Shanghai’s education puzzle: Four mysteries behind a world-class school systems

Shanghai's strong performance in international assessments such as the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) has attracted worldwide attention. Policymakers, researchers, and journalists have debated whether Shanghai represents a model of educational excellence or whether its success depends on conditions that would be difficult to replicate elsewhere. A conceptual paper published on  March 1 2018 in ECNU Review of Education  by Allan Walker and Haiyan Qian examines this debate and explores some of the underlying conditions that may help explain Shanghai's educational achievements.

Rather than focusing solely on test scores, the authors argue that understanding educational success in Shanghai requires a broader and more contextualized perspective. Drawing on existing research, policy documents, and educational literature, they examine four questions that appear paradoxical to many outside observers.

The first mystery concerns educational equity. China's education system is widely recognized as centralized and highly competitive. Yet international assessments have shown that Shanghai performs unusually well in helping disadvantaged students to achieve strong academic outcomes. According to PISA analyses discussed in the paper, many students from low socioeconomic backgrounds in Shanghai outperform students with similar backgrounds in other countries. The authors suggest that this apparent contradiction may be explained by China's long-standing tradition of centralized governance combined with a strong policy commitment to expanding educational opportunities.

The second mystery is how a highly stratified school system can also foster cooperation among schools. Shanghai's schools are organized into different levels according to status and performance, and resources are often distributed unequally across these levels. However, the authors note that Shanghai has introduced policies encouraging stronger schools to support weaker ones. Rather than intensifying competition between schools, the system often promotes collaboration because schools tend to accept their different roles and focus on improving educational opportunities for their own students.

A third mystery involves school leadership. In China, principals are typically appointed by government authorities rather than selected by local school communities. From an international perspective, such a system might be expected to weaken principal legitimacy. However, the paper argues that Chinese principals gain professional credibility through their expertise in teaching and learning. Their legitimacy therefore rests not only on formal authority but also on recognized professional competence. Teachers are more likely to respect principals who demonstrate strong instructional knowledge and provide meaningful guidance on teaching and learning.

The fourth mystery focuses on teachers and professional learning. Shanghai's teachers work within a tiered ranking system that differentiates them according to professional expertise and performance. While hierarchical systems are often associated with competition, the authors argue that Shanghai's teacher classification structure also encourage collaboration. Advancement often depends not only on individual teaching effectiveness but also on mentoring colleagues and contributing to professional learning.

The paper identifies four broad conditions that shape educational success in Shanghai: cultural values, policy reforms, leadership practices, and approaches to teaching. However, the authors emphasize that none of these conditions alone can adequately explain the system's outcomes. Traditional values influence how schools operate. Government reforms have expanded access and improved opportunities for disadvantaged students. School leaders play an active role in supporting instructional quality, while teachers engage in extensive professional learning and collaboration. Success emerges from the way these elements interact rather than from any single factor.

One particularly important theme throughout the article is the coexistence of seemingly contradictory features. The authors describe Shanghai's education system as characterized by "paradox": hierarchy exists alongside collaboration, competition alongside equity, and centralization alongside reform. These contradictions challenge simplified interpretations of Shanghai as either a model to copy or a system to reject. Instead, the authors argue that educational practices need to be understood within their broader social, cultural, and organizational context. The paper also highlights the role of school leadership in connecting different dimensions of educational improvement. An instructional leadership framework presented in the article illustrates how principals support learning through curriculum leadership, teacher development, relationship building, and community engagement.

The authors conclude that understanding school success in Shanghai requires moving beyond simple explanations based on culture, examinations, or teaching techniques alone. Educational outcomes result from the interaction of multiple forces operating simultaneously within schools and society. They suggest that future research should explore more closely how values, structures, leadership, and professional practices come together in everyday school life to create conditions that support learning and achievement.