By Cheung Wai Chung (Douglas)
How to save a nation through education? In the 1910s, some Chinese scientists upheld shi ye jiao yu guan [values of industrial education] 實業教育觀, which began to gain its popularity since the late Qing period. By investigating the Ke Xue (Science) magazine published by the Science Society of China, this blog post examines the complexities between industrial education, modern science and nationalism when China was undergoing political, social and cultural transformation in the 1910s.
The 1910s saw a decade of drastic political and cultural changes in China. Firstly, the 1911 Revolution marked the end of the Qing Dynasty, breaking up with the dynastic past of China. Next, the New Culture Movement and the May Fourth Movement shaped and reshaped cultural landscapes of China because of an influx of ideas from all parts of the world. Like the Chinese intellectuals in literacy circles, Chinese scientists also tried to answer a question, that was, how to save the nation in a period of chaos and instability?
Considering the situation in the 1910s, some Chinese scientists established the Science Society of China (The Society) to promote modern science in China. The Society was an academic society established by enthusiastic Chinese scientists who received education from the United States.[1] The Society organized the iconic Ke Xue magazine which primarily published academic works about scientific research. Even though the magazine was positioned as an academic and research-oriented magazine, the editors sometimes explored educational issues such as industrial and science education written or translated by Chinese scientists.
Chinese scientists drafted various proposals to spread the idea of industrial education. For the articles I have read, Industrial or technical education were interchangeable terms which covered a wide scope of education programs. Yang Quan楊銓, an early member of the Society, highlighted the five major areas of industrial education, which referred to specialized, commercial, agricultural, manufacturing and household education. There were seven types of industrial schools, such as prevocational, intermediate, and continuation schools etc.[2] Houshen Li李垕身, a Chinese civil engineer educated in the United States, explained the industrial education system in Germany and the United States. Li suggested that the government should prepare apprenticeship regulations and launch compulsory primary school education. To gather support from civilians, Li also recommended the construction of a museum about industrial products. Ideally, more people in China would endorse industrial education when they become more familiar with the accomplishments.[3]
Crucially, discussions about industrial education went beyond educational philosophies. Chinese scientists tried to radiate the importance of industrial education through the Ke Xue magazine. In Ke Xue, Yang Quan assessed the significance of industrial and technical education in 1916. Yang argued that opponents to industrial and technical education overlooked its significance. One should not be ashamed of achieving a good living standard. The key was to pursue material benefits for both the state and society. Yang also claimed that Thomas Edison would not despise one’s desire to pursue better material life. They always aspired to enhance the living standard of the impoverished at the same time.[4]
Much as Yang and other scientists argued, industrial education was maintained as a political topic such that it would not only affect personal life of students. It was more of a subject about national power and destiny. Houshen Li argued that industrial education would nurture “benevolent citizenship” in China. The employees would be able to adapt to community needs and improve their physical strength. Thus, industrial education would help cultivate morality and knowledge.[5] In 1917, H. C. Zen任鴻雋, a chemist and a core member of the Society, argued that the emergence of modern science escalated the vitality of industrial education. In Zen’s words, advocating industrial education embodies political implications, including national survival and resistance to imperial infiltration and invasion.[6] As a result, the Chinese scientists perceived industrial education as a collective issue by nature.
Above all, industrial education symbolized the hopes among Chinese scientists to establish a strong and wealthy nation in the 1910s. Chinese scientists, for example, Zen, Yang and Li, proposed industrial education programs concerning their interpretations on modern science and nationalism. Hence, the history of industrial education was a lens through which historians would get to know the changing dynamics between nationalism, education and modern science.
———————————————————————————————————————————————
Sources:
[1] See Zuoyue Wang, Saving China through Science, on https://www.jstor.org/stable/3655275
[2] Yang Quan 楊銓, “Shiye jiaoyu guan” (實業教育觀) [On Vocational Education], Kexue (科學) [Science] 2, no. 6 (1916): 597–602.
[3] Li Houshen 李垕身, “Zhigong jiaoyu” (職工教育) [Workers’ Education], Kexue (科學) [Science] 2, no. 4 (1916): 371–385.
[4] Yang, “Shiye jiaoyu guan”, 597–602.
[5] Li, “Zhigong jiaoyu,” 371–385.
[6] Ren Hongjun 任鴻雋, “Shiye jiaoyu guan” (實業教育觀) [On Vocational Education], Kexue (科學) [Science] 3, no. 6 (1917): 616.
Blog Writer Biography
Cheung Wai Chung (Douglas) is an MPhil student in the Faculty of Arts at the University of Hong Kong. His current research interests mainly lie in the history of modern China. He has published a journal article in the Journal of Royal Asiatic Society (Hong Kong branch) about the history of psychiatry in Hong Kong. He received the Wang Gungwu Prize for Undergraduate Students in History. He also shared his research outputs in the Cambridge Economic and Social History Workshop, the Cambridge Cultural History Workshop and the Oxford Hong Kong Forum in the past.