From Catwalk to Sidewalk : can China role model education development for the South ?
Last year I was part of a team who visited rural China to review the DFID funded Gansu Basic Education Project (GBEP), more than 10 years after it finished (see report here and films here). We wanted to see what remained of the education initiatives GBEP had piloted and whether teachers and officials had continued to reform the system.
Our review was overwhelmingly, but not exclusively, positive. Even ten years after project completion we found enthusiastic educators and officials who felt completely changed by their experience.
But, in sharing our review we have also been asked – and asked ourselves - were the successes we found only applicable to China, and were the failures too ? China has developed so fast that many dismiss it – seeing in it an exceptionalism none can learn from. They see China as the model on the catwalk whose clothes you could never wear on the sidewalk. So, is there anything developing countries can learn from China’s experience ?
If you’re prepared to look, of course there is. I’d single out three observations :
- Back champions. Where initiatives had been successful and become part of the education fabric it was because there had been enough time to experiment, adapt and localise the change. Crucially, key individuals staying in post provided continuity from project initiative to sustainability. Inspection and teacher training were two such examples.
- Experiment boldly. Local leadership allowed experimentation in the early days (“directed improvisation” see Yuen Yuen Ang on this) and added weight to initiatives that were “working” (like school development planning) and withdrew support from those that weren’t. Sometimes, this was about timing : the project piloted a school feeding scheme which was abandoned through lack of support, but 10 years later is universal across western provinces.
- Get lucky. Initiatives that fitted well with national and local policy aims thrived – for example, a more inclusive approach to student participation. Other initiatives, though popular locally – such as a series of supplementary readers and Big Books - declined without administrative champions or were crowded out by increased choice of materials. Picking winners is part science, part art, part timing.
Of course, at this level of analysis how could there not be lessons to learn ? But, the real lessons are to be found with the devil in the detail. But, finding those lessons requires engagement, curiosity, analysis, understanding and the skill to try to work out what might be adaptable in a different context and what not.
What surprises me is the low level of interest shown in studying the lessons of Chinese education development by those donor agencies and countries who support the development of education systems in developing countries. Here’s a country which has astonished everyone by the breath-taking speed of its change, but instead of saying “can we bottle that ?” the standard response is to dismiss it as “that’s China”.
Interestingly, the best-known part of China’s rapid growth was its ability to copy. But, it wasn’t just consumer electronics and white goods where this happened – it happened in education too through multiple study visits to OECD countries, conferences, reading, analysis and experimentation. Above all a desire among Chinese educators and officials to take the best of what they could and adapt it for China.
There’s a real lesson.