For the last 10 years, university rankings have dominated Chinese students’ decision-making when choosing where to study abroad. Yet recent developments in the market suggest the landscape is beginning to re-shift.
- A while back, say 20 years ago, QS rankings of UK universities mattered little for Chinese students. That was the time when universities that invested in China gained their return with limited competition, such as the University of Lancashire.
- Ten years ago, QS rankings started to matter more; then well-ranked universities, such as Russell Group institutions, started to take the market share of lower-ranked universities.
- In the last year or two, those so-called G5 universities also started actively in-person recruitment activities in China, including UCL and KCL. They then gradually take the market share of some of the Russell Group universities.
Are we going into a war of ranking in order to sustain Chinese student recruitment?
The University of York and the University of Exeter joining CSCSE to accept SQA students directly into the final year of undergraduate study would have been almost unimaginable five years ago. This signals a broader shift in the UK sector’s approach to recruitment in China, as well as a challenging market for some universities.
However, an uncomfortable reality remains that some might be unwilling to face: once an institution opens access to one student pool, it often risks losing another. In the Chinese market, institutions are quickly “positioned” at a perceived level. This creates a tension between perceived immediate recruitment opportunities and maintaining elite brand perception.
So why are Chinese students so ranking-sensitive in the first place?
At the heart of this lies employability.
A UK degree no longer guarantees strong labour-market outcomes in the way it might have 15–20 years ago. Both Chinese families and students increasingly recognise that overseas study alone does not automatically translate into job prospects in China or abroad.
Several structural factors reinforce this:
- China’s highly stratified higher-education system encourages continuous upward credentialism. Higher qualifications from higher-ranked institutions are perceived as safer bets.
- Years of observing returnee graduates struggle to outperform domestically educated peers have weakened the assumed “premium” of overseas education.
- Lower academic entry thresholds in some UK institutions compared to leading Chinese universities create a perception mismatch. A student who might enter a Tier-3 university in China may access a much higher-ranked UK institution, raising doubts about equivalence.
As one professor from a UK university recently commented: “UK teaching and learning is increasingly measured by getting students to pass, rather than by what skills and knowledge they truly acquire for the subject.” While provocative, this perception exists and shapes market behaviour.
- There is also a powerful economic lens. A graduate from a top Chinese university may have invested around £10,000 in their UG degree, while a graduate from a top UK university may have invested £100,000–£200,000. Naturally, families and graduates expect radically different salary outcomes. When these do not materialise, confidence erodes.
This is where Transnational Education (TNE) becomes strategically important.
Chinese universities with TNE partnerships often maintain higher academic entry thresholds than overseas universities themselves. Admission into reputable Chinese institutions already signals capability, discipline, and academic resilience in the employment market. When combined with international curricula, students gain both domestic credibility and international exposure.
Equally important: proximity to employers.
Many Chinese universities operate deep, structured relationships with industry, offering embedded internships, sponsored projects, job fairs, and employer-co-designed curricula. These mechanisms provide clearer employment pipelines for graduates based in China.
This raises a critical question:
Is lowering entry criteria a quick fix—or a medium-to-long-term risk to the UK’s reputation in China?
If a programme could credibly guarantee high-quality internships or structured employer engagement, would ranking still dominate student choice?
Employers currently use rankings as a crude filtering mechanism because better signals are absent. If universities solve employability at scale, ranking dependency may weaken organically.
Rather than focusing primarily on lowering entry thresholds or increasing commission, a more sustainable strategy may lie in meaningful employer engagement. This is a much broader shift in HE in general, but not yet fully translated into the international market.
Of course, this is easier said than done.
In China, relationships (关系 guanxi) matter. Senior-level trust, institutional commitment, and long-term presence are critical. Engagement is not built through one-off visits, handshakes, or banquets. It is developed through sustained collaboration around mutual needs—talent pipelines, applied research, workforce development, and regional economic priorities.
This requires local expertise and direct involvement from senior leaders in UK universities.
With high-level political engagement between the UK and China, there is renewed space for deeper institutional collaboration.
TNE is not a quick fix in China. Should you wish to run TNE in China through a cheap model, your return will equally be short-term.
TNE can become a strategic bridge—not only supporting Chinese students, but also enhancing employability outcomes for UK-based graduates through reciprocal industry partnerships. Effectively using TNE as your alternative opportunities in your China engagement should be the way forward.
The future question Chinese students and parents ask may no longer be:
“How high is your ranking?”
But rather:
“What employment outcomes can you demonstrably deliver?”
If the sector can shift the basis of competition from ranking to employability outcomes in China, we may finally subvert ranking as the primary driver of choice in China.
Written by Dr Cheryl Y. , Director of Programmes, TNE-Institute