While the data showed mostly positive attitudes regarding returnees, there were also some negative issues. Both non-returnee colleagues and administrators agreed that although it was necessary to recruit returnees, they should focus on attracting top-level returnees. In their view, not all returnees who had come back to China were top returnees. They realised that it was necessary for universities to employ top returnees instead of normal ones, as shown in Figures 4-7 and 4-8.
Figure 4-7 Administrators’ views regarding recruiting top-level returnees
Figure 4-8 Non-returnee colleagues’ views regarding recruiting top-level returnees
0%
0% 11%
22%
67%
It is important for this university to recruit top returnees (N=9)
Strongly disagree Disagree Uncertain Agree Strongly agree 0% 0% 27% 46% 27%
It is important for this university to recruit top returnees (N=11) Strongly disagree Disagree Uncertain Agree Strongly agree
The data indicated that both groups preferred universities to recruit top-level returnees. It showed that nearly 83% (N=8) non-returnees and nearly 89% (N=8) administrators agreed with this statement. However, the data also showed some difference between the groups, with nearly 67% (N=6) of administrators choosing “strongly agree” and 22.2% (N=2) choosing “agree”, whereas 27.3% (N=3) of non-returnees chose “strongly agree” and 45.5% (N=5) chose “agree”. Administrators, who viewed this issue from a management perspective, seemed to be more concerned about it.
The responses to the interview questions also supported this attitude regarding recruiting top-level returnees. NR1 commented that there were differences between returnees who
held a master’s degree and those who held a doctoral degree in terms of their strengths
and disadvantages. He commented that:
As far as I know, the length of study for a master’s degree is only one year in some foreign countries. Therefore, in terms of the difference between returnees and non-
returnees, there is none. … However, as for returnee doctorate holders, I think most of their [returnees’) advantage is shown in doing research. Returnees [with a] PhD
are much better. … Moreover, as for teaching, they probably have different teaching
methods from those who are educated in China.
Clearly, some non-returnee colleagues thought that universities should recruit returnees
with a doctoral degree, rather than a master’s degree. The data also showed that the
attitudes of Chinese people towards foreign-awarded credentials were changing. Although non-returnee colleagues and administrators agreed that returnees brought with them new ideas, new knowledge, new teaching approach and new research methods, they were very cautious about foreign-awarded degrees, which were no longer valued as highly as they used to be in China, particularly in terms of returnees’ practical research abilities.
NR2 argued that a person’s ability to do research depended on the time and effort that individual would spend on the project, not necessarily on whether he or she had an overseas background. Even if a student stayed in China and focused on one field for long enough, NR2 thought their research would not necessarily be less robust than that of
returnees. She further argued that the quality of a teacher’s research depended on the
research field. NR4 also thought that returnees were not necessarily better than non- returnee colleagues in teaching and research. He said:
The difference between returnees and non-returnees in terms of their teaching and research is not obvious. Maybe there is a little bit of a difference ... but when it comes to some specific research. It depends on one’s own ability. It depends on your own effort and your research focus. Whether you have stayed overseas for a few years or not does not necessarily mean you have a high level of research ability. It [overseas experience) may give you some direction or vision, but doing research needs your effort.
Figure 4-9 shows the attitudes of non-returnees and administrators regarding foreign- awarded credentials.
Figure 4-9 Non-returnees’ (N=11) and administrators’ (N=9) views regarding foreign-awarded credentials and Chinese awarded credentials
The data showed that only 27.3% (N=3) of the non-returnees agreed that foreign-awarded credentials held more value than Chinese-awarded credentials. The administrators were more confident about foreign-awarded credentials, with 55.5% (N=5) agreeing with the statement. This difference in attitude could be related to the backgrounds and positions of the administrators, who would view this issue from the perspective of management.
As one of the purposes of the universities’ policies to recruit returnees was to use the
returnees’ foreign credentials to enhance the teaching and research quality of the
universities, they would have to have confidence in the returnees they employed. Further, eight of the administrators (almost 90%) had overseas experience themselves, either as visiting scholars or as members of cooperative projects, which would also make
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Strongly disagree Disagree Uncertain Agree Strongly agree
Foreign-awarded credentials hold more value than Chinese awarded credentials
Administrators Non-returnees
them more confident regarding foreign-awarded credentials.
The administrators had a range of opinions regarding returnees’ teaching and research performance. Some administrators, including A1 and A2, thought that returnees’
teaching was better than their research. He attributed this to the returnees’ overseas educational background. Most of them had been to English-speaking countries, where they were immersed in a real English environment, meaning their English-speaking ability was very good and they knew the Western cultures well. A2 thought that
returnees’ level of initiating research was lower than that for non-returnees and that in the social sciences, non-returnees were better than returnees at publishing articles. In his view, although returnees might have the chance to publish articles in international journals, that kind of chance was rare, because it was not that easy to publish articles in international journals. He stated that non-returnees and returnees both had their advantages and their contribution did not necessarily depend on whether or not they were returnees. Similarly, A6 and A8 also expressed their concerns about this issue, saying:
From my point of view … there is not much difference between them [returnees] and
‘normal’ teachers [non-returnees]. Most of the time, they are almost the same. ….
They both have their advantages and disadvantages. The thing is that one person’s
performance in the workplace is not directly related to his overseas background. It is related to his attitudes towards work and his effort to work. (A6)
At our school, for example in evaluating academic titles or research performance, all
these are relevant to one’s research results. It is not that because you are foreign- educated returnees, we have preference for you. It depends totally on your research. If you have no research outputs, you do not have any privileges even if you are returnees. (A8)
Figures 4-10 and 4-11 show the responses of administrators and non-returnees regarding
Figure 4-10 Non-returnees’ views regarding returnees’ teaching and research performance
Figure 4-11 Administrators’ views regarding returnees’ teaching and research performance
The data indicated that almost half (N=5)of the non-returnees agreed that returnees were likely to perform better that non-returnees in teaching, and the proportion for research was more than half (N=6). Of the nine administrators, almost half (N=5) agreed that returnees were likely to perform better than non-returnees in teaching and in research, more than half (N=6) thought that returnees were likely to perform better than non-
0% 20% 40% 60% Strongly disagree Disagree Uncertain Agree Strongly agree
Non-returnee colleagues' view on returnees (N=11)
Returnees are more likely to perform better than non-returnees in research
Returnees are more likely to perform better than non-returnees in teaching 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Strongly disagree Disagree Uncertain Agree Strongly agree
Administrators' view on returnees (N=9)
Returnees are more likely to perform better than non-returnees in research
Returnees are more likely to perform better than non-returnees in teaching
returnees. Although the data regarding these two items were not completely negative, they indicated that both groups were not very positive about returnees in respect of their teaching and research and there seemed to be a gap between the expectations of non-
returnees and administrators regarding returnees’ performance in teaching and research
and their actual performance, compared with non-returnees.