U.S. students losing interest in China as dream jobs prove elusive

[Simon_CH]

Some of you may have already read it, but Reuters published an article on how (US) students are losing interest in studying Chinese (and going to China). 

 

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/12/us-china-usa-students-idUSKBN0M82MU20150312

 

It's an interesting topic, and something I have said for years. A language alone isn't enough to land a job nor is familiarity with its (traditional) culture. 

I know plenty of students who have studied something with China or dedicated lots of time to learning Chinese, but nobody seems to have scored a job that really rewards that. 

 

But where does that lead? China trying to clamp down on "Western ideas" and blocking more and more media and entertainment from the West, and the West increasingly disinterested in China, both economically and culturally. I'm not sure this bodes well for future relations. 

 

I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on this. 

[jbradfor]

I wonder if all the negative news about the Chinese government plays into this as well.  Not just the pollution, but the cyber attacks / espionage, protests in HK [1], Chinese military aggression in the area, talk of housing / financial bubbles, aiding "questionable" regimes [2] in Africa, etc.  If you read the news in the USA about China, it doesn't exactly encourage one to go.

 

Personally, even for my first time into China (in 1989), I've been a bit uncomfortable when in China.  Not due to the people, or the food, or the traffic, or the scams, or even the pollution, but just due to the feeling that I'm among an "enemy" government (or at least one I have serious disagreements with).

 

[1] I realize that HK is not the same as mainland government, as I'm sure most everyone here understands that as well.  But I would hazard a guess that the typical non-Sinophile doesn't really distinguish the two.

[2] Yes, I realize as well that "questionable" is a value judgement as well, but again I'm using a typical young USA student POV as the basis.

[MarsBlackman]

As much of it has to do about China, I think much of that trend has to do with the US job market and how employers evaluate potential job candidates.

The Chinese side is talked about often. Why hire a foreigner when a local hire with good english is willing to be paid less? This makes economic sense for most entry to mid-level jobs. Most foreigners I see in China are either highly technical or upper level management responsible for strategy and operations. I think China has lost some it's luster because it's not the shiny new toy anymore. The pollution and government certainly come into play too.

On the U.S. Side, return on investment is often said to be the culprit of students choosing to study other subjects instead of foreign languages. I agree studying a foreign language often isn't enough. However, I always ask myself, then why isn't it worth the ROI? Most people don't use their college degree directly in their career but instead indirectly (problem solving and critical thinking, how to formulate an argument, etc). I fear that the American university system is becoming more and more of a trade school model. Employers want students educated to do a specific job. In a country where most people only speak one language, it's diffiicult to quantify and evaluate the personal qualities of attention to detail, perseverance, dedication, among many others when studying a language (not to mention so many lessons of humility and recovering from failure when first speaking with native speakers). It's simply too much of a risk for most hiring managers to hire somebody who is not entering the company on some obvious or linear track. It's very expensive to hire and train someone, only to realize a year later they're not right for the job.

Students are simply responding to market pressures.

[studychinese]

You have to bring something more to the table than speaking Chinese.

Speaking Chinese might be enough in the context of no Chinese immigration to the west, but that isn't the case.

[Flickserve]

Agree, a US student could have chinese skills but perhaps have other aspects that make a person 'less competitive' e.g. poor interpersonal skills, poor CV writing, lack of leadership skills, too high expectations for early career progress...

[Angelina]

Meanwhile in Russia (someone mentioned regimes)

http://e.huawei.com/en/news/global/2015/201502131126

 

 

 “Together with our partners, Huawei is dedicated to providing reliable, integrated solutions to address the current and future needs of stadiums and sports arenas in Russia as well as worldwide.”

 

 

Personally, even for my first time into China (in 1989), I've been a bit uncomfortable when in China.  Not due to the people, or the food, or the traffic, or the scams, or even the pollution, but just due to the feeling that I'm among an "enemy" government (or at least one I have serious disagreements with).

 

There are no enemies Jbradfor, there is no East/West, no democracy/communism. 

 

 

One reason why less and less US students are coming to China is because they consider American education superior to Chinese education. I do agree that Chinese education does not encourage creativity, but there is no such thing as absolute superiority. Anyway, I haven't seen many American people getting their degrees in China. Many were coming to learn Chinese, or for those special programs for foreign students, mostly of dubious quality. Maybe they have realized that you can't learn Chinese in one year (not enough Chinese to significantly improve your existing skill set) and are giving up. 

 

Another reason is work. The job market in China is extremely competitive. Teaching English (for people who are not particularly interested in it), and being a model (excluding professional models of course) or an extra in a Chinese movie, is not the job many Americans want. It's difficult to get a good job in China. Speaking a little bit of Mandarin does not help, your competitors will be people who speak fluent Mandarin and fluent English, and have plenty of experience, skills, 等等. One year of learning Chinese won't considerably improve your employability. It can help definitely, but it's not like you will go from zero to hero. 

 

Hm, in this article they mentioned how our 'enemies' know a lot about us and we don't know much about them, therefore we should be worried about the fact that Americans are not that interested in Chinese anymore. Sad. 

 

I agree with the conclusion though. It's not smart to give up work in order to learn a language that would take a lot of time to learn if your goal is to make more money or to get a better job. Learn it for the sake of learning it and then see what happens! 

 

Also, schools like Xi'an Jiaotong-Liverpool University, NYU Shanghai, University of Nottingham Ningbo, Duke Kunshan are a breath of fresh air. Maybe US students should try studying there. They are obviously working together with China, but this does not seem to have affected academic freedom much. It will be easier to get funding for your research there. 

[Guest realmayo]

Rather scarey passage from the article:

 

Wang Huiyao, president of the Center for China and Globalization and the author of a report on foreign students in China, says there are too few agents in the United States bringing students to China to study, and bemoans the U.S. government's inability to force universities to send more American students there.

 

[anonymoose]

Another factor I suspect is that very few foreigners (Westerners at least) get to a sufficiently high level in Chinese for it to be of value in the workplace.

 

I feel the academic bar for foreigners learning Chinese is set so low as to be at odds with real-life demands. HSK6 is often considered to be advanced Chinese (which I guess only a small proportion of learners ever reach), but when faced with real-life demands, one realises that even with an HSK6, how inadequate one's Chinese is to proficiently handle the situation.

 

I mean, I guess most of us could only dream of having Chinese as proficient as Julien Gaudfroy or Dashan, but if you were looking for a job solely on the basis of being able to speak French, Spanish or German, I think having that level of proficiency would be seen as par for the course.

[Angelina]

The fact that the academic bar has been set so low does not prevent foreigners from learning fluent Chinese.

 

What prevents foreigners from learning fluent Chinese is:

 

1. They don't want to learn Chinese (not the people reading this, more about the rest of the population);

2. They are not trying hard enough;

3. Many Chinese people already speak English, so it feels more natural to communicate in English. When two people meet, they tend to use the language both of them feel more comfortable using. 

 

It takes a lot of hard work to learn Chinese. You have to spend a lot of time memorizing characters, reading books. Chinese has a very long literary history, there is no shortcut to achieving perfect mastery of it. Even 'native' speakers of Chinese, it took them many years (a lot of hard work) until they became fully literate. 

 

 

I suspect is that very few foreigners (Westerners at least) get to a sufficiently high level in Chinese

 

I don't know if I am a Westerner and I don't think I can ever know. What I do know is that my Chinese will get as good as I want. It has less to do with the fact that not that many foreigners have managed to learn fluent, near native Chinese, and more to do with the fact that I need to put a lot of effort into learning Chinese.

 

It's probably easier for Chinese people to learn fluent English than for English-speaking people to learn fluent Chinese because learning Chinese requires a lot of work, even for 'native' speakers. 

[Shelley]

It reminds me of intrepid travelers that made it out to the "frontier" and found it was rich in opportunities and experiences, who then wrote home with tales of how great this place is and why don't you come and join us.

 

While you are one of few fish in a pond the are plenty of jobs and being a foreigner is an advantage, once the pond is full of fish, there are less opportunities to go round and being a foreigner is not a novelty anymore.

 

I guess you could say the china bubble has burst.

 

I think there will always be opportunities for anyone who really wants to make it in China, but its not going to be as easy as it was. You will need to have that something extra to make you stand out from the rest of the fish in the pond.

[Meng Lelan]

The frontier, that's about right, how things were there back in the 1970s and 1980s when I was there, almost like the Wild West. Then in the 1990s the Westerners all started coming and joining in. So has the China Bubble finally burst?

[gato]

Some study abroad executives say a move toward more direct enrolment in Chinese universities could also, in part, account for fewer students taking traditional programs that typically offer a summer or semester overseas.

This part from the article might be the key.

The study abroad programs surveyed by the article are sponsored by US universities and incredibly expensive. When the Chinese government is offering scholarships to those who enroll directly in Chinese universities, why pay tens of thousands of dollars to a U.S. middleman?

[Angelina]

Good point Gato.

 

So American students are not losing interest in learning Chinese in China, they are only losing interest in attending study abroad programs in China offered by US universities? 

[Simon_CH]

 

 

This part from the article might be the key. 

The study abroad programs surveyed by the article are sponsored by US universities and incredibly expensive. When the Chinese government is offering scholarships to those who enroll directly in Chinese universities, why pay tens of thousands of dollars to a U.S. middleman? 

 

I honestly don't think so. Even though the article only mentions American students the same can be said about 3-4 European Universities I'm familiar with (and that a lot of friends studying Chinese or something with China have graduated from) Many people have studied Chinese because they were told it's the future, employers will really value their skills, they can work as agents between the cultures and and and.. but this has never materialized for many of them. 

 

But lacking job prospects alone may not be the reason, as mentioned by others it's just the general sense that things in China don't progress anymore (socially, culturally, politically) and that increasingly even Westerners with a positive attitude towards China struggle to defend its course of action. Just 5-6 years ago lots of people in my country had a very positive, optimistic opinion of China, "sure it has problems, but things are changing for the better, it is lifting people out of poverty..." but that has changed dramatically in the last few years. 

 

According to Wikipedia only 400 people enroll into Chinese studies in Germany each year, compared to over 10'000 English studies enrollments, and also far less than Japanese studies, which still seems to have more appeal. All in all it does seem like the Chinese bubble has already burst, at least in terms of studies. 

[金妙漪]

This article is like the description of my life right now.

[jbradfor]

 

There are no enemies Jbradfor, there is no East/West, no democracy/communism.

I have no idea what you mean by this comment.

 

I was careful to say "enemy governments"; governments very most certainly can be enemies with other governments; they have been in the past, they are now, I expect they will be in the future.

 

People can be enemies with each other.  I do distinguish enemy governments and enemy people, but there most certainly are enemy people.  You think if I, as an otherwise nameless American, walking into an ISIS camp they would calmly serve me dinner and then escort me home?

 

"There is no East/West"  WTF?  Ignoring the obvious that a simple glace at a map proves how meaningless that is, what I assume you mean is that "we are all people".  Duh.  But there are still significant cultural differences between groups.

 

"no democracy/communism"  If you go by a very strict reading of these terms using their original meaning, then yes.  But that's meaningless.  If you mean that all governments are the same or equally good, then that's absurd.

[Angelina]

You think if I, as an otherwise nameless American, walking into an ISIS camp they would calmly serve me dinner and then escort me home?

 

I clearly remember 2013. If you went there back in 2013, they would have calmly served you dinner.

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/cia-begins-weapons-delivery-to-syrian-rebels/2013/09/11/9fcf2ed8-1b0c-11e3-a628-7e6dde8f889d_story.html

 

 

“We feel we’re able to get these local councils off to a good start,” said Ward, a veteran U.S. Agency for International Development official who has worked in Libya, Afghanistan and Pakistan. “We vet individuals who are getting our assistance to make sure they are not affiliated with terror organizations.”

“When you finally have a free Syrian government, you will know them and they will know us,” Ward said. “We will have been working with them week after week, month after month. These won’t be strangers.”

 

Just like Afghanistan

 

http://www.siliconafrica.com/wars-in-africa-explained-to-a-beautiful-french-girl-in-paris/

 

"There is no East/West"  WTF?  Ignoring the obvious that a simple glace at a map proves how meaningless that is, what I assume you mean is that "we are all people".  Duh.  But there are still significant cultural differences between groups.

 

What are the groups? I don't want to put people into groups and I refuse to put myself into groups. I am probably culturally closer to you than I am to people born and raised in Beijing. Yet, I don't know if I am a Westerner. I was raised Orthodox Christian, does it mean I am not a Westerner? Growing up I saw 'Western' armies (NATO) killing innocent people justifying it by saying how they are saving other innocent people. I was culturally closer to the people being killed by NATO, so I am not a Westerner? I refused to worship NATO's nemesis and their propaganda, maybe I am a Westerner? 

 

 

If you mean that all governments are the same or equally good, then that's absurd.

 

There you go. Don't forget the anti-communist part. 

 

http://www.kuwo.cn/yinyue/3670642/

 

 

 

Simon, how did things change in China? I don't see much difference between China now and China a few years ago, except maybe that they are more powerful. It's not a good idea to follow popular opinion when deciding what to do with your life anyway. 

[gato]

Since the 2011 Arab Spring, the Chinese government has tightened control of the media and internet and cracked down hard on dissent (arresting many activists). After Xi came into power two years ago, this trend has only accelerated.

[Kenny同志]

焦点对话: 两会风声鹤唳，中共“进入残局”？

 

http://www.voachinese.com/content/voaweishi-20150313-pro-and-con-1/2678786.html

[gato]

http://sinosphere.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/03/15/q-and-a-david-shambaugh-on-the-risks-to-chinese-communist-rule/?module=WatchingPortal&region=c-column-middle-span-region&pgType=Homepage&action=click&mediaId=thumb_square&state=standard&contentPlacement=6&version=internal&contentCollection=sinosphere.blogs.nytimes.com&contentId=http%3A%2F%2Fsinosphere.blogs.nytimes.com%2F2015%2F03%2F15%2Fq-and-a-david-shambaugh-on-the-risks-to-chinese-communist-rule%2F&eventName=Watching-article-click

Q. and A.: David Shambaugh on the Risks to Chinese Communist Rule

MARCH 15, 2015 9:00 PM

The question is: What do Leninist parties do to cope with the atrophy and stave off inevitable decline? Essentially, they can be reactive and defensive — ruling by repression, in effect — or they can be proactive and dynamic, ruling through opening and trying to guide and manage change. From roughly 2000 through 2008, under Zeng Qinghong’s aegis, the party chose the latter. But in the middle of 2009, after Zeng had retired, it abruptly shifted, in my view.

One can date it very precisely — Sept. 17, 2009 — the day after the Fourth Plenum of the party’s 17th Central Committee closed. That plenum meeting, which was on “party building,” put out a very progressive “decision” basically codifying everything Zeng and the party had been undertaking the previous eight years. I was living in Beijing that year, and when I read it I thought, “Great!”

But it was not to be. The party had, in fact, already grown very nervous during the previous spring and summer with riots in Tibet and Xinjiang. So, my guess is that the Plenum document was a kind of summary of previous years’ reforms, but had to be released because it had been in preparation for nearly a year and it was difficult to publicly announce that the party was going to reverse course, turn towards harsh repression and abandon the proactive political reforms. But that is what happened.