Apply now to join The Sociological Review’s annual three-day residential writing retreat for early career scholars, which this year will be held in November at a beautiful rural location in Wales. Fourteen places will be awarded on a competitive basis to PhD students and postdocs, and the retreat is free of charge to attend.
About The Sociological Review’s 2023 ECR Writing Retreat
Since 2016, the Sociological Review Foundation’s annual writing retreat has offered early career scholars the chance to focus on writing a journal article or chapter of a PhD thesis within a supportive and focused environment.
We are delighted to announce that in 2023, our ECR writing retreat will be facilitated by Sociological Review editorial board members Professor Steven Brown and Dr Cath Lambert. The retreat, which will take place at Gladstone’s Library in the village of Hawarden in Wales, will offer participants a wonderful opportunity to spend three days writing in a tranquil environment under the guidance of qualified writing retreat facilitators, as well as the opportunity to rest, socialise and enjoy the beautiful surroundings of Hawarden village.
Strictly Come Writing 2023 will be free to attend for the 14 participants selected in open competition, with all writing sessions, meals and on-site accommodation provided.
Date and location
Strictly Come Writing 2023 will be held at Gladstone’s Library. It will begin at 13.00 on Wednesday 8 November and conclude at 17.00 on Friday 10 November.
Gladstone’s Library is located in Church Lane, Hawarden, Flintshire, CH5 3DF, Wales. The village of Hawarden is 7 miles from Chester and 30 miles from Liverpool Airport.
Founded by William Ewart Gladstone and overseen by a registered charity, this unique institution centres on a residential library that contains over 200,000 volumes of theology and history as well as material on philosophy, classics, art and literature.
Aims and activities
The aim of Strictly Come Writing 2023 is to give participants the opportunity to advance their writing on a journal article or chapter of a PhD thesis within a supportive environment free of surveillance and distractions.
Work during the retreat will be based on the principles developed by Grant & Knowles (2000), McGrail et al. (2006), Murray and Newton (2009) and Murray (2012).
Participants will receive information about the preparation they will be expected to undertake prior to the retreat. Retreat days will comprise timed writing sessions, with all delegates writing in one room at the same time, with facilitators telling participants when to start and when to stop. Facilitators will also provide one-on-one support during breaks, and will moderate peer discussion to review progress during the retreat.
Eligibility criteria
Strictly Come Writing 2023 is a writing retreat for early career scholars: postdocs who are within three years of the award of their doctorate (excluding career breaks for paternity, maternity or health reasons), and postgraduate research students within the final or write-up year of their PhD studies.
There are 14 places available on this year’s retreat, to be awarded on a competitive basis. All applications will be reviewed by members of The Sociological Review editorial board.
Due to the significant cost to the Sociological Review Foundation to run these annual retreats, successful applicants will be required to make a refundable deposit of £50 to secure their place.
Bursaries
Strictly Come Writing 2023 is free of charge to those awarded a place, including all writing sessions, meals, single-occupancy accommodation for the nights of Wednesday 8 and Thursday 9 November 2023, and transportation between Chester train station and Gladstone’s Library.
For early career researchers who meet the relevant criteria, we offer travel bursaries of £100 for UK-based applicants and £200 for non-UK based applicants, and childcare bursaries of £70 per day. Further details about bursaries are provided in the application form for Strictly Come Writing 2023.
Please note that we will consider applications for bursaries only from unfunded students who are not in receipt of scholarships, or funding from research councils or their home institutions to support their studies. Those who are in receipt of a full-time wage are not eligible for the above bursaries, with the exception of ECR teaching fellows who are on a contract of 12 months or less and do not have institutional conference/event attendance funding.
We will seek verification of the employment and funding status of those selected for bursaries.
If you have any questions about this application process, please email events@thesociologicalreview.com
Deadline
The deadline to apply to join Strictly Come Writing 2023, The Sociological Review’s annual ECR writing retreat, is Friday 1 September, 17.00 BST/UTC+1.
Decisions of the selection panel will be communicated to applicants on Monday 18 September 2023.
With pressing need for advanced knowledge and professional skills in the evolving labour market, Chinese government has recognised the importance of extending international education to the postgraduate level and educating high-calibre talents (Mok & Han, 2016). Such realisation and conviction to change the landscape manifest in nation’s educational policy and endeavours of diverse cross-border collaborative partnerships (e.g., Ministry of Education, 2013), among which Sino-foreign cooperation is an important carrier. By 2022, the Ministry of Education has approved over 220 such institutions and programmes at the postgraduate level held by different universities; the new establishment is expected every year (CFCRS, 2022). Observing the Sino-foreign cooperative education can reveal the variability among universities and how far they approach the internationalisation of higher education as claimed. Unlike undergraduate education, largely dominated by national discourses, master’s education has greater flexibility in responding to the internationalisation (Shimauchi & Kim, 2020). In terms of Sino-foreign cooperation at the postgraduate level, most of analysis focused on the overall status quo in this field or different practical models at regular Chinese universities (e.g., Miao & Yang, 2016; Qiu, 2018), rarely capturing master’s education in the specific context of Sino-foreign cooperative universities (SFCUs). It is worth noticing the peculiarities of SFCUs, which are recognised as independent ‘international university in China’ as opposed to fragmented practices of internationalisation (Hu & Willis, 2016). In light of the gap, this study devoted particular attention to master’s education at SFCUs, to explore their operational characteristics as well as universities’ understanding of the concept of internationalisation in the programme implementation. Thus, the following research questions are raised: First, what are the current state and characteristics of implementing master’s programmes at SFCUs? Second, how does transnational partnership negotiate and navigate cross-border contexts in internationalising master’s programmes at SFCUs?
This study adopts a postcolonial perspective on neoliberal approaches to the internationalisation of higher education, particularly drawing on the concepts of mimicry and resistance (Bhabha, 1994). Mimicry, commonly used to describe paradoxical state in the coloniser control and colonised compliance, provides the theoretical lens to interpret transnational partnership as practiced in the internationalisation (Ashcroft et al., 2000). In postcolonial studies, the resistance emerges in multiple forms, but for the purpose of investigating neoliberal higher education, this study draws from the model that Jeffress (2008) calls the ‘resistance as subversion’. Such resistance assumes people simultaneously affirm emulation and reshape the structure and the ways determined by neoliberal logic. The ambivalent nature of mimicry creates a ‘in-between space’ that transcends binary oppositions, where subversive resistance occurs in the meeting of various cultures. SFCUs, featured with providing cross-system and cross-cultural education, are considered as representatives of such unique space (Yu, 2021). These universities mimic their foreign partner’s educational model and offer similar master’s programmes, however, the embedded contexts are ostensibly different across countries. The negotiation with the local context on educational management and operation leads to different practices. On this view, the scrutiny of master’s programmes at SFCUs contributes to examining mimicry and resistance, by extension, applying postcolonial theories into the context of transnational partnerships. We conducted a qualitative analysis of publicly accessible documents produced by 133 master’s programmes at nine SFCUs. The data were primarily collected from the universities’ official websites and media channels, with additional policy-related documents pertaining to master’s programmes collected from government websites. Examining the current status and practices of master’s programmes at nine SFCUs, the findings show the diversified development of disciplines and heterogeneity across nine universities. The analysis of master’s programme coverage also reflects the common issue in the development. There is an uneven distribution of coursework-based (105) and research-oriented (28) programmes. The research type degree, as the initial embodiment of master’ education, are less emphasised at SFCUs.
Further, the findings illustrate how these programmes entangle with neoliberal ideas through transnational partnership. The commercial focus dominates the position in operating master’s education at SFCUs for more successful competition over mutuality (De Wit & Merkx, 2022). We discovered some SFCUs explicitly introduced market logic and advertised corresponding arrangements as the advantages. For example, time efficiency (i.e., short length of schooling) is stressed in the official programme guidelines. The international image of these programmes and the foreign educational resources are often mentioned as a marketing tool to differentiate themselves from local competitors. Master’s programmes have been equated with professional credentials rather than for the academic development. Most curriculums are structured around workforce development, incorporating practical training, technical skills, and occupational certificates into course content to meet students’ needs in terms of career advancement and employability (Afdal, 2017; Gallagher, 2016). In addition, the ambivalent desire between following Western practices and resisting them is evident in internationalising higher education system at SFCUs. On the one hand, the regulations governing the importation of well-developed programmes in transnational partnerships require host institutions to adopt their home universities’ curriculum to ensure adequate subject knowledge and fluent operations, posing a challenge to localising global standards in the educational practices. SFCUs, on the other hand, essentially in the role of integrating educational models of two institutions, exercise their agency to adapt teaching content to the local context to resist the potential neocolonial harms from mimicry. Our findings indicate that some SFCUs resist foreign educational models in terms of programme structure, course design and university administration. They tend to maintain the national discourses while introducing foreign knowledge and perspectives.
This study makes implication for seeking the balance between home and host institutions is necessary for mutuality in the partnership involvement (Mwangi, 2017). In addition to introducing world-leading disciplinary content and expertise, local elements and culture should be embedded into the curriculum and instruction. As Lo (2014) proposed, the slogan ‘think globally and act locally’ must be operationalised if the host institution aims to be truly international. Shifting our understanding of internationalisation from a western paradigm to a real global collaboration becomes a key concern for future development. Though this document analysis introduces the design and pattern of master’s programmes, it is likely that actual practices and contents are slightly different from the elaborations in the documents. Considering the limitation, a follow-up interview and field observation are essential to understand actual programme implementation in the further research.
References: Afdal, H. W. (2017). Research-based and profession-oriented as prominent knowledge discourses in curriculum restructuring of professional programs. Higher Education, 74(3), 401–418. Ashcroft, B., Griffiths, G., & Tiffin, H. (2000). Post-colonial studies: The key concepts. Abingdon: Routledge. Bhabha, H. (1994). The Location of Culture. New York: Routledge. CFCRS. (2022). Shuoshi ji Yishang Zhongwai Hezuo Banxue Iigou yu Xiangmu [List of Master’s Degree or above at Chinese-foreign Cooperative Institutions and Programs]. https://www.crs.jsj.edu.cn/aproval/orglists/1 De Wit, H., & Merkx, G. (2022). The history of the internationalization of higher education. In D. Deardorff, H. de Wit, B. Leask, & H. Charles (Eds.), Handbook on International Higher Education (2nd ed.) (pp. 23-52). Sterling, Virginia: Stylus Publishing, LLC. Gallagher, S. R. (2016). The Future of University Credentials: New Developments at the Intersection of Higher Education and Hiring. Harvard Education Press. Hu, M., & Willis, L. -D. (2016). Towards a common transnational education framework: peculiarities in China matter. Higher Education Policy, 30(2), 245–261. Jeffress, D. (2008). Postcolonial resistance: Culture, liberation and transformation. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Lo, W. Y. W. (2014). Think global, think local: The changing landscape of higher education and the role of quality assurance in Singapore. Policy and Society, 33(3), 263-273. Miao, H., & Yang, Y. (2016). Yanjiusheng jiaoyu zhongwai hezuo banxue de xianzhuang fenxi yu fazhan lujing. Yanjiusheng jiaoyu yanjiu [Journal of Graduate Education], 3, 7-11+35. Ministry of Education (2013). Shenhua yanjiusheng jiaoyu gaige de yijian [Opinions on deepening the reform of postgraduate education] http://www.moe.gov.cn/srcsite/A22/s7065/201304/t20130419_154118.html?from=groupmessage&isappinstalled=0 Mok, K. H., & Han, X. (2016). The rise of transnational higher education and changing educational governance in China. International Journal of Comparative Education and Development, 18(1), 19–39. Mwangi, C. A. G. (2017). Partner positioning: Examining international higher education partnerships through a mutuality lens. The Review of Higher Education, 41(1), 33-60. Qiu, P. F. (2018). Kuaguo shuoshi shuangxuewei xiangmu yu lianhe xuewei xiangmu de moshi tezheng ji shishi jianyi [Patterns, features of and implementation proposals for transnational postgraduate double degree and joint degree programs]. Yanjiusheng jiaoyu yanjiu [Journal of Graduate Education], 1, 49-54. Shimauchi, S., & Kim, Y. (2020). The influence of internationalization policy on master’s education in Japan: A comparison of “super global” and mass-market universities. Higher Education Policy, 33, 689-709. Yu, J. (2021). Consuming UK Transnational Higher Education in China: A Bourdieusian Approach to Chinese Students’ Perceptions and Experiences. Sociological Research Online, 26(1), 222–239. https://doi.org/10.1177/1360780420957040
Mei Laiis a PhD candidate in the Faculty of Education, the University of Hong Kong. She received M.A. in International Educational development from Teachers College, Columbia University in 2018. Her research interests are internationalization of higher education, transnational higher education, identity development and career orientation of students at Sino-foreign cooperative universities. Her recent publications appear in journals such as Higher Education and Higher Education Quarterly. She can be reached at email: laim@connect.hku.hk
Jisun Jung is an Assistant Professor in the Faculty of Education at the University of Hong Kong since September, 2015. She received a Ph.D. from Seoul National University, Korea, in 2011, and she was a postdoctoral fellow at the University of Hong Kong. She has been involved in the international comparative project ‘The Changing Academic Profession’ since 2009. Her current research focuses on academic profession, doctoral education, employment and postgraduate studies and higher education research in Asia. She is the co-editor of two journal special issues, ‘Higher Education Research in East Asia: Regional and National Evolution and Path-Dependencies’ in Higher Education Policy and ‘Graduate Employment and Higher Education in East Asia’ in International Journal of Chinese Education, and also a co-editor of the two books ‘The Changing Academic Profession in Hong Kong’ published by Springer in 2018 and ‘Researching in Higher Education in Asia’ by Springer in 2019. She is currently co-editor of Higher Education Research & Development.
The expansion of higher education on a global scale has led to the development of High Participation Systems, prompting researchers to examine the equity implications of increased opportunities for higher education (Breen et al. 2009; Wu et al., 2020). Their primary query is whether educational expansion has decreased the inequality in educational opportunities. This paper seeks to investigate this question in the context of Chinese higher education.
China has undergone a rapid expansion of higher education, a trend that is consistent with global patterns. However, the country’s higher education expansion has unique characteristics that may cause variations in the impacts on access to higher education. Firstly, unlike many other countries, the expansion of college enrolment in China is more driven by the supply side than the demand side, with state policies playing a central role in the expansion (Marginson 2016; Wu et al., 2020). Secondly, China’s higher education enrolment has increased rapidly within a short period, and its scale and speed are unprecedented (Wu et al., 2020). Thirdly, the supply of higher education varies greatly across provinces due to the decentralisation reform in educational administration and finance since the 1980s, coupled with rising inter-provincial economic disparities (Hannum & Wang 2006; Zhang & Kanbur 2005).
Furthermore, compared to western countries, structural factors, such as hukou status and province of residence, play a more significant role in educational stratification in China than family background (Lyu et al., 2019). Against this backdrop, this study adopts a cross-provincial assessment approach and uses representative data from five provinces of China Family Panel Studies (CFPS) to explore the relationship between higher education expansion and rural-urban inequality in college enrolment.
The findings of this study reveal that despite the expansion policy, the rural-urban gap in college enrolment remained in all five provinces (Liaoning, Shanghai, Henan, Guangdong, and Gansu). The size of this gap varied significantly across the provinces, with Shanghai having the smallest gap, while Gansu had the largest. These results underscore the importance of including provinces in research on educational inequalities in Chinese higher education. For instance, in the post-expansion cohort (1981–1986), rural hukou holders in Shanghai had higher predicted probabilities than urban hukou holders in many other provinces.
Furthermore, this study highlights the increasing disparities in college enrolment among students from different provinces. The decentralisation reforms since the 1980s have led to the provincial government playing a more significant role in higher education administration and finance (Li, 2017). Consequently, economically developed provinces, such as Guangdong and Shanghai, are better equipped to build new institutions and increase enrolment, leading to growing differences in the supply of higher education across provinces. Given the provincial quota system that largely favours local students, this study finds that residents in Shanghai and Guangdong benefit more from the expansion than those in Liaoning and Henan, contributing to the increasing inter-provincial disparities in college enrolment.
The results of this study confirm the relevance of the Maximally Maintained Inequality (MMI) approach in the Chinese context to some extent. Before the expansion policy, the participation rate of higher education in China was very low (Yeung, 2013), which was far from the saturation point predicted by MMI. Therefore, it was not expected that there would be a decrease in inequality along with the expansion. However, it is worth noting that the past two decades have witnessed a continuing expansion in higher education enrolment, and the gross tertiary education rate in China reached about 54.4% in 2020, a point that might be close to or even surpass the saturation point. Moreover, in response to the growing rural-urban inequality in access to college, the central government has launched admission programs specifically targeting high-achieving students in poor rural areas (Niu, 2017). Given all these changes that have occurred after 2003, future research can use more recent data to capture the latest status of inequality of opportunity in higher education.
References:
Breen, R., R. Luijkx, W. Müller, and R. Pollak. 2009. “Nonpersistent Inequality in Educational Attainment: Evidence from Eight European Countries.” American Journal of Sociology 114 (5): 1475–1521. doi:10.1086/595951.
Hannum, E., and M. Wang. 2006. “Geography and Educational Inequality in China.” China Economic Review 17 (3): 253–265. doi:10.1016/j.chieco.2006.04.003.
Li, T. 2017. “Financial Decentralization and Geographical Stratification of Access to Higher Education in China: The Case of Shanghai.” Chinese Sociological Review 49 (3): 212–238. doi:10.1080/21620555.2016.1271701.
Lyu, M., W. Li, and Y. Xie. 2019. “The Influences of Family Background and Structural Factors on Children’s Academic Performances: A Cross-country Comparative Study.” Chinese Journal of Sociology 5 (2): 173–192. doi:10.1177/2057150X19837908.
Marginson, S. 2016. “High Participation Systems of Higher Education.” The Journal of Higher Education 87 (2): 243–271. doi:10.1353/jhe.2016.0007.
Niu, X. 2017. “Early Academic Performance of Rural Students under Special Admission Policies: Evidence from an Elite University.” Fudan Education Forum 15(4): 52–61. [In Chinese.]
Wu, L., K. Yan, and Y. Zhang. 2020. “Higher Education Expansion and Inequality in Educational Opportunities in China.” Higher Education 80 (3): 549–570. doi:10.1007/s10734-020-00498-2.
Yeung, W.-J. J. 2013. “Higher Education Expansion and Social Stratification in China.” Chinese Sociological Review 45 (4): 54–80. doi:10.2753/CSA2162-0555450403.
Zhang, X., and R. Kanbur. 2005. “Spatial Inequality in Education and Health Care in China.” China Economic Review 16 (2): 189–204. doi:10.1016/j.chieco.2005.02.002.
Dr. Kai Zhao is a research assistant professor at the School of Graduate Studies of Lingnan University, Hong Kong. He earned his Ph.D. in Higher Education and Student Affairs from the Ohio State University. Before joining Lingnan, he worked as research faculty at Centre for Postsecondary Success within Florida State University. Dr. Zhao’s research interests broadly focus higher education policy and internationalisation of higher education.
This symposium aims to examine international student mobility in the contemporary era with a specific focus on the issue of inequality and the practices and experiences related to the possibility of democratization of international education.
Since the late 20th century, international student mobility has been expanding rapidly. National governments see international student mobility as a means to cultivate global talent, provide international aid, and promote soft power. Educational institutions promote student mobility to increase the quality of education, revenues, as well as prestige. Individual students participate in cross-border mobility for skills, knowledge, credentials, as well as the opportunity for labor migration and cultural adventures. Currently, the volume of international student mobility is unprecedented and has become a major industry, involving different levels of actors from the state to individuals. However, despite its rapid expansion and commodification, international student mobility remains largely an elite educational practice.
First, the academic and policy discourse about international education and international student mobility focuses primarily on phenomena and practices at the higher education level. Second, government policy toward international student mobility often ties international students to talent programs. Third, cross-border mobility itself is largely a practice among the elites. Most of those who have access to international student mobility at the higher education level are among the economically better-off in society or those from the global north. Even though a minority of international students might come from less socioeconomically endowed backgrounds or countries, they are often academic elites chosen for the opportunity to pursue higher education across borders.
This elitist tendency seems to be at odds with the philosophy of modern education itself. John Dewey in the early 20th century pointed out that education as an important institution in modern society should be grounded in the principles of democracy and aim to cultivate active and informed citizens who can contribute to the betterment of society. Moreover, the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals 4 (SDG4) aim to ensure inclusive and equitable quality education for all. Granted, international student mobility entails crossing national and cultural borders and can be costly. Are there possibilities for international education to be inclusive, equitable, and rooted in democratic principles?
In this symposium, we ask how students from a wide range of social backgrounds, not just the socioeconomically affluent and academic elites, can be included in cross-border educational mobility. We pay attention to the plurality of international educational practices, including those in and beyond higher education, and those following unconventional trajectories. We invite submissions from researchers in different disciplines, including but not limited to sociology, geography, anthropology, education, and political science. We welcome original empirical studies that engage the following discussions:
The question of social (in)equality and sustainability in international student mobility
International student mobility into diverse educational institutions, including language academies, vocational schools, and other education and training programs
International student mobility into non-English speaking zones and non-conventional destinations
The emergent actors and stakeholders of international student mobility
International student mobility and individual capability building
ICT and the democratization of international education
SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS
Paper proposals should include a title, an abstract (300 words maximum), and a brief personal biography of 150 words for submission by 15 September 2023. Please also include a statement confirming that your paper has not been published or committed elsewhere, and that you are willing to revise your paper for potential inclusion in an edited journal publication (in collaboration with the workshop organizers and other participants) if we proceed with such a project.
Please submit your proposal to glfarrer@waseda.jp. Successful applicants will be notified by mid-October. Panel presenters will be required to submit drafts of papers (4,000-6,000 words) by 15 January, 2024. These drafts will be circulated to fellow panelists and discussants in advance. Drafts need not be fully polished. Indeed, we expect that presenters will be open to feedback from fellow participants.
This symposium is funded by Waseda University Top Global University Program and will be held in person on Waseda University campus. Depending on availability, we would be able to cover full or partial travel costs for selected participants. Please indicate in the proposal form if you require funding support.
The British Journal of Sociology of Education is delighted to invite calls for proposals from individuals or teams to edit a special issue. We are particularly keen to receive proposals that focus on topics that are at the leading edge of current debates and are clearly relevant to the journal’s international leadership.
Proposals should be clearly sociological in nature and address any area of education (including formal and informal sectors). Submissions can adopt theoretical, methodological, review-based and/or empirical angles and must clearly articulate how the overarching theme proposed will make a significant and lasting contribution to the field.
We particularly welcome submissions from editors/editorial teams who identify as from minoritised/ marginalised communities.
Proposals should outline: the topic of the proposed special issue; the research expertise and any previous editorial experience of the proposed editor/editorial team; and a provisional timetable for putting the special issue together.
Please note that all British Journal of Sociology of Education special issues are advertised through an open call for papers.
Proposals (no more than 1500 words) should be emailed to Rachel Brooks (r.brooks@surrey.ac.uk) by 16th October 2023.
Network for Research into Chinese Education Mobilities (NRCEM) 