Incubating Future Scholars in the Humanities: A Case Study of an Honors Program at Peking University

Courses and Academic Training

The honors program provided gifted undergraduates with various kinds of academic training in Classics. Particularly, training in Classical languages and intensive reading of Classical literature were regarded as the program’s greatest benefit, especially among students in the Western Classics track. LS-2 spent much time doing homework after language class, and she concluded as follows: “Training in ancient Greek and Latin enhances your linguistic competence and the ability to think logically because these two languages are utterly logical.”

Students also appreciated interdisciplinary classes in literature, history, and philosophy for broadening their horizons. ZW-1 offered a theoretical explanation, “The idea of the program itself is very good. This training mode is most suitable for Humanities students, especially those studying ancient Classics.” Practically, a multidisciplinary learning environment better equipped them for PhD. research in certain fields. ZX-3 majored in Western philosophy as an undergraduate, but his present major is philology. One of the key reasons for the change, he explained was the opportunity to meet linguistics and history students in the honors program, which convinced him that “their status of conducting academic research was better fit for me.”

However, the interview data suggested that the Classics program did not equip them with sophisticated skills in researching Classics. This Classics program was an extra honors program rather than a degree program. Students might not have been able to learn Classics thoroughly in additional coursework during a 3-year period. Unlike elite high school students in some Western countries, who might have access to plentiful opportunities and resources to learn ancient Greek or Latin (Connor, 2016), Chinese high school students seldom have a chance to systematically and professionally learn Western Classical languages before they enroll at the university. Consequently, for students in the Western Classics track, the limited period for learning Classical languages (Latin for 2 years and Greek for 1 year or Greek for 2 years and Latin for 1 year) was insufficient preparation for further academic research. Students in the Chinese Classics track were much more familiar with the ancient Chinese language, yet they also encountered language and cultural barriers when doing research on Chinese Classics. This is largely the result of the prevalence of Western educational models in their schools before coming to university, which promulgates subject differentiation and scientific knowledge derived from the West drastically reducing the study of ancient Chinese.

Supervision and Apprenticeship

Each student in the honors program was supervised by an instructor from the Division of Humanities based on the willingness of both the teacher and the student. The instructor’s responsibility was to supply all-round guidance for conducting research in Classics. As this supervision could not be easily standardized like a curriculum, the effects of the supervision depended on the frequency and quality of student-instructor interaction. Accordingly, three categories of supervision can be identified. The first category was higher participation, greater progress. Instructors in this category paid attention to tutorials and their students’ academic performance, and students were able to ask their instructor for academic advice with an active and positive attitude. In these cases, the tutorial largely promoted the students’ academic ability. The second category was free-range, free growth. Although these instructors made few requests for tutorials with their students and the students seldom contacted their instructors, students would ask their instructors to guide their thesis writing, which was not the requirement of this program but the prerequisite for the bachelor’s degree in their respective departments. The third category was little interaction, little effect, and both teachers and students in this group rarely communicated with each other. Only one participant fell into this category and he gained little benefit from his supervisor in this honors program.

Effective supervision could be regarded as an apprenticeship as students gained a close look at instructors’ work in the academic community. Students who were influenced by their instructors identified two impacts. First, instructors provided students with academic training based on the students’ abilities and requests. Students could focus on one specific academic field by taking their instructors’ courses. Several participants even took advanced-level courses under their instructors’ guidance. Moreover, students could ask their instructors for academic advice, and instructors might offer critical suggestions such as specific books, research methods, and general guidance, which in some cases shaped their research interests. Both ZX-1 and ZW-2 explicitly mentioned that their current research interests were based on their instructors’ step-by-step instruction, including how to search the literature and identify a research topic.

Second, students could learn from their instructors’ personal charisma and life attitudes during the activities they participated in together. The effective interactions between students and teachers often went beyond doing research. LS-3 recalled that her instructor was quite concerned about the living conditions of the working class: “I remember when I was a sophomore, and I often went to his office to discuss social issues, such as rural education in the United States.” Her instructor’s statement that the ultimate goal of being an academic is to be a good person influenced her blueprint of an ideal life. Moreover, students can be subtly transformed by instructors’ demeanor as well as their inspiring words. ZX-1 adopted a different approach from his instructor in a philosophical demonstration in his paper. However, after ZX-1 finished his sound demonstration, the broad-minded instructor praised the paper in front of other students. ZX-1 was moved by his instructor’s attitudes toward divergent opinions: “Now, I work as a part-time teaching assistant for my instructor. When I review junior fellows’ assignments, I always try to do what my instructor did for me.” Similarly, LS-1 took his instructor as an example:

I want to be moderate (“zhongyong”) just like my instructor. He never gives particularly harsh criticism. If he disagrees with your opinion, he will euphemistically point out the problem in your work. Then you need to be conscious of the problems because they are indeed problems. Anyway, he always gives people smiles. You know, many students gossip about teachers, but I have never heard of anything about him having a bad relationship with people. So, I think he gets everyone’s approval. Once I met a teacher from another department… She highly spoke of my instructor as an honorable man (“junzi”).

Other Academic Support

Apart from the course and supervision, the honors program strongly supported students’ academic enhancement in different forms. The funding for academic development was unanimously appreciated by the students; it covered book fees (CNY1 500 each semester), scholarships for overseas exchange programs (CNY 30,000 for half a year, CNY 50,000 for one year), and travel expenses for domestic and international conferences. In addition, each student in the Chinese Classics track received a famous version of the commentaries of Thirteen Classics (Shisan Jing Zhushu), while each student in the Western Classics track received Latin and Greek dictionaries. The funding was regarded by all interviewees as an essential foundation for their academic progress.

The honors program also tried to cultivate a sense of academic community. In 2016, with the support of teachers, several students launched a semi-annual academic journal named Peking University Classical Studies and set up an official WeChat platform. The students were also encouraged to hold academic seminars. ZX-1 explained, “Some senior fellow students were particularly keen on a certain topic and then held a seminar to exchange ideas. The participants were mainly students, including undergraduates and graduate students from other universities.” Institutional support for activities such as exchange programs and conferences was also a part of the attempts to help students develop an international perspective, which was a goal of the program (Division of Humanities of Peking University, 2019).

However, the program failed to effectively integrate certain academic support into students’ learning, leading to low utilization of funds and a lack of awareness of the global academic community among students. In other words, the program borrowed the institutional design from Western academic communities at an administrative level, providing funding, journals, seminars, conferences, and exchange programs, but the implementation was less than optimal. All of the interviewees spoke highly of the funding for books, but very few used the available funding for participating in domestic or international conferences or for exchange programs. Most of the participants did not get a clear sense that they were doing academic research in a globalized academic system, and they failed to gain an international perspective on the field of Classics.

Disciplinary Culture

Studying Humanities, particularly the Classics, influenced students in a nuanced and subtle way, providing more than purely academic enhancement. These disciplinary effects changed students’ attitudes toward life and academic research, which helped students to develop appropriate qualities for future scholars in the Humanities.

First, the feature of learning and producing knowledge in the Humanities cultivates the personal attributes required for research. LS-2 mentioned that she felt much calmer and more peaceful, “I often have to be immersed in the books and documents for a long time. . . You need to be attentive to do it. . . Whether you are willing to do it or not, you have to calm down.” In addition, knowledge production in the Humanities is based on an individual’s original perspective rather than teamwork, which means that the students did not necessarily attach importance to close connections with other students, making them likely to be more independent and introverted. ZW-3 compared her experience in the School of Business when she was a freshman with her experience after moving to the Division of Humanities:

When you are in the School of Business, you feel that this discipline obviously emphasizes your personal performance, expression, and exchanges. . . You have to team up with others, which is not commonly required in the Division of Humanities. Also, you need to be aggressive, and I have never heard of such a requirement in other places. . . You will naturally become like this, otherwise, you won’t be able to catch up with others. . . Now it is good to get rid of so many troublesome things. You can be recognized by others because of your excellent achievements even though you are not good at handling interpersonal relationships. . . On the other hand, I was a lot more outgoing in the School of Business than I am now. I really feel that I am increasingly independent and get in touch with too few things and people.

Second, many Humanities disciplines, especially Classics, focus on well-established and profound topics about human beings instead of current issues and objects. Students in the Humanities are able to pay attention to the fundamental questions of our time by studying Classics. Reflecting on this problem, LS-2 said that after studying history, she had become “indifferent” to current affairs and trivial details, “You will be free of worries about daily matters. Because our research topics are commonly related to time, life, and death and even transmigration, we adopt a lighthearted perspective on issues in our lives.”

Last but not least, learning Classical languages and literature is crucial for students’ personal enrichment based on the great virtues taught in Classics. LS-1 stated:

If you read the Analects of Confucian every day, which prioritizes moral standards such as kindness, integrity, loyalty, and so on. . . Despite some dregs, these old sayings influence you to some degree. You may want to be moderate as the Confucians advocated.

Likewise, ZW-1 took Confucius’ saying as an example:

Confucius said, ‘He who requires much from himself and little from others will keep himself from being the object of resentment.’. . . If you learn these things and are constantly reflecting, you will feel great to be such a person, and you will want to be such a person.

Slightly different in the Western Classics track, ZX-1 used Aristotle’s philosophical concepts to summarize the changes in his life over his bachelor’s study, from a “life of action” to a “life of contemplation.” He currently preferred to stand at a distance from hotly debated issues, allowing him to maintain a clear understanding and critical analysis of them.

However, whether the honors program in Classics or departmental training enhances students’ development of appropriate traits for being future Humanities academics is arguable. The honors program did not directly develop a talent pool for sustaining the Chinese Classics and Western Classics defined by the curriculum planning. Based on the interviewees’ self-reports, most of the students in the Western Classics track studied the literature, history, and philosophy of other periods after entering graduate school rather than concentrating on ancient Greek or Latin Classics. Students in the Chinese Classics track continued in that field, but they were inclined to relate this educational outcome to their departmental training, not the honors program. For some of them, several of the honors courses overlapped with the departmental compulsory courses. ZW-1 commented, “My department had already offered courses on reading classic texts. I majored in Chinese ancient literature, which equipped me with a more solid foundation for Classical Studies than students in other departments.” As a result, whether disciplinary impacts on students’ aspirations toward academic careers came more from departments or the honors program in Classics is unclear.

Chinese and Western Academic Traditions

The implementation of this honors program was based on the adoption of Western institutional designs, despite the fact that the program was held in a Chinese setting in which studying Chinese Classics has its own academic traditions. While the participants acknowledged the institutional strength, the program indicated its inadequate integration of Chinese and Western academic traditions.

From participants’ perspectives, undergraduates in the Humanities would benefit from Western-style institutional strength revealed by this honors program. First, the educational setting, including curriculum management, tutorials, and funding, provided a well-organized framework for improving undergraduates’ academic potential in a Chinese university. ZW-1 stated that students majoring in Chinese classical literature at Peking University in the early 1980s, when departments were not as specialized as they are now, “learned Chinese philosophy in the philosophy department, history in the history department, and history of literature in the literature department, while having solid training in Classics.” In some ways, he saw the honors program in Classics as reviving the traditional learning pattern of Chinese Classics. Second, the honors program facilitated students’ aspirations toward academic careers. Seven of the participants identified their academic interests and declared their willingness to pursue a doctoral degree when they were in the program, paving the path for becoming academics in the Humanities. The participants’ graduate outcomes corresponded with the statistics published in the admission brochure in 2019 (Division of Humanities of Peking University, 2019):

There have been six classes of graduates between 2012 and 2018 and most of the graduates have gone on to prestigious universities worldwide to pursue master’s or doctoral degrees. It is estimated that the proportion who do further academic research is as high as 80 percent.

Furthermore, both tracks in the program had their own academic traditions of excellence that enhanced students’ academic potential. The Chinese Classics track valued the integration of moral teaching and academic research. ZW-1 commented on the academic culture he sensed when studying Chinese Classics:

I decide to keep researching the Humanities, which will not only help me to get a job in the future, but also solve my fundamental confusion about life in an instructive way. . . For example, how to be a good person, how to get along with others, how to deal with yourself and your surroundings. . . I think this is why I am willing to do academic research in this field.

The Western Classics track gave students a more international perspective and professional training. Most of those who participated in exchange programs and academic conferences came from the Western Classics track. Students learning Western Classics appeared to accept these academic norms more naturally than those learning Chinese Classics, demonstrating a more obvious sense of being part of a global academic community.

However, the honors program failed to effectively integrate the two academic traditions. First, the program did not consciously help students to gain a general understanding of the similarities and disparities of Chinese and Western Classics through institutional design. Courses were gathered from each department then combined without any idea of how they might naturally fit together. As a student in the Chinese Classics track, ZW-2 elaborated:

I know almost nothing about Western Classics, so I really hope there will be a course providing a systematic introduction to Western Classics. I think it would be much better than the current regulation, which is that we need to attend one of the specialized courses in the Western Classics track.

Under this circumstance, students may not have the opportunity to learn about the academic traditions in the other track.

Second, the program did not integrate the two academic traditions very well, leaving each track to exert its own specific cultural influence on the students. On the one hand, the Chinese Classics track, despite having achieved institutional recognition, the honors program is still in its infancy. Students in this track seemed to lack a clear idea of how to integrate their research into the global setting, as illustrated by the lack of exchange in this track. ZW-2 reflected on his little participation in the global network after he graduated from the program: “Some scholars and students in my track seldom proactively exchange ideas, which I think is not good. Sometimes if you don’t say anything, others would think you don’t have the ability.” On the other hand, students in the Western Classics track were sometimes subjected to over-professional academic training at early stages of their academic career. Several of the interviewees were sensitive to the side-effects of academic standardization, including ZX-1, who observed “a conflict between increasingly systematic academic training and decreasing attention to fundamental philosophical questions.” The reconciliation of two academic cultural heritages can better address this tension is conceivable, making it more effective not only for educating gifted students in the Humanities, but also for the all-round development of scholars in the context of globalization.