{"title":"提升员工技能?中国改革时期国家技能政策的批判性分析","authors":"Geng Wang","doi":"10.1080/01425692.2023.2219405","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Government reports and documents claim that building a high skill society is critical for national success in China. In this paper, eight policies in relation to the government’s espoused priorities of upskilling are examined. Applying the principles of critical policy analysis, the paper aims to expose the ideological presuppositions made in these policies. The findings in this paper reveal that the Chinese government may have focused on upgrading the credentials, rather than the actual skills that these credentials signal, thus reinforced forms of consciousness that maintain the academic-focus, credential-driven hegemony. The new policies have vigorously invested in the ‘model schools’, yet further excluding non-model schools and the marginalised learners. This investment, emphasising the ‘supply-side’ of skills provision, has also led to a more fragmented connection between the training system and industry. The promotion of ‘entrepreneurial talent training’, with an intention of enhancing young people’s employability and building a knowledge-based economy, may act as a technique for ‘self-government’ under the influence of a neoliberal ideology. The responsibility of skill acquisition may have shifted to individual students, who will encounter increased precarity on their routes into work. Drawing on Gramsci’s concept of hegemonic power, the paper highlights China’s national skills policies may further facilitate the reproduction of current forms of inequality in training as well as contribute to construct and manage the neoliberal subjects required by the Reform Era.","PeriodicalId":48085,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Sociology of Education","volume":"44 1","pages":"978 - 995"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Upskilling the workforce? A critical analysis of national skills policies in China’s Reform Era\",\"authors\":\"Geng Wang\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/01425692.2023.2219405\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Government reports and documents claim that building a high skill society is critical for national success in China. In this paper, eight policies in relation to the government’s espoused priorities of upskilling are examined. Applying the principles of critical policy analysis, the paper aims to expose the ideological presuppositions made in these policies. The findings in this paper reveal that the Chinese government may have focused on upgrading the credentials, rather than the actual skills that these credentials signal, thus reinforced forms of consciousness that maintain the academic-focus, credential-driven hegemony. The new policies have vigorously invested in the ‘model schools’, yet further excluding non-model schools and the marginalised learners. This investment, emphasising the ‘supply-side’ of skills provision, has also led to a more fragmented connection between the training system and industry. The promotion of ‘entrepreneurial talent training’, with an intention of enhancing young people’s employability and building a knowledge-based economy, may act as a technique for ‘self-government’ under the influence of a neoliberal ideology. The responsibility of skill acquisition may have shifted to individual students, who will encounter increased precarity on their routes into work. Drawing on Gramsci’s concept of hegemonic power, the paper highlights China’s national skills policies may further facilitate the reproduction of current forms of inequality in training as well as contribute to construct and manage the neoliberal subjects required by the Reform Era.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48085,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"British Journal of Sociology of Education\",\"volume\":\"44 1\",\"pages\":\"978 - 995\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"British Journal of Sociology of Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/01425692.2023.2219405\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Sociology of Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01425692.2023.2219405","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
Upskilling the workforce? A critical analysis of national skills policies in China’s Reform Era
Abstract Government reports and documents claim that building a high skill society is critical for national success in China. In this paper, eight policies in relation to the government’s espoused priorities of upskilling are examined. Applying the principles of critical policy analysis, the paper aims to expose the ideological presuppositions made in these policies. The findings in this paper reveal that the Chinese government may have focused on upgrading the credentials, rather than the actual skills that these credentials signal, thus reinforced forms of consciousness that maintain the academic-focus, credential-driven hegemony. The new policies have vigorously invested in the ‘model schools’, yet further excluding non-model schools and the marginalised learners. This investment, emphasising the ‘supply-side’ of skills provision, has also led to a more fragmented connection between the training system and industry. The promotion of ‘entrepreneurial talent training’, with an intention of enhancing young people’s employability and building a knowledge-based economy, may act as a technique for ‘self-government’ under the influence of a neoliberal ideology. The responsibility of skill acquisition may have shifted to individual students, who will encounter increased precarity on their routes into work. Drawing on Gramsci’s concept of hegemonic power, the paper highlights China’s national skills policies may further facilitate the reproduction of current forms of inequality in training as well as contribute to construct and manage the neoliberal subjects required by the Reform Era.
期刊介绍:
British Journal of Sociology of Education is one of the most renowned international scholarly journals in the field. The journal publishes high quality original, theoretically informed analyses of the relationship between education and society, and has an outstanding record of addressing major global debates about the social significance and impact of educational policy, provision, processes and practice in many countries around the world. The journal engages with a diverse range of contemporary and emergent social theories along with a wide range of methodological approaches. Articles investigate the discursive politics of education, social stratification and mobility, the social dimensions of all aspects of pedagogy and the curriculum, and the experiences of all those involved, from the most privileged to the most disadvantaged. The vitality of the journal is sustained by its commitment to offer independent, critical evaluations of the ways in which education interfaces with local, national, regional and global developments, contexts and agendas in all phases of formal and informal education. Contributions are expected to take into account the wide international readership of British Journal of Sociology of Education, and exhibit knowledge of previously published articles in the field. Submissions should be well located within sociological theory, and should not only be rigorous and reflexive methodologically, but also offer original insights to educational problems and or perspectives.