The past couple of weeks saw millions of people in a few key countries use their voices—and votes—to weaken or oust incumbent political leaders, in the hope of bringing about change to address corruption, the high cost of living, and other concerns.

While no similar elections were able to take place in China, the ruling communist party just issued a crucial decision aimed at improving the party itself to ensure its continued governance over the country.  Unfortunately, to a Chinese professor who was struggling to abide by Chinese law while also facing pressure to utilize his own resources to set up fake research projects, this decision and related potential reforms come too late.  The professor chose suicide, leaving behind a note that has drawn widespread attention to problems prevailing in Chinese academia.

“Rigorous Governance of the Party”

In late October, at the Fifth Plenary Session of the 20th Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party, the Decision on Several Major Issues Regarding Persistently Advancing Comprehensive and Rigorous Governance of the Party was adopted.

“The Decision includes a long paragraph describing problems within the Chinese Communist Party.”

The Decision includes a long paragraph describing problems within the Chinese Communist Party.  It states that “the caliber and capabilities of some Party members and cadres do not meet the requirements of the times”.  In addition, according to the Decision, “a small number of Party members and cadres—including some senior cadres—[…] hold distorted views of political achievements”.  Deeply mired in “formalism, bureaucracy, hedonism, and extravagance”, these individuals “fail to take responsibilities or perform their duties, disregard discipline and rules, and even abuse their power for personal gain, becoming corrupt and morally degenerate”.  The paragraph ends with a sentence concluding that “the task of maintaining the advanced nature and purity of the Party has become even more arduous”.

The Decision then highlights several major tasks aimed at improving governance within the party.  One major task is to forge “a high-caliber contingent of [Party] cadres who are politically steadfast, highly competent, possess an excellent work style, and strictly observe discipline” through strengthening the “education, training, selection, appointment, management, and supervision of [Party] cadres”.  Specifically, Party members who are “within the talent pool” are encouraged to serve as role models in areas such as “tackling key scientific research challenges, mentoring the next generation, fostering collaboration, [upholding] academic integrity, and [adhering to] scientific ethics”.  They should also oppose “academic misconduct such as academic fraud and plagiarism”.

“The Emperor’s New Clothes”

A year ago, SINOTALKS^® published an article discussing problems in China’s scientific research institutions, including misappropriation of scientific research funds committed by personnel at these institutions (see Nobel Prizes and China’s Scientific Research).

The recent passing of BAI Baoguo, an associate professor of piano at Yan’an University in Shaanxi Province and vice-chair of the Yan’an Musicians Association, reveals challenges also being faced by Chinese scholars in the humanities.  With over thirty years of teaching experience, Professor Bai received high praise from students and was honored multiple times as an outstanding supervisor for students’ graduation theses.  However, according to a note found after Professor Bai’s suicide, his university informed him that he had failed to meet performance targets for two consecutive contract terms and that any further failure would result in a demotion or transfer to another position.

“To scholars dedicated to teaching piano and other humanities subjects, these two requirements can be challenging, […].”

To meet performance targets, Professor Bai, like many of his colleagues, was required to demonstrate his ability to publish academic papers and secure research funding through industry-sponsored projects.  To scholars dedicated to teaching piano and other humanities subjects, these two requirements can be challenging, while their counterparts in science and technology may find the requirements easy—or at least easier—due to China’s strong focus on artificial intelligence and other high-tech disciplines.  According to Professor Bai’s note, many of his colleagues managed to pass their performance appraisals by paying academic journals to publish their articles and by using their own money to set up, in collaboration with companies, fake research projects accompanied by fabricated accounting records.  Professor Bai referred to this practice as “The Emperor’s New Clothes”, suggesting that this has been an open secret.  Although he had the resources to do the same as his peers, he refused to commit academic misconduct—a professional boundary that his integrity did not allow him to cross.

Professor Bai’s passing is now being investigated by the Shaanxi Provincial Department of Education.  It should be noted that months before this tragedy occurred, the Chinese media had already reported the problem of Chinese scholars being pressured by their own academic institutions to set up fake industry-sponsored research projects.  A faculty member at a university located in Northwest China stated that the university requires each professor to secure RMB 80,000 of industry-sponsored funding every year, while the requirements imposed on each associate professor and each lecturer are RMB 70,000 per year and RMB 40,000 per year, respectively.  Given that failure to meet these targets can lead to the loss of promotion opportunities and other consequences, many scholars set up fake projects as shortcuts.

Rules and Remedial Measures

It is not that China lacks legal rules to prohibit academic misconduct.  For example, the Higher Education Law notes that higher education institutions should evaluate “the ideological and political performance, professional ethics, professional competence, and work achievements [emphasis added]” of their faculty members, administrative staff, teaching support personnel, and other specialized technical staff.  Results of these evaluations serve as “the basis for appointments, dismissals, promotions, rewards, or disciplinary actions”.

In December 2021, as reported by the Education, Science, Culture and Public Health Committee of the National People’s Congress, 30 members of the national legislature, all of whom were from Shaanxi Province, noted that “incidents of academic fraud occur from time to time at universities and research institutions”.  As a result, these legislators proposed to amend the Higher Education Law by strengthening enforcement through the introduction of a new form of punishment.  The proposed punishment was to expose those faculty members and other educators at universities found to have violated the rules of professional ethics by identifying them—and their loss of credibility—on a “national credit information sharing platform”.

The efforts of these members of the National People’s Congress to address academic fraud should be commended.  However, their proposed solution to the problem—punishing the educators—fails to address the root cause of the challenges facing conscientious academics like Professor Bai: unrealistic metrics set by universities which ignore the nature of different academic disciplines.  Hopefully, the Chinese Communist Party’s current emphasis on academic integrity will lead to fundamental remedial measures that enable the performance of academics to be assessed fairly while holding fraudsters accountable.

---

• The citation of this article is: The Editorial Board of SINOTALKS^®, China’s Academia, Employment, and Anti-Corruption Campaign, SINOTALKS.COM^®, SinoExpress™, Nov. 11, 2026, https://sinotalks.com/sinoexpress/china-academia-employment-corruption. ↩︎

Related Articles