Chinese "practical PhDs"

Investment Analysis Clubs Macro Economic Trends and Risks
1

The Chinese are focused on results and have a command economy. They are awarding “practical PhDs.”

American universities would probably fight this tooth and nail because they are ossified into their traditional models.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-026-00356-8?utm_source=Live+Audience&utm_campaign=5b426a7270-nature-briefing-daily-20260205&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_-33f35e09ea-50396344

First ‘practical PhDs’ awarded in China — for products rather than papers

The programme is designed to train more elite engineers who can help boost the country’s innovation.

By * Xiaoying You, Nature, 05 February 2026

Last month, Zheng Hehui gave an oral defence of his PhD in civil engineering at Southeast University in Nanjing, China. But Zheng had not written a thesis. Instead, he talked about a product he had developed: a set of Lego-like blocks, made with reinforced steel, that fit together to form a bridge pylon.

Zheng is among the first cohort of Chinese doctoral students to be assessed on the basis of practical achievements that lead to new products, techniques, projects and installations. His invention is being used in a huge cable-stayed rail and road bridge built across the Yangtze River.

Since September, at least 11 such ‘practical PhD’ students, all engineers, have obtained their doctoral degrees through this route. …

Practical PhDs are part of the Chinese government’s broader education reforms, which started in 2010, to cultivate ‘elite engineers’ that can help boost innovation in the country. In 2022, the government instructed top-tier universities to team up with major companies to set up graduate colleges for engineers.

A law passed in 2024 allows universities to let master’s and PhD students graduate on the basis of practical achievements. At present, only students in engineering-related subjects are eligible for this no-thesis arrangement…

The programme is part of China’s effort to build a talent pool for key and emerging industries, such as artificial intelligence and semiconductors, to drive innovation…

Over the past three years, 50 graduate colleges for engineers have been established in China to bring the policy into practice. …[end quote]

This concept is itself innovative. If an engineer can point to an actual successful innovation, like the blocks used to build a bridge over the Yangtze River, why shouldn’t he get a Ph.D.? The title comes with additional prestige and is a real motivator, especially because they can patent their developments.

Notice this is for engineers only so far. There aren’t any "practical Ph.D.s in literature for writers of best sellers…yet.

Wendy

4 Likes
2

Wendy, this is not directed at you.

In my view this is mostly Department of redundancy department.

The university system has granted practical “Master’s of” topic to students who have completed a project/program/process demonstration for many years.

I think recognition (and compensation) are wonderful things that align use with intent, purpose, achievement and attainment. The OP is about achievement and attainment, but muddies the water a bit by calling for PhDs.

Parsing these things out as PhDs is… theater.

I invent a bread slicer. The world swoons.
I invent the sandwich.
I invent grilled cheese. The world swoons again
I invent the BLT. The world swoons
…Philly
…hoagie
..hotdog bun

Practicing and innovating are fantastic aspects of practical ingenuity.

Do they make us a great coach? A thought leader who standardizes concepts to the masses (skills deployment, skills enablement)?

Do I have a PhD to teach culinary techniques, a patent for a machine, process or product, and millions of dollars (or nothing - maybe I gave it away for free)?

Why do we grant PhDs?

Why do we grant MSs?

Why do we have Patents, IP and salesworthy products?

5 Likes
3

A PhD usually signifies a mastery of a subject area and the ability to do original research in that area that advances human knowledge. This is realm of pure research. What the Chinese are doing is the realm of applied research, which is different. That would be the reason for any push-back, and it is a legitimate reason.

5 Likes
4

I dunno. Academics partnering with industry is fairly common in the US and other countries. China is just catching up.

As related to engineering, the linked article includes -

“Many engineering professors in Chinese universities have always been academics and never worked in the industry. That is why it is important to pair them up with experts from the industry to teach those PhDs,” Li says."

If we thought China was kicking our 屁股 before, we haven’t seen anything yet.

1 Like
5

Practical PhDs has been an issue in the US forever. The classical liberal arts education is the standard to which others are compared.

Until the Civil War most railroads were built by engineers trained at West Point. The govt saw a need for practical skills and created a land grant program to encourage practical art especially in engineering and agriculture. Discussion on how their various degrees rank continues.

And by the way, land grant schools had to require ROTC. Its the reason many had ROTC classes in the Viet Nam era.

1 Like
6

When I had my first job working for Corning Glass back in 1978. The engineering group I’d hired into had recruited an MIT grad the previous year and spent several months outfitting him with the tools required to do the job (e.g., concrete design manual, the “Steel Manual” (a dictionary-sized catalogue of standard structural steel sizes), and drafting instruments for making construction drawings. Of course, the MIT grad was a quick learner and got up to speed within a few months.

At WPI, the university focused on practical applications and project work. My new colleagues were astonished that I arrived with all the reference books and even a state-of-the art drafting machine that allowed me to be immediately productive.

intercst

2 Likes