This year's National Congress sessions have placed the transformation of university disciplines in the spotlight. Industry leaders, including Xiaomi Corp. CEO Lei Jun, have called for the establishment of interdisciplinary fields such as "Intelligent Electric Vehicles." Concurrently, Academician Zhang Boli of the Chinese Academy of Engineering has proposed adding Rehabilitation Medicine as a primary discipline. Liao Xiangzhong, Party Secretary of the Communication University of China, revealed that the university merged or adjusted 16 undergraduate programs last year, including Translation and Photography, while introducing three new majors related to artificial intelligence. These developments reflect new demands from industrial and societal development for talent cultivation in higher education.

In fact, over the past two years, universities have already undergone a wave of program closures and mergers in response to accelerating industrial changes. Promoting interdisciplinary integration has become a broad societal consensus. This year's government work report explicitly called for improving the alignment of talent cultivation with economic and social development needs, categorically advancing university reforms, dynamically adjusting academic disciplines, launching a new round of "Double First-Class" initiative construction, establishing national interdisciplinary centers, and increasing efforts to cultivate top-tier innovative talent domestically. Several education experts noted that truly fostering interdisciplinary integration requires not only a fundamental shift in the operational logic of universities but also supportive measures; otherwise, it may only result in a series of new disciplines in name only.

Confronted with the demands of new quality productive forces and emerging industries, universities across China began a large-scale optimization of disciplines in 2024. The mainstream approach involves phasing out low-efficiency programs and strengthening interdisciplinary fields. In recent years, several top universities have taken the lead in restructuring traditional, foundational disciplines. For example, East China Normal University will suspend enrollment for 24 undergraduate programs in 2025, including Insurance and German. Six of the 19 programs halted by Jilin University this year belong to the arts category. Beijing Language and Culture University will discontinue seven translation-related master's programs in 2025, such as Russian Translation and Japanese Interpreting.

During the National Congress sessions, Jin Li, an academician of the Chinese Academy of Sciences and President of Fudan University, stated that technological innovation requires breaking disciplinary boundaries and that future development must be planned beyond the constraints of primary and secondary discipline classifications. Ding Kuiling, also an academician of the Chinese Academy of Sciences and President of Shanghai Jiao Tong University, believes a key aspect of integration is breaking the traditional model where "several disciplines form one school" and instead exploring超前 models where "several schools belong to one field." Late last year, universities including Fudan University, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, and Nanjing University explored cultivating interdisciplinary, top-tier innovative talent through disciplinary restructuring and AI empowerment, including piloting a dual-degree program combining an academic PhD with a professional AI master's degree—a first in the nation.

Despite proactive efforts by universities, significant barriers to genuine interdisciplinary integration remain. A leader from a 985 Project university commented that suggestions like Lei Jun's for a "Intelligent Electric Vehicles" interdisciplinary discipline, or calls from higher education circles for specific evaluation and recognition criteria for interdisciplinary fields, highlight that many still operate within a traditional disciplinary mindset. True integration today is not about creating new interdisciplinary disciplines, but about dismantling all walls between existing fields. Changing this mindset is challenging, the official noted, as Chinese university development has long been driven by disciplinary logic. Disciplines are the fundamental units within universities, governing everything from teaching management to faculty promotion, and are synonymous with resources and academic standing. Consequently, promoting interdisciplinary integration inevitably encounters challenges related to evaluation and resource allocation.

A scholar engaged in interdisciplinary research mentioned that under traditional evaluation systems, recognizing cross-disciplinary achievements is exceedingly difficult. When seeking promotion, he struggled to find an appropriate department for his work and ultimately relied on科研成果 from a traditional discipline to advance. Furthermore, cultivating interdisciplinary talent still faces issues such as relatively rigid evaluation mechanisms, long degree authorization cycles, and inadequate channels for selecting students across disciplines. An official from a renowned university pointed out that while disciplinary barriers must be broken, cultivating interdisciplinary talent still requires new program approvals and degree authorizations. Roughly estimating a two-year cycle for approving a new program, it takes at least six years from application to the first graduating class. Many industries undergo dramatic changes in just six months, making a minimum six-year training cycle completely misaligned with the pace of talent demand iteration.

Despite these barriers, positive signals emerged during the National Congress. Minister of Education Huai Jinpeng announced that the construction of national interdisciplinary centers will begin in 2026. A plan for breakthroughs in basic and interdisciplinary disciplines will be implemented, fostering organized, cross-disciplinary research and providing long-term, stable support for young talent engaged in original and disruptive technological innovation. Reforms to align talent supply and demand are advancing; the discipline catalog, previously revised every ten or five years, is now updated annually with a list of urgently needed fields, allowing for program establishment and student enrollment within the same year.

Many industry experts believe this round of disciplinary adjustment is not merely about adding or subtracting programs but represents a deep institutional reform. The core objective is to better align university talent cultivation with national development and industrial needs—essentially, a process of strategic addition and subtraction based on demand. To address bottlenecks in the evaluation, employment, and career development of interdisciplinary talent, leaders from top universities proposed specific solutions. Jin Li suggested creating exclusive evaluation standards for interdisciplinary work, moving away from a singular focus on research papers, and improving rules for mutual recognition and scoring of achievements across institutions. He also advocated for a "revolving door" between universities, research institutes, and enterprises, implementing a dual-supervisor system and establishing independent promotion tracks. Yang Jinlong, an academician of the Chinese Academy of Sciences and President of Tongji University, proposed detailed mechanisms, suggesting the Ministry of Education lead in formulating guidelines and assessment methods for national interdisciplinary centers, and establish a cycle involving "demonstration-construction-evaluation-exit." He also recommended expanding enrollment in interdisciplinary fields and allowing researchers to apply for projects and seek promotions across different schools or departments.