Colleges between Public and Private: An Ethnographic Case Study of Independent Colleges in China

Independent colleges in China are a group of peculiar higher education institutions emerging in the late 1990s and expanding at a speed, hardly seen in any other higher education systems but maybe conceivable in the context of China’s large college-aspiring population and miraculous economic development. One of the most peculiar things about independent colleges is their institutional nature – whether they are public or private. Building upon the literature context of privatization in education and China’s higher education experience, this study investigates this young group of higher education institutions growing up in China’s market reform era. The central research question focuses on the nature of these independent colleges from an insiders’ perspective. Are they truly private higher education institutions born out of China’s market reform efforts in the higher education sector? Or are they rather some market adapted extension of some public higher education institutions? To answer these questions, a macro-perspective analysis is given to both present the important social policy context for China’s privatization experience and describe the Chinese characteristics in the higher education privatization process. More importantly, a micro-perspective is further provided in the form of an ethnographical case study to reveal the nature of independent colleges from an insiders’ point of view. The ethnographical case study is based upon Schein’s theoretical framework for studying organizational/institutional culture. Physical “artifacts”, espoused official value and differentiated assumptions are investigated to provide a wholesome picture of the institution. Zhejiang University City College, the first independent college in Zhejiang, is selected as the site for this ethnographical case study. Through this micro and macro-perspective study, it is found that 1) founding public higher education institutions exert great influence over the operation of independent colleges. Their crucial role in the emergence and development of independent colleges is a pragmatic policy decision to quickly expand and diversify the higher education provision. Therefore, the influence of the public force shall not be overlooked in China’s higher education privatization experience. 2) Students in independent colleges hold an ambiguous view on the nature of independent colleges. On the one hand, because of the participation of public higher education institutions they see independent colleges as more trust-worthy and quality-ensured. On the other hand, they are troubled by the marginalized/stigmatized status of independent colleges as minban (private or people run in literal meaning) higher education institutions in China’s public dominant higher education system. 3) Faculty and staff in independent colleges are able to see both the advantages and disadvantages of this hybrid model of higher education. Academic resources and social recognition are important advantages. Lack of character and autonomy are mentioned as disadvantages. However, many argue independent colleges shall not go on a path with more independence. More support from the public higher education institution and the local government is essential to its future survival and success in China’s public dominated higher educationsystem