Transnational education (TNE) expert Charles Sun discusses how universities entering China’s TNE market should look beyond quantitative rankings and government designations to select institutional partners based on strategic alignment, discipline-specific strengths, and mutual value.

Every foreign university entering China’s TNE market faces the same question early in the process: How do we identify the right Chinese partner?

The instinctive answer is to reach for a ranking. And the most accessible ranking is often the ShanghaiRanking Best Chinese Universities Ranking – the domestic companion to the ARWU. It is comprehensive, data-rich, and familiar to international audiences.

But there is another label that carries enormous weight in China: Double First-Class – the government designation that determines which universities and disciplines receive national strategic support.

These two systems measure different things. Confusing them can lead a foreign university to overlook genuinely excellent partners – or to overinvest in reputations that do not align with its strategic needs.

What double first-class actually is

The Double First-Class Initiative (双一流) was launched in 2015 by the State Council as the successor to Projects 211 and 985. It is not a ranking. It is a government classification system with direct funding and policy implications.

The core concept is discipline-driven development: rather than designating entire universities as “world-class”, the initiative supports specific disciplines within universities to reach world-class status. A university may be strong overall but have only a handful of designated “First-Class Disciplines”. Conversely, a lesser-known university may have one or two disciplines that are nationally leading.

The selection is based on third-party evaluation across six dimensions taking consideration of geographical distribution within the country: talent cultivation, scientific research (including basic research, applied research, and humanities), contributions to society (including industry-university collaboration), preservation and promotion of Chinese culture, faculty and research team development, and international cooperation.

The list is adjusted every five years. In the first round (2017), universities were classified into A-level (36 universities), B-level (6 universities), and a separate category for First-Class Disciplines. The second round (2022) unified these categories and expanded the list to 147 universities.

Critically, the system is dynamic. Institutions can be downgraded or lose their status if they fail to meet required standards during the evaluation cycle. The Ministry of Education has signalled that the 2026 selection will show “regional balanced features, tilting more resources toward populous provinces and the central and western regions”.

The key phrase to understand is “serve national strategic needs”. The Double First-Class system rewards alignment with China’s economic and technological priorities – AI, semiconductors, advanced manufacturing, biomedicine, and green technology. A university’s Double First-Class status tells you something important: the Chinese government has identified this institution or discipline as a national priority.

What the ShanghaiRanking Best Chinese Universities Ranking measures

The Best Chinese Universities Ranking (BCUR), launched in 2015, is a comprehensive quantitative ranking of over 1,000 Chinese universities. It uses a detailed evaluation system with 10 modules, 35 dimensions, 104 indicators, and 398 variables.

The ten modules cover: education level, discipline strength, institutional resources, faculty size and structure, talent cultivation, scientific research, social service, high-end talent, major projects and outcomes, and international competitiveness.

The weighting reflects a strong emphasis on research output and talent cultivation. The methodology includes Freshmen Gaokao scores (30% weighting) and graduate employment rates (10%) under the teaching and learning module, alongside research indicators such as Scopus papers, field-weighted citation impact, and top 1% cited papers.

In the 2026 BCUR, 91 of the top 100 universities are Double First-Class institutions. This high correlation is expected – both systems reward research strength and national investment.

But the correlation is not perfect. And the divergences are precisely where foreign universities need to pay attention.

The critical difference for partner selection

The distinction between these two systems matters enormously for partnership decisions.

Double First-Class is a government designation, not a ranking. It is based on discipline-level strategic evaluation, operates on a five-year review cycle, and signals that a university or discipline has been identified as a national priority with access to strategic funding. Its limitation is that only 147 universities are designated – meaning many excellent institutions are excluded, especially those in provinces with over-concentrated universities – and it does not measure teaching quality or partnership readiness.

BCUR, by contrast, is a quantitative ranking based on institution-level comprehensive metrics, updated annually, and reflecting overall institutional performance and market reputation. Its limitation is that it does not indicate government support or strategic alignment – and a high composite score may mask weakness in your specific discipline.

In practical terms: a Chinese university ranked in the BCUR top 100 but not designated Double First-Class may be an excellent institution – but it lacks the national strategic mandate that comes with the designation. It may have less access to central government funding (but may be more local funding like Shenzhen University).

Conversely, a Double First-Class university ranked outside the BCUR top 100 in comprehensive terms may have a specific First-Class Discipline that is nationally leading or in some cases, the only best university in a province.

The King‘s College London – SUSTech example

The partnership between King’s College London and the Southern University of Science and Technology (SUSTech) illustrates exactly why foreign universities should look beyond both labels.

SUSTech was established in 2011 – less than 15 years ago – by the Guangdong provincial government with the aim of creating “a new type of tertiary education” and becoming a world-class research university. It is not a traditional Double First-Class university in the comprehensive sense. It does not carry the historical prestige of a Peking University or a Fudan University.

Yet King‘s College London chose SUSTech as its partner for the SUSTech–King’s School of Medicine, a joint programme leading to double degree awards from both institutions.

Why SUSTech? The answer lies in strategic alignment, not ranking.

SUSTech is located in Shenzhen – China‘s technology capital and the heart of the Greater Bay Area. It is a young, research-intensive university with a strong focus on biomedicine, engineering, and applied sciences. It has the institutional agility to design and deliver a joint programme quickly, without the bureaucratic inertia that sometimes characterises older institutions.

King’s College London – itself one of the world‘s leading biomedical research universities – recognised that SUSTech offered complementary strengths: a biomedical research ecosystem in one of the world‘s fastest-growing innovation hubs, combined with the freedom to co-design a curriculum from scratch.

As the SUSTech School of Medicine describes it, the collaboration “brings together an innovative university in Shenzhen with an established university in London to create a new model of global engagement for the development of the future biomedical workforce”.

This is the key insight. King‘s did not choose SUSTech because of a ranking. It chose SUSTech because of strategic fit – and because the partnership could be designed as a genuine co-creation, not a one-way transfer of curriculum.

A practical framework for foreign universities

When selecting a Chinese partner, foreign universities should consider both systems – but with clarity about what each one tells you.

Step 1: Check Double First-Class status – but focus on the discipline.

If your proposed partnership is in a specific field, check whether the Chinese partner has a First-Class Discipline designation in that field. This tells you whether the Chinese government has identified that discipline as a national priority – and whether the university has access to strategic funding to support it.

Do not dismiss a university simply because it is not on the comprehensive Double First-Class list. Many excellent institutions – like SUSTech – are not.

Step 2: Use BCUR for institutional benchmarking – but understand its limitations.

The BCUR provides a useful snapshot of overall institutional performance. It is particularly valuable for comparing research output, faculty quality, and talent cultivation across a large number of institutions.

But remember: the BCUR is a composite ranking. A university may score highly overall while having a weak department in your specific field. Use it as a starting point, not a final verdict.

Step 3: Look for strategic alignment.

The most important question is not “How highly is this university ranked?” but “Does this university‘s strategic direction align with ours?”

Consider geographic fit – is the university located in a region that aligns with China’s industrial priorities and with your own strategic interests? Shenzhen, for example, offers proximity to the Greater Bay Area‘s technology ecosystem.

Consider disciplinary complementarity – does the partner bring strengths that complement your own? King’s College London did not need a partner that replicated its biomedical expertise; it needed a partner that offered access to a different research ecosystem.

Consider institutional agility – younger institutions like SUSTech may have fewer bureaucratic layers and greater flexibility to co-design programmes, while older, more established universities may offer prestige and alumni networks but slower decision-making.

And consider government support – universities in provinces may have access to local government incentives and support that are not visible in rankings.

Step 4: Assess partnership readiness, not just reputation.

A highly ranked Chinese university may be an excellent research institution but a poor TNE partner if it lacks experience with international curriculum design, English-medium teaching capacity in your discipline, a track record of successful joint programme delivery, or willingness to share governance and co-create.

The best indicator of future partnership success is past partnership success. Ask for evidence of existing TNE programmes, graduate outcomes, and partner satisfaction.

The bottom line

The Double First-Class designation and the ShanghaiRanking BCUR are both useful tools. But they answer different questions.

Double First-Class tells you whether the Chinese government has identified this university or discipline as a national strategic priority. BCUR tells you how this university performs across a comprehensive set of quantitative indicators. Neither tells you whether this is the right partner for your institution, your discipline, and your strategic goals.

For foreign universities entering China’s TNE market, the lesson is clear. Use the labels as a starting point. But make your decision based on strategic alignment, partnership readiness, and the potential for genuine mutual value.

The best partner is not always the one with the highest ranking. It is the one with the right fit.

Charles Sun is founder and managing director of China Education International (CEI).