A Changing Tide for US-China Education Exchanges?

People-to-people exchanges have long been a cornerstone of cultural relations between countries, no matter their differences. In the U.S.-China context, some of the most high-profile exchanges date back to the ping-pong diplomacy of the early 1970s, which symbolized a thaw in ties between Beijing and Washington during the Cold War. Another important dimension of people-to-people exchanges is education.

U.S. higher education institutions are the top recipients of international students. China plays a particularly large role, with 37 percent of foreign degree-seeking students coming from China between March 2017 and March 2018, according to a report from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s Student and Exchange Visitor Program. Over the past few decades, China has also emerged as a popular destination for international students, welcoming more than 440,000 students in 2017. China’s entry into the World Trade Organization in 2001 liberalized its education sector, opening the door for it to host more international students. Bilaterally, however, there is a significant asymmetry: China sends far more students to the United States than American students travel to China.

The growing trend of international connectivity, facilitated in part by technological advancements in transportation and increasing economic integration, has been just as present in the educational sector, and not only in terms of people. U.S. higher education institutions have set up campuses in China, including New York University Shanghai, Duke Kunshan University, and Johns Hopkins University-Nanjing University Center. For its part, China’s Ministry of Education, in partnership with international universities, has established hundreds of Confucius Institutes worldwide, providing language, cooking, and calligraphy classes, and hosting celebrations of Chinese holidays. Of the over 500 Confucius Institutes scattered across the globe, more than 20 percent are in the United States. This month, China outlined objectives for its Ministry of Education, highlighting a push to further open its education system and to boost cooperation with foreign partners for schools in China.

While the volume and scope of U.S.-China student exchanges has expanded since the early 2000s, educational ties may be experiencing a chill, ensnared in broader geopolitical tensions simmering between Beijing and Washington. This development is worrisome for a few reasons. First, people-to-people exchanges tend to be a source of more nuanced views of bilateral dynamics, rooted in deeper experience and understanding that can bridge otherwise daunting cultural barriers. Educational exchange, as a long-term investment, informs future generations of leaders and can lead to the promotion of peaceful diplomatic ties and the reduction of tensions during crises. Second, securitizing more dimensions of an international relationship as important as the U.S.-China one risks fanning the flames of already potentially combustible ties.

The View from Beijing

Educational exchanges between the United States and the People’s Republic of China flourished after the normalization of relations in 1979. China’s economic prowess in the 40 years since its initial economic and reform policies has transformed the country’s economy from an agrarian one and lifted millions of people out of poverty, elevating millions of others into an emergent middle class.

Today, most of the Chinese students abroad, particularly in the United States, are self-funded. The number of wealthy Chinese families has grown in tandem with the country’s economic boom. Now with socioeconomic classes endowed with greater means, more and more families opt to send their children to U.S. universities, not only for academic achievement, but also for the prestige that comes with a U.S. degree. Yet, the draw of the United States has not been the only factor pushing Chinese students abroad. In the world’s most populous country, competition for admittance to China’s top educational institutions is fierce, with requisite good performance in an entrance exam (gaokao). The conventional wisdom has been that bachelors and postgraduate degrees acquired abroad, notably from the United States and to a lesser extent the United Kingdom, provide young Chinese entering an equally competitive labor market a leg up when job hunting. Yet there are some signs that the value of elite U.S. education may be dropping for China’s younger generations.

A new working paper reveals that Chinese employers are more likely to call back job applicants with degrees from Chinese universities than graduates of U.S. institutions, offering some evidence on the value of American postgraduate education in the Chinese labor market. The paper finds that higher callback rates for Chinese-educated applicants may be attributable to a hiring managers’ perceptions of a U.S.-educated applicant having better options or being overqualified, or the recruiters’ lack of understanding of the U.S. education system. Despite this new trend, a growing number of Chinese who have studied abroad are returning home. Whether or not this movement is induced by the pull of China’s economic potential, family reunions, or tougher immigration constraints in countries like the United States is difficult to disentangle, for all of these factors, along with others, may be driving the homecoming. Separately, while many returnees to China do successfully find employment, their responsibilities and salaries tend to fall below their expectations. This reality may raise questions about whether the cost of a U.S. education pays the dividends once back home.

The View from Washington

Meanwhile, a political shift appears afoot in Washington. Educational exchanges and partnerships between China and the United States have come under heightened scrutiny from some U.S. universities citing concerns about academic freedoms (especially related to Taiwan, Tibet, and Xinjiang) and the activities of some Chinese student associations on campuses, as well as alarms from the U.S. government and intelligence community about China’s impact on the nation’s educational system and national security. U.S. worries have translated into action with the closure of a smattering of Confucius Institutes in recent years and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s (MIT) decision to sever partnerships with Huawei and ZTE, two Chinese tech giants alleged to have violated U.S. sanctions. Separately, the National Defense Authorization Act passed by Congress in April 2018 prohibits the provision of Department of Defense funding for Chinese language programs at U.S. universities also hosting a Confucius Institute (although institutions can apply for waivers).

Beyond the institutional ramifications, the chill toward bilateral education exchanges also has implications for students and scholars alike. In March 2019, Caixin reported that more than 100 students from China studying in the United States have been stuck back home in limbo awaiting visa approvals. This news comes less than a year after the U.S. State Department issued a new policy shortening visas for Chinese students in the United States from five years to one year while pursuing masters or doctoral degrees in high-tech fields. The visas of a handful of prominent Chinese scholars were also recently canceled by U.S. authorities. While China has been known to limit or deny access to American scholars conducting research on topics sensitive to the regime, the U.S. move is far more uncharacteristic.

The Road Ahead?

In many ways, the state of U.S.-China educational exchanges is emblematic of larger questions in the bilateral relationship amid an ongoing shift in the balance of power between the two countries. The classic story of a dominant power and a rising power is unfolding in an educational context. It will be important for U.S. academic institutions and policymakers to remain clear-eyed about the potential for Chinese influence and interference in the education system. However, it would be far too strong to characterize all facets of bilateral educational exchanges as sites of Chinese malign intent. Moreover, China too has its own concerns about foreign influence and maintains significant wariness vis-a-vis U.S. intentions within its own borders, in the form of education programs or otherwise.

There are inherent benefits to positive educational ties free of politicization or securitization. Giving into the “China threat” narrative in the educational arena by pressuring institutions to end exchanges with China and tightening access to U.S. institutions for both Chinese students and scholars, may generate negative consequences. Not only might such efforts increase the incentives for Chinese initiatives and exchanges to move elsewhere in the world, they may also damage important channels of information and knowledge sharing that helps foster better overall bilateral relations.