Approaches and Reforms in Undergraduate Education for Integration of Major and General Education: A Comparative Study among Teaching, Teaching—Research, and Research Universities in China

Abstract

With the major education model as the dominant model, general education is squeezed in quality and quantity, and implementing the concept of general education is challenging. There are several problems in undergraduate education with “strong majors and weak general education” that need to be addressed in order to integrate major education with general education. Therefore, we selected three levels of universities: nine first-class research universities, seven key provincial teaching–research universities, and seven teaching universities from China. One-way ANOVA, principal component analysis (PCA), and cluster analysis were used to analyze the differences in three kinds of universities based on the total undergrad credits and “big category” majors. One-way ANOVA results showed that “total undergrad credits” and “big category” majors are significantly different between research universities, teaching–research universities, and teaching universities, but there are no significant differences in minor course credits, general course credits, disciplinary and major basic course credits, and elective course credits. Based on cluster analysis, the first cluster G1 showed that all the research universities had similarities in the total undergrad credits, minor course credits, general course credits, disciplinary and major basic course credits, elective course credits, and “big category” majors. PCA results confirmed that research universities are significantly separated from teaching universities and teaching–research universities at the PC1 axis, which has a higher number of “big category” majors. There are three key issues with strong majors and weak general education: (1) the difficulties in popularizing the progressive minor training model; (2) the low percentage of elective courses, general elective courses, and individualized courses; and (3) major transfer system restrictions. Based on their own student characteristics and school resources, teaching universities, research universities, and teaching–research universities are encouraged to enhance the cultivation of students’ compound knowledge and skills at the three levels of micro-major, double degree (minor degree), and minor-major (double majors or second majors), respectively. The universities should adhere to the diversified combination of general and major education, the integration-oriented undergraduate education, the reform concept of reducing burden and improving quality, appropriately increase students’ freedom of choice in undergraduate instructional management for an effective combination of “general education and major education”, and then bring the undergraduate education to a characteristic and high level.

Use of comparative research in the study of chemistry education: A systematic analysis of the literature

“…Despite this, comparative research has been gaining increasing attention due to its irreplaceable function in providing insights through comparison [ 21 , 61 ]. With its growing popularity in educational research [ 62 , 63 ], its impact on chemistry education is anticipated to increase continuously in the forthcoming decades.…”

Study of medicinal plants used in ethnoveterinary medical system in riverine areas of Punjab, Pakistan

“…Furthermore, because of the low literacy rate in the study region, the residents are significantly reliant on medicinal plants for a few uses to sustain their needs. Education reform is also critically required to preserve folklore and traditional knowledge, as well as prioritized majors such as humanities and social sciences [ 67 ].…”