projects. Those who
got their highest degrees from Chinese universities prefer doing practical research.
Regarding working experience, faculty members who have working experience in
industry are fond of doing practical research while those who have pure academic
experience prefer theoretical research.

Educational background

Non-academic
Working
experience

Overseas

In China

Yes

theoretical and mixed research

practical research

No

theoretical and mixed research

mixed and practical research

Table 7.2

Preference of research orientation

263

Some faculty members do not want to do any research. They prefer teaching only. All
of them got their education in China and most of them did not have non-academic
working experience. The school usually assigns only teaching duties to these people.
However, they need to go through the same evaluation as other faculty members and
the evaluation includes both teaching and research indicators. Basically, teachers think
that doing research is a personal choice, so they want to decide what kind of research
to do. School should not put pressure on them.

I think we should respect teachers decision. We shouldnt force people to do.

Some teachers want just pure theoretical research. If you force them to do
engineering, it is impossible. Some teachers just like doing engineering projects. If
you force them to write theoretical paper, they are not be able to do it (Informant
15).

Gender does not make big difference between the choice of teaching and research
even though womens preference of teaching may be observed sometimes. Among
those who prefer doing research, slightly more women prefer doing theoretical
research than men.

The collaboration among faculty members across different sections was limited. This
was especially true those who do theoretical research. One faculty member
complained:

I dont communicate with anyone. I need to discover everything myself. Now Im

still in the exploration period. At least I never communicate with anyone. I have no
time and I didnt know any opportunity to do so. Even if I have the chance, I can
hardly have time to do. I know my future solely dependents on academic research.
Even administrative work, (I dont do any). (Informant 14)

264

7.3 Preliminary discussion

Teaching is the fundamental mission of higher education institutions. It is also the
most important task of SSE. Under the pressure of marketization, the tension between
teaching and research has become significant worldwide (Massy, 2004; S. V. Scott,
1999; Slaughter & Leslie, 1997). The quality of teaching has become a concern. One
of the missions of national pilot software engineering schools is to find a solution to
improve teaching quality. SSE is a teaching-oriented faculty and bears the
responsibility of finding the new way of educating students with both theoretical
knowledge and practical skills. Curriculum development has been the focus of the
school since it was established. The principles are practical, internationalized and
market-oriented. Industry has played a very important role in curriculum development.
Some scholars have noticed that heavy influence from market on curriculum
development (Williams, 1997; Q. Yin & Gordon, 1994). Commercial enterprises
participated in almost every aspect of curriculum design and course design. They also
provided resources to support teaching and learning. Internationalization can be
observed in teaching from the selection of textbooks, language of instruction, and
teaching collaboration. The school has created a culture of emphasizing practical
skills and valuing hardworking.

However, the shift of focus of faculty from teaching to research has been observed in
many places (Arbor, 1993; Massy, 2004; Meek, 2000; S. V. Scott, 1999; Slaughter &
Leslie, 1997). SSE could not escape from the mainstream. Research has become more
and more important to SSE along with the process of SSE returning to a normal
faculty in the university. It can no longer be exempted from assessed by research
performance. As the result, the school has to develop its own research plan and
policies. SSE has done some research, mainly practical and market-oriented, and
accumulated some experience and reputation. Faculty members are divided into two
groups, one doing research and the other teaching. How to evaluate their research
workload is a challenge.
265

Then why did SSE make so many changes? Under the decentralization reform, the
school obtained more autonomy with more responsibilities to support itself. It mainly
deals with three main external pressures: government, the university, and market. In
order to survive, it must depend on these external actors for funding, academic and
administrative support, human resource, knowledge and technology, and employment
positions, etc.

Government

The government required all national pilot SE schools to do experiment in teaching.

Innovation in teaching needed money to support, but MoE did not give financial
support. It gave favorable policies to let the schools to get resources from other
channels. These schools have made use of these policies to seek external resources to
support their initiatives. Later on, these schools gradually developed their own
specialties in teaching programs. For example, SSE has developed a direction through
the external help from IBM while the SE school in Shanghai Jiaotong University set
up special program under the help from Oracle. To evaluate these schools using
governments criteria, some schools are quite successful while some are not.
Nevertheless, they have made changes within their schools as well as to their mother
universities.

The Ministry of Education was against SE schools effort of developing research

capacity. In SSE case, the universitys attitude is natural and has never given formal
pressure of doing research on the school. The university can tolerate the existence of a
teaching-oriented school without research, but it would not stop SSE from improving
its research capacity as long as the effort does not interfere to regular teaching work.

Nevertheless, all these schools encountered difficulties to retain a teaching-oriented

focus in research universities. These schools together pushed MoE to reinforce their
266

working focus as teaching and eliminate the possibility of being merged to other units.
They negotiated with MoE and initiated changes to government policies. During the
experiment period, MoE has modified its policies or issued more policies to reinforce
the importance of teaching and the legitimacy of SE schools in order to prohibit some
universities consideration of amalgamation. As indicated in the resource dependence
theory (J. Hu, 2006; S. Hu, 2003; Oliver, 1997; Pfeffer & Salancik, 1978), these
schools managed to influence the policy makers by bargain and negotiation. The
nature of relationship between SSE and government has not changed. However, like
Pan (2009) mentioned in her research of Tsinghua University, SSE also tried to
influence governments policies through collaboration and negotiation.

The university

The university is the direct manager of SSE and it is the key force to decide SSEs
legitimacy of existence. From this stand, the university has the strongest influence on
SSE. The university provides all kinds of academic and administrative support to the
school, so SSE must deal with the university carefully and try to get as many
resources as possible to facilitate its development. The university basically supported
SSEs changes in teaching and has promoted some of these changes to other schools
within the university. The school has successfully let university leadership realize the
specialty and importance of the school.

However, some changes SSE made on curricula deviated from the academic norms
possessed by the university. The school has tried to move backwards to minimize the
gap between two standards. The school was in a situation that it could not meet the
requirements from the ministry and the university simultaneously since their demands
do not align with each other. At the first several years, MoE paid much attention to the
experiment and gave strong support to SE schools, so SSE more or less deviated from
the requirements of the university. When experimental period expired and the ministry
transferred most of the administrative power to the university, the school has to switch
267

to the university and completely implement universitys internal policies.

SSE has created a sub-culture which emphasizing teaching and practical knowledge.
It was created on the joint effort of both the school and market. This culture is
important for the school to adopt market mechanism in internal administration and
tailor its education to market needs. It is also the platform to attract external resources
from market for schools survival and development.

Faculty members helped to create and maintain SSEs internal culture and have
consensus on the values and beliefs advocated in SSE. However, when they face
barriers in their academic promotion, they have no choice but yielding to the
universitys academic system which values different norms and beliefs. In order to
avoid discrimination from others, they have to reduce the distinctiveness and try to
conform to institutional standards.

As an academic unit in a university, SSE is deeply influenced by the culture of the

university. The duplication of the structure and regulatory system has brought
institutional norms and value system to the school. It faces invisible pressure of
aligning with universal standard in the institution. Even though the university
leadership did not put pressure of doing research, the school cannot escape from the
collective norm that research is critical to determine the performance of an academic
unit and the status of a school within the university.

Doing research is a non-choice choice to SSE although it looked like it was schools
active choice. The school needs to go through various evaluations organized by
administrative departments in the university and the results of evaluations were
published in the university. Even if SSE people do not mind staying at the bottom of
the ranking list, they do care that the evaluation results affect future resource
allocation and personnel promotion.
268

The establishment of university/faculty/department structure was the result of internal

decentralization as well as marketization (Apple, 1999; Clark, 1995; Meek & Wood,
1997; Ngok, 2006). SSE was established to make changes and it did make differences
in teaching. However, it is an academic unit of the university, so it needs to abide
universitys regulations. People in SSE, including faculty, staff and students, are
immersed in the environment of the university and influenced by the norms, value and
beliefs of the university. Each person acts as an agent to change the school, moving
towards the standards of the university. On the one hand, the school actively
persuaded the university to accept and tolerate SSEs nature of teaching-oriented and
to make decisions in favor of the school. On the other hand, it has to compromise to
the university under the pressure of conformity because it needs to be accepted by
both formal and informal systems within the university.

Industry

Market influence on teaching and research has increased in the new economy
(Slaughter & Rhoades, 2004; Williams, et al., 1997; Q. Yin & Gordon, 1994). The
national pilot software engineering school project has deepened the influence.
Market-oriented was another requirement from MoE. Since the government and the
university could not give much support to SSE, SSE had to turn to market for help
and market was the main source for SSE to get financial and human resources. The
school wanted to make teaching practical-oriented and market-oriented, so it must
know what market needed and chase market changes. SSE needs not only funding,
but also knowledge, technology and human resources.

Besides financial support on hardware and software, industry also provided resources
in curriculum design and course design. Human resources were most wanted by the
school in order to complement it scarcity of teaching staffing. Experts from
companies were invited to provide support in teaching and teacher training. Certainly,
industrys support came with conditions. As the exchange, the school provided a
269

platform for companies to promote their technologies and products. The school has
noticed the penetration of industry and tried to avoid dependency on it. However, as
long as the school needs information and support from market, it cannot complete
avoid the interference from the industry. The collaboration with industry has both pros
and cons at the same time.

The school needs to get resources from market. In return, SSE provides opportunity
for companies to do promotion and to get talented students. Both parties negotiated to
maximize their interests and benefits. Basically, the school relies on market to get
information and improve its specialty and reputation. The school needs to know the
most updated development in technology and the most needed skills for employment.
The school also needs experts from industry to teach although the percentage of their
teaching has been continuously reduced. The collaboration between the school and
industry has created a brand name of SSEs teaching to attract more and better
students to enroll in the programs. The financial benefit is not the main incentive for
the school to cooperate with industry. The sponsorship and research income counts
very limited among the total revenue of the school.

Besides external pressures, internal forces also played important role in schools
development. The role of leadership was very important. The decision of making
changes to curricula was made primarily by the leadership in order to obtain more
resources from market and gain more favorable policies from government and the
university. The decision-making structure determines that leadership has the dominant
power affecting the changes in teaching. Nevertheless, faculty members also have
some influence in teaching. Their opinions were seriously considered in curriculum
development. Meanwhile, faculty members are the implementers of curricula. They
were not the critical participant of decision making, but their opinions consisted of an
important part of the rationale of making decision in teaching affairs.

The change of doing research started from both the bottom and the top based on
270

different considerations. But the nature is conforming to institutional environment and

adherence to well-accepted rules and norms. The school is too powerless to resist the
immersive influence from the university. Neo-institutional theory can provide an
appropriate explanation of such a change. However, the neo-institutional theory
overlooks the organizations initiative to adapt to its dynamic environment. Although
the school is unable to make fundamental changes to the university, it has managed to
make operational changes to existing system within institutional framework. These
changes may be trivial, but gain some negotiation room for the school.

SSE has shown its achievement in teaching and attempt to confirm its legitimacy. The
positive confirmation from university leadership gave the school confidence to
proceed on its own plan. The strategic plan of research finds an appropriate position
in the structure, fitting in the needs of other faculties and avoiding possible fierce
competition. The school does not depend on the university to get resources for
research, so it successfully avoids competition for internal resources among faculties
and reduces the opposition or obstacles within the university. Because the school has
actively responded to pressures from its environment, it might be able to obtain
survival space through interacting with external power and influences. The reaction of
SSE to external pressure of conformity can be best explained by resource dependence
theory which emphasizes initiative and adaptation.

In sum, the changes in teaching and research in SSE can be mostly explained by the
resource dependence theory and neo-institutional theory. The quality and outcomes of
teaching decides the space and legitimacy of SSEs existence while the outcome of
research determines the position of the school in the university structure. The quality
of teaching and output of research are the critical conditions when SSE negotiated
with external parties. As long as the school can provide high quality and demanded
graduates to labor market, its legitimacy of existence and stability is guaranteed. If the
research capacity is increased, the status of the school within the university system
would become stable.
271

7.4 Summary
One of the fundamental requirements for all the national pilot software engineering
schools was teaching-oriented. The Ministry of Education wanted to create a program
emphasizing increasing teaching quality rather than research capacity. Therefore,
teaching has the highest priority in SSE. The school also bears the responsibility of
finding the new way of educating students with both theoretical knowledge and
practical skills.

The school has put great effort on curriculum and pedagogical development since it
was established. According the requirements from MoE, the school made its own
principles of teaching: practical, internationalized and market-oriented. The school
borrowed experience from similar programs in overseas institutions in order to make
the programs internationalized and to guarantee certain degree of standardization.
Industry also played a very important role in curriculum and pedagogical
development by widely and deeply participating in almost every aspect of curriculum
and course design. Companies also provided support teaching and learning activities.
Collaborating with industry, the school has created a culture of emphasizing practical
skills and valuing hardworking.

However, under the formal and informal pressure from the university, research has
become more and more important to SSE along with the process of SSE returning to a
normal academic unit in the university. After the expiration of experimental period,
the school is now assessed by the same criteria which emphasizing research
performance. The school has thus developed its own strategy to cope with the policy
change. It started to do research projects, most of which were practical and
market-oriented.

From its strategic plan of moving from pure teaching-oriented to mixed teaching and
research, we could find that SSE has shown its capability to confirm its legitimacy.
272

The positive confirmation from university leadership gave it more confidence to

proceed on its own plan. The strategic plan of research finds an appropriate position
of the school, fitting in the needs of other academic units and avoiding possible fierce
competition. Taking no account of whether the school can completely implement its
strategic plan, the school has actively respond to expectations and pressures from its
environment and attempt to obtain survival space through interacting with external
power and influences.

273

Chapter Eight Further Discussion and

Conclusion
In this chapter, I will discuss findings in detail, show the implication for practice, give
recommendations for future research, and finally conclude the study.
8.1 Further Discussions
In previous chapters, detailed findings in teaching, research, and administration have
been described, analyzed, and discussed. These aspects cover the routine operation of
the studied school. However, these aspects are not isolated but intertwined together.
8.1.1

Influence of decentralization

As mentioned in the literature review, after the implementation of decentralization,

academic units have been given more autonomy to make decisions on their
development. This means they can decide whether to stay status quo or to make
changes to the current situation. In order to make changes, they need to have
motivation and obtain necessary resources.

The autonomy comes with responsibilities (Hackl, 2000; Sizer & Mackie, 1995). For
schools, faculty and staff, having more autonomy equals being given more
responsibilities, doing more work, changing mindsets, and changing culture, values,
and beliefs. Making changes is a systematic project, with expected difficulties and
resistance. If there is no strong incentive, people will not change their ways of
thinking and working. Nowadays, higher education institutions face external pressure,
but they lack internal motivation to make changes.

Decentralization is a bidirectional process (Karlsen, 2000; Rondinelli, 1990; Weiler,

1990). It is not only about whether the upper level wants to transmit power to the
274

lower level. It is also about whether the lower level wants to accept the power. Both
upper and lower levels, calculate the gains and losses to make the decision whether to
complete the transmission of power. SSE was established under the expectation from
both the MoE and the University A to make changes to the existing system, although
their interpretation on the expectation may vary. The expectation becomes the
incentive for the school to make organizational changes to prove its legitimacy.
8.1.1.1 SSEs autonomy
Not like the academic autonomy in western universities, the autonomy in Chinese
universities is more about the right to manage themselves and the power to make
administrative decisions (Hayhoe & Zhong, 2001; Zhong, 1997). The school was
given the autonomy to decide what kind of education to provide to students and how
to realize it. The favorable policies and exemption from regular evaluation seemed to
create a closed and independent space for the school to implement its reform.
However, the autonomy came not only with responsibilities but also with restrictions
(Karlsen, 2000). The school could make whatever changes they decided, but all these
changes should not exceed the governments policy framework and the universitys
regulatory framework.

Moreover, the resources that SSE could obtain from the environment were very
limited. Both government and the university did not invest financially in the school.
They did not provide any human resources, either. The benefit they provided was the
restricted policies and regulatory environment in which SSE could manipulate
whatever resources it could obtain to achieve the pre-set goals.

The school has to replicate the basic structure and working process from the
university with trivial modifications to fit in its special needs. The duplication of
formal structure not only prevents the school from making fundamental changes but
also transfers an informal cultural system to the school. As noted by other scholars
275

(Oliver, 1991; W. R. Scott, 1987), the informal system creates invisible pressure to the
school to conform to common accepted institutional norms and values.

Like mentioned in the literature, the decentralization in Chinese higher education

transfers only administrative power to the school to manage itself (Hayhoe & Liu,
2010). It can make strategic plans for its development and decide matters such as
curricula, teaching methods, facultys teaching load, research, etc. The literature also
mentioned that the transmission of administrative power is combined with the
transmission of conflicts (Karlsen, 2000). SSE not only inherited such conflicts from
the university but also created more conflicts during its reform in teaching, research,
and administration. The conflicts between the school and its internal and external
stakeholders occurred when the school dealt with pressures, adapted to the
environment, and obtained resources. From the description of peoples perceptions of
teaching, research, and administration, the controversial issues appeared frequently in
decision making and implementation.

Nevertheless, SSE was given more power to make decisions than other regular
faculties, even though some of the power was taken back later on. The critical power
came from the slight loosening of control in financial and personnel management.
This loosening of control has put SSE in a better bargaining position to negotiate with
its two superiors (the MoE and the university) and get resources from the market. The
achievement SSE has reached (the ranking in the final assessment of all the national
pilot SE schools) became the bargaining chip. SSE got financial support from the
MoE and market for such a rank and gained reputation in the SE education market
which reinforces its ability to obtain resources in the future. Meanwhile, the
achievement has proved its capability of meeting the universitys expectations, gained
support from university leadership, and obtained the legitimacy of existence.

Not like academic autonomy in western universities (Ashby, 1966; Clark, 1983b;
Neave & van Vught, 1994a), in SSEs power structure, faculty power is rarely
276

represented. Faculty members more or less act as the opinion providers rather than the
participants in decision making. They have limited influence on academic issues, but
mostly they are managed rather than being the managers. Their power and influence
seems to be becoming less than that of traditional faculties. Leadership is the main
power on control.
8.1.1.2 Relationship between SSE and the university
Before the decentralization reform, the university was the superior and faculties were
subordinates. The university gave orders while faculties obeyed orders. The university
pointed out the direction of development and faculties went to that direction.
Fundamentally, the old relationship between university and its faculties was simply
direct superior-subordinate relation.

Since the decentralization reform, the university has shifted some decision-making
and administrative power to lower-level academic units with the responsibility of
managing themselves. In the studied case, SSE obtained the right to make decisions
on its development and manage most of its administrative affairs with the
responsibility of supporting itself. The school can make long-term strategic
development plans which cannot deviate too much from the universitys direction of
development. It can also decide most affairs on teaching, research, and administration.

Under decentralization reform, the relationship between the faculty/school and

university seems to be becoming looser. In the studied case, SSE obtained even more
autonomy compared to other regular academic units in the same university. The
university allows the school to make decisions regarding teaching, research, and
administration. The university tends to manage the school through regulation but not
direct control. However, the fundamental nature of the relationship has never been
changed. Whenever the university wants to tighten the control, it can do this right
away through administrative orders and the appointment of leadership. Ultimately, the
277

school leaders are responsible to the university but not the people within the school. It
completely depends on the universitys willingness to either tightly control academic
units or loosely monitor their operation.

SSEs leadership was appointed by the university. The second leadership was
promoted within the school, but they were not elected by school members. In a
marketized organization, the role of leadership is extremely important. It is the
leadership who makes the strategic plans and organizes the implementation of the
plans. When the leadership is responsible to the university rather than the school
members, how it makes choices when the interests of the university and the school
conflict is unpredictable.

Since the university holds the power of appointing deans, deans are responsible and
report to the university rather than the internal members of the school. When the
university gives commands to the school, the leadership has to execute these
commands whether or not these commands are in accord with SSEs interests. In the
SSE case, the improvement comes from the fact that the school has gained some room
for negotiation when implementing the universitys orders.

Nowadays, the university usually does not tell faculties how and what to do in
administrative orders. Instead, through regular evaluations, the university screens the
development strategies by promoting the right ones and restraining the wrong
ones. The screening process consists of both formal and informal mechanisms. The
negative outcomes of the evaluations place formal pressures on faculty leaders to
make changes towards the universitys expectations. The long, well-established
institutional culture also plays an important role that transformed peoples perceptions
of negative outcomes into informal pressures to make changes. For instance, these
functions had operated together to push SSE to change policies on research.

The replicated structure and working process from the university deeply shaped the
278

schools formal structure and regulatory system. Especially, the monitoring on SSEs
financial and personnel systems guarantees that the university controls the most
important resources of the school and then controls the schools development
accordingly. The formal structure and informal structure work together to push the
school towards the university system. The school replicated the formal structure and
regulatory system, so it has been framed in the cage of institutions and shaped by
them. Furthermore, the informal structure of the university has had even more
powerful influence on the school. The culture, values, and beliefs embedded in the
informal system affect the behaviors of individuals in the school and thus change the
behavior of the school.

Furthermore, the interaction between the school and university has become more
frequent although the university has shifted more administrative power to the school.
According to literature, after the delegation of power to a lower level, the relationship
between the university and the school should become looser and the influence of the
university should decrease (Merrien & Musselin, 1999; Neave & van Vught, 1994a).
However, the actual situation in the selected case was different. The school was given
the power to manage its operation, so it had to fight for its survival. The university
was considered as a very important resource holder with which the school must
closely cooperate. Having a good relationship with resource holders helped the school
to gain more support and resources for its development. Moreover, whenever the
school wanted to make innovative changes, it needed to ask for approval and support
from the university. The school paid great attention to universitys attitude and
researched university policies carefully. The school actively moved closer to the
university and enforced the relationship between them. Therefore, it is not a surprise
that the school assimilated to the university and the influence of the university has
been reinforced.

The force from the university pushes the school to conform to the existing system
which is conservative and bureaucratic. As demonstrated in the model designed for
279

this study, the school has gradually moved towards the conservative and bureaucratic
system, apart from the original innovative system. People in the school have tried to
resist the movement and retain its innovation, but their force was too small to build a
balance between two forces, pushing it to different directions.

In sum, after the decentralization reform, the relationship between the university and
SSE is still the superior-subordinate relation with looser control on administrative
work. The nature of the relationship did not change while the interaction between
them became more frequent and closer. The university makes regulations, creates
systems, gives administrative orders, and appoints deans. The school abides by
regulations, obeys orders, and has limited autonomy within the universitys
framework to manage itself and its dean reports to the university.
8.1.1.3 Relationship between SSE and government
The relationship between the government and universities has changed since
decentralization reform started (Hayhoe & Zhong, 2001; Zhong, 1997). Universities
have been given the power to decide their own development. University senior
administrators, including presidents, deans, and department heads, are considered
government official equivalents even though they are not treated as civil servants. The
government has the power to appoint or remove key administrators in universities.
From this point of view, Chinese universities are still the extension of the government
organizations after decades of decentralization reform. The government still tightly
controls universities and their internal segments through the appointment of key
persons in all levels in organizations (J. Hu, 2006; Ngok, 2006; Pan, 2003).

SSE was under dual-direction of the MoE and its parent university. The government
supported all the national pilot SE schools to negotiate with their parent universities.
The MoE was the designer of the experiment and SE schools were implementers of
the MoEs plan. The government gave relatively high flexibility on how to execute
280

their plans as long as the schools achieved the original goals set by the government.
Basically, the government set the policy framework to the experiment and determined
the rules of the game.

The governments expectation gave external pressure to SSE and pushed it to make
changes in teaching and administration. Chinese government has learnt to monitor
higher education institutions by assessment and regulations (Hayhoe & Zha, 2006;
Hayhoe & Zhong, 2001). SSEs work was also under the governments monitoring
and had undertaken several evaluations organized by the MoE. Whenever the
government found problems in these SE schools, it either made new policies or made
changes to existing polices. The interaction between the MoE and these SE schools
was frequent and prompt.

The governments support did not come from the MoE only. The characteristics of the
discipline and its relation with the new economy have determined that many
governmental ministries and agencies are interested in the development of SE schools.
For instance, when the Ministry of Commerce realized the importance of the software
outsourcing industry and the contribution of software industry to national GDP
growth, the ministry started to invest in SE education. As the result, many national
pilot SE schools received financial and policy support from the Ministry of
Commerce.

The governments influence on SE schools can also be observed through market

changes. If the government emphasizes the development of a certain industry, it will
increase the investment in this industry. IT industry has become increasingly
important under the globalization of knowledge industry, so government has invested
huge funding and human resources to make it prosperous. The prosperity of the
industry encouraged companies to invest more in IT education and therefore
improved the financial conditions of most SE schools.
281

The pressure from the government became the conditions of negotiation between SSE
and the university. As a faculty in the university, SSE always faces pressure of
conformity from the university, formally or informally. The governments pressure,
which actually deviated from requirements from the university, supported SSE in the
bargain with the university. The school made use of government pressure to obtain
space to keep its own uniqueness and autonomy.

Compared to universities, academic units such as SSE have more freedom to manage
itself due to the diversity of disciplinary natures. Faculties may gain certain levels of
freedom to make decisions beyond the baseline of the regulatory system of the
university, as long as the decisions do not violate political rules set by the government.
In current China, governmental regulations have much room for improvement
regarding comprehensiveness and being meticulous, so the implementation of policies
has relatively high flexibility. When the power of self-administration is transferred
from the university level to the faculty level, it is amplified to some extent and gains
more flexibility.

When the experiment terminated, the relationship between the school and the
government became loosened. The school returned to the university system
completely. The influence of the government became indirect through market and the
university. I would say that the government realized the problematic design of the
experiment and tried to correct it by giving back the direct control to the institutional
level. Afterwards, the government guided the development of SE schools mainly
through market and industry.
8.1.2

Influence of marketization

Marketization has been adopted in higher education all over the world to solve the
problems caused by ever-decreasing funding from government (Gewirtz, et al., 1995;
Kwong, 2000; Meek, 2000; Mok, 2000a). The general public also believes that
282

marketization can solve the problem of the decreasing quality of education and low
efficiency and effectiveness (Glennerster, et al., 1995; Middleton, 2000;
Psacharopoulos, 1993; Ravich, 1999; Valimaa, 1999; Williams, 1995; Woodhall,
1992). Under such a general trend in higher education reform, SSE could not be
exempt from it. In fact, SSE has gone even further in marketizing the school.
8.1.2.1 Self-support mechanism
SSE was expected to survive without the financial support from either the government
or its parent university. In return, the school was given more autonomy to get
resources from other places. This was a radical change to an academic unit in a
Chinese university. Regular faculties are supported completely by the university
budget. Even though the conditions are not satisfactory, these faculties do not worry
about survival in the quickly changing environment.

In order to survive, SSE turned to other sources for funding. It charged higher tuition
which consisted of the largest part of its revenue. The higher tuition came with the
cost of providing better facilities, better faculty, and better future employment
opportunities. In order to meet consumers expectations, the school invested many
resources and then found that the tuition could not cover the cost of providing such
services. Therefore, the school had to look for other income generating sources.

The MSE programs were the major source of income for SSE to subsidize the regular
academic programs. Many people thought that these programs were low-level and
money-generating. Basically, these programs could not reach the academic level of
masters degrees. Students paid tuition to buy the certificates of degree. For the
school, the programs generated the most needed funds for the schools survival. To
some extent, the recruiting of MSE students could be considered as the tradeoff
between academic standards and financial gain. The income generated from MSE
programs has become crucial to the schools survival.
283

The school also turned to industry for resources. Industry mainly supported the school
through providing technical support and human resources. The school itself lacked the
ability to make the education oriented to the market. It needed industry to provide
knowledge and technology needed in the market, as well as experts who could help in
curriculum development and teaching. The involvement of industry in the education
process guaranteed that, in some degree, students were trained practically and
well-prepared for their careers. From this stand, the input from industry was also
critical to the schools survival.

The adoption of a self-supported mechanism gave extreme pressure to the school.

Everyone in the school had to keep making-money in mind all the time. Otherwise,
the school could not sustain itself. School leadership faced even greater pressure to
keep the school operating properly. Whenever they made decisions, they needed to
give the highest priority to financial consideration. Sometimes, leaders had to
sacrifice academic standards or students interests/benefits to obtain financial support
from external stakeholders.

However, SSE is an academic unit in a university and this gives SSE another pressure
of keeping its prestige and holding certain levels of academic standards. Academic
prestige remain important under the pressure of marketization (Marginson &
Considine, 2000). The school was usually pushed by these two contrary forces and
moved back and forth. This could be observed from the inconsistency of internal
policies on teaching and research. The conflicts of demands from these two contrary
stakeholders were major factors which have caused the school to make continual
changing.
8.1.2.2 Market mechanism in administration
SSE had implemented a market mechanism in daily administration. Peoples income
284

was directly connected with their positions and workload. The workload of every
position had been carefully calculated and a hierarchical structure had been set up in
management. Even faculty members were under the tight control of the managers. For
example, faculty members were encouraged to stay in their offices all day by being
given subsidiaries. Although this regulation was not compulsory, faculty members still
felt the pressure from administrative leaders to come to the office every day. Faculty
members were also frequently organized to participate in activities or events whether
they liked it or not. They were given many tasks besides teaching and research to
fulfill their workload requirements. They were also under various evaluations in order
to ensure the quality of their work.

The calculation of cost and profit had been implanted into many aspects of school
management. When designing curricula or courses, the costs of materials and the
faculty members workload was carefully calculated to make sure the program would
not lose money. When organizing events or activities, cost was the most important
indicator in the report of feasibility. When hiring faculty or staff members, their salary
and potential benefits that they might bring to the school were also the main
considerations. Almost everything was measured by money. Morality, personal
interest, academic values have all given the way to financial gain and loss.

In order to increase the effectiveness of using fund, market and bureaucratic features
have been reinforced (Meek, 2000). The school was managed more or less like a
business firm. In regular faculties, the size of faculty is much bigger than the size of
staff, and faculty members have stronger influence on internal decision making than
staff. In SSE, the importance of staff has increased much. The number of faculty
members is almost equal to the number of staff members. A middle level of
management was consisted of staff members, so staff possessed a relatively equal
power in internal decision making.

Nevertheless, faculty members still have strong influence in teaching and research
285

affairs. Different from what happened in western universities that faculty members are
under heavy pressure of doing research (Massy, 2004; S. V. Scott, 1999; Slaughter &
Leslie, 1997), faculty in SSE was not given much pressure to do research. They were
encouraged but not pushed to do research. Teaching activities were managed by the
school, but faculty members had full control on their teaching. They also heavily
affected the development of academic programs and curricula.

Having been established for almost 10 years, the school has created a system of
institutions and gradually built up its bureaucratic structure. These were heavily
influenced by the university system in order to align with that system. As the structure
and institutions became mature, it became more difficult and costly to make radical
changes in the school. The cost of making changes has grown up. The latency of
responding to environmental changes has become longer as well.

When chatting with faculty members, I found that the resistance from faculty on
academic capitalism was not as strong as that in western universities. In literature,
academics in western universities think that academic capitalism is a deviation from
traditional academic beliefs, so they are against the implementation of a market
mechanism in management or the utilitarianism in research (Slaughter & Rhoades,
1996). Fundamentally, they think the introduction of the market to the academic world
is against the purpose of higher education. However, the situation in China is different.
In China, the university was imported from the western world to serve the country and
meet the countrys construction needs. General public, as well as university members,
believe that the implementation of a market mechanism in higher education is one of
the solutions to solve many severe problems. Within such social contexts, people in
SSE did not show much resistance to the introduction of a market mechanism. Some
faculty members did complain that the deeply marketized system has hindered the
development of the academic research culture, but their thoughts were not widely
represented.
286

In SSE, since students pay higher tuition, faculty and staff were required to treat
students as customers. The phenomenon of student-as-consumer has been well
documented and analyzed by many scholars (Clark, 1995; Fairclough, 1993; Kwong,
2000; Siu & Wilson, 1995). This idea has been well accepted in SSE that students are
the investors of education, and industry is the consumer. Therefore, both students and
companies should be treated well. Between students and the school, there is an
exchange process between money and knowledge. Between the school and industry,
there is the exchange of money and products, which are students. This is a typical
market ideology being applied in higher education. It is not clear yet whether the idea
helps improve the quality and accountability, but it has changed peoples attitudes
towards students. The relationship between students and schools has become closer.
8.1.2.3 Relationship between SSE and industry
Chinese higher education institutions were established to serve the country, so they
have the tradition to cooperate with industry (Hayhoe, 1999; Hayhoe, et al., 2011;
Hayhoe & Zha, 2006; Min, 2004; Q. Yin & Gordon, 1994; J. Zhou, 2006). SSE and
industry were business partners to some extent. They exchanged what they owned
with what they wanted. The school was a financially constrained manufacturer who
had the capacity of teaching/research and producing the students as products. The
industry was wealthy clients who had critical resources and could provide
employment opportunities. The exchange relationship between the school and
industry was considered a win-win cooperation.

The adoption of a market mechanism in SSE opened the door to the collaboration
between the school and industry. The research collaboration between the school and
the market were usually initiated by individual faculty or staff members. These people
acted as the agents between the school and industry. On the contrary, the cooperation
in teaching was usually initiated by industry. Companies usually contacted the school
rather than individuals to start the negotiation. The principles of market mechanism
287

accelerated the cooperation and ensured the quality of collaboration (Q. Yin &
Gordon, 1994).

At the beginning, the school was new, small and weak, and lacked bargaining chips to
negotiate with industry, so it had to sacrifice something in order to get urgently
needed resources. Typical sacrifices were the integrity of curricula and quality of
teaching. This could be easily seen in the early phases of the curriculum development.
The heavy influence from industry also brought severe interference to the normal
operation of teaching. In order to improve the conditions, the school struggled very
hard to become stronger academically and financially, and attempted to reduce the
dependency on the market by diversifying resource providers.

When the school became strong enough, it began to modify its policies on cooperation
with industry. It set up a committee to evaluate collaboration in teaching with industry.
By this means, the school gradually took control of the bilateral cooperation with
industry. Fundamentally, the school and industry were business partners and they
bargained the gains and losses according to the chips they owned.

What industry needs were innovation, new ideas, new technology and skills, and new
methods, which allow it to keep changing. In order to meet its demands, the school
had to make changes frequently. Industry has been a very important force affecting
the schools development for a long time. The school and industry co-existed,
depending on each other.

Industry is the most important force to help the school stay innovative. In order to
meet market demands, the school had to pay close attention to changes happening in
the market and to stay aligned with them. Innovation needs an innovative system to
support and the system should be able to make changes frequently. Therefore,
industry or market is the main force that pushes the school towards an innovative
system, away from conservativeness and bureaucracy.
288

The influence of the market on the schools operation had increased for the first
several years and decreased in later years. The change of the relationship came along
with the change of both parties strength and the dynamic of the markets needs. When
the school became stronger, it gained the power to negotiate with the market for better
treatment. At the same time, the dynamic demands for talents affected the attitude of
both sides. In general, the relationship between the school and market was dynamic
and kept changing along with the changing balance of strengths and needs.

According to Clarks triangle of coordination (Clark, 1983b), higher education system

should always situate in somewhere in the triangle. In my study, I found that the
influence from faculty in Chinese universities is very limited. Faculty members
usually only involve in teaching and research. They are almost excluded from
important decision making which is critical to the development of academic units as
well as the university. The administrative leaders hold very important power to decide
the development path while market influence has become ever increasing important.
In this case, Clarks triangle could be simplified into two-dimensional coordinate with
two axes of market influence and governmental control.

Figure 8.1

Development of Chinese universities within the framework of market influence and

government control

289

Generally, the degree of marketization positively relates to the degree of autonomy in

the current new economy. Before Chinese higher education started reform in 1980s,
Chinese higher universities were pure state-controlled and with no market orientation
at all. They only produced students according to the national man-power plan from
the government (Hayhoe, 1999). Currently, Chinese universities are moving towards
less government control and more market-oriented.
8.1.3

Organizational change

Organizations change for various reasons, some of which can cause resistance and
conflicts. Therefore, when discussing organizational changes, it is important to
identify the motivation for making changes. The studied school has made changes
frequently in order to fulfill its interests, keep its legitimacy, and obtain stability.
8.1.3.1 Legitimacy
Both the neo-institutional theory and resource dependence theory agree that
organizations need to gain legitimacy, although the two theories suggest different
methods to do so. The neo-institutional theory assumes that an organization should
imitate or reproduce the structure, value, and culture of its environment while the
resource dependence theory emphasizes mobilizing resources for instrumentality
(Hinings & Greenwood, 1988; Pfeffer, 1981, 1982).

On the one hand, SSE was established to make changes to an existing teaching and
administration system and educate students in innovative ways. As far as the school
can survive and make innovative changes, its legitimacy can be protected. On the
other hand, as an academic unit in the university, the school should abide by all the
regulations and act as all other academic units. Its legitimacy depends on the
conformity of the current structure and system.

Although SSE had not been able to get traditional financial support from the
290

government and its university, it still has managed to obtain needed resources from
other channels, including students and industry. It also gained support from
government and the university in other forms, such as research funds. Though its
financial status is still healthy, it has faced increasing pressure and difficulties.
Financial stability is fundamental for the school to gain a legitimate existence.

When the school was new and weak, it lacked the ability to mobilize resources around
it. Therefore, it had to sacrifice some of its values or standards to exchange sufficient
resources for survival. This could be clearly observed in the development of curricula
and implementation of teaching. This could also be found in SSEs disadvantaged
position when negotiating with the university.

When the school grew stronger and matured, its ability to manipulate its environment
has been enhanced. When dealing with industry, it became more confident and started
to set rules for the collaboration between them. The cooperation with industry was
monitored and regulated by both parties rather than by the companies alone. The
school is taking initiatives now instead of passively waiting for others. It has gained
some ability to manipulate the interaction between it and its environment (Pfeffer &
Salancik, 1978).

The school is becoming more mature and well-developed, and its status as an
academic unit in the university has been proven and confirmed by its performance. Its
capability of retaining its financial status has also enhanced in these years. It has
developed the ability to generate revenue and manage its finance and other affairs
appropriately. It has proven that it has fulfilled the obligation as a participant of the
experiment to support itself without support from the government and university.
From this stand, the school has gained its legitimacy.

National pilot SE schools were established to make innovative changes. SSE has
made many changes in teaching, research, and administration. Some of the changes
291

have been acknowledged by the university and extended to the other academic units.
Some changes were effective but context-bounded, so they were not appropriate to
apply to other places. There were also some changes proven to have failed and were
thus terminated in SSE.

However, many changes which SSE had made were not unique. SSEs advantage was
that it was easy to make changes. SSE was a small and newly established school, so
its cost of making changes was much lower than a well-developed faculty. The
conflicts and resistance it faced were also less than that faced by mature faculties.
While SSEs history grows and the structure and processes become well established,
the cost of making changes is increasing. Nowadays, if SSE wants to make critical
changes, leadership needs to consider the flexibility of an established structure and
balance the interests of existing faculty and staff. Basically, making major changes to
todays SSE is no longer easy. SSE has been losing its flexibility of making changes
as its structure gets rigid and bureaucratic.

Considering the improvement in graduates employment rates, SSE was a success in

the first several years. Its programs met the urgent needs of the Chinese IT industry
for mid-level software engineering professionals. China needs to train many such
talents if it wants to compete with India in the software outsourcing market. The
operation of SE schools has quickly provided needed talents to meet the human
resource demand. Furthermore, the introduction of software engineering programs has
stimulated a competition with current computer science programs for students,
teaching/research resources, and the job opportunities. Computer science programs
then have to make changes accordingly. The holistic capacity and strength of the
Chinese IT education has been increased.

Many people believe that the mission of SSE has been completed. The mission to
stimulate the computer science program has been successful. The CS program in the
university has made significant changes moving towards an SE model. The
292

universitys reputation of computing science has increased. However, its mission on

reforming existing administrative mechanisms failed. Although SSE has made some
procedural changes, the current system is so powerful that SSEs tiny push made little
progress. When the reform touched some bottom-lines of the current mechanism and
challenged the existing systems tolerance, the school could not proceed further.

Nevertheless, the school negotiated with its two superiors (MoE and University A) in
order to gain more space to operate. Besides the resources obtained from government
and university, the school also actively sought support from the market. The school
understood its advantages of having potential human resources needed by industry,
and negotiated with industry to get benefits and support.

On the one hand, the destiny of all the SE schools seems to have been determined
when they were established as part of the experimental project. External parties did
not expect the experiment to last forever. When the tasks attached to it are finished,
the schools are likely to disappear, either being dismissed or merged with other
schools. On the other hand, there has always been the possibility of retaining SSE if it
performs well and makes significant contributions to the university. For many years,
SSE has struggled for the legitimacy of existence and the opportunity and space to
survive.
8.1.3.2 Stability
In both institutional and resource dependence theories, it is assumed that
organizations attempts to obtain stability and the efforts of making changes will cause
resistance (Oliver, 1991). However, the two theories differently explain the process of
gaining stability. The neo-institutional theory focuses on the reproduction of
organizational structure, activities, and routine, and organizations achieve stability by
conforming to external pressures and expectations (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983;
Zucker, 1977, 1983). On the contrary, the resource dependence theory explains that
293

the achievement of stability is through the exercise of power, control, or the

negotiation of interdependencies in order to get a stable flow of resources or a
predictable environment (Oliver, 1991; Pfeffer & Salancik, 1978).

The two theories can both be applicable in the SSE case. The school is tied in
different ways to obtain sufficient resources for its survival and development. It
cooperated with industry to get financial support and human resources. It built up a
good reputation in teaching and employment to attract enough students and generate
revenue from tuition fees. It encouraged faculty to conduct research and contracted
projects to subsidize them. It negotiated and bargained with the university to reduce
the financial burden. All these activities have shown SSEs ability to interact with its
stakeholders, enlarge its living space, and secure its legitimacy and stability.

Furthermore, the school has also moved towards the standards and values of the
university under the condition that the movement did not hinder the healthy
development of the school. To many outsiders, the school has become similar to other
academic units and less special. The resistance from other units became less and the
relationship between the school and the university, or other units, has gotten better. By
sacrificing its specialty and the legitimacy of being a pilot experimental project, the
school possesses a higher level of stability.

However, the situation in SSE is slightly different from the situations described in
these two theories. Most normal organizations tend to seek stability, and changes to
the existing system may cause resistance (Oliver, 1997; Pfeffer & Salancik, 1978; W.
R. Scott, 1987). SSE was an experiment project that was designed to make changes. It
can be said that the legitimacy of the school lays on the assumption that the school
should keep making changes.

Making continual changes was the expectation from external forces, i.e. the
government, the university, and market. SSE has created an internal culture which
294

values the spirit of change. This is also heavily influenced by the social and
economical culture in concurrent China. In order to survive, organizations and
individual persons seek continuous changes to become distinguished from other
competitors (R. W. Scott, 1998; W. R. Scott, 2003). Immersing in such a social and
cultural environment, SSE members, i.e. leaders, faculty, staff and students, actively
respond to changes. They think that welcoming changes is a positive and active
attitude towards work and life. Their perceptions of policies or regulations regarding
changes may vary, but this does not hamper them from making changes. Change itself
is highly recommended and encouraged in SSE.

Therefore, it is feasible to consider keep changing as a type of stability.

Furthermore, when the legitimacy and stability encounter survival, legitimacy and
stability has to yield to the priority of survival. In the SSE case, if the school cannot
survive the competition and thus be merged or dismissed, the efforts to obtain
legitimacy or stability become meaningless.
8.1.3.3 Driving interests
Both neo-institutional and resource dependence theories accept that organizations are
interest-driven, although these interests may be defined differently in these two
perspectives (Oliver, 1991). In neo-institutional theory, social or institutional interests
are more important to mobilize organizational changes (DiMaggio, 1988; Dowling &
Pfeffer, 1975; Hinings & Greenwood, 1988; W. R. Scott, 1987). In the resource
dependence theory, organizations are self-interested (Meyer & Rowan, 1977; Pfeffer,
1981; Pfeffer & Salancik, 1978).

The national pilot software engineering schools were established as an experiment to

test new policies and new methods. Nobody, including officials in the Ministry of
Education, could predict the future of these schools. They might be preserved,
dismissed, or merged with other faculties. Their fortune depends on the attitude of the
295

ministry as well as their parent universities. However, the performance and attitude of
these schools may also affect their destinies.

First, SSEs interest of making changes was socially defined. The school bore the
responsibility of creating an innovative system to educate students as well as manage
the school. Its establishment was a governmental initiative and a political task. It was
partly the outcome of the government responding to demands from industry and the
general public. Therefore, the missions of the school were defined based on these
inquiries and the implementation was under supervision from all stakeholders.

In the first several years, the national pilot software engineering school dean assembly
was held monthly and the ministry sent senior officials to attend the meeting and
collect data and opinions. Relevant measures were issued upon discussion with deans
and experts in the field. As time went by, the ministry sent only junior officials to
participate in meetings, and opinions and questions raised in the meeting no longer
received responses. Since 2008, no new policy or regulation regarding SE schools has
been issued. The ministry has basically given up the project. Nevertheless, many
people in the school still hold the thought that the school should continue to be
innovative.

Second, the schools interest was institutionally defined. SSE is one of the academic
units in the university, so the traditional academic value and belief were accepted.
Especially, after the experimental period expired, SSE returned back to the normal
systems and needed to be managed and evaluated equally as other units. Generally,
the university was willing to see the experiment conducted on its campus. If the
experiment succeeded, the university could benefit from its positive outcomes and
extend the reform on site. If the experiment failed, the university would not bear any
responsibility.

Nevertheless, the university had its own interests. It could benefit from the experiment
296

because two programs (CS + SE) definitely obtained more resources and produced
more graduates than one program. The University A faced the same problems and
difficulties as other Chinese higher education institutions. Some initiatives had been
launched at various levels in the university. The experiment of SE schools was
initiated from the top by the government to solve some of these problems, remarkably
shortening the time to achieve the goals and covering wider ranges.

Finally, SSEs interest was self-constructed. The school did bear the responsibility to
fulfill the obligations set by the government and the university. However, during the
process of implementing their policies and decisions, the school also constructed its
own interests and produced their own development plans and strategies. Sometimes,
the interest might be the compromising of the government and universitys different
interests. For instance, the effort of doing research was to cope with the controversial
requests from the government and the university.

The school also created its own agenda of development based on the demands of
faculty, staff, and students. They are important internal stakeholders who can
manipulate the schools direction of proceeding. Although the decision making
mechanism was centralized, the opinions and wills of faculty, staff, and students still
could be represented in the leadership while forming the common goals and interests
of the school. When the government gave up the experiment and the university took
the school as a regular unit, the school mainly relied on itself to set up goals and make
strategic plans for its development. By carefully analyzing its internal and external
demands, resources, and restrictions, the school made some changes based on its own
interests.

In general, the school has changed the way of constructing its interests. The
government has gradually withdrawn from the process after having given up the
experiment. However, its influence continued to exist since it has been embedded into
the spirit and culture of the school. The universitys influence increased after the
297

school was considered as a regular academic unit. Both the formal structure and
informal culture on campus shaped the definition of the schools interests. Ultimately,
SSE was self-interested, although the interests were produced from the opinions of
many parties. The school made its own decisions on how to develop. Its ability to
combine requests from all stakeholders decided its destiny.
8.1.3.4 The role of leadership
The neo-institutional theory emphasizes the compliance with institutional norms and
requirements, and organizations are passive when facing the process of conforming to
the external environment (DiMaggio, 1988; DiMaggio & Powell, 1983; Zucker, 1988).
It also claims that an organizations survival requires it to conform to social norms of
acceptable behavior (Cavaleski & Dirsmich, 1988). However, the resource
dependence theory puts more emphasis on the virtue of noncompliance. Pfeffer
pointed out that organizations do not just passively respond to external pressures and
constraints, but undertake various strategies to somehow alter the situation
confronting the organization to make compliance less necessary (Pfeffer, 1982).

In SSE, leadership has played a significant role in its development. The

decision-making mechanism in SSE determined that the knowledge, attitude, and
characteristics of leadership were critical to determine the destiny of the school. When
making important decisions, leaders firstly communicated formally or informally with
faculty, staff, and students, if necessary. Then they discussed internally with each
other and made collective decisions based on their knowledge and understanding of
the situation, environment, and others opinions.

The first leadership consisted of a group of people who knew the problems with
teaching, research, and administration in Chinese universities. They were inspired by
the ideas of improving the quality of education in higher education and they agreed to
the

ministrys

principles

of

practical-orientation,

market-orientation,

and
298

internationalization. They completely implemented the governments policies of

establishing national pilot SE schools. The school was teaching-oriented; the
administration was flexible; the curricula were practical-oriented and market-oriented;
internationalization was highly promoted, etc. They selected faculty and staff who
could well implement all these policies and created a culture promoting practical
knowledge and skills, treasuring innovation, and valuing the spirit of change.

Through their personal social networks, they established collaboration with many
companies and obtained precious financial and personnel resources for the new school.
Because they had studied and worked in the university for many years, they had built
up social/academic capital within the university. This helped the school create a clear
and smooth communication channel with various administrative departments as well
as senior university administrators. Their efforts have made it possible for the school
to get many resources which it might not have been able to get if there had been no
such relationship with external resources holders.

During the field work, faculty and students also mentioned how important the
leadership was. Several faculty members recalled that they joined SSE only because
they were inspired by one of the leaders. They were attracted by the future of the
school and moved by the attitude the leader demonstrated. They mentioned leaders
emphasis on teaching and practical-orientation and their dedication to their teaching
and research. Some students commented that they made the decision of transferring to
SSE because of the leaders persuasive and encouraging speech. Many students talked
about how the leaders made use of every method and opportunity to enforce and
reinforce the ideas of practical-orientation and market-orientation. It was the first
leadership to bring to the school a teaching-oriented and practical-oriented faculty. It
built up a network which helped to obtain various resources and the opportunity for
negotiation with external pressures.

The change of leaders has also caused significant changes to the school. The
299

procedure of making decisions has changed along with the change of members of the
leading teams. Moreover, the university still has strong control on the school by
keeping the power of appointing leadership (Hayhoe & Zha, 2006; Ngok, 2006;
Zhong, 1997). The important role of leadership brings great uncertainty to the
development of the school. There is a Chinese saying, , which
means the key person Xiaohe makes great success as well as great failure. The
leadership switchover may also determine the destiny of the school.
8.2 Implication for Practice
This study reviewed the development of an academic unit in a Chinese university,
dealing with various external and internal factors under the influence of
decentralization and marketization. The experience described in the study may not be
identical to the situations in other Chinese universities. However, it does give
practical implications to practitioners in Chinese higher education. The Chinese
higher education system is now going through radical changes with various policies
and strategies being produced. SSEs experience can be considered an indication for
institutions which might want to adopt a similar approach.

The Ministry of Education wanted to set up an experiment to make administrative

changes to existing systems. The motivation was ideal, but they may not have chosen
an appropriate place to do the experiment. A faculty in a university cannot afford to
bear the responsibility of changing the university system. The school was trying to do
something beyond its capability, like what a mantis does in the traditional Chinese
saying, a mantis trying to stop a chariot.

University A is a well-established university with a long history, rich cultural heritage,

and matured institutions. All the regulations have been set up and the whole system
has operated for a long period of time. The members within the system are used to
both formal and informal systems. Latecomers need to adapt to the system in order to
300

survive; adaptation is the process of accepting existing norms, values, and beliefs.

SSE is a newly founded school which includes many newcomers to the university. At
the very beginning, the school tried to create an isolated and different culture in the
school, promoting new values, norms, and beliefs among students, staff, and faculty.
Some of these values were consistent with those of the university while some were
not. Later on, as school members interacted with members in the external institutional
environment, they gradually assimilated. They were not forced to do so, but they
wanted to become similar to members of the bigger system. Conforming to the
university system made their lives easier.

The pressure of conformity may not come directly from formal administrative leaders.
It may come from both formal and informal sources. For instance, the criteria of
academic promotion strongly influence academic in the university, including those in
SSE. Faculty members need academic ranking to evaluate their work. They also need
affiliation to the profession which has certain standards. When these standards
conflict with the requirements from the school, it is difficult to predict which side
academics will support. The regular evaluation on teaching quality conducted by the
registrar department based on standardized procedures and criteria also pushes the
teaching towards university standards which favor traditional teaching methods rather
than new teaching methods.

The most serious drawback of this experiment was that the MoE tried to directly
manage a faculty, bypassing the function of the university. The ministry made policies
for these SE schools to implement, not considering whether the universities agreed or
not. In fact, without the support from the universities, it was impossible for these
schools to successfully implement the governments plans. In consideration of the
universities power to appoint and replace deans, any experiment without universities
support would be nonsense.
301

The school did make some changes in teaching and administration and some of these
changes have been promoted to other faculties by the university. These changes were
bottom-up procedural changes which were within the framework of the old system
and within the tolerance of the university leadership.

The intention of using a small innovative system to change the big conservative and
bureaucratic system was unrealistic. The assumption of such a plan wanted to initiate
a bottom-up change to the current system. However, the experience in SSE has proved
that adopting a bottom-up approach to make innovative changes in a conservative and
bureaucratic system was difficult.

How to motivate faculty members to invest time and energy in teaching has become a
great challenge to many university administrators. The general public criticizes the
decreasing quality of higher education, so the universities are facing the challenge of
changing the status quo. Monetary bonuses are no longer attractive to teachers. As a
teaching-oriented school, SSE has put great emphasis on teaching and designed a
system to motivate and monitor teaching. It has started the effort to make a new
personnel system which has helped to maintain a professional instructor team. SSEs
experience, successful or not, may help practitioners find the incentive mechanism
that best fits their conditions.

As a faculty deeply affected by academic capitalism, the school has adopted a market
mechanism in administration. The leadership has the greatest power to make
important decisions. A level of staff was set in the middle to provide services to
faculty and students and facilitate working efficiency. Meanwhile, faculty members
still keep some degree of academic freedom in teaching and research. The school has
created a hierarchical structure similar to that in business firms. This combination of
administrators authority with faculty freedom might be one of the alternatives to
solve the problems of low-efficiency and low accountability in Chinese universities.
302

SSE has made some improvement to the existing system. The school has adopted a
more flexible financial and personnel management system which helped the school
adapt more efficiently to environmental changes. The new system did have some
conflicts with the current system, but both the university and the school have been
working together to find the solutions to solve the problems. If the solution can be
worked out, it is possible to initiate a top-down structural change to the existing
administrative system.

Although many people complained that the market mechanism harms academic
values and traditions, the adoption of the market mechanism has increased the
effectiveness and efficiency of higher education institutions (Clark, 1998; Slaughter &
Leslie, 1997; Q. Yin & Gordon, 1994). From SSEs experience, what matters is
keeping a reasonable balance between the market and academic values. The balance is
dynamic and keeps changing under external pressures and internal demands. With
necessary administrative autonomy, the school was able to manage the situation and
make the best beneficial choices.

Some changes initiated by the school have been extended to the whole university and
have broken some tiny holes in the firm conservative system. The school has also
pushed other academic units in the university to make changes in order to compete for
internal resources. The competition has also become the trigger for change. The
school has become famous for its innovation in many aspects and has inspired
followers in the university. From this point of view, the experiment of national pilot
software engineering schools has achieved some of its initial goals.

Many lessons have been found in this study and the above-mentioned are only some
of them. The whole case has shown typical problems in many Chinese higher
education institutions, as well as in academic units in these universities. Although the
government initiated experiment could not be seen as a success, it did make partial
progress and improvement in some areas in each participating school. The
303

implications learned from this case study might be useful for future policy making
and educational studies.
8.3 Recommendations for Future Research
This study of SSE suggests quite a number of questions for further study.

First, since more and more SE schools have been set up across the country and
produced more and more software professionals at various levels, the market demand
for SE talents is gradually becoming saturated. From the industrys standpoint, their
interest and need to involve in the development of SE schools seems to become less.
Because SE schools heavily depend on industry for resources which are critical to
their survival and development, it is necessary to investigate the influence of changing
attitudes in industry.

Second, the knowledge exchange between the school and industry deserves deep
investigation, too. Traditionally, knowledge flows from higher education institutions
to industry. However, the situation has changed in the new economy. Nowadays, a
great amount of knowledge is produced by industry. The collaboration between the
school and industry is an excellent example of knowledge exchange, each party
seeking its wanted resources. As a new phenomenon, this knowledge exchange
process deserves further study. It is meaningful and has many implications.

Third, this study focused on organizational changes, leaving peoples perceptions

behind. The study mentioned only a little on peoples perceptions of teaching and
research, but it did not touch other aspects of the schools operation. The research did
not give emphasis on cultural influences, either. In an engineering faculty, the
construction of organizational culture is affected deeply by the characteristics of the
discipline, institutional context, and Chinese culture. This would be an excellent
project to investigate.
304

Furthermore, SSE adopted new teaching methods to educate students in different

ways. This study gave a glimpse of teachers perspectives focusing mainly on
teachers sides. The evaluation of the outcome of these teaching methods was based
on graduates employment rates. There is definitely a necessary need to understand
deeply how these methods affect students learning from students perspectives.

Within the context of heavy academic capitalism in the school, the role and function
of each individual person as an agent who initiates bottom-up changes is also worth
further study. Each individual faculty, staff, or student has his/her own interests and
expectations for his/her work/study/career, etc. How these personal interests and
expectations influence organizational members behavior and further affect
organizational behaviors has both theoretical and practical implications.

The gender composition of faculty members in SSE is very interesting. In such an

engineering school, females make up half of the faculty and it is very likely that the
number of female faculty members will soon become bigger than that of male faculty.
Even the most important positions in leadership have been occupied by females. The
rationales behind this phenomenon and situation of faculty academic development in
Chinese universities deserve further investigation.
8.4 Conclusion
Before conducting the field work, I raised a research question: How did SSE respond
to external pressures and expectations for survival and sustainable development in the
context of decentralization and marketization? Based on literature review and the
finding in exploring field study, the main research question was further broken into
three sub-questions.

The first question explores the factors affecting SSEs development. From the analysis
305

of SSEs operation, it could be found that many internal and external factors affected
SSEs development. Internal factors include leadership, faculty, staff, and students
while external factors involve the government, the university, competitors inside and
outside the university, and industry. The interaction among them constructed the
complex and interdependent environment which interacts and exchanges with the
school. Among all the external factors, the most critical ones are government, the
university, and industry. They worked jointly to shape the development of the school
and caused SSE to change from a more innovative organization to a more
conservative and bureaucratic organization.

To an academic unit, it always locates in somewhere within the triangle of

coordination of government, university and market. Under decentralization, higher
education institutions started to design their own development. As the result, the
interests of the government and the university began to deviate while the university is
not always aligning with government anymore. Within universities, faculty and
departments are granted more autonomy to decide their path of development. It is
understandable that the interest of academic units started to differentiate from that of
the universities. Therefore, the government and the university may push the academic
unit towards different directions. Marketization process also makes market influence
critical for the development of universities as well as academic units. Considering all
three important forces which affect SSEs development, I drew a new triangle, which
is derived from Clarks triangle of coordination, to demonstrate the relationship
between SSE and its important external stakeholders. The role of academics is
neglectable since facultys involvement in important decision making is very limited.

306

Figure 8.2 Modified triangle of coordination for SSE

SSEs position in the triangle is dynamic and keeps changing according to the change
of influence of the three forces. At the early stage, the influence of government was
strong because the Ministry of Education directly led and guided the operation of the
school. The influence from market was heavy too and this could be observed from
curricula and teaching activities. The importance of the university became significant
when the experimental terminated and the school returned to a normal academic unit
in the university. The moving towards the university shows the trend of conformity.

The second and third research questions investigate the relationship between the
school and the critical factors and the mechanism of how these factors affect the
school. The relationship between the school and the government was complex and
dynamic. The school was a participant of a government initiated experiment to create
innovative education. Since the government could not provide any financial support to
this experiment, it gave some favorable policies and extra autonomy instead. These
national pilot SE schools were encouraged to seek resources from other social sectors
and be innovative in teaching and administration. Basically, the government wanted
these schools to bring significant changes to the current conservative and bureaucratic
higher education system.

When the schools were first established, the government not only negotiated with
307

universities on internal treatment of these SE schools but also directly guided and
monitored the operation of the school. During the experimental period, the ministry
also actively issued needed policies to support these schools initiatives to make
changes to the existing systems. It has shown its determination to push these schools
towards innovation and reform. In the University A, SSE definitely had a golden era
to produce many innovative ideas and measures to make changes to the current
administration and teaching.

However, when the experiment was terminated, the ministry decided to allow these
schools to return back to regular academic units in their universities. SSE became
normal after this decision. However, it was still self-supported and owned the
autonomy to manage its operation. By not doing anything to encourage the innovative
reform, the government has not only withdrawn its force of pushing the school
towards innovation, but also pushed the school to reversely move towards the
opposite end, conservativeness and bureaucracy.

The relationship between the school and the university was interdependent and
unequal. The university shifted more power of decision-making to the school and let
the school manage its operation and development. In order to improve efficiency and
accountability, the school made changes to the existing financial and personnel
systems and modified the procedure of working. In order to improve the quality of
teaching, which was evaluated by the employment rate of fresh graduates, SSE built
up the culture favoring values and norms different from those valued in the university.
Academic performance was still emphasized in the school, but other non-traditional
values, such as market-orientation and practical-orientation, were promoted, too. The
university did not interfere with the operation of the school and supported many
changes the school has made. Some changes were acknowledged by the university
and extended to the whole university. The university has never been formally against
the innovative changes made by the school. On the contrary, the university
encouraged the school to expand the size of undergraduate programs because the
308

graduates from these programs were easy to get employed and thus helped solve the
employment rate problem of the university.

However, the school has been assimilated to the informal system, becoming similar to
a regular academic unit. The school duplicated most of its structure and processes
from the university and frequently exchanged information and resources with the
university. In order to be accepted by others, people in the school have become
familiar to the institutional system and changing their behaviors and thoughts
accordingly. Furthermore, faculty members academic promotions and regular
evaluations of the schools performance have also kept the school within the
universitys regulatory framework, not further deviating from the norms and values of
the current university system. The conformity to the external environment was to
create a better institutional environment for the school, increase its legitimacy and
stability, and further improve the possibility of survival.

Therefore, the university was the major force pulling the school away from innovation.
The university did not do this intentionally. In fact, the university encouraged
innovative changes to the current system in order to improve the quality of education
and service. However, the current institutional system had been developed for many
years and became conservative and bureaucratic. It was so strong that most bottom-up
efforts of changing status quo would be abstracted to the existing system. Even
top-down reform on the concurrent system may not be able to make radical structural
changes.

SSE and market were interdependent and they exchanged with each other to create
mutual benefits. The influence of marketization could be easily observed in the school,
such as the market-oriented and practical-oriented teaching, income-generating
research, close collaboration with industry, market-like management, etc. The
rationale of adopting a market mechanism was to survive and improve effectiveness
and accountability. The ideology of this change is that education becomes a
309

commodity and students become the consumers of education and the products of
universities.

However, SSE is not a business firm. It adopts market mechanism in internal

management and makes use of market for resources, but seek maximum benefit has
never been its goal. It struggled to get resources for survival and development.
Meanwhile, it must maintain certain level of academic standard and accountability.
When academic standard and accountability is challenged, the university as well as
government will intervene. This has been happened in SSE case that re-centralization
has occurred and market influence has been decreased purposefully.

The market mechanism provided an interface to facilitate the seeking of maximum

resources. The school possessed some resources needed by industry (knowledge,
facilities, students, and the brand) while the market also held some resources that the
school wanted (funding, knowledge and skills, human resources, and employment
opportunities). The cooperation between the school and industry was mutually
beneficial, although their roles in the cooperation might not be equal. When the
school grew mature and possessed a sufficient ability to control some key resources, it
gained more chips with which to bargain with industry. The school did not passively
accept the disadvantaged position in the negotiation. It managed to actively control
the environment where the most needed resources were located. Their relationship
was dynamic, too.

In the new economy, innovation is critical to win the competition in the globalized
market. Therefore, the market is the greatest advocator to promote innovation. The
collaboration between the school and industry pushed the school to pursue innovation
in teaching, research, and administration. Industry not only promotes innovation, but
also realizes it into practice through its involvement in teaching and research, as well
as other types of interaction and communication with the school. The influence of the
market regarding innovation has reached every level of the school and initiated both
310

top-down and bottom-up changes in the school. It can be said that market was the
strongest force to push the school towards innovation.

The experiment of national pilot software engineering schools was a government

initiative, but it lacked careful planning and was launched in haste. The government
did not give detailed guidance on how to realize the requirements and principles. The
ministry let these schools interpret governmental documents and implement related
policies based on their understanding and conditions. In order to compensate for the
lack of financial support, the government gave more autonomy to these schools in
order to create chances to survive and do something innovative. These measures left
great room for these schools to manipulate policies and their environment, and
brought great uncertainty of their destiny.

SSE has partially achieved the initial goals. It has made market-oriented and
practical-oriented curricula, adopted innovative teaching methods, and created
international collaboration programs. It responded to market needs instantly and tried
to make students internationally employable. It adopted self-supported financial
management and by now has successfully maintained its survival. Even if the school
started doing research under the informal pressure from the university, it still invested
most of its resources in teaching and kept a reasonable balance between teaching and
research.

SSE has also achieved some goals which may be beyond expectations. For instance, it
has successfully created an incentive system to promote teaching in a research
intensive university. The current evaluation system and academic promotion system
emphasize research outcomes only, so faculty members are under great pressure to do
research, paying little attention to teaching and ignoring students needs. In SSE,
faculty members concerned about teaching, and the relationship between faculty and
students are closer and more equal. Faculty members are encouraged to do research
for their own interests rather than under the pressure of productivity. The school has
311

created a rather flexible and active atmosphere of teaching and doing research.

However, SSE failed to reach another goal set for all pilot SE schools: to make critical
changes to current conservative and bureaucratic administrative systems. On the one
hand, the government over-emphasized the ability of these schools and expected these
schools to radically change their universities through bottom-up initiatives, ignoring
the nature of the relationship between the schools and their parent universities. On the
other hand, the government overlooked the importance of universities cooperation. In
the design of the experiment, the government directly mobilized schools, bypassing
the universities. In fact, without the cooperation from universities, these schools could
not even operate appropriately. As a result, these schools were put in a perplexed
situation under disaccording directions from two superiors.

SSE has managed to get out of the predicament and gradually converge to the
university authority. It has tried to create an innovative system and culture different
from the universitys system and culture. However, its energy has been too weak to
push the huge university to make radical changes. On the contrary, its legitimacy of
existence is at risk. Finally, the school was gradually assimilated and moved towards a
conservative and bureaucratic system.

As an academic unit, SSE has more flexibility than its parent university when
negotiating with government and market. It is far from the heart of political power, so
it is less affected by political struggle and chaos. Furthermore, it is an academic
operating unit which is granted high degree of autonomy in academic affairs, i.e.
teaching

and

research.

Its

disciplinary

characteristics

also

affect

many

decision-making in the school. When government policies go down to the academic

level, the policies need to be modified to fit in disciplinary context. In this process,
people in the unit, both faculty and staff, might be able to manipulate policies to
maximum benefit the unit and the people within it. Policy transformation happened in
the process. Therefore, it is reasonable to say that academic units have more freedom
312

than university regarding government policy implementation.

In sum, the studied academic unit has demonstrated its ability to sustain itself under
the influence of decentralization and marketization by making organizational change
accordingly. It achieved this by conforming to existing institutional system to gain
stability and legitimacy as well as obtaining needed resources through negotiation
with external forces. It coordinated with the government, the university and market to
meet their expectations and pressures. Under such circumstance, the school has
struggled to get more autonomy to achieve its own goals while avoiding being
completely absorbed into current conservative and bureaucratic system, and meet the
expectation from market, consumers and other social sectors.

To conclude the study, I would argue that if the units similar to SSE within Chinese
universities are granted more administrative autonomy and oriented themselves to
market forces, they will be more able to respond effectively to external pressures and
expectations, and there will be a higher likelihood that they can be self-sustaining. In
the Chinese context, administrative autonomy makes a difference if it is combined
with market force. SSE did not make radical changes to the current university
structure or system, but it did initiate some procedural changes and successfully
extended these changes to the whole university. It has demonstrated the ability to
sustain itself, innovate, and gain legitimacy through continuing negotiation and
compromise with university authority and forces in other social sectors.

SSEs experience suggests that depending on a small, innovative system to change a

big, conservative, and bureaucratic system is unrealistic. The outcomes of such kinds
of experiments have been proven unsatisfactory. However, such bottom-up
approaches could stimulate the static atmosphere in the university system and might
trigger more changes. While the force for change reaches the breakthrough point,
structural changes may happen.
313

Appendices
Appendix i: Informed Consent Form for Adult_Interview (English version)
Appendix ii: Informed Consent Form for Adult_Interview (Chinese version)
Appendix iii: Informed Consent Form for Adult_Focus group discussion (English
version)
Appendix iv: Informed Consent Form for Adult_Focus group discussion (Chinese
version)
Appendix v: Interview questions_Leadership (Chinese version)
Appendix vi: Interview questions_Faculty (Chinese version)
Appendix vii: Interview questions_Staff (Chinese version)
Appendix viii: Interview questions_Student (Chinese version)
Appendix ix: Schedule of individual interviews
Appendix x: Schedule of focus group discussions

314

Appendix i: Informed Consent Form for Interview (English version)

Informed Consent Form for Adult

Contemporary Higher Education Development: A Case of Software Engineering

Faculty in a Research University of China

You are invited to participate in a research study conducted by Ms. Yang Dongsheng,
a PhD candidate, in the Faculty of Education at the University of Hong Kong.
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The aim of the research is to investigate how an engineering faculty in a Chinese
university interacts with stakeholders inside and outside the faculty and deals with the
fast changing social/economic/political environment.
PROCEDURES
You are invited to attend an interview which may take for about one hour. Some
questions related to your daily routine work and opinions on some internal regulations
and decisions will be asked. You are welcome to express your opinions freely.
POTENTIAL RISKS / DISCOMFORTS AND THEIR MINIMIZATION
The questions will not be sensitive to privacy or political issues, but some opinions on
existing internal regulations and decisions might be touched. However, you are free to
decide whether to answer these questions.
COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPATION
Your participation is voluntary, so there is no compensation for participation.
POTENTIAL BENEFITS
Your participant will help researchers study in large extent. She would like to express
her sincere thanks to your assistance.
CONFIDENTIALITY
All the information collected in the interview is confidential. No one except the
researcher can access the information. Your identification will not be mentioned in
the research report. Some content of the interview might be analyzed for research
purpose only. After the research is finished, all the data will be destroyed.
PARTICIPATION AND WITHDRAWAL
Your participation is voluntary. This means that you can choose to stop at any time
without negative consequences.
315

QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS

If you have any questions or concerns about the research, please feel free to contact
Ms. Yang Dongsheng at HKU (Office: Room 101, HOI Building; Tel: 22194366;
email: yang2007@hkusua.hku.hk). If you have questions about your rights as a
research participant, please feel free to contact the Human Research Ethics Committee
for Non-Clinical Faculties, HKU (2241-5267).

SIGNATURE
I _________________________________ (Name of Participant)
understand the procedures described above and agree to participate in this study.

Signature of Participant:
Date of Preparation: [Date]
HRECNCF Approval Expiration date:

316

Appendix ii: Informed Consent Form for Interview (Chinese version)

852-68991017
yang2007@hkusua.hku.hk
(852-22415267)

317

Appendix iii: Informed Consent Form for Focus group discussion (English
version)

Informed Consent Form for Adult

Contemporary Higher Education Development: A Case of Software Engineering

Faculty in a Research University of China

You are invited to participate in a research study conducted by Ms. Yang Dongsheng,
a PhD candidate, in the Faculty of Education at the University of Hong Kong.
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The aim of the research is to investigate how an engineering faculty in a Chinese
university interacts with stakeholders inside and outside the faculty and deals with the
fast changing social/economic/political environment.
PROCEDURES
You are invited to attend a focus group discussion which may take for about one hour.
Some questions related to your daily study and campus life and opinions on some
internal regulations and decisions will be asked. You are welcome to express your
opinions freely.
POTENTIAL RISKS / DISCOMFORTS AND THEIR MINIMIZATION
The questions will not be sensitive to privacy or political issues, but some opinions on
existing internal regulations and decisions might be touched. However, you are free to
decide whether to answer these questions.
COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPATION
Your participation is voluntary, so there is no compensation for participation.
POTENTIAL BENEFITS
Your participant will help researchers study in large extent. She would like to express
her sincere thanks to your assistance.
CONFIDENTIALITY
All the information collected in the discussion is confidential. No one except the
researcher can access the information. Your identification will not be mentioned in
the research report. Some content of the discussion might be analyzed for research
purpose only. After the research is finished, all the data will be destroyed.
PARTICIPATION AND WITHDRAWAL
318

Your participation is voluntary. This means that you can choose to stop at any time
without negative consequences.

QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS

If you have any questions or concerns about the research, please feel free to contact
Ms. Yang Dongsheng at HKU (Office: Room 101, HOI Building; Tel: 22194366;
email: yang2007@hkusua.hku.hk). If you have questions about your rights as a
research participant, please feel free to contact the Human Research Ethics Committee
for Non-Clinical Faculties, HKU (2241-5267).

SIGNATURE
I _________________________________ (Name of Participant)
understand the procedures described above and agree to participate in this study.

Signature of Participant:
Date of Preparation: [Date]
HRECNCF Approval Expiration date:

319

Appendix iv: Informed Consent Form for Focus group discussion (Chinese
version)

852-68991017
yang2007@hkusua.hku.hk
(852-22415267)

320

Appendix v: Interview questions for leadership (Chinese version)

321

322

Appendix vi: Interview questions for faculty (Chinese version)

323

Appendix vii: Interview questions for staff (Chinese version)

324

Appendix viii: Interview/Focus group discussion questions for student (Chinese

version)

325

Appendix ix: Schedule of individual interviews

Others

Alumni

Staff

Faculty

Leadership

Interviewee

Date

Venue

Remark

Informant

01

20090524

A caf near campus,

Shanghai

Informant

03

20090422

Her office on campus,

Shanghai

Informant

04

20090520

His office on campus,

Shanghai

Informant

05

20090410

His office on campus,

Shanghai

Informant

06

20090508

A restaurant near his office,

Beijing,

Informant

07

20090414

A research lab on campus,

Shanghai,

Informant

08

20090415

His office on campus,

Shanghai

Informant

11

20090409

His office on campus,

Shanghai

Informant

12

20090416

His office on campus,

Shanghai

Informant

13

20090531

Her office on campus,

Shanghai

Informant

14

20090411

A restaurant on campus,

Informant

15

20090527

His office on campus,

Informant

16

20090519

Shuttle bus to main campus,

Informant

17

20090413

His office on campus,

Informant

18

20090423

A restaurant on main campus,

Informant

19

20090421

His office on campus,

Shanghai

Informant

20

20090416

His office on campus,

Shanghai

Informant

21

20090519

At home,

Informant

22

20090420

His office on campus,

Informant

23

20090413

At home,

Informant

24

20090408

His office on campus,

Shanghai

Informant

25

20090409

His office on campus,

Shanghai

Informant

26

20090409

Her office on campus,

Shanghai

Informant

27

20090414

A caf on campus,

Informant

28

20090415

Her office on campus,

Informant

31

20090510

A caf in a shopping mall,

Informant

32

20090507

A restaurant near my hotel,

Beijing

Informant

33

20090420

A restaurant near his home,

Shanghai

Informant

35

20090811

A restaurant near HKU,

Informant

36

20090509

A restaurant near my hotel,

Informant

37

20090509

A caf in a shopping mall,

Informant

38

20090816

A classroom in his university,

Informant

39

20090423

Her office in her company,

Informant

40

20090425

A caf on main campus,

Informant

29

20090507

His office in his company,

Informant

30

20090807

A caf in IFC,

Also in industry
Also a alumnus

Shanghai
Shanghai
Shanghai

Shanghai
Shanghai

Shanghai
Shanghai

Shanghai

Shanghai

Also alumnus

Shanghai
Beijing

Hongkong
Beijing
Beijing
Hongkong

Shanghai

Shanghai

Hongkong

Beijing

From industry
From a foreign
university

326

Appendix x: Schedule of focus group discussions

students

Graduate students

Senior undergraduate

Interviewee

Date

Venue

Remark

Informant

41

20090415

A classroom on campus,

Shanghai

Informant

42

20090415

A classroom on campus,

Shanghai

Informant

43

20090415

A classroom on campus,

Shanghai

Informant

44

20090415

A classroom on campus,

Shanghai

Informant

45

20090416

A classroom on campus,

Shanghai

Informant

46

20090416

A classroom on campus,

Shanghai

Informant

47

20090416

A classroom on campus,

Shanghai

Informant

48

20090416

A classroom on campus,

Shanghai

Informant

49

20090416

A classroom on campus,

Shanghai

Informant

50

20090416

A classroom on campus,

Shanghai

Informant

51

20090416

A classroom on campus,

Shanghai

327

References

Adams, D. R., & Athey, T. H. (Eds.). (1981). DPMA Model Curriculum for
Undergraduate Computer Information Education. Park Ridge, Ill: Data
Processing Management Association Foundation.
Altbach, P. G. (1997). Let the Buyer Pay: International Trends in Funding for Higher
Education. International Higher Education, 9, 16-17.
Apple, M. W. (1999). Rhetorical reforms: markets, standards and inequality.
Comparative Education Global, 101(2).
Arbor, A. (1993). Service universities and market forces. The Education Digest, 58(5).
Ashby, E. (1966). Universities, British, Indian, African. Cambridge: Harvard
University Press.
Aslen, J. (1996). The United Kingdom. In R. in't Veld, H. P. Fussel & G. Neave (Eds.),
Relations between State and Higher Education (pp. 285-294). The Hague,
London, Boston: Kluwer Law International.
Babbie, E. (2001). The Practice of Social Research. Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.
Bagert, D. J. (2000). Computing Education 2020: Balancing Diversity with
Cooperation and Consistency. In T. Greening (Ed.), Computer Science
Education in the 21st Century (pp. 7-18). New York: Springer.
Balderston, F. E. (1995). Managing Today's University: strategies for viability, change,
and excellence. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Ball, S. J. (1990). Politics and policy making in education. London: Routledge.
Balogun, J. (2003). From blaming the middle to harnessing its potential: Creating
change intermediaries. British Journal of Management, 14(1), 69-83.
Barnard, C. I. (1938). The Functions of Executive. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press.
Bartunek, J. M., & Louis, M. R. (1996). Insider/Outsider Team Research. Thousand
Oak, London, New Delhi: Sage Publications.
Beck, L. C., Trombetta, W. L., & Share, S. (1986). Using focus group sessions before
decisions are made. North Carolina Medical Journal, 47(2), 73-74.
Bell, J. (1999). Doing your own research project (3rd ed.). Buckingham: Open
University Press.
Berdahl, R. (1990). Academic freedom, autonomy and accountability in British
universities. Studies in Higher Education, 15(2).
Berdahl, R., Graham, J., & Piper, D. R. (1971). Statewide Coordination of Higher
Education. Washington: American Council on Education.
Berdahl, R., & Millett, J. (1991). Autonomy and accountability in U.S. higher
education. In G. Neave & F. van Vught (Eds.), Prometheus Bound. Oxford:
Pergamon.
328

Bess, J. L., & Dee, J. R. (2008). Understanding College and University Organization:
Theories for Effective Policy and Practice. Sterling, Virginia: Stylus.
Blau, P. (1956). Bureaucracy in Modern Society. New York: Random House.
Bloor, M., Frankland, J., Thomas, M., & Robson, K. (2001). Focus Groups in Social
Research. London: Sage.
Bolton, A. (2000). Managing the academic unit, managing universities and colleges:
Guides to good practice. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Boyer, E. L. (1993). Introduction. In P. G. Altbach & D. B. Johnstone (Eds.), The
Funding of Higher Education: international perspectives (pp. xv-xvii). New
York: Garland Publishing.
Boyko, L., & Jones, G. A. (2010). The Roles and Responsibilities of Middle
Management (Chairs and Deans) in Canadian Universities. In L. Meek, L.
Goedegebuure, R. Santiago & T. Carvalho (Eds.), The Changing Dynamics of
Higher Education Middle Management. Dordrecht: Springer.
Bray, M. (1991). Centralization versus Decentralization in Educational Administration:
Regional Issues. Educational Policy, 5(4), 371-385.
Bray, M. (1998). Financing education in Developing Asia: Patterns, Trends, and
Policy Implications: Asian Development Bank.
Bray, M. (1999). Control of Education: Issues and Tensions in Centralization and
Decentralization. In R. F. Arnove & C. A. Torres (Eds.), Comparative
Education: The Dialectic of the Global and the Local. Lanham: Rowman and
Littlefield.
Bright, D. F., & Richards, M. P. (2001). The academic deanship: Individual careers
and institutional roles. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Brint, S. G. (1994). In an Age of Experts: The Changing Role of Professionals in
Politics and Public Life. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Brown, R. H., & Cligent, R. (2000). Democracy and capitalism in the academy: the
commercialization of American higher education. In R. H. Brown & R.
Cligent (Eds.), Knowledge and power in higher education (pp. 17-48). New
York; London: Teachers College Press.
Browning, L. (2006). BMW's custom-made university, New York Times, pp. CI, C6.
Buchbinder, H. (1993). The market oriented university and the changing role of
knowledge. Higher Education, 26, 331-347.
Buckley, W. (1967). Sociology and Modern Systems Theory. Upper Saddle River,
New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Burgess, R. (1997). Fiscal reform and the extension of basic health and education
coverage. In C. Colclough (Ed.), Marketising education and health in
developing countries (pp. 307-346). London: Clarendon Press.
Burn, B. B. (1971). Higher Education in the Soviet Union. In B. B. Burn (Ed.),
Higher education in nine countries : a comparative study of colleges and
universities abroad.
Burrell, G., & Morgan, G. (1979). Sociological Paradigms and Organizational
Analysis. London: Heinemann.
Cameron, K., & Smart, J. (1998). Maintaining effectiveness amid downsizing and
329

decline in institutions of higher education. Research in Higher education,

39(1), 65-85.
Cantor, P. A. (1998). It's not the tenure, it's the radicalism. Academic Questions, 11(1),
28-36.
Cavaleski, M. A., & Dirsmich, M. W. (1988). An institutional perspective on the rise,
social transformation, and fall of a university budget category. Administrative
Science Quarterly, 33, 562-587.
Chen, C., Ma, Z., & Huang, L. (1989). (The
way out for Chinese higher education lies in joining in economic operation).
(Educational Research), 8(August).
Chen, Z., Wu, Z., & Xie, S. (2000). The extent of marketization of economic system in
China. New York: Nova Science Publishers, Inc.
Cheng, K. M. (1997). Markets in a Socialist System: Reform of Higher Education in
China. In K. Watson, C. Modgil & S. Modgil (Eds.), Education Dilemmas:
debate and diversity (Volume Two) (pp. 238-249). London: Cassell.
Cheng, K. M. (1998). Reform in the Administration and Financing of Higher
Education. In M. Agelasto & B. Adamson (Eds.), Higher Education in
Post-Mao China (pp. 11-27). Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
Cheng, K. M. (1999). Education and market: how could it be different and what is
new? Comparative Education.
Cheng, X., & Zhou, C. (1995). (The history and status
of institutional research in the United States). (Suzhou
University Academic Journal), 1995(4).
China Software Industry Association. (2004). 2004
(2004 Research Report on Development of China's Software Industry ).
Beijing: CSIA.
ChinaLabs. (2006). (Research report on China's
development strategies of software industry ).
Chinese Central Government. (1999). Law on Higher Education in the People's
Republic of China.
Clark, B. (1983a). Governing the higher education system. In M. Shattock (Ed.), The
Structure and Governance of Higher Education. Guildford: Society for
Research into Higher Education.
Clark, B. (1983b). The Higher Education System: Academic Organization in
Cross-National Perspective. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Clark, B. (1995). Complexity and Differentiation: the deepening problem of
university integration. In D. D. Dill & B. Sporn (Eds.), Emerging patterns of
social demand and university reform: through a glass darkly (pp. 159-169).
Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Clark, B. (1997). Common problems and adaptive responses in the universities of the
world: organizing for change. Higher Education Policy, 10(3/4), 291-295.
Clark, B. (1998). Creating entrepreneurial universities: Organizational pathways of
transformation. Oxford, UK: IAU Press and Pergamon.
Clarke, J. (2004). Changing Welfare, Changing States: New Directions in Social
330

Policy. London: Sage.

Clarke, J., Gewirtz, S., & McLaughlin, E. (2000). New managerialism, new welfare?
London: Sage.
Clarke, J., & Newman, J. (1997). The Managerial State: Power, Politics and Ideology
in the Remarking of Social Welfare. London: Sage.
Cohen, L., & Manion, L. (1994). Research Methods in Education (Forth ed.). London,
New York: Routledge.
Colclough, C. (1997). Education, health and the market: an introduction. In C.
Colclough (Ed.), Marketizing education and health in developing countries:
miracle or mirage? (pp. 3-34). Oxford: Clarendon.
Comm, C. L., & Mathaisel, D. F. X. (1998). Evaluating teaching effectiveness in
American business schools: implications for service marketers. Journal of
Professional Services Marketing, 16(20), 163-170.
Cougar, J. D. (1973). Curriculum recommendations for undergraduate programs in
information systems. Communications of the ACM, 16(12), 727-749.
Creswell, J. W. (1994). Research Design: Qualitative & Quantitative Approaches.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Currie, G., & Procter, S. J. (2005). The antecedents of middle managers' strategic
contribution: The case of a professional bureaucracy. Journal of Management
Studies, 42(7), 1325-1356.
Currie, J. (1998). Introduction. In J. Currie & J. Newson (Eds.), Universities and
Globalization: Critical Perspectives. Thousand Oaks, CA and London: Sage.
Dai, X. (2000). The massification and marketization of higher education. Taibei:
YiangZhi Cultural Enterprise ltd. .
Damanpour, F., & Evan, W. (1984). Organizational innovation and performance: The
problem of organizational lag. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29, 392-409.
de Zilwa, D. (2010a). Academic Units in a Complex, Changing World: Adaptation
and Resistance. Dordrecht: Springer.
de Zilwa, D. (2010b). Academic Units in a Complex, Changing WorldAdaptation
and Resistance. Dordrecht: Springer.
Deem, R. (2004). The knowledge worker, the manager-academic and the
contemporary UK university: New and old forms of public management?
Financial Accountability & Management, 20(2), 107-128.
Deem, R., & Brehony, K. (2005). Management as ideology: The case of New
Managerialism in higher education. Oxford Review of Education, 31(2),
217-235.
Deem, R., Hillyard, S., & Reed, M. (2007). Knowledge, Higher Education, and the
New Managerialism: The Changing Management of UK Universities. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Denning, P. (2000). Computing the Profession. In T. Greening (Ed.), Computer
Science Education in the 21st Century. New York: Springer.
Denning, P., Brandin, D., & McCracken, D. (1989). Computing as a discipline. IEEE
Computer, 22, 63-70.
Denzin, N. K. (1970). The Research Act in Sociology. Chicago: Aldine.
331

Denzin, N. K. (1989). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological

methods (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice Hall.
Dill, D. D. (1997). Higher education markets and public policy. Higher Education
Policy, 10, 167-185.
Dill, D. D., & Sporn, B. (1995). The implications of a postindustrial environment for
the university: an introduction In D. D. Dill & B. Sporn (Eds.), Emerging
Patterns of Social Demand and University Reform: Through a glass darkly (pp.
1-14). Oxford: Pergamon Press.
DiMaggio, P. J. (1988). Interest and agency in institutional theory. In L. G. Zucker
(Ed.), Institutional patterns and organizations: Culture and environment (pp.
3-21). Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional
isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American
Sociological Review, 48(April), 147-160.
Dowling, J., & Pfeffer, J. (1975). Organizational legitimacy: Social values and
organizational behavior. Pacific Sociology Review, 18(122-135).
Du Gay, P. (2000). In Praise of Bureaucracy. London: Sage.
Eckel, P. D., & King, J. E. (2006). United States. In J. J. F. Forest & P. G. Altbach
(Eds.), International Handbook of Higher Education: Regions and Countries.
Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
El Saddik, A., Yang, D., & Georganas, N. D. (2003). A Lightweight Multi-session
Synchronous Multimedia Collaborative Environment. Paper presented at the
ACS/IEEE International Conference on Computer Systems and Applications,
Tunisia, Tunis.
El Saddik, A., Yang, D., & Georganas, N. D. (2007). Tools for Transparent
Synchronous Collaborative Environments. Journal of Multimedia Tools and
Applications, 33(2), 217-240.
Enteman, W. (1993). Managerialism: The Emergence of a New Ideology. Wisconsin,
WI: University of Wisconsin Press.
Fairclough, N. (1993). Critical discourse analysis and the marketization of public
discourse: the universities. Discourse and Society, 4(2), 133-168.
Fan, J. (1999). (Development theory of higher
education and implementation in China). Shanghai, China:
(Fudan University Press).
Fayol, H. (1949 trans). General and Industrial Management. London: Pitman.
Feldman, M., Feller, I., Ailes, C. P., & Roessner, J. D. (2002). Impacts of research
universities on technological innovation in industry: Evidence from
engineering research centers. Research Policy, 19, 335-348.
Fergusson, R. (2000). Modernizing Managerialism: The Case of Education. In J.
Clarke, S. Gewirtz & E. McLaughlin (Eds.), New Managerialism, New
Welfare? London: Sage.
Flick, U. (1998). An introduction to qualitative research. London: Sage.
Floyd, S. W., & Wooldridge, B. (1994). Dinosaurs or dynamos? Recognizing middle
management's strategic role. Academy of Management Executive, 8(4), 47-57.
332

Floyd, S. W., & Wooldridge, B. (1997). Middle management's strategic influence and
organizational performance. Journal of Management Studies, 34(3), 465-485.
Fontana, A., & Frey, J. (2002). Postmodern Trends in Interviewing. In J. Gubrium & J.
Holstein (Eds.), Handbook of Interview research: Context and Method (pp.
161-180). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Frank, T. (2000). One Market under God: Extreme Capitalism, Market Populism and
the End of Economic Democracy. New York: Secker & Warburg.
Fulton, O. (2002). Higher Education governance in the UK: Change and Continuity.
In A. Amaral, G. A. Jones & B. Karseth (Eds.), Governing Higher Education:
National Perspectives on Institutional Governance (pp. 187-211). Dordrecht,
The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Gewirtz, S., Ball, S. J., & Bowe, R. (1995). Market, Choice & Equity in Education.
Buckingham: Open University Press.
Giddens, A. (1987). Social Theory and Modern Sociology. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Glennerster, H., Falkingham, J., & Barr, N. (1995). Education funding, equity and the
life cycle. In J. Falkingham & J. Hills (Eds.), The dynamics of welfare: the
welfare state and the life cycle (pp. 150-166). New York: Prentice Hall.
Glowka, D. (1971). Soviet Higher Education Between Government Policy and
Self-determination. In B. Holmes & D. G. Scanton (Eds.), Higher education in
a changing world. London: Published in association with the University of
London Institute of Education and Teachers College, Columbia University,
New York, by Evans Bros.
Gmelch, W. H. (2004). The department chair's balancing act. New Directions for
Higher Education and Modernization, 126(69-84).
Gonsales, R., & Dee, J. R. (2004). Corporate partnership in graduate education:
Faculty roles, academic policy, and institutional strategy. Paper presented at
the Annual meeting of the Association for the Study of Higher Education,
Kansas City, MO.
Gornitzka, A. (1999). Governmental policies and organisational change in higher
education. Higher Education, 38, 5-31.
Gouldner, A. W. (1954). Patterns of Industrial Bureaucracy. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
Grey, C. (1999). We Are All Managers Now: We Always Were: On the Development
and Demise of Management. Journal of Management Studies, 36(5).
Gubrium, J. (1988). Analyzing field reality. Newbury, CA: Sage.
Gumport, P. (1993). The contested terrain of academic program reduction. Journal of
Higher Education, 66(5), 283-311.
Hackl, E. (2000). Decentralization of Higher Education and Autonomy. In W. Berka, J.
D. Groof & H. Penneman (Eds.), Autonomy in Education: Yearbook of the
European Association for Educational Law and Policy (Vol. 3, pp. 105-109).
The Hague, Netherlands: Kluwer Law International.
Hall, A. D., & Fagen, R. E. (1980). Definition of system. In G. Chen, J. Jamieson, L.
Schkade & C. H. Smith (Eds.), The general theory of systems applied to
management and organization (Vol. I, pp. 73-85). Seaside, CA: Intersystems.
Halpern, D. (1997). What's your degree worth to you? New Statesman, 126(4365),
333

22-24.
Halpern, S. (1969). The Institute of International Education: A History. Ph.D,
Columbia University.
Hamel, J., Dufour, S., & Fortin, D. (1993). Case Study Methods. Newbury Park, CA:
Sage.
Hankel, M., & Little, B. (Eds.). (1999). Changing Relationships between Higher
Education and the State. London: Jessica Kingsley.
Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. (1977). The Population Ecology of Organizations.
American Journal of Sociology, 82(1977), 931.
Hanson, M. (1995). Decentralization and Decentralization of Columbian Education.
Comparative Education, 39(1), 101-123.
Haplern, D. (1997). What's your degree worth to you? New Statesman, 126(4365),
22-24.
Harman, G. (2002). Academic leaders or corporate managers: Deans and heads in
Australian higher education, 1977 to 1997. Higher Education Management
and Policy, 14(2), 53-70.
Hayhoe, R. (1989a). China's universities and the open door. Armonk, NY: M.E.
Sharpe.
Hayhoe, R. (1989b). China's universities and Western University models. In P. G.
Altbach & V. Selvaratnam (Eds.), From dependence to autonomy: The
development of Asian Universities (pp. 25-61). Dordrecht, Netherlands:
Kluwer Academic.
Hayhoe, R. (1999). China's Universities 1895-1995: A Century of Cultural Conflict.
Hong Kong: Comparative Education Research Centre, The University of Hong
Kong.
Hayhoe, R., Li, J., Lin, J., & Zha, Q. (2011). Portraits of 21st Century Chinese
Universities: In the Move to Mass Higher Education. Hong Kong:
Comparative Education Research Centre, The University of Hong Kong.
Hayhoe, R., & Liu, J. (2010). China's Universities, Cross-Border Education, and
Dialogue among Civilizations. In D. W. Chapman, W. K. Cummings & G. A.
Postiglione (Eds.), Crossing Borders in East Asian Higher Education. Hong
Kong: Comparative Education Research Centre, The University of Hong
Kong.
Hayhoe, R., & Zha, Q. (2006). China. In J. J. F. Forest & P. Altbach (Eds.),
International Handbook of Higher Education, Part Two: Regions and
Countries. Dordrecht: Springer.
Hayhoe, R., & Zhong, N. (2001). University Autonomy in Twentieth Century China.
In G. Peterson, R. Hayhoe & Y. Lu (Eds.), Education, Culture and identity in
20th Century China. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Hedrick, T. E., Bickman, L., & Rog, D. J. (1993). Applied research design: A
practical guide. Newbury. Park: Sage.
Hinings, B., & Greenwood, R. (1988). The normative prescription of organizations. In
L. G. Caves (Ed.), Institutional patterns and organizations: Culture and
environment (pp. 39-56). Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
334

Holcomb, J. H. (1993). Educational Marketing: A business Approach to

school-community Relations. Lanham: University Press of America.
Hu, J. (2006). An Analysis of Reform in Administrative System of Chinese Higher
Education. Frontiers of Education in China, 1(3), 402-416.
Hu, S. (2003). (Discussion on internal
financial allocation system of higher education). (Higher
Engineering Education Research), 2003(2).
Jessop, R. (1993). Towards a Schumpeterian workfare state? Preliminary remarks on
post-Fordist political economy. Studies in Political Economy, 40, 7-39.
Johnstone, D. B. (1993). The costs of higher education: worldwide issues and trends
for the 1990s. In P. G. Altbach & D. B. Johnstone (Eds.), The Funding of
Higher Education: international perspectives (pp. 3-24). New York: Garland
Publishing.
Johnstone, D. B. (1999). Financing higher education: who should pay? In P. G.
Altbach., R. O. Berdahl & P. J. Gumport (Eds.), American higher education in
the twenty-first century (pp. 347-369). Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins
University Press.
Julius, D. J. (1997). Will Chinese universities survive an emerging market economy?
Higher Education Management, 9(1), 141-156.
Kanamori, T., & Zhao, Z. (2004). Private sector development in the People's Republic
of China. Tokyo: Asian Development Bank Institute.
Karlsen, G. E. (2000). Decentralized centralism: framework for a better understanding
of governance in the field of education. Journal of Education Policy, 15(5),
525-538.
Kehm, B. M. (2006). Germany. In J. J. F. Forest & P. G. Altbach (Eds.), International
Handbook of Higher Education. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
Keller, G. (1983). Academic strategy: The management revolution in higher education.
Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Kidder, L., & Judd, C. M. (1986). Research methods in social relations (5th ed.). New
York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
King, E. (1998). What's Decentralization Got To Do With Learning? The Case of
Nicaragua's School Autonomy Reform Working Paper Series on Impact
Evaluation of Education Reform, Paper No. 9. Washington, D. C.: World
Bank.
Kirby-Harris, R. (2003). Universities responding to policy: Organisational change at
the University of Namibia. Higher Education, 45, 353-374.
Kirkpatrick, I., & Lucio, M. (1995). The politics of quality in the public sector: The
management of change. London: Routledge.
Korten, D. (1995). When Corporations Rule the World. London: Earthscan.
Krahenbuhl, G. S. (2004). Building the academic deanship: Strategies for success.
Westport: Praeger.
Kwong, J. (1997). The reemergence of private schools in socialist China.
Comparative Education Review, 41(3), 244-259.
Kwong, J. (2000). Introduction: marketization and privatization in education.
335

International Journal of Education Development, 20(2), 87.

Lawrence, P. R., & Lorsch, J. W. (1967). Organization and Environment: Managing
Differentiation and Integration. Boston: Graduate School of Business
Administration, Harvard University.
Le Grand, J., & Bartlett, W. (Eds.). (1993). Quasi-markets and social policy. London:
Macmillan.
Leadbeater, C. (2003). Personalisation through Participation. London: Demos.
Leslie, L., Rhoades, G., & Oaxaca, R. (1999). Effects of changing revenue patterns on
public research universities. Report to the National Science Foundation, grant
SBR9628325.
Lewin, K., Little, A. W., Xu, H., & Zheng, J. (1994). Educational innovation in China:
tracing the impact of the 1985 reforms. Harlow, UK: Longman.
Leydesdorff,
L.,
&
Etzkowitz,
H.
(1997).
A triple
helix
of
university-industry-government relations. In L. Leydesdorff & H. Etzkowitz
(Eds.), Universities and the global knowledge economy - a triple helix of
university-industry-government relation (Vol. 155-162). London, Washington:
Pinter.
Lin, J., Zhang, Y., Gao, L., & Liu, Y. (2005). Trust, ownership, and autonomy:
challenges facing private higher education in China. The China Quarterly, 5(1),
61-81.
Lin, N. (1976). Foundations of Social Research. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Lindblom, C. (1959). The science of muddling through. Public Administration Review,
19, 78-88.
Liu, N. C. (2007). Research Universities in China: Differentiation, Classification, and
Future World-Class Status. In P. G. Altbach & J. Balan (Eds.), World Class
Worldwide: Transforming Research Universities in Asia and Latin America
(pp. 54-69). Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Liu, X. (2008). (Institutional Research). Beijing:
(Higher Education Press).
Liu, X., & Zhao, J. (2002). Hightening Administrative Level of Higher Institution in
Terms of the Results of Educational Research Carried Out by College &
University Themselves (--
). China Higher Education Research, 2002(3).
Liu, Y. (Ed.). (1993). (The Chronicle of Chinese education events).
Hangzhou, China: (Zhejiang Education Press).
Luhmann, N. (1995). Social Systems. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
March, J. G., & Simon, H. A. (1958). Organizations. New York: John Wiley.
Marginson, S., & Considine, M. (2000). The Enterprise University: Power,
Governance and Reinvention in Australia. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Marvasti, A. B. (2004). qualitative Research in Sociology: An Introduction. London:
Sage.
Massy, W. F. (2004). Markets in Higher Education: Do They Promote Internal
Efficiency? In P. Teixeira, B. Jongbloed, D. D. Dill & A. Amaral (Eds.),
336

Markets in Higher Education: Rhetoric or Reality. Dordrecht, Boston, London:

Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Mayo, E. (1945). The Social Problems of an Industrial Civilization. Boston: Graduate
School of Business Administration, Harvard University.
McConnell, S. (2004). Professional software development : shorter schedules, higher
quality products, more successful projects, enhanced careers. Boston, MA:
Addison-Wesley.
McCracken, G. (1988). The Long Interview. Newbury Park: Sage.
McNay, I. (1995). From the collegial academy to corporate enterprise: the changing
cultures of universities. In T. Schuller (Ed.), The changing university? (pp.
105-115).
Meek, V. L. (2000). Diversity and marketisation of higher education: incompatible
concepts? Higher Education Policy, 13(1), 23-39.
Meek, V. L., Goedegebuure, L., & De Boer, H. (2010). The Changing Role of
Academic Leadership in Australia and the Netherlands: Who Is the Modern
Dean? In L. Meek, L. Goedegebuure, R. Santiago & T. Carvalho (Eds.), The
Changing Dynamics of Higher Education Middle Management (pp. 31-54).
Dordrecht Springer
Meek, V. L., Goedegebuure, L., Santiago, R., & Carvalho, T. (2010a). Introduction. In
V. L. Meek, L. Goedegebuure, R. Santiago & T. Carvalho (Eds.), The
Changing Dynamics of Higher Education Middle Management. Dordrecht
Springer
Meek, V. L., Goedegebuure, L., Santiago, R., & Carvalho, T. (Eds.). (2010b). The
Changing Dynamics of Higher Education Middle Management. Dordrecht:
Springer.
Meek, V. L., & Wood, F. Q. (1997). The market as a new steering strategy for
Australian higher education. Higher Education Policy, 10, 253-274.
Merriam, S. B. (1988). Case study research in education: A qualitative approach. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Merriam, S. B. (2001). Qualitative Research and Case Study Applications in
Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Merrien, F., & Musselin, C. (1999). Are French Universities Finally Emerging? Path
Dependency Phenomena and Innovative Reforms in France. In D. Braun & F.
Merrien (Eds.), Towards a New Model of Governance for Universities? A
Comparative View. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers Ltd.
Merton, R. K., Fiske, M., & Kendall, P. L. (1990). The focused interview: A manual of
problems and procedures. New York: Free Press.
Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure
as Myth and Ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83, 340-363.
Miao, S. (1997). Tentative Discussion on Fairness in Education under the Conditions
of Charging Fees for Higher Education. Chinese Education and Development,
30(2), 39-50.
Middlemass, K. (1979). Politics in Industrial Society: The Experience of the British
System Since 1911. London: Andre Deutsch.
337

Middleton, C. (2000). Models of State and Market in the "Modernization" of Higher

Education. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 21(4), 537-554.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: A sourcebook of
new methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Miller, E. J., & Rice, A. K. (1967). Systems of Organization. London: Tavistock.
Miller, R. I. (1999). American higher education issues and challenges in the 21st
century. London; Philadelphia: Jessica Kingsley.
Min, W. (1994). People's Republic of China: Autonomy and Accountability: An
Analysis of the Changing Relationships between the Government and
Universities. In G. Neave & F. van Vught (Eds.), Government and Higher
Educational Relationships Across Three Continents: The Winds of Change.
Oxford, New York, Tokyo: Elsevier.
Min, W. (2004). Chinese Higher Education: The Legacy of the Past and the Context
of the Future. In P. G. Altbach & T. Umakoshi (Eds.), Asian Universities:
Historical Perspectives and Contemporary Challenges (pp. 53-84). Baltimore:
The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Min, W., & Chen, X. (1994). (The
financial needs of higher education and the reform of investment system).
(Educational Research), 1994(12), 30-38.
Ministry of Education. (2001a).
(Ministry of Education and the State Planning
Commission approved the experiment of national pilot software engineering
schools). Beijing.
Ministry of Education. (2001b). (Policy
regarding the experiment of national pilot software engineering schools).
Beijing.
Mok, K. H. (1996). Marketization and decentralization: development of education and
paradigm shift in social policy. Hong Kong Public Administration, 5(1), 35-56.
Mok, K. H. (1997a). Privatization or Marketization: Educational Development in
Post-Mao China. International Review of Education, 43(5-6), 547-567.
Mok, K. H. (1997b). Retreat of the state: marketization of education in the Pearl River
Delta. Comparative Education Review, 41(3), 260-276.
Mok, K. H. (1998). Education and the marketplace in Hong Kong and Mainland
China. Hong Kong: Department of Public and Social Administration, City
University of Hong Kong.
Mok, K. H. (2000a). Marketizating higher education in post-Mao China. International
Journal of Educational Development, 30, 109-126.
Mok, K. H. (2000b). Social and political development in Post-reform China.
Basingstoke, UK: Macmillan Press.
Mok, K. H. (Ed.). (2003). Centralization and Decentralization: Educational Reforms
and Changing Governance in Chinese Societies. Hong Kong: Comparative
Education Research Centre, The University of Hong Kong.
Morgan, D. L. (2002). Focus Group Interviewing. In J. Gubrium & J. Holstein (Eds.),
Handbook of Interview Research: Context and Method (pp. 141-160).
338

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Musselin, C. (2004). The Long March of French Universities. New York: Routledge.
Musselin, C. (2006). France. In J. J. F. Forest & P. G. Altbach (Eds.), International
Handbook of Higher Education: Part Two: Regions and Countries (Vol. 18, pp.
711-728). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
Neave, G., & van Vught, F. (1994a). Government and Higher Education in Developing
Nations: A Conceptual Framework. In G. Neave & F. van Vught (Eds.),
Government and Higher Education Relationships Across Three Continents:
The Winds of Change. Oxford: Pergamon.
Neave, G., & van Vught, F. (Eds.). (1994b). Government and Higher Education
Relationships Across Three Continents: The Winds of Change. Oxford, New
York, Tokyo: Elsevier.
Neuman, W. L. (1994). Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative
Approaches (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Neuman, W. L. (2000). Social research methods : qualitative and quantitative
approaches (4th ed.) (4th ed.). Boston, MA Allyn and Bacon.
Newman, F. (1987). Choosing Quality, Reducing Conflict between the State and the
Univeristy. Denver: Education Commission of the States.
Newman, J. (2001). Modernising Governance: New Labour, Policy and Society.
London: Sage.
Newman, J. (2002). Managerialism, Modernisation and Marginalisation. In E.
Breiten-bach, A. Brown, F. McKay & W. J. Basingstoke (Eds.), The Changing
Politics of Gender Equality in Britain. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave.
Ngok, K. (2006). Globalization and Higher Education Reform in China. In N. S.-k.
Pang (Ed.), Globalization: Educational Research, Change and Reform. Hong
Kong: The Chinese University Press.
Oliver, C. (1991). Strategic responses to institutional processes. Academy of
Management Review, 16(1), 145-179.
Oliver, C. (1997). Sustainable competitive advantage: Combining institutional and
resource-based views. Strategic Management Journal, 18(9), 697-713.
Omari, I. M. (1994). Kenya: Management of Higher Education in Developing
Countries: The Relationshop between the Government and Higher Education.
In G. Neave & F. A. van Vught (Eds.), Government and Higher Education
Relationships Across Three Continents: The Winds of Change. Oxford, New
York, Tokyo: Elsevier.
Osborne, D., & Gaebler, T. (1993). Reinventing Government: How the
Entrepreneurial Spirit is Transforming the Public Sector. New York: Plume.
Pan, S. (2003). How Higher Educational Institutions Cope With Social Change: The
Case of Tsinghua University, China. Ph.D, The University of Hong Kong,
Hong Kong, China.
Pan, S. (2009). University Autonomy, the State, and Social Change in China. Hong
Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
Pan, S., & Law, W. W. (2006). Legalizing education: the role of law in the regulation
and deregulation of China' s private education. Education and the Law, 18(4),
339

267-282.
Parker, J. (2002). A New Disciplinarity: Communities of Knowledge, Learning and
Practice. Teaching in Higher Education, 7(4), 373-386.
Paul, D. A. (2005). Higher education in competitive markets: Literature on
organizational decline and turnaround. JGE: The Journal of General
Education, 54(2), 106-138.
Pfeffer, J. (1981). Power in organizations. Boston, MA: Pitman.
Pfeffer, J. (1982). Organizations and organizational theory. Boston, MA: Pitman.
Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (1978). The External Control of Organizations. New
York: Harper & Row.
Prost, A. (1968). Histoire de l'enseignement en France: 1800-1967. Paris: Colin.
Psacharopoulos, G. (1993). The future of higher education funding. In P. G. Altbach &
D. B. Johnstone (Eds.), The Funding of Higher Education: international
perspectives (pp. 61-70). New York: Garland Publishing.
Qiang, L. (1995). (A comparative Study on Higher
Education in China, U.S.A., and Japan). Shanghai, China:
(Fudan university Press).
Ravich, S. F. (1999). Marketization and democracy: East Asian experiences. New
York: Cambridge University Press.
Reed, M. I. (1992). The Sociology of Organizations Themes, Perspectives and
Prospects. Hemel Hempstead, UK: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Rondinelli, D. A. (1990). Decentralization, territorial power and the state: a critical
response. Development and Change, 21, 491-500.
Rose, N. (1999). Powers of Freedom: Reframing Political Thought. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (1995). Qualitative Interviewing: The Art of Hearing Data.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Ryan, K., Boehm, B., & Eakin, K. (1996). Meeting Industry's Needs: Should We
Teach the Software Engineering of the Past? Paper presented at the Ninth
Conference on Software Engineering Education, Daytona Beach, Florida.
Samoff, J. (1990). Decentralisation: the politics of interventionism. Development and
Change, 21, 513-530.
Santiago, R., Carvalho, T., Amaral, A., & Meek, V. L. (2006). Changing patterns in
the middle management of higher education institutions: The case of Portugal.
Higher Education, 52(2), 215-250.
Sawyerr, A. (1994). Ghana: Relations between Government and Universities. In G.
Neave & F. A. van Vught (Eds.), Government and Higher Education
Relationships across Three Continents: The Winds of Change. Oxford, New
York, Tokyo: Elsevier.
Schimank, U., Kehm, B. M., & Enders, J. (1999). Institutional Mechanisms of
Problem Processing of the German University System: Status Quo and New
Developments. In D. Braun & F. Merrien (Eds.), Towards a New Model of
Governance for Universities? A Comparative View. London: Jessica Kingsley
Publishers Ltd.
340

Scott, R. W. (1998). Organizations: Rational, Natural and Open Systems (4th ed.).
Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.
Scott, S. V. (1999). The academic as service provider: is the customer 'always right'?
Journal of Higher Education Policy & Management, 21(2), 193-203.
Scott, W. R. (1987). The adolescence of institutional theory. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 32(493-511).
Scott, W. R. (2003). Organizations: Rational, Natural, and Open Systems (5th ed.).
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Scott, W. R., & Meyer, J. W. (1983). The organization of societal sectors. In J. W.
Meyer & W. R. Scott (Eds.), Organizational environments: Ritual and
rationality. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Seliger, H. W., & Shohamy, E. (1989). Second language research method. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Selznick, P. (1949). TVA and the Grass Roots. Berkeley: University of California
Press.
Shattock, M. (2006). United Kingdom. In J. J. F. Forest & P. G. Altbach (Eds.),
International Handbook of Higher Education (pp. 1019-1033). Dordrecht, The
Netherlands: Springer.
Simon, H. A. (1997). Administrative Behavior: A Study of Decision-Making Processes
in Administrative Organizations (4th ed.). New York: Free Press.
Siu, N. Y. M., & Wilson, R. M. S. (1995). Modelling Marketing Orientation. Hong
Kong: Business Research Centre, Hong Kong Baptist University.
Sizer, J., & Cannon, S. (1999). Autonomy, Governance and Accountability. In J.
Brennan, J. Fedrowitz, M. Huber & T. Shah (Eds.), What Kind of University?:
International Perspectives on Knowledge, Participation and Governance (pp.
193-202). Buckingham, Philadelphia: SRHE, Open University Press.
Sizer, J., & Mackie, D. (1995). Greater accountability: the price of autonomy. Higher
Education Management, 7(3), 323-332.
Slaughter, S. (1990). Higher Learning and High Technology: Dynamics of Higher
Education Policy Formation. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Slaughter, S., & Leslie, L. (1997). Academic Capitalism: Politics, Policies, and the
Entrepreneurial University. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Slaughter, S., & Rhoades, G. (1990). Renorming the social relations of academic
science: Technology transfer. Educational Policy, 4, 341-361.
Slaughter, S., & Rhoades, G. (1996). The emergence of a competitiveness research
and development policy coalition and the commercialization of academic
science and technology. Science, Technology, and Human Values, 21, 303-339.
Slaughter, S., & Rhoades, G. (2004). Academic Capitalism and the New Economy:
Markets, State, and Higher Education. Baltimore, London: The Johns Hopkins
University Press.
Smith, H. W. (1975). Strategies of Social Research: The Methodological Imagination.
London: Prentice Hall.
Sotirakou, T. (2004). Coping with conflict within the entrepreneurial university:
Threat or challenge for heads of departments in the UK higher education
341

context. International Review of Administrative Science Quarterly, 70(2),

345-372.
Stake, R. E. (1995). The Art of Case Study Research. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
State Council. (2000).
(State council's policies regarding encouraging the development of
software industry and integrated circuit industry). Beijing.
Taylor, F. W. (1911). The Principles of Scientific Management. New York: Harper.
The State Council of China. (2000).
(Policy regarding the encouragement of the
development of software industry and IC industry). Beijing, China.
Thompson, J. D. (1967). Organizations in Action. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Tolbert, P. S. (1985). Resource dependence and institutional environments: Sources of
administrative structure in institutions of higher education. Administrative
Science Quarterly, 20, 229-249.
Townley, B. (2002). Managing with Modernity. Organisation, 9(4), 549-573.
Trowler, P. (2001). Captured by the discourse? The socially constitutive power of new
higher education discourse in the UK. Organization, 8(2), 183-201.
Trowler, P. (2010). UK Higher Education: Captured by New Managerialist Ideology?
In L. Meek, L. Goedegebuure, R. Santiago & T. Carvalho (Eds.), The
Changing Dynamics of Higher Education Middle Management (pp. 197-211).
Dordrecht: Springer.
Tsang, M. C. (1994). Costs of education in China: Issues of resources mobilization:
equality, equity and efficiency. Education Economics, 2(3), 287-312.
Tucker, A. B., Barnes, B. H., Aiken, R. M., Barker, K., Bruce, K. B., Cain, J. T., . . .
Turner, A. J. (1990). Computing Curricula 1991: Report of the ACM/IEEE-CS
Joint Curriculum Task Force. New York, NY; Los Alamitos, CA: ACM Press,
IEEE Computer Society Press.
Tutty, L. M., Rothery, M., & Guinnell Jr., R. M. (1996). Qualitative Research for
Social Workers: Phases, Steps, and Tasks. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
UNDP. (2003). Human development report. Millennium development goals: a
compact among nations to end human poverty. New York: UNDP.
Valimaa, J. (1999). Managing a diverse system of higher education. In M. Henkel & B.
Little (Eds.), Changing relationships between higher education and the state
(pp. 23-41). London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
Van Maanen, J. (1988). Tales of the field: On writing ethnography. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
van Vught, F. (1992). Autonomy and Accountability in Government University
Relationships. Washington, D.C.: World Bank.
Wang, S., & Zhou, W. (1991). (Regular higher
education allocation mechnism in China). (Educational Research),
1991(4).
Weber, M. (1968 trans). Economy and Society: An Interpretive Sociology. New York:
Bedminister Press.
Weick, K. (1969). The Social Psycology of Organizing. Reading, MA:
342

Addison-Wesley.
Weiler, H. N. (1990). Decentralisation in Educational Governance: An Exercise in
Contradiction? In M. Granheim, M. Kogan & U. P. Lundgren (Eds.),
Evaluation as policymaking: Introduction Evaluation into a National
Decentralised Educational System. London: Jessica Kingsley.
Welch, A. (1997). All change? the professorate in uncertain times. Higher Education,
34, 299-303.
Welch, A. (1998). The cult of efficiency in education: comparative reflections on the
reality and the rhetoric. Comparative Education, 34(2), 157-176.
Welsh, T., & McGinn, N. F. (1999). Decentralization of education: why, when, what
and how? Paris: UNESCO: International Institute for Educational Planning.
Whalen, E. (1991). Responsibility center budgeting: An approach to decentralized
management for institutions of higher education. Bloomington: Indiana
University Press.
Whitty, G., & Power, S. (2000). Marketization and privatization in mass education
systems. International Journal of Educational Development, 20(2), 93-108.
Whyte, W. F. (1959). Man and Organization. Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin.
Wiersma, W. (2000). Research methods in education: An introduction (seventh ed.).
Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Williams, G. (1995). The "marketization" of higher education: reforms and potential
reforms higher education finance. In D. D. David & B. Sporn (Eds.),
Emerging patterns of social demand and university reform : through a glass
darkly (pp. 170-193). Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Williams, G. (1997). The market route to mass higher education: British experience
1979-1996. Higher Education Policy, 10(3/4), 372-389.
Williams, G., Liu, S., & Shi, Q. (1997). Marketization of higher education in the
People's Republic of China. Higher Education Policy, 10(2), 151-157.
Williamson, O. E. (1975). Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust
Implications. New York: Free Press.
Williamson, P. (1989). Corporatism in Perspective: An Introductory Guide to
Corporatist Theory. London: Sage.
Wolverton, M., Gmelch, W. H., Montez, J., & Nies, C. T. (2001). The changing nature
of the academic deanship. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass/ASHE-ERIC.
Wong, L., & Mok, K. H. (1995). The reform and the changing social context. In L.
Wong & S. MacPherson (Eds.), Social Change and Social Policy in
Contemporary China (pp. 1-26). Aldershot, England, Hong Kong: Avebury.
Woodhall, M. (1988). Designing a student loan programme for developing country:
the relevance of international experience. Economics of Education Review,
7(1), 153-161.
Woodhall, M. (1992). Economic Development and Higher Education. In B. Clark & G.
Neave (Eds.), The Encyclopedia of Higher Education (Vol. 2, pp. 889- 896).
Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Woodward, J. (1965). Industrial Organization: Theory and Practice. New York:
Oxford University Press.
343

World Bank. (1994). Higher Education: the lessons of experience. Washington D. C.:
World Bank.
World Bank. (2003). 2004 World development report: making service work for poor
people. Washington, D. C.: World Bank.
Yang, D. (2007). How Does Internationalisation Affect Learning and Teaching of
Computer Science: A Study at Tongji University in China. Paper presented at
the The 7th Baltic Sea Conference on Computing Education Research, Koli,
Finland.
Yang, D., El Saddik, A., & Georganas, N. D. (2002). Latecomer Support and Client
Synchronization for Synchronous Multimedia Collaborative Environments.
Paper presented at the The 4th International Workshop on Collaborative
Editing, Adjunct to the ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative
Work, New Orleans, USA.
Yang, R. (2000). Tensions between the global and the local: A comparative illustration
of the reorganisation of China's higher education in the 1950s and 1990s.
Higher Education, 39, 319-337.
Yang, R. (2003). Progress and Paradoxes: New Development in China's Higher
Education. In K. H. Mok (Ed.), Centralization and Decentralization:
Educational Reforms and Changing Governance in Chinese Societies (pp.
173-200). Hong Kong: Comparative Education Research Centre, The
University of Hong Kong.
Yang, R., Vidovich, L., & Currie, J. (2007). Dancing in a cage? Changing autonomy
in Chinese higher education. Higher Education, 54(4), 575-592.
Yin, Q., & Gordon, W. (1994). The 'marketization' of Chinese Higher Education: a
critical assessment. Comparative Education, 30(3), 217-237.
Yin, R. K. (1984/1989). Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Newbury, CA:
Sage.
Yin, R. K. (1994). Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Thousand Oaks,
London, New Delhi: Sage.
Yin, R. K. (2003). Case Study Research: Design and Methods (3rd ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Zajda, J. (2003). Why Education Reform Fail? European Education, 35(1), 58-88.
Zaltman, G., & Duncan, R. (1977). Strategies for planned change. New York: John
Wiley.
Zeng, L. (1997). (Discussion on basic
functions of the implementaion of University-school-department model).
(Higher Education Research), 1997(2).
Zha, Q. (2011). Is there an Emerging Chinese Model of the University? In R. Hayhoe,
J. Li, J. Lin & Q. Zha (Eds.), Portraits of 21st Century Chinese Universities:
In the Move to Mass Higher Education. Hong Kong: Comparative Education
Research Centre, The University of Hong Kong.
Zhang, C., Sun, A., & Tian, H. (2003). (Analysis of the
University Board in Chinese and Foreign Universities). Journal of Nanjing
University of Science and Technology(Social Science), 2003(4), 15-18.
344

Zhao, J. (2005). (Chinese University and Institutional

Research). (Higher Education Research), 2005(8).
Zheng, Y. (2004). (The change of student
management concept in higher education institutions). Jiangsu Higher
Education, 2004(1), 115-117.
Zhong, N. (1997). University Autonomy in China. PhD, University of Toronto,
Toronto.
Zhou, J. (2006). Higher Education in China. Singapore: Thomson Learning.
Zhou, Y. (1998). Brain drain from Chinese Universities in the 1990s. Journal of
Contemporary China, 7(17), 103-123.
Zhou, Y. (2001). Vital reform and innovation of higher education system. China
Higher Education, 2001(1).
Zucker, L. G. (1977). The role of institutionalization in cultural persistence. American
Sociological Review, 42, 726-743.
Zucker, L. G. (1983). Organizations as institutions. In S. B. Bacharach (Ed.), Research
in the sociology of organizations (Vol. 2, pp. 1-47). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Zucker, L. G. (1988). Where do institutional patterns come from? Organizations as
actors in social systems. In L. G. Zucker (Ed.), Institutional patterns and
organizations: Culture and environment (pp. 23-49). Cambridge, MA:
Ballinder.

345