Governance Logic and Educational Adaptability of Non-academic Off-campus Training under the Derivative Governance of China’s “Double Reduction” Policy

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Since the implementation of the "Double Reduction" policy, non-academic off-campus training has, somewhat unexpectedly, emerged as a central focal point of governance. Driven by the imperatives of risk aversion and the mounting pressure of accountability, local governments have proactively allowed the strict regulatory logic—originally designed for academic subjects—to "spill over" into the non-academic sector, thereby creating a unique phenomenon of "derivative governance." However, this mode of governance, constrained by the institutional background where the legal status of non-academic training remains ambiguous, creates a profound tension with the inherent laws of non-academic education, which is characterized by long-term accumulation, personalization, and aesthetic qualities.
The primary objective of this study is to transcend the limitations of mere policy text analysis and delve into the front lines of governance practice. It explores the formation mechanisms of "derivative governance," the coping logic adopted by multiple stakeholders, and the adaptability of these measures to educational laws. This research centers on four core questions: (1) How do local governments formulate a derivative governance logic dominated by risk prevention and control? (2) How do training institutions seek a survival equilibrium between legitimacy and adherence to educational laws? (3) How do families adjust their choices amidst the tension between administrative regulation and market demand? (4) Given the misalignment between administrative logic and educational laws, how can a governance optimization path be constructed to enhance educational adaptability?
Methodologically, this study adopts a qualitative multi-case approach, selecting seven representative cities and conducting in-depth interviews with 14 key actors (including institution heads, teachers, parents, and individuals with dual identities). Utilizing Grounded Theory, the data were subjected to three-level coding to construct an analytical framework of "Policy Spillover—Governance Extension—Local Accountability Pressure," which is interpreted in conjunction with New Institutionalism and State-Society Relations theory.
The study yields the following findings: First, the government's governance logic exhibits a clear priority on "risk prevention and control." To circumvent liability, the locus of governance has shifted toward fund supervision and formal compliance, leading to a proactive expansion of governance boundaries and "one-size-fits-all" regulation. Second, the survival logic of institutions manifests as "adaptive compliance." Institutions acquire legitimacy through "ritualistic compliance" while simultaneously employing "dual-track operations" and "decoupling" strategies to survive, facing the industry-wide risk of "bad money driving out good." Third, the logic of family choice has undergone a "transfer of anxiety." The contraction of supply has triggered a secondary amplification of anxiety; parents maintain their rigid demand through "compensatory consumption" and by forming a "collusion" with institutions, which further exacerbates social stratification. Fourth, the essence of the governance adaptability dilemma lies in the systemic misalignment between the logic of administrative safety and the professional laws of education. This misalignment not only suppresses the long-term and personalized nature of education but also leads to the neglect of safety risks inherent in the teaching process (such as physical injury).
The study recommends that the central government clarify the governance boundaries between academic and non-academic sectors; local governments should promote a paradigm shift from being "liability-centered" to "people-centered," constructing a differentiated governance model that respects educational laws while addressing gaps in teaching safety supervision; and diverse social forces should be introduced to reconstruct a balance between risk prevention and industry development.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• CHAPTER 1. Introduction 1
• 1.1 Research Necessity and Research Objectives 2
• 1.1.1 Macro Background 2
• 1.1.2 Practical Dilemma 2
• 1.1.3 Family Perspective 3
• 1.1.4 Personal Perspective 3
• 1.2 Research Objectives 4
• 1.3 Research Questions 5
• 1.4 Structure of the Dissertation 8
• CHAPTER 2. Theoretical Background and Literature Review 10
• 2.1 Conceptual Definitions 11
• 2.1.1 The "Double Reduction" Policy 11
• 2.1.2 Non-academic Off-campus Training 13
• 2.1.3 Derivative Governance 15
• 2.1.4 Governance Logic 16
• 2.1.5 Educational Adaptability 17
• 2.2 Literature Review 18
• 2.2.1 Policy Evolution and Historical Context of Off-campus Training Governance 18
• 2.2.2 Institutional Origins: Legal Status and Entry Dilemmas of Non-academic Training 22
• 2.2.3 Direct Effects of "Double Reduction": Academic Governance and Consumption Transfer 24
• 2.2.4 Extension of Governance: The Regulation of Non-academic Training 28
• 2.3 Theoretical Framework 32
• 2.3.1 Policy Spillover and Governance Extension 33
• 2.3.2 Local Accountability and Risk Aversion 33
• 2.3.3 Solidification of Governance Logic and Tension with Educational Laws 34
• 2.4 Expanded Theoretical Perspectives 35
• 2.4.1 "Coercive Isomorphism" and "Legitimacy Seeking" from the Perspective of New Institutionalism 35
• 2.4.2 "State Penetration" and "Social Adaptation" from the Perspective of State-Society Relations 37
• 2.5 International Mirroring and Tensions in Educational Laws 38
• 2.5.1 Diversified Paths of Off-campus Training Governance in International Perspective 38
• 2.5.2 Diversity, Long-term Nature, and Personalized Needs of Educational Laws 39
• 2.5.3 Tension between Educational Laws and Governance Models in the Chinese Context 40
• 2.5.4 Potential Consequences of Insufficient Educational Adaptability and International Mirroring 41
• 2.5.5 Perspectives Provided for Subsequent Research 42
• 2.6 Research Gap 43
• CHAPTER 3. Research Design 46
• 3.1 Research Path and Methodology 46
• 3.2 Case Selection and Sampling Strategy 48
• 3.3 Interviewees and Data Collection 50
• 3.3.1 Composition of Interviewees 50
• 3.3.2 Data Collection Process 52
• 3.4 Data Analysis Methods 53
• 3.4.1 Analytical Strategy: Grounded Theory Coding 53
• 3.4.2 Operational Procedures 54
• 3.4.3 Coding Process 54
• 3.4.4 Coding Example 55
• 3.4.5 Theoretical Saturation 58
• 3.5 Research Reliability and Validity 58
• 3.6 Summary 61
• CHAPTER 4. Research Analysis and Findings 63
• 4.1 Policy Governance Logic 63
• 4.1.1 Prioritization of Risk Prevention 64
• 4.1.2 Accountability-Driven Mechanisms 69
• 4.1.3 Governance Extension 74
• 4.2 Institutional Strategy Logic 78
• 4.2.1 Compliance and Transformation 79
• 4.2.2 Undergroundization and Implicit Operations: Gray Spaces under Policy Pressure 84
• 4.2.3 Dilemmas of Industry-wide Contraction and Theoretical Reflection 88
• 4.3 Family Education Choice Logic 93
• 4.3.1 Rigid Demand and Educational Anxiety of Parents 94
• 4.3.2 Adaptive Strategies and Survival Logic of Non-academic Training Institutions 100
• 4.3.3 In-depth Analysis and Cross-Comparison 104
• 4.4 Misalignment between Administrative Safety Logic and Educational Laws 106
• 4.4.1 Misalignment in the Temporal Dimension: Short-term Compliance Cycles vs. Long-term Literacy Accumulation 106
• 4.4.2 Misalignment in the Formal Dimension: Standardized Regulatory Tools vs. Personalized Educational Needs 107
• 4.4.3 Misalignment in the Value Dimension: Prioritization of Risk Prevention vs. Generation of Educational Value 108
• 4.5 In-depth Analysis of Typical Cases 109
• 4.5.1 Case Study I: "Li Tanqi" — The Educational Idealist Trapped in the "Compliance Trap" 110
• 4.5.2 Case Study II: "Han Baozao" — A Sober Critic of Industry Alienation and Capital Logic 111
• 4.5.3 Structural Tension within Individual Dilemmas 112
• 4.6 Regional Differences — Diversified Local Practices of Derivative Governance 113
• 4.7 Summary of Research Findings 115
• 4.7.1 Findings at the Local Governance Level 115
• 4.7.2 Findings at the Institutional Level 116
• 4.7.3 Findings at the Parental Level 117
• 4.7.4 Synthesis of Overall Contradictions 118
• CHAPTER 5. Research Implications and Discussion 119
• 5.1 Formation of Derivative Governance 121
• 5.1.1 The "Safety Valve" Effect of Local Governance Logic 121
• 5.1.2 Continuous Deepening of Family Anxiety and Interactive "Collusion" of Institutional Strategies 125
• 5.1.3 The Circular Dilemma of Tripartite Interaction 128
• 5.1.4 Summary 131
• 5.2 Core Conflicts 131
• 5.2.1 Inherent Tension between Two Logics 132
• 5.2.2 Specific Manifestations of Core Conflicts in Governance Practice 133
• 5.2.3 International Comparison Deepened 143
• 5.2.4 Systemic Consequences of Core Conflicts 146
• 5.2.5 Summary 146
• 5.3 Theoretical Response and Contributions 147
• 5.3.1 Reflection and Deepening of the Core Analytical Framework 147
• 5.3.2 Dialogue with New Institutionalism and State-Society Relations Theories 149
• 5.3.3 Supplement to Policy Implementation Theory 154
• 5.3.4 Summary and Sublimation of Research Significance 158
• 5.4 Conclusion 159
• CHAPTER 6. Conclusion and Policy Recommendations 161
• 6.1 Research Conclusions 161
• 6.1.1 Government Governance Logic: Prioritization of Risk Prevention and Accountability Drive 162
• 6.1.2 Institutional Survival Logic: Adaptive Compliance and the Dilemma of Standardization 163
• 6.1.3 Family Choice Logic: Transfer of Educational Anxiety and Rigid Demand 164
• 6.1.4 Governance Adaptability Dilemma: The Tension between Administrative Safety Logic and Educational Laws 165
• 6.2 Policy Recommendations 167
• 6.2.1 Adjustment and Optimization at the Central Policy Level 167
• 6.2.2 Improvement and Balancing of Local Governance Logic 168
• 6.2.3 Construction of Family and Social Support Systems 169
• 6.3 Research Limitations and Future Outlook 170
• 6.3.1 Research Limitations 170
• 6.3.2 Future Research Outlook 172
• 6.4 Epilogue 173
• References 178
• Appendix 184