Search

Since 1990, a large and dynamic global science system has evolved, based on grass roots collaboration, and resting on the resources, infrastructure and personnel housed by national science systems. Euro-American science systems have become intensively networked in a global duopoly; and many other countries have built national science systems, including a group of large- and middle-sized countries that follow semi-autonomous trajectories based on state investment, intensive national network building, and international engagement, without integrating tightly into the global duopoly. The dual global/national approach pursued by these systems, including China, South Korea, Iran and India, is not always fully understood in papers on science. Nevertheless, China is now the number two science country in the world, the largest producer of papers and number one in parts of STEM physical sciences. The paper investigates the remarkable evolution of China's science funding, output, discipline balance, internationalisation strategy and national and global networking. China has combined global activity and the local/national building of science in positive sum manner, on the ground of the nationally nested science system. The paper also discusses limits of the achievement, noting that while China-US relations have been instrumental in building science, a partial decoupling is occurring and the future is unclear.

The rise of China as a scientific research superpower has been frequently discussed in media and literature. However, past analyses are usually based on the geographical database and they ignore how the millions of emigrated Chinese students, who are now being considered the major research workforce in many countries, affect their academic outputs. Here we quantitatively analyze the contribution of Chinese scholars in physical science around the globe by their publications in a country's papers from 2010 to 2021 as well as their citations. Contrary to common perception, we find that increasing the number of Chinese scholars does not correlate with the net publication growth or decline in their host countries before the Chinese population exceeds a critical value. On the other hand, increasing Chinese authors in a paper improves its citations. The phenomena, though anomalous, are observed in many subfields of physics across the globe. Our analysis suggests that although Chinese scholars do not change the perceived publication capabilities of many countries but may have reshaped their research culture as well as workforce distributions. The results would be valuable for R&D, higher education, and immigration policymakers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The transfer of learning is arguably the most enduring goal of education. The history of science reveals that although numerous theories have been transferred from the natural sciences to the socio-political realm, educational practitioners have often deemed such transfers romantic and rhetorical. We conducted an experiment that randomly assigned a sample of 292 college freshmen in China to two groups to learn different thermodynamic theories: entropy or self-organization theory. We examined whether the two groups may arrive at different implications about social (and government) control without explicit instructions. We found that participants who learned the theory of entropy were more likely to believe the social system would become chaotic over time without external control; thus, they preferred tightened social control. Whereas participants who learned self-organisation theory were more likely to believe that order may form from within a social system; therefore, they downplay external control and prefer stronger individual agency. Follow-up interviews showed that the participants' narratives about social control were largely consistent with the thermodynamic concepts they had learned. Our findings have critical implications for the recent trend in STEM education that promotes the teaching of cross-cutting concepts—seeking patterns from interdisciplinary ideas—that may implicitly prime students to borrow physical science theories to formulate personal social hypotheses and engage in moral–civic–political discourse. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]