In April 2014, I sat in a shuttle bus surrounded by strangers with one thing in common: we all had the option to attend NYU Shanghai. With nametags and blatantly obvious anxiety, we were all forced to converse in one way or another. “Where are you from?” “What’s your major?” I, myself, had not actually gone over the bulletin in great detail - a commonality I have with a lot of people now - but perhaps, if I got an idea of the ‘popular’ majors, I might have something to study by the time I attended in the fall. During that long shuttle ride, and many more that were to follow, one thing became obvious: Global China Studies was it. It was the ‘popular’ major - the one everyone came here to study. The oh-so mysterious major that, from its name, was to teach me the internal and external workings of the mighty middle kingdom. I’d be fluent in Mandarin in a year and by graduation would be able to provide you with all the details of the inner maze of the PRC. In theory, it makes sense. I would come to China to learn everything I could about China. Then, something shifted after the arrival of the Class of 2018. Suddenly, people were no longer Global China Studies majors. They wanted to study politics, international relations, economics - and no longer had interest or time for classes on modern Chinese literature or the history of Chinese philosophy. Looking at the core classes, students suddenly began to think - what is the use of all this? In the 2014-2015 Undergraduate Bulletin, it was brought to students’ attention, that Global China Studies had changed into a track under Humanities. The Humanities Major, as the name suggests, is essentially a conglomeration of literature, history, and philosophy - “the study of human culture.” Under Humanities, it seemed as though Global China Studies was just going to involve the study of Chinese literature, Chinese history, and Chinese philosophy.But what about China in the modern world? What about its role as a global superpower? What was the word ‘global’ meant to allude to then? Maybe this was all an issue of miscommunication: the readers of the academic bulletin interpreted the study of “global currents in China… in the context of commercial, religious, cultural, political, and other interactions” to mean something else.As someone who was previously excited about studying Chinese politics and the Chinese economy, I was disappointed and discouraged. Browsing through the core classes, I saw I had to take The Concept of China, a course on Chinese diaspora, among other electives. Out of all the electives at the time, only two or so were centralized around the social sciences. One was a political science class and the other was about East Asian-U.S. Relations -- not enough for an entire academic career. If I wanted to study about China, I had to bear through courses that I was simply not interested in. The undeniable mesh between Global China Studies and the Humanities was, however, ultimately inevitable, as the lead ‘creator’ of the major, Provost Joanna Waley-Cohen, designed the major with an historical focus. An expert in Chinese history, Waley-Cohen looked into hiring other ‘China experts.’ Thus, Professor Lena Scheen, Chen Jian, and Celina Hung were all introduced into the NYU Shanghai faculty. The other reason the Global China Studies major was so heavily based on humanities subjects, was, as Waley-Cohen argues, because prior to its establishment, NYU Shanghai had placed an extremely low priority on the Humanities. “As Dean, I wanted to pick up Humanities from the bottom, and bring it up. I wanted to show people here that it was something worth caring about,” Waley-Cohen said. Almost a year later, with a new incoming class, the question still stands regarding whether or not things have changed. Global China Studies is no longer the ‘popular’ major, and I say this with the uttermost sadness and regret. It’s disappointing. We all came to China for a reason - thinking it could offer us something - and yet, the majority of us have chosen a different major than the one that, in theory, allows us to get the most out of our time in China. Out of the approximately 300 freshmen, only a select few are considering majoring in Global China Studies. In the class Concept of China, a core class for the Global China Studies major, only one freshman had definite interest in the major. There is a considerable miscommunication regarding this previously popular major. The dynamic array of information, coming from various sectors of administration, have ultimately left students in confused limbo. For Chinese students, the ambiguity around the Global China Studies major surrounds the question of how much more they could possibly learn about China. To put it in perspective, an American going on to study U.S. history seems trite, especially considering U.S. history is such an integral part of the American high school curriculum. For Chinese students, taking history classes on ancient China and Confucius would be highly repetitive.Another issue that Professor Waley-Cohen addressed was the inclusion of Advanced Chinese I and II in the core Global China Studies requirements. Originally, the plan was to offer Classical Chinese so that Chinese students would have the opportunity to advance their linguistic abilities. However, at present, the administration has seen limited interest in the class from students, and has found few professors to actually teach the class. With the current structure of the Global China Studies major, it seems that Chinese students are not only being deterred from the major, but actually cannot partake in it.At NYU Shanghai, we engage in lots of conversation about how ‘global’ we are because we come from all over the world and get the rare chance to experience Chinese society. But what about for those who call Shanghai home? What global insights do they gain if their classes simply recap of the highlights of the Ming Dynasty and the fall of the Qing? These are the types of questions that leading faculty have started to ask. As of the Fall 2015 semester, NYU Shanghai appointed Professor Pierre Landry as Director of the Global China Studies program. With a background in the social sciences, Landry has centralized his work around Asian politics and local governance. In hiring a political scientist, perhaps Global China Studies will begin to lead toward the social sciences instead of its current leaning towards the humanities. For Landry and Professor Waley-Cohen, Global China Studies is truly interdisciplinary -- that is, it should focus on more than just one branch of knowledge.When asked if students were going to be able to choose their own track, both Waley-Cohen and Landry gave the classic NYU Shanghai answer: it is all in the works. If you want interest in your major, this is how you do it. Why is IMA NYU Shanghai’s leading major? It is because I can sit in Interaction Lab and with the tools I’m given, I can create anything. With Global China Studies, I can’t create anything and I’m not being pushed. I’m not encouraged to analyze or interpret, and instead I’m being forced to like things -- such as Chinese films or literature -- that I simply have no interest in.If NYU Shanghai is looking to bring back Global China Studies as the ‘popular’ major, the major should appeal to more interests. Right now, the major is sitting in a crevice between the humanities and the social sciences instead of building a bridge between the two. We all came here for a reason, and for the majority of us, we came here for China. But none of us are interested in the same China. Not all of us are interested in Confucius, not all are interested in U.S.-Asia relations, and not all of us are interested in contemporary Chinese writers. We’re just not getting what we wanted. This article was written by Isabella Farr. Send an email to [email protected] to get in touch. Photo Credit: NYU Shanghai