Li Heliang: Clarifying the Fundamental Issues of Ideological and Political Education in the Curriculum
At the current stage, curriculum-based ideological and political education (curriculum ideopolitical) has drawn high-level attention from across society, becoming a "buzzword" in the field of higher education. It is generally believed that curriculum ideopolitical is the act of "preaching the Way" (chuándào [1]) within the process of "teaching professional knowledge and resolving doubts." However, scholars have developed significant differences regarding how to understand the concepts of teaching, resolving doubts, and preaching—as well as the relationships between them—and how to strengthen the construction of curriculum ideopolitical. If universities are to truly integrate curriculum ideopolitical into the minds and actions of teachers and students, they must return to the ontological origin of education as a process of cultivating people, and re-examine the contemporary significance of the practice from the perspective of "cultivating virtue through the curriculum."
I. Curriculum Ideopolitical as a Logical Return to the Ontological Origin of Education
Since the launch of curriculum ideopolitical, scholars have continuously sought to justify it and find theoretical support, with some even regarding it as a new breakthrough in educational theory, showing a tendency toward establishing it as an entirely new discipline. In reality, this is a misinterpretation of curriculum ideopolitical.
"A teacher is one who preaches the Way, teaches professional knowledge, and resolves doubts." These three functions constitute the original meaning of education and the inherent duty of a teacher. The "Way" (dào) is inherent to "professional knowledge" (yè); it is the refinement and sublimation of that knowledge, not an external addition. Preaching the Way represents the highest realm of the teaching profession. Aside from its new name, the content and values contained within curriculum ideopolitical are the original meaning of education—that is, education is the cultivation of people (yùrén). This cultivation involves not only the growth of knowledge but also the construction of a spiritual world. In any form of education or any discipline, cultivating people is the core task; if this is abandoned, the value and meaning of education vanish entirely. The proposal of the concept of curriculum ideopolitical is an affirmation and support for the return of this human-cultivation value.
While definitions of education vary, there is a consensus that education cannot be separated from society or from the free and comprehensive development of the individual. On one hand, the fact that education cannot be separated from society means that society invests education with many expectations and missions. The famous educational psychologist Vygotsky once pointed out: "It must be noted that education at any time and in any place has a class character, whether its defenders or adherents realize it or not. The point is that in human society, education always has a completely specific social function, and it is always guided by the interests of the political class. The so-called freedom of a small-scale artificial educational environment and its so-called independence from the larger social environment are, in essence, extremely relative freedoms and independences within a certain narrow scope." [1] Thus, it is not difficult to see that education naturally possesses political characteristics and a clear mandate: to cultivate specific types of people.
General Secretary Xi Jinping has pointed out: "Throughout history and across the world, while there are many schools of thought and diverse theoretical perspectives on education and school management, there is a consensus that education must cultivate the people needed for social development. To be more specific, it is to cultivate the people required for social development, the accumulation of knowledge, the inheritance of culture, the survival of the state, and the operation of the system." [2] Consequently, all educational content, all vehicles of instruction, and all courses should naturally shoulder this heavy responsibility. While Ideological and Political Theory Courses (Sīzhèngkè [2]) carry the heavy responsibility of education in Marxist theory, courses other than the Sīzhèngkè should also undertake the mission of cultivating virtue and people alongside their role in professional, disciplinary, and knowledge-based training.
On the other hand, the fact that education cannot be separated from the free and comprehensive development of the individual means that the focus of education is the human being, aiming to promote that development. Education is not external to the person; rather, it is a natural component of one’s free and comprehensive development and a part of human production and life. Beyond the acquisition of knowledge and skills, this development requires the support of social rules, cultural values, and moral concepts, which must be accomplished through education—this is precisely what distinguishes humans from animals. From this, we can see that education inherently contains elements and functions of moral cultivation; enhancing the ideological and moral literacy of individuals is an inevitable requirement of knowledge-based education and its curriculum systems. In this sense, curriculum ideopolitical is common sense in education and an inherent part of the professional curriculum system. "Curriculum ideopolitical is the connotative development of inherent moral education resources under the premise of following the curriculum's own logical system; it is a process of returning to the value of cultivating people through the curriculum." [3] By excavating the ideopolitical elements [3] within the foundation of traditional professional education, we can achieve the dual harvest of knowledge transmission and moral cultivation.
II. The Relationship Between Curriculum Ideopolitical and Sīzhèngkè: Same Direction, Mutual Synergy
There are many commonalities between Sīzhèngkè and curriculum ideopolitical; in particular, both focus on implementing the fundamental task of "fostering virtue and cultivating people" (lìdé shùrén [4]), and both emphasize the important value and significance of ideological and political education. However, the two systems differ, and they require different levels of intensity in ideological and political education.
For the Sīzhèngkè, the requirements for ideological education are higher, and its "explicit education" (xiǎnxìng jiàoyù) is more distinct. The Sīzhèngkè is a "course about ideological and political education"; here, ideological and political education is the core, while the course is the vehicle or support. At no time and under no circumstances should the role of ideological and political education be weakened or neglected for any reason.
Regarding curriculum ideopolitical, although it is also a combination of the terms "ideopolitical" and "curriculum," it is not a simple splicing of the two, nor is it a Sīzhèngkè formed through their fusion. Rather, it is a new discourse formed based on an understanding of the mission and task of the relevant courses. While curriculum ideopolitical possesses the functions and characteristics of ideological education, it primarily utilizes "implicit education" (yǐnxìng jiàoyù), which is reflected more in the educational content and the personal conduct of the teacher.
Therefore, teachers must fully realize the distinctions between Sīzhèngkè and curriculum ideopolitical. First, curriculum ideopolitical is not a "transplant" of the Sīzhèngkè. While Sīzhèngkè plays a massive role, it has boundaries and cannot cover everything. Second, the Sīzhèngkè and curriculum ideopolitical are different curriculum systems with different emphases. The Sīzhèngkè emphasizes the level of ideological and political theory, guiding students to form correct value cognitions and deepening their identification with the Core Socialist Values. Curriculum ideopolitical emphasizes strengthening ideological and value-based guidance during the transmission of basic professional theoretical knowledge, thereby safeguarding security in the ideological sphere and firming up students' political stance. Third, curriculum ideopolitical is not a "supplement" to the Sīzhèngkè, but a "synergy." A supplement implies a hierarchy of primary and secondary, whereas synergy is a relationship of equality. In ideological and political education, while the Sīzhèngkè does play an irreplaceable role, the status of curriculum ideopolitical should not be underestimated. Within the overall ideological and political education system, the two simply represent different channels; there is no distinction of "high" or "low" between them. Only when the two move in the same direction and exert a synergistic effect can the best results for ideological and political education be achieved.
General Secretary Xi Jinping has clearly emphasized: "We must persist in taking the fostering of virtue and the cultivation of people as the central link, integrating ideological and political work throughout the entire process of education and teaching to achieve all-process and all-around cultivation, and strive to create a new situation for the development of higher education in our country." [4] "We must make good use of the main channel of classroom teaching. Ideological and political theory courses must persist in strengthening through improvement, enhancing the affinity and target-orientation of ideological and political education to meet the needs and expectations of students' growth and development. All other courses must guard their own 'section of the canal' and tend to their 'fields of responsibility' [5], ensuring that all types of courses move in the same direction as ideological and political theory courses to form a synergistic effect." [5]
III. Curriculum Ideopolitical is the Excavation of Ideopolitical Elements Within the Curriculum Itself
Curriculum ideopolitical does not change the essence of things, nor does it change the nature of a course. Rather, through the innovation of the internal arrangement of elements and the modes of operation, it stimulates the "human-cultivating" components of the curriculum. It is the restoration and stimulation of the original nature and tasks of the course—the excavation and activation of its own ideopolitical elements. This actually involves a deep-seated issue: how to understand the relationship between "ideopolitical elements" and "curriculum elements" within curriculum ideopolitical, and how they should be paired to achieve the optimal curriculum.
We often say "moral education comes first" (déyù wéishǒu); this actually emphasizes the status of moral education and its pioneering and foundational role in the process of cultivating people. The key to its effectiveness, however, lies in its integration into "all forms of education" (zhùyù). "Moral education at the lead, with all educations cultivating virtue" is the normal state of education. Curriculum ideopolitical is a restoration and restatement of this original state of education.
As is well known, any discipline or course has the nature and function of cultivating people; this includes both an intellectual education function and a moral education component. However, under the long-term drive of instrumentalist goals, the knowledge-based and professionalized content of courses has become increasingly prominent, with the intellectual function emphasized at the expense of the moral component, which has become increasingly hidden or even ignored. People have blindly pursued professional knowledge and skills while neglecting the guiding role of values. The current emphasis on curriculum ideopolitical is a reconsideration of the nature and function of courses. It aims to fully excavate the ideopolitical elements inherent in the courses themselves and reactivate the comprehensive role of the curriculum in cultivating people.
In curriculum ideopolitical, curriculum elements are the focus, but ideopolitical elements cannot be slighted. However, the greatest problem currently existing in the practice of curriculum ideopolitical is that some professional teachers, regardless of the design of the professional course itself, blindly respond to policy requirements by artificially, stiffly, and externally forcing many ideopolitical elements into professional courses. This turns professional courses into Sīzhèngkè. This not only affects professional teaching and curriculum construction but also causes resentment toward ideopolitical education among students. Over time, people will develop a mentality of indifference toward curriculum ideopolitical.
There is no fixed rule for the ratio between curriculum elements and ideopolitical elements; it must be determined by the nature and tasks of different courses. Any proportion is acceptable as long as it facilitates the operation of curriculum ideopolitical without affecting the professional characteristics and task arrangements of the course itself. For example, in a poetry course within a literature major, the teaching of poetry involves the transmission of knowledge and training in poetry-writing skills; this is external, explicit education. Meanwhile, the functions inherent in poetry—expressing emotion, clarifying one’s aspirations (míngzhì), and transforming people (huàrén)—constitute internal, implicit education. "Historically, poetry was linked with religion and morality; it was once used for the purpose of penetrating the mysteries of things. Poetry also possesses great patriotic value. For the Greeks, Homer's poems were a bible, a textbook of morality, a history, and the inspiration of the Greek nation. In any case, we can say that if education does not succeed in making poetry a resource for life and a means for leisure, then that education is deficient. Otherwise, poetry is merely artificial verse." [6]
Therefore, integrating ideological and political education elements into poetry courses is not about simply and rigidly forcing related theoretical knowledge into them. Rather, it is about articulating the historical contexts, patriotic sentiments (jiāguó qiánghuái [6]), cultural meanings, and even the expressions of joy and sorrow inherent in poetry while explaining its creation and the rich emotions it contains. This encourages students to be educated and grow in their abilities within these imagined contexts.
As one of the important ways to strengthen ideological and political education, curriculum ideopolitical plays an increasingly important role in the human-cultivating practices of universities. How to strengthen the effectiveness of curriculum ideopolitical is therefore particularly important. Based on an exploration of the essence of curriculum ideopolitical, universities can stimulate its human-cultivating functions, promote its renewal in response to changing circumstances (yīnshì ér xīn [7]), and push for its innovative development through methods such as deeply mining curriculum resources, strengthening practical concepts, and enhancing overall coordination and design.
IV. The Practical Purpose of Curriculum Ideopolitical Lies in Stimulating, Mobilizing, and Realizing the Human-Cultivating Functions of Many Courses
In order to accelerate the promotion of curriculum ideopolitical, some universities have established curriculum ideopolitical research institutions and opened specific courses on the subject. This fully reflects the high level of importance universities attach to curriculum ideopolitical and their speed of action. The practice of establishing specialized research institutions to conduct further specialized research is indeed worth advocating. However, if specialized research evolves into a purely theoretical discussion of curriculum ideopolitical by a small number of people, this approach is debatable. Furthermore, defining curriculum ideopolitical as just one or several specific courses is another misunderstanding.
Based on the needs of economic and social development for comprehensive talents and the needs of students' own comprehensive development, most universities offer many foundational education courses in addition to Sīzhèngkè and professional courses; these are referred to as "general education courses" (tōngshì kèchéng). General education courses aim to broaden students' horizons through the foundational, holistic, comprehensive, and broad nature of knowledge, cultivating students who can think and judge, and who possess a complete personality and a strong sense of responsibility.
Currently, general education courses in domestic universities mainly include three types:
- Public foundational courses such as university foreign languages and physical education.
- Common foundational courses for related majors, such as Advanced Mathematics for science and engineering or College Chinese for liberal arts.
- Quality-expansion courses based on cross-disciplinary studies, such as artistic literacy, traditional culture, and the dialectics of nature.
"General education" may be a single term for these three or a combination thereof, with descriptions varying across different universities. Regardless of the specific type, general education courses—offered based on the concept of "all-around education" (tōngcái jiàoyù)—stand in contrast to professional courses. Their main purpose is to enhance students' qualities and abilities. Although they involve some moral education components, they cannot be equated with curriculum ideopolitical. It is still necessary to excavate the ideopolitical elements within them for conscious education.
The value and connotation of Kecheng Sizheng [8] are manifested in all courses, rather than in just one or a few. In order to help more teachers understand Kecheng Sizheng and master better pedagogical techniques for it, universities can develop Kecheng Sizheng initiatives targeted at faculty, such as specialized training courses and thematic lectures. However, if one merely responds to policy requirements by specifically establishing one or more political or moral education courses for students, it would be "adding feet to a painted snake" [9]. This not only wastes curriculum resources but, more importantly, weakens the educational efficacy of Kecheng Sizheng. Kecheng Sizheng is not about creating new courses; rather, it aims to deeply mine and refine the ideological and political education resources inherent in all courses—such as belief pursuits, moral norms, social responsibility, family-and-country sentiment [10], scientific literacy, and humanistic spirit. Through the organic unity of knowledge transmission and value leadership, it seeks to cultivate "new people of the era" who possess strong professional abilities, high scientific literacy, and deep humanistic sentiments.
It must be noted, however, that emphasizing Kecheng Sizheng does not mean forcibly imposing it upon every single course. The emphasis is on ensuring that educators form a pedagogical philosophy of Kecheng Sizheng in their minds and keep its "string" pulled taut. Specific applications depend on various factors; one must "teach students according to their aptitude" [11], as there is no fixed model to follow. Basic theoretical courses in certain disciplines, highly technical courses, or pure natural science courses do not necessarily have to carry out Kecheng Sizheng. Forcing the integration of ideological and political elements may not only fail to achieve the intended effect but might even lead to the opposite outcome, adversely affecting both course education and ideological-political education. Therefore, a teacher's attitude toward students, their love for knowledge, and their enthusiasm for scientific questions can all produce unexpected educational effects—this, too, is Kecheng Sizheng. Kecheng Sizheng does not mean talking at length about politics and morality in professional [12] courses, nor does it mean crowding out professional course time to turn them into political or ideological-political theory classes. It emphasizes that in the process of transmitting knowledge, teachers should provide appropriate value guidance. This does not necessarily require long-winded discourse; sometimes a few words can play a key role. Nor does it require this in every single class session; adjustments should be made timely according to the professional requirements and the needs of the content being taught.
V. The Practical Implicated Power of Kecheng Sizheng Lies in Continuous Advancement, Optimization, and Innovation
At present, the theoretical exposition and value significance of Kecheng Sizheng are relatively clear. While it is certainly necessary to construct a framework and system for it, the most urgent task is its advancement and innovation in practice, followed by summarization and re-practice based on that experience. The promotion of Kecheng Sizheng is a very difficult and extremely complex process. First, it involves all courses, with diverse content and no unified standard. Second, different majors and courses have their own attribute requirements and operational laws; although Kecheng Sizheng is an inherent part of them, it is difficult to master the proper "degree" [13] during operation. Third, while the academic qualifications, knowledge literacy, and transmission abilities of university teachers are beyond doubt as their levels rise, some teachers still lack sufficient ability to identify the laws of students' ideological and moral development or psychological health crises. Fourth, the knowledge levels and cognitive abilities of students in the internet era have made a qualitative leap. If Kecheng Sizheng does not consider the "learning situation" [14] or the feelings of students, and fails to achieve results "where water flows, a channel is formed" [15], even if artificial and forced additions are avoided, it will still cause student resentment.
Therefore, universities need to constantly explore and even engage in continuous trial and error in practice to find a development path for Kecheng Sizheng that suits different courses. Different universities and courses can choose different methods based on their own characteristics. As long as the goals of Kecheng Sizheng can be achieved and student interest can be stimulated, any scientific method can be applied. Even within the same school, the same major, and the same type of course, different teachers can employ different teaching forms based on their own instructional styles to achieve the same educational effect. The key is to carry out Kecheng Sizheng teaching based on the specific school and major. For example, regarding traditional culture courses, a maritime university and a normal [16] university can be completely different in their approach to Kecheng Sizheng. The former can focus on maritime culture, allowing students to understand the unique Chinese maritime cultural tradition that differs from Western maritime development models. Conversely, if the traditional culture courses of these two types of institutions are identical in content, we must reflect on our Kecheng Sizheng. Of course, this does not mean there are no laws to follow, no experiences to summarize, or no models to promote. In fact, many courses have commonalities and many contents can be used as mutual references. The operation of Kecheng Sizheng also requires the establishment of relevant rules and regulations, the summarization of construction standards, and even the formulation of "negative lists." For instance, in a Higher Mathematics calculus course, when explaining abstract and difficult concepts such as constants and variables, the finite and the infinite, differentiation and integration, discrete and continuous, or bounded and unbounded, any university or major needs to reveal the philosophical principles within them, such as qualitative and quantitative change or the unity of opposites in contradictions. Kecheng Sizheng must "innovate according to the momentum, transform according to the matter, and advance according to the times" [17]—this is the fundamental requirement for its practice.
VI. The Practical Path of Kecheng Sizheng Requires Strengthening Overall Design
Currently, scholars and experts have not yet reached a unified understanding of Kecheng Sizheng. Some scholars believe it is like the "Ideological and Political Theory Course" (Sizheng Ke), belonging to the realm of ideology, and should be the primary responsibility of the Propaganda Department and managed by the School of Marxism. Others believe it differs from the Sizheng Ke, with its focus on course teaching, and should be managed by the Academic Affairs Department. Some believe Kecheng Sizheng is simply "Curriculum + Moral Education," where professional teachers are responsible for teaching and counselors (fudaoyuan) complete the moral education. Still others believe it is a new phenomenon with unclear management boundaries and that a new dedicated institution should be established to manage it. These lack of unified understandings have caused the current chaos in the cognition and practice of Kecheng Sizheng, which precisely illustrates its extreme complexity, requiring systemic thinking and coordinated advancement.
General Secretary Xi Jinping pointed out: "Ideological and political work is fundamentally a work concerning 'man.' It must revolve around the students, care for the students, and serve the students, constantly improving their ideological level, political awareness, moral character, and cultural literacy, so that they become well-rounded talents with both integrity and ability." Ideological and political education, as work concerning "man," cannot be completed independently by any single factor in a university. It requires the attention and coordination of the Party committee, functional administrative departments, and secondary colleges [18]; the participation of leaders, teachers, general staff, and service personnel; and the coordinated linkage between the "first classroom" [19] and the "second classroom," as well as the full mobilization and exertion of student subjectivity. As an important component of ideological and political education in universities, Kecheng Sizheng must be student-oriented and focus on the comprehensive development of the person, especially the construction of their spiritual world, requiring the joint support and promotion of the aforementioned ideological and political education forces. To this end, the "Guidelines for the Construction of Kecheng Sizheng in Higher Education Institutions" promulgated by the Ministry of Education in May 2020 clearly stated: "Comprehensively promoting the construction of Kecheng Sizheng is a strategic measure to implement the fundamental task of 'fostering virtue and nurturing people' (lidedushu)." It further emphasized "grasping the 'main force' of the teaching staff, the 'main battlefield' of curriculum construction, and the 'main channel' of classroom teaching, so that all universities, all teachers, and all courses assume the responsibility of education, 'guarding their section of the canal and tending their field of responsibility' [20], ensuring that all types of courses move in the same direction and in harmony with ideological-political theory courses, unifying explicit education with implicit education, forming a synergistic effect, and building a 'Great Pattern' of educating people by all personnel, throughout the entire process, and in all respects."
Kecheng Sizheng must employ systemic thinking and comprehensive, coordinated measures to form an atmosphere, system, and policy support for valuing, researching, and deepening its practice. Specifically, Kecheng Sizheng should be reflected in all courses. The ultimate goal of course learning is not merely learning course knowledge—i.e., staying at the level of grasping disciplinary concepts and principles to improve cognitive levels—but rather enabling students to form their own independent judgments and develop strong thinking skills through the rehearsal of thinking patterns during the process of knowledge learning. On the basis of reflection, they should form inner beliefs and clarify their life goals and direction. Within this, the stimulation of the subjectivity and enthusiasm of both teachers and students is crucial. The strength of students' awareness of participation, the level of their self-reflection, the expression and influence of teachers' attitudes and emotions, and the use and infiltration of language and methods all play an important role in enhancing the effect of Kecheng Sizheng. It is worth mentioning that Kecheng Sizheng places very high demands on teachers' pedagogical literacy. How to achieve moral education without affecting the transmission of professional knowledge, and how to implement ideological and political education in the teaching of knowledge to achieve the effect of "sneaking into the night with the wind, nourishing things silently" [21], is something every teacher needs to seriously consider and strive to practice. In addition, Kecheng Sizheng differs from general courses; its design possesses clear interdisciplinarity. Teachers need to draw on and apply the theories and methods of related disciplines, majors, and courses to stimulate students' value perceptions, humanistic sentiments, and moral psychology. For example, courses related to language disciplines and majors can use the theories and methods of psychology, sociology, pedagogy, and other disciplines to conduct scientific interpretations of professional content and carry out effective pedagogical transformations.