Twenty-First Century Competencies in the Chinese Science Curriculum

  • Yan WangEmail author
  • Jari Lavonen
  • Kirsi Tirri
Part of the Palgrave Studies on Chinese Education in a Global Perspective book series (CEGP)


Learning competencies for the twenty-first century has been an internationalized slogan in education reforms that has been framed into policy documents by various supranational organizations and thereafter adopted in national-level curricula by several nations. First, by comparing eight frameworks for the describing of competencies from both national and supranational levels, this chapter observes a convergence of the connotations and choice of competencies as twenty-first century competencies across the frameworks. Then, the chapter examines the implementation of the internationalized aims in the Chinese National Primary Science Curriculum with the revised analytical framework based on the international project Assessment and Teaching of 21st Century Skills. There it finds an integration of the internationalized aims into the Chinese science curriculum, though not in a systematic way.



The research presented in this chapter was supported by the China Scholarship Council.

We express our gratitude to Professor Bangping Ding from Capital Normal University, who shared the National Primary Science Curriculum text.


  1. Adamson, B., & Morris, P. (2014). Comparing curricula. In M. Bray, B. Adamson, & M. Mason (Eds.), Comparative education research: Approaches and methods (2nd ed., pp. 309–332). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  2. Ananiadou, K., & Claro, M. (2009). 21st century skills and competences for new millennium learners in OECD countries. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
  3. Binkley, M., Erstad, O., Herman, J., Raizen, S., Ripley, M., Miller-Ricci, M., & Rumble, M. (2012). Defining twenty-first century skills. In P. Griffin, B. McGaw, & E. Care (Eds.), Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills (pp. 17–66). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bray, M., & Thomas, R. M. (1995). Levels of comparison in educational studies: Different insights from different literatures and the value of multilevel analyses. Harvard Educational Review, 65(3), 472–491. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chinese Society of Education. (2016). 中国学生发展核心素养(征求意见稿) [Core competencies for student development proposal]. Retrieved from
  6. Communication, In Merriam-Webster online. (n.d.). Retrieved from
  7. Cropley, A. J. (2011). Definitions of creativity. In M. A. Runco & S. R. Pritzker (Eds.), Encyclopedia of creativity (2nd ed., pp. 358–368). San Diego: Academic Press. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Delors, J. (1996). Learning: The treasure within: Report to UNESCO of the international commission on education for the twenty-first century. Paris: UNESCO Publishing.Google Scholar
  9. Eisenberg, M., Lowe, C. A., & Spitzer, K. L. (2004). Information literacy: Essential skills for the information age. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.Google Scholar
  10. European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice. (2012). Developing key competences at school in Europe: Challenges and opportunities for policy (Eurydice Report). Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.Google Scholar
  11. European Union, Education and Culture DG. (2007). Key competences for lifelong learning: European reference framework. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.Google Scholar
  12. Finnish National Board of Education. (2016). National core curriculum for basic education 2014. Helsinki: Finnish National Board of Education.Google Scholar
  13. Fisher, R. (1991). Teaching children to think. Hempstead: Simon and Schuster Education.Google Scholar
  14. Fryer, M., & Fryer-Bolingbroke, C. (2011). Cross-cultural differences in creativity. In M. A. Runco & S. R. Pritzker (Eds.), Encyclopedia of creativity (2nd ed., pp. 326–334). San Diego: Academic Press. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Halász, G., & Michel, A. (2011). Key competences in Europe: Interpretation, policy formulation and implementation. European Journal of Education, 46(3), 289–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Heiman, M., & Slomianko, J. (Eds.). (1987). Thinking skills instruction: Concepts and techniques. Washington, DC: National Education Association. Retrieved from Google Scholar
  17. Hoskins, B., & Fredriksson, U. (2008). Learning to learn: What is it and can it be measured? Brussels: European Commission.Google Scholar
  18. Jaušovec, N. (2011). Metacognition. In M. A. Runco & S. R. Pritzker (Eds.), Encyclopedia of creativity (2nd ed., pp. 107–112). San Diego: Academic Press. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. John-Steiner, V. (2011). Collaboration. In M. A. Runco & S. R. Pritzker (Eds.), Encyclopedia of creativity (2nd ed., pp. 222–225). San Diego: Academic Press. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Korhonen, T., & Lavonen, J. (2016). A new wave of learning in Finland—Get started with innovation! In S. Zoo, D. Sawch, A. Villanueva, & R. Vinz (Eds.), Educating for the twenty-first century: Perspectives, policies and practices (pp. 447–468). Singapore: Springer.Google Scholar
  21. Lin, C. (Ed.). (2016). 21世纪学生发展核心素养研究 [Research on 21st century competencies for students’ development]. Beijing: Beijing Normal University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Lubert, T. I. (1998). Creativity across cultures. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 339–350). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Mason, M. (2007). Critical thinking and learning. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 39(4), 339–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mayring, P. (2015). Qualitative content analysis: Theoretical background and procedures. In Approaches to qualitative research in mathematics education (pp. 365–380). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.Google Scholar
  25. Meyer, H., & Benavot, A. (2013). PISA and the globalization of education governance: Some puzzles and problems. In H. Meyer & A. Benavot (Eds.), PISA, power, and policy: The emergence of global educational governance (pp. 9–26). Oxford: Symposium Books.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Musil, C. (2009). Educating students for personal and social responsibility. In B. Jacoby & Associates (Eds.), Civic engagement in higher education: Concepts and practices (pp. 49–68). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  27. Niu, W. (2006). Development of creativity research in Chinese societies: A comparison of mainland China, Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Singapore. In J. C. Kaufman & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The international handbook of creativity (pp. 374–394). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Oliva, P. (1997). The curriculum: Theoretical dimensions. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
  29. Pellegrino, J. W., & Hilton, M. L. (2012). In J. W. Pellegrino & M. L. Hilton (Eds.), Education for life and work: Developing transferable knowledge and skills in the 21st century. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  30. Reimers, F. M., & Chung, C. K. (2016). A comparative study of the purposes of education in the twenty-first century. In F. M. Reimers & C. K. Chung (Eds.), Teaching and learning for the twenty-first century: Educational goals, policies, and curricula from six nations (pp. 1–24). Cambridge: Harvard Education Press.Google Scholar
  31. Schmidt, W. H., Raizen, S., Britton, E. D., Bianchi, L. J., & Wolfe, R. (1997). Many visions, many aims: Volume 2: A cross-national investigation of curricular intensions in school science. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.Google Scholar
  32. Schwarz, B. (2015). A study on professional competence of future teacher students as an example of a study using qualitative content analysis. In C. Knipping & N. Presmeg (Eds.), Approaches to qualitative research in mathematics education (pp. 381–399). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.Google Scholar
  33. Vahtivuori-Hänninen, S. H., Halinen, I., Niemi, H., Lavonen, J. M. J., Lipponen, L., & Multisilta, J. (2014). A new Finnish national core curriculum for basic education (2014) and technology as an integrated tool for learning. In H. Niemi, J. Multisilta, L. Lipponen, & M. Vivitsou (Eds.), Finnish innovations & technologies in schools: A guide towards new ecosystems of learning (pp. 33–44). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  34. Villalba, E. (2011). Critical thinking. In M. A. Runco & S. R. Pritzker (Eds.), Encyclopedia of creativity (2nd ed., pp. 323–325). San Diego: Academic Press. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Voogt, J., & Roblin, N. P. (2010). 21st century skills: Discussion paper. Retrieved from
  36. Voogt, J., & Roblin, N. P. (2012). A comparative analysis of international frameworks for 21st century competences: Implications for national curriculum policies. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 44(3), 299–321. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Wang, L., Zhu, Y., Jiang, Y., Wei, R., Zhou, Y., Guo, Y., … Liu, E. (2016). Science education research in mainland China. In M.-H. Chiu (Ed.), Science education research and practice in Asia (pp. 17–39). Singapore: Springer.Google Scholar
  38. Wang, Y. (2016). Thinking big, acting small: Lessons from twenty-first-century curriculum reform in China. In F. M. Reimers & C. K. Chung (Eds.), Teaching and learning for the twenty-first century: Educational goals, policies, and curricula from six nations (pp. 69–92). Cambridge: Harvard Education Press.Google Scholar
  39. Ward, T. B. (2011). Problem solving. In M. A. Runco & S. R. Pritzker (Eds.), Encyclopedia of creativity (2nd ed., pp. 254–260). San Diego: Academic Press. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Educational SciencesUniversity of HelsinkiHelsinkiFinland
  2. 2.Faculty of Educational SciencesHelsinki Collegium for Advanced Studies, University of HelsinkiHelsinkiFinland

Personalised recommendations