-
InternatIonalHIgHereducatIonT H E B O S T O N C O L L E G E C E
N T E R F O R I N T E R N A T I O N A L H I G H E R E D U C A T I O
N
International Higher Education is the quarterly publication of
the Center for International Higher Education.
The journal is a reflection of the Center’s mission to
en-courage an international per-spective that will contribute to
enlightened policy and prac-tice. Through International Higher
Education, a network of distinguished international scholars offers
commentary and current information on key issues that shape higher
education worldwide. IHE is published in English, Chinese, Russian,
Portuguese, and Spanish. Links to all editions can be found at
www.bc.edu/cihe.
Number 75: SpriNg 2014
International Issues
2 DiplomacyandEducation:AChangingGlobalLandscape Patti McGill
Peterson3 HowCorruptionPutsHigherEducationatRisk
Stephen P. Heyneman5
MOOCsasNeocolonialism:WhoControlsKnowledge?
Philip G. Altbach7
TopUniversitiesorTopHigherEducationSystems?
Benoît Millot8 OutcomesAssessmentinInternationalEducation
Darla K. Deardorff10
APEC’sBoldHigherEducationAgenda:WillAnyoneNotice?
Christopher Ziguras
China: English and the Brain Race
12 China’sRemovalofEnglishfromtheGaokao Yang Rui13
“EnglishFever”inChina:AWatershed
Wang Xiaoyang and Li Yangyang15
WillChinaExcelintheGlobalBrainRace?
Qiang Zha
International Student Flows
16 PointSystemsandInternationalStudentFlows Jing Li18
GermanStudentsAbroad
Jan Kercher and Nicole Rohde19
Canada’sImmigrationPoliciestoAttractInternationalStudents
Anita Gopal
Africa: Quality Assurance and Regulation
21 TrendsinRegulationinsub-SaharanAfrica A. B. K. Kasozi22
PrivateHigherEducation’sQualityAssuranceinGhana
Linda Tsevi
Focus on Ukraine
24 Ukraine’sTestingInnovation Eduard Klein25
InternationalizationinPost-SovietUkraine
Valentyna Kushnarenko and Sonja Knutson
Departments
28 NewPublications31 NewsoftheCenter
-
I N T E R N A T I O N A L H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N2 I N T E
R N A T I O N A L H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N 3International
IssuesInternational Issues
Whenagreementsforacademiccooperationaresignedbyuniversitypresidents,thesettingandformalitieshaveallthetrappingsofaninternationalagreement.Thesigning,aswithalltreaties,representssignificantgroundworklaidbyinstitutionalrepresentatives.Thecelebratorymomentisnotalwaysfollowedbysustainablerelationships,andexpec-tationsaresometimesmetwithdeepdisappointment.Theresult
canhaveanegative impacton institutional aswellasnational
relations,although the lattermaybeanunin-tendedconsequence.
Whilecollegesanduniversitiesmustadheretonationallawsandarewise
tobewell-awareof local customs, theyoperatemainlyon theirown
reconnaissancewhenagree-mentsaresigned.Inthisdimension,theyaremovingbe-yondsovereigntybuttheymaystillberegardedasnationalrepresentatives.Forthisveinofpublicdiplomacy,it
isex-tremely important, just as in official diplomatic
negotia-tions,sothatinstitutionsdevelopprotocolsthatrecognizeallthedetails,promises,andexpectationsthatarecriticaltobothpartiesbeforesigning.Andwhenunexpecteddevelop-mentscausetensions,itwillbeequallyimportanttohavewaystoadjudicatetheseissues.
Sound Diplomacy for Strong RelationshipsIt would be safe to say
that in most educational diplo-macy there are mixed motives for
seeking
engagement.Thesearchforfee-payingstudentsisaleadingreasonforgreatercross-borderactivity.Institutionsandgovernmentsincountrieswithwell-developedhighereducationarecre-atinginitiativestoreceivestudentsfrommanydevelopingcountries.Someuniversitiesinspiteoflesswell-developedhighereducationseekrelationshipswithotherinstitutionstheyviewasmoreprestigioustoincreasetheirchancesofahigherdegreeinglobalrankings.
Counteringthesemorenarrowmotivationsforengage-ment, many
institutions are developing broader
interna-tionalizationstrategies,toseekcooperativeagreementsthatdefinethemselvesasglobalinstitutions.Theymaywanttopursueavarietyofgoals
throughengagement—toenrichtheiracademicprograms,enlargetheknowledgeandexpe-riencebasefortheirstudents,hostamoreinternationallydiversestudentbodyandfaculty,providemoreopportuni-tiesfortheirfacultytojoininternationalresearchnetworks,
andultimatelytodevelopawidespectrumofjointactivitythatwillbenefitbothpartners.Aswithallsustainablerela-tionships,thecharacterofthepartiesandtheethicalframe-workinwhichtheyoperateareallimportant.Countriesandinstitutionsengagingineducationaldiplomacyhaveanob-ligationtoconsiderthebenefits—notmerelytothemselvesbutalsototheirpartners.Thiswillbeinthebestspiritofin-ternationalrelationsandinternationalizationofhigheredu-cation.Ifdonewell,itwillbearisingtidethatliftsallships.
HowCorruptionPutsHigherEducationatRiskStephen P. Heyneman
Stephen P. Heyneman is professor of international education
policy at Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee. E-mail:
[email protected].
Competitionforresourcesandfameplacepressuresonhighereducationinstitutions.Weaker
institutionsaremore prone to corruption. In some instances,
corruptionhas invaded university systems and threatens the
reputa-tion of research products and diplomas. Where this
hasoccurred,corruptionhasreducedtheindividualandsocialeconomicrateofreturnonhighereducationinvestments.Some
countries have acquired a reputation for academ-ic dishonesty,
raising questions about all graduates
anddoubtsaboutallinstitutions.
Corruptioncanariseat
theearlystageofrecruitmentandadmission.Studentsmayfeeltheyhavetopayashad-owprice,tobeadmittedtoaparticularuniversityprogram.Somestudentspaybribesasaninsurancepolicy,becausetheydonotwanttobeleftbehindfornotpayingabribe.
Financialfraudremainsamajorchallenge.Reductionsinpublicfinancehaveaffectedsystemsofinternalcontroltoprevent
fraud.Becauseeach facultymayhave
separatecostcenters,financialmonitoringmaybedifficult.Nor
isiteasytomonitorstudentassociationsthathandlemoneyseparatelyfromtheuniversityadministration.
Directlyrelatedtotheglobalinternet,accessisanava-lanche of
so-called “degree mills”—thousands of
them,locatedinallregions.ThereisaWikipediapagethat
listshousepetsthathaveearneddegrees.Howmightonerec-ognizeadegreemill?Theyoftenpromiseadegreewithinashortamountoftimeandwithlowcosts;theygivecreditfornonacademicexperience;theirWebsitesoftenlisttheiraddressesasbeingapostbox.Equally,problematicarefake
DiplomacyandEducation:AChangingGlobalLandscapePatti McGill
Peterson
Patti McGill Peterson is presidential advisor for
internationalization and global engagement at the American Council
on Education, Wash-ington, DC. E-mail: [email protected].
Diplomacy—theartofinternationalrelations—wasoncetheprovinceofheadsofstateortheirappointedrepre-sentatives.Over
the last century, itsparametersexpandedto include the concept of
“public diplomacy,” a term
thatcoverstheactionsofawide-arrayofactorsandactivitiesin-tendedtopromotefavorablerelationsamongnations.
In the practice of diplomacy as well as domination,countries
have extended their national interests
througheducation.Itplayedacentralroleinthelonghistoryofco-lonialismbythosewishingtoinfluencelocalpopulations.In
thepostcolonialera,educationstillplaysan
importantroleintheadvancementofnationalinfluence.
Higher Education and Soft PowerInmorerecentyears,
theroleofeducationandacademicexchangeinbuildinginternationalrelationshipshasbeencharacterizedbythetermof“softpower.”Ratherthanem-ploying
force, softpower isdependenton
thestrengthofideasandculture,toinfluencethefriendshipanddisposi-tionofothers.Highereducationisanidealvehicleforsoftpower.
TheFulbrightProgram—sponsoredbytheUSDepart-mentofState—isanexcellentexampleofpublicdiplomacy,being
furthered through higher education. Its
principalgoalistofostermutualunderstandingbetweenpeopleandnations,andtheprogramhasalwaysbeenamixofgovern-mentandpeople-generatedsoftpower.Itclaimsthelargestmovementofstudentsandscholarsacross
theworld thatanynationhaseversponsored.Governmentofficialsoftencite
it asoneof thegreatdiplomaticassetsof theUnitedStates. Citizens and
leaders of other countries who haveparticipated inFulbright
frequentlyproclaima familiaritywith anda fondness for
theUnitedStates and
itspeopleduetotheirexperiences—aresultthatgeneratesgoodwillfortheUnitedStatesabroad.
WhileFulbrighthasnotbeenreplicatedbyothercoun-tries, there are
other well-organized efforts to extend na-tional diplomacy through
education. The British
Councilisaprimeexample.Withofficesaroundtheworld,some-times
operating as an affiliate of British embassies, theBritish Council
describes itself as the United Kingdom’sinternational organization
for educational opportunities
andculturalrelations.AlongtheFulbrightmodel,itoffersscholarshipsforstudyintheUnitedKingdomandsponsorseducational
exchanges between higher education
institu-tionsthereandinothercountries.
TheGermanAcademicExchangeServiceplaysasimi-larbutlessextensiverole;andveryimportantly,non-West-ern
countries have followed with their diplomatic efforts.China emerged
with an idea for its own brand of
educa-tionaldiplomacy,in2004.ItsConfuciusInstitutesarede-signedtopromoteChineselanguageandcultureabroad.By2011,therewere353ConfuciusInstitutesin104countriesandregions.
Diplomacy or HegemonySoft power relationships, informed by
enlightened
self-interest,oftensignalunequalrelationships.ThisissuehasbeenraisedparticularlywithregardtoEast-WestandNorth-Southcooperation.Giventhedemandforhighereducationin
developing countries, they are unwilling to
discouragethosewhowishtohelpeitherthroughscholarshipsoras-sistancewiththeformationofinstitutions.Inthebestofallpossibleworlds,theseofferscancreatedevelopmentforthereceivingcountryasawaytobuildhumancapacity.How-ever,countriesthatarerecipientsofeducationaldiplomacyneed
to understand the motivations of those wishing
tobuildrelationships.
Asweenteraperiodofacceleratedglobalengagement,country-to-countryeducationaldiplomacyisbeingovertak-enbyinstitution-to-institutionrelationshipsandabroadar-rayofactors.Thismakestheeducationaldiplomacyscenar-ioevenmorecomplicated
for thoseon thereceivingend.Italsomeans thatgovernmentsarenot
theprimeactors.Whilegovernmentsmayviewcollegeanduniversitycross-borderactivityasanimportantpartoftheirdiplomaticef-forts,institutionsareincreasinglyoperatingbeyondsover-eignty,basedontheirownstrategiesandmotivations.
Beyond Sovereignty?
AreportonglobalhighereducationengagementfromtheAmerican Council on
Education depicted institutions
asactingsimultaneouslyonthemesofcompetitionandcoop-eration.Whileitdidnotdisputetheroleofhighereducationinpublicdiplomacy,thereportfocusedmoreontheneedforcollegesanduniversitiestodeveloptheirownengage-ment
strategies. This can lead to direct relationships
andnegotiations,notjustwitheducationalinstitutionsoutsidetheUnitedStates,butalsowithgovernmentsthemselves.WhenthepresidentsofAmericanuniversitiestraveltoIn-dia,
China, or any number of other countries, they
oftenmeetwithgovernmentofficialsaspartoftheirefforts—tobuildeducationalrelationshipswiththosecountries.
In the practice of diplomacy as well as
domination, countries have extended
their national interests through educa-
tion.
-
I N T E R N A T I O N A L H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N4 I N T E
R N A T I O N A L H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N 5International
Issues
batcorruption.Developmentassistanceagenciesalsohaveimportantroles.Amongcriteriaforproject,approvalmightbe
thecorruption
infrastructurenotedabove.Inaddition,countriesmightbeheld
accountable for their anticorrup-tion performance, based on the
evidence that
corruptionhaddeclined,thattheleveloftransparencyhadincreased,and
that the public perception of corruption had shifteddownward.
Inregularsurveys,TransparencyInternationalhasas-sistedtheunderstandingofgeneralcorruptionbygaugingthedegreetowhichanation’sbusinessandgovernmentarebelievedtobecorrupt.Asimilarsetofindicatorscouldbeusedonhighereducation.Itcouldbeamatterofpride,tofindthatthelevelofparticipationandthepublicperceptionof
corruption are on the decline. If governments
encour-agesuchsurveys,itisahealthysign;ifgovernmentsforbidsuchsurveys,itisasignthattheyhavenotyetunderstoodthelevelofriskinvolvedbybeingpassive.
Perception is all-important. It is common to
denywrongdoing.“Whereistheevidence?”onemightask.Thisisthewrongapproach.Whenaninstitutionisperceivedtobecorrupt,
thedamage isalreadydone.Perception is
theonlyevidenceneededforharmfuleffectstooccur.Thisisone reason why
all world-class universities post anticor-ruption efforts on their
Web sites. This implies that anyuniversity, in any culture, that
has ambitions to
becomeworldclassisrequiredtoerectasimilarethicalinfrastruc-ture.Thismayrequireachangeofattitudeonthepartofmanyrectorsanduniversityadministrators.Itmayrequirethemtoshiftfromamodeofself-protectionanddenialtoamodeoftransparencyandactiveengagement,evenwhentheevidencemaybedisturbingand/orpainful.Ifthebestuniversitiesintheworldsubmitthemselvestosuchethicalinspections,thentheotherscantoo.
MOOCsasNeocolonialism:WhoControlsKnowledge?Philip G. Altbach
Philip G. Altbach is research professor and director of the
Center for International Higher Education at Boston College.
E-mail: [email protected].
Massiveopenonlinecourses,orMOOCs,arethelatesteffort to harness
information technology for highereducation.The concept
takesadvantageof the significant
advancements in technology thatpermitsmuchmore
in-teractivepedagogyaswellasmoresophisticateddeliveryofcontent.WhileMOOCsare
still in anascent stageofde-velopment,
theirsponsorsaswellasmanycommentatorsandpolicymakersareenthusiastic,andseethemasanin-expensiveandinnovativewayofdeliveringcontenttovastaudiences,whileothersseepotentialforprofits.
OneaspectoftheMOOCmovementhasnotbeenfullyanalyzed—whocontrolstheknowledge.ConsideringwherethecontentandthetechnologythatsupportMOOCsorigi-nate,theanswerisclear.MOOCsarelargelyanAmerican-led
effort and themajority of the courses available so
farcomefromuniversitiesintheUnitedStatesorotherWest-erncountries.Themainprovidersarealso
in the techno-logically advanced countries. The technology in use
wasdevelopedinSiliconValley,KendallSquareinCambridge,Massachusetts,andotherhubsof
informationtechnologyinnovation.Earlyadoptershaveasignificantadvantageinthis
arena. While globalization has increased the sway
oftheacademiccenters ineconomicallypowerfulcountries,MOOCs promise
to enhance this higher education
hege-monybyharnessingtechnologytotheexistingknowledgenetwork.
Others, in diverse and less-developed regions of theworld, are
joining the MOOC bandwagon, but it is likelythat theywillbeusing
technology,pedagogical
ideas,andmuchofthecontentdevelopedelsewhere.Inthisway,theonlinecoursesthreatentoexacerbatetheworldwideinflu-enceofWesternacademe,bolstering
itshighereducationhegemony.
Two of the original MOOC sponsors, Coursera andEdX,areAmerican
initiatives—thefirst foundedbyStan-ford professors and based in
Silicon Valley in Californiaand the second established by Harvard
University andthe Massachusetts Institution of Technology. Many
othertopuniversities,mainly in theUnitedStates,have
joinedtheseefforts.Courseraoffers535coursesinmanyfieldsofstudy—24percentofthecoursesoriginatefromoutsidetheUnitedStates,Canada,
theUnitedKingdom,
andAustra-lia;EdXprovides91courses—19ofwhicharefromoutsideNorth
America and the United Kingdom. Some of
thesecoursesenrollasmanyas300,000students,withaverageenrollmentsof
approximately20,000.The
largemajorityofstudentscomefromoutsidetheUnitedStates.Comple-tionratesseemtobelow—mostlessthan13percent.ManyintheMOOCmovementareseekingtoearnprofitsfromMOOCs—agoalsofarunmet.
Who Controls Knowledge and Why Does It Matter?The large majority
of MOOCs are created and taught byprofessors in
theUnitedStates.Companiesanduniversi-
accreditation agencies, promising quick assessments
andpermanentaccreditation.
Cross-bordereducationalprogramsraisequestions inthreeareas:
therecognitionofdegrees, theuseofrecruit-mentagents toencourage
internationalstudents,and
theestablishmentofprogramsabroadbyinstitutionsofdubi-ousreputation.Thoughcross-borderprovisionraisesnewrisksofcorruption,itmayalsobeaconduitforcross-borderintegrity.Cross-borderprovisionofexcellenceinhighered-ucationcanofferarareopportunityforlocalstudentsandinstitutionstoobservehowacorrupt-freeinstitutionoper-ates.
To attract students, institutions may exaggerate thesuccessof
theirgraduates.Thismaybeaparticularprob-lemwiththefor-profitinstitutionsandwithparticularlow-qualityprogramsinthevocations.Academicintegritycon-sistsofhonesty,
trust,respect,fairness,andresponsibilityand is fundamental to
thereputationofacademic
institu-tions.Alackofintegrityincludesthepracticeofplagiarism,cheating,unauthorizeduseofothers’work,payingforas-signmentsclaimedasone’sown,
the falsificationofdata,
downloadingassignmentsfromtheinternet,themisrepre-sentationofrecords,andfraudulentpublishing.Italsoin-cludespayingforgradeswithgifts,money,orsexualfavors.
Areas Needing Careful DiscussionDefinitional
limits.Whenuniversitiesarenotmanaged
well,somesuggestthatitisasignofcorruption.Inefficien-cy,aconcentrationofpower,slownessinmakingdecisions,andareluctancetoshareconfidentialinformationarenotsigns
of corruption. When educational institutions
seeknontraditionalsourcesof
income,somemayconfusethatwithcorruption—althoughwhereverlegal,itisnot.
Differences in corruption
levels.Thereareinstancesofcorruptionineverycountry,butthisdoesnotmeanthatcor-ruptionisdistributedidentically.Insomecircumstancesitisendemic,affectingtheentiresystem;inothercasesitisoccasional.Insomecircumstancesitismonetaryinnature;
inothersittendstocenteronprofessionaltransgressions,such as
plagiarism. Where international students
intendtostudyisrelevant.Ingeneral,studentsacttoleaveplaceswherecorruptionisrampantandprefer
tostudywhere itisminor.
Differences between institutional and individual cor-ruption.
Causes and solutions need to be differentiated.Institutional
corruption—financial fraud, the illegal pro-curement of goods and
services, and tax
avoidance—areproblemsthatcanbehandledthroughtheenforcementoflegislation.
Individual corruption—including faculty mis-behavior, cheating on
examinations, plagiarism, the falsi-fication of research
results—constitutes transgressions
ofcodesofprofessionalconduct.Inthefirst,themaincontrolisthroughlegislationandenforcementincourt.Inthesec-ond,controlisinternaltotheuniversity.Legislationshouldnotattempttoincludeinfractionsofindividualcorruption,onbehalfofindividualstudentsandfaculty.
The Environment and
CorruptionThoughcompetitionforrevenuesplacespressuresonfac-ulty,itisinsufficienttousesuchpressuresasanexcusetoengageincorruptpractices.Nor,isitsufficienttosuggestthat,becausecorruptbehavioriscommon,one’sownpar-ticipationcanbeexcused.Eveninenvironmentsinwhichcorruptionisvirtuallyuniversalthereare“resisters”tocor-ruption.
Are Anticorruption Measures International?Some individuals
suggest that anticorruption
measuresshouldbebasedondomesticvaluesandlaws.Althoughnu-merousinstancesseemcorrect,thereappeartobesomein-stancesinwhichuniversalmeasuresarealreadythenorm.Forinstance,inthecaseofuniversitiesrankedbytheTimes
Higher
Educationmagazineacross40countries,98percentethicalinfrastructureelements—ontheirWebsites—codesofconductforfaculty,students,andadministratorshonorscouncils.
Future WorkInternational agencies have an important role.
Findingwaystocombathighereducationcorruptionisaviablecan-didate for
theUnitedNationsEducational,Scientific,
andCulturalOrganization’sattentionandextrabudgetarysup-port.UNESCOcouldassistcountriestoestablishstrategiescoveringexaminationprocedures,accountabilityandtrans-parencycodes,andadjudicationstructures,suchasstudentandfacultycourtsofconduct.
TheCouncilofEuropeandtheEuropeanUnionhaveimportant roles. To
participate in the Bologna process,universities and the countries
seek tobe
recognized.Therecognitionprocedurecouldincludemechanismstocom-
International Issues
Cross-border educational programs
raise questions in three areas: the rec-
ognition of degrees, the use of recruit-
ment agents to encourage international
students, and the establishment of pro-
grams abroad by institutions of dubious
reputation.
-
I N T E R N A T I O N A L H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N6 I N T E
R N A T I O N A L H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N 7
cultures,thelocationofthemaincreatorsanddissemina-torsofMOOCs,andtheorientationofmostofthosecreat-ing
and teaching MOOCs ensures the domination of
thelargelyEnglish-speakingacademicsystems.Themillionsofstudents
choosing toparticipate inMOOCs
fromallovertheworlddonotseemtobeconcernedaboutthenatureoftheknowledgeorthephilosophyofpedagogythattheyarestudying.Universitiesinthemiddle-incomeanddevelop-ingworlddonotseemconcernedabouttheoriginsorori-entationsoftheknowledgeprovidedbytheMOOCsortheeducationalphilosophiesbehindMOOCpedagogy.
Idonotmeanto implyanyuntowardmotivesbytheMOOCcommunity. I
amnotarguing that
thecontentormethodologiesofmostcurrentMOOCsarewrongbecausethey are
based on the dominant Western academic
ap-proaches.ButIdobelieveitisimportanttopointoutthatapowerfulemergingeducationalmovement,
theMassiveOpenOnlineCourses,strengthensthecurrentlydominantacademicculture,perhapsmakingitmoredifficultforal-ternativevoicestobeheard.
TopUniversitiesorTopHigherEducationSystems?Benoît Millot
Benoît Millot is an independent consultant. He is a former
education economist at the World Bank. E-mail:
[email protected].
Internationaluniversityrankingshavebecomeafamiliarcharacteronthehighereducationscene.Astheirimpacthas
grown, reactions have followed suite, running fromenthusiastic
adherence, to passive resistance, and also
tooutrightcriticism.Thankstothelatter,methodologiesareimproving—guidelinesandsafeguardsarebeingdeveloped(e.g.,BerlinPrinciples)andfollowedup(e.g.,InternationalRankingExpertGroup).Yet,seriouscriticismsrelatetothefactthat,bydefinition,theserankingsfocusexclusivelyonindividualinstitutions—theworld-classuniversities—tobefoundonlyinasmallclusterofcountries.Thus,universityrankingsignorethevastmajorityofinstitutionsworldwidethatcannotcompeteonthesameplayingfieldasworld-classuniversities.Inturn,policymakerstendtoprioritizeasmallnumberofinstitutionsinordertoimprovetheircountry’sposition
in the rankings, often at the expense of the
restofthecountry’shighereducationsystem.Tocountertheseunexpectedandperverseeffects,attemptsarebeingmade
tomeasure,rank,andcomparenationalhighereducationsystems, rather
than individual
institutions.Tofigureoutwhethertheseattemptsaresuccessful,thisnotecomparestheirresultswiththoseobtainedbyuniversityrankings.
The Two Types of
RankingsAsafirststepinthecomparison,universityrankingsandsystem
rankings need to be selected. Regarding the Aca-demic Ranking of
World Universities, usually referred toas the Shanghai rankings,
Times Higher Education, andthe QS rankings are selected for being
the most popularand well-established league tables. Because of its
innova-tiveaspect,theWebometricsrankingisaddedtothese“bigthree.”Asfarassystemrankingsareconcerned,thechoiceislimited,andUniversitas21(U21,ledbytheUniversityofMelbourne,Australia)standsoutasanobviouspick,withcurrently
no real competitor, even though earlier
workshaveexploredwaystoassessentiresystems.U21uses22measures(“desirableattributes”)groupedintofourcatego-riesormodules:resources,environment,connectivity,andoutputsweighted,respectively(25%,20%,15%,and40%).
Most measures draw from conventional and verifiablesources
(OrganizationforEconomicCooperationandDe-velopment,UniversityInformationSystems,andSCImagodata,
etc.), and theyprovide a comprehensive viewof
themostimportantfacetsofhighereducationsystems.Particu-larlyinterestingistheinclusionoftheunemploymentratesof
university graduates to reflect external efficiency
(evenifthemeasureneedssomefine-tuning).Anotherwelcomefeatureistheefforttoreflecttheregulatoryenvironmentofhighereducationsystems.However,themodalitiestocomeupwithanindicatorforthisdimensionareelusiveandrelyonacombinationofsources—asurveyamongU21institu-tions,datafromrenownedinstitutions,andfromWebsites.Finally,
theuseof an “overall” indicatorbuilt on the
fourmodulesindicatorsishighlydependentontheweightsofits components
and, therefore, remains controversial
be-causeofthearbitrarinessofsuchweights—apitfallsharedbyuniversityrankings.
tieswith thefunds todevelopgoodMOOCcourses—andwith high
development costs—are American. Udacity,
anAmericanMOOCprovider,estimatesthatcreatingasinglecoursecosts$200,000,andisincreasingto$400,000.TheUniversity
of California, Berkeley, estimates
developmentcostsatbetween$50,000and$100,000,withaccesstoso-phisticatedtechnologyrequired.
For the most part, MOOC content is based on
theAmericanacademicexperienceandpedagogical ideas.Byand large, the
readings required by most MOOC
coursesareAmericanorfromotherWesterncountries.ManyofthecoursesareinEnglish,andevenwhenlecturesandmateri-alsare
translated intoother languages thecontent
largelyreflectstheoriginalcourse.ThevastmajorityofinstructorsareAmerican.Itislikelythatmorediversitywilldevelopbutthebasiccontentwillremain.
Approachestothecurriculum,pedagogy,andtheover-allphilosophyofeducationdifferaccordingtonationaltra-ditionsandpractices,
andmaynot reflect theapproachesprovided by most MOOC instructors or
the companiesand universities providing MOOC content and
pedagogy.No doubt, those developing MOOCs will claim that
theirmethodsarebestandreflectthemostadvancedpedagogicalthinking.Perhaps,therearearangeofapproachestolearn-ingandmanytraditions.
Why is this important? Neither knowledge nor peda-gogy are
neutral. They reflect the academic
traditions,methodologicalorientations,andteachingphilosophiesofparticularacademicsystems.Suchacademicnationalismisespecially
evident in many social science and
humanitiesfields,butitisnotabsentinthesciences.WhileacademicswhodevelopMOOCcoursesarenodoubtmotivatedbyadesiretodothebestjobpossibleandtocatertoawideau-dience,theyaretoasignificantextentboundbytheirownacademicorientations.
Since the vast majority of material used comes fromWestern
academic systems, examples used in
sciencecoursesarelikelytocomefromAmericaorEuropebecausethesecountriesdominate
the literatureandarticles in
in-fluentialjournals,andaretaughtbywell-knownprofessorsfromhigh-profileuniversities.ModesofinquiryreflecttheWesternmainstream.Whilethisknowledgebaseandpeda-gogicalorientationnodoubt
reflect current
ideasofgoodpractice,theymaynotbetheonlyapproachtogoodscien-tificinquiryorcontent.
These issuescomeintoevensharperfocus in theso-cial sciences and
humanities. In fields such as literatureand philosophy, most
courses reflect Western traditionsof knowledge, theWestern
literature canon, andWesternphilosophical assumptions. The social
sciences reflectWestern methodologies and basic assumptions about
the
essentialsofscientificinquiry.Mainstreamideasandmeth-ods
infields fromanthropology to sociology
reflectWest-erntrends,especiallytheAmericanacademiccommunity.Themajoracademicjournals,editors,andeditorialboards,bigacademicpublishersarelocatedintheglobalcentersofknowledge,
likeBoston,NewYork,andLondon.It is,un-der these circumstances,
natural that the dominant
ideasfromthesecenterswilldominateacademicdiscourse,andwillbereflectedinthethinkingandorientationsofmostofthoseplanningandteachingMOOCs.MOOCgatekeepers,suchasCoursera,Udacity,
andothers,will seek
tomain-tainstandardsastheyinterpretthem,andthiswillnodoubtstrengthen
the hegemony of Western methodologies andorientations.
English not only dominates academic scholarship
inthe21stcentury,butalso theMOOCs.English is the lan-guage of
internationally circulated academic journals; re-searchers in
non-English-speaking environments are in-creasingly using English
for their academic writings andcommunication. Major academic Web
sites tend to be
inEnglishaswell.BecauseEnglishisthelanguageofschol-arly
communication, the methodological and
intellectualorientationsoftheEnglish-speakingacademiccultureholdswayglobally.
Theimplicationsfordevelopingcountriesareserious.MOOCs produced
in the current centers of research
areeasytoaccessandinexpensivefortheuser,butmayinhibittheemergenceofalocalacademicculture,localacademiccontent,andcoursestailoredspeciallyfornationalaudienc-es.MOOCshavethepotentialtoreachnoneliteaudiences,thusextendingtheinfluenceofthemainacademiccenters.
The Neocolonialism of the WillingThose responsible for creating,
designing, and
deliveringMOOCcoursesinallfieldsareingeneralpartoftheaca-demiccultureofmajoruniversitiesintheEnglish-speakingcountries.Theydonotseektoimposetheirvaluesormeth-odologies
on others, influence happens organically
andwithoutconspiracies.Acombinationofpowerfulacademic
International Issues International Issues
The large majority of MOOCs are creat-
ed and taught by professors in the Unit-
ed States. Companies and universities
with the funds to develop good MOOC
courses—and with high development
costs—are American. In turn, policymakers tend to prioritize
a small number of institutions in order
to improve their country’s position in
the rankings, often at the expense of the
rest of the country’s higher education
system.
-
I N T E R N A T I O N A L H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N8 I N T E
R N A T I O N A L H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N 9
culturallearning.However,acloserlookisrequiredatthoseassessmentefforts,whichalthoughgrowinginpopularityarenotalwaysdesignedwell,executedeffectively,orlever-agedtomaximumeffect.
Oftentimes,institutionsengagedinoutcomesassess-mentwithininternationaleducationwilldothefollowing:Have
one person or one office “do the assessment”;
useonlyoneassessmenttool(usuallyapre/posttool);andusethatparticulartoolbecauseanotheruniversityoralluniver-sitiesinacertaingroupareusingit.Sometimesaninstitu-tionwillevendesigntheirowntool,oftennotvettingitforreliabilityorvalidity.
Fartoooftentheassessmenteffort
isanafterthoughtoranadhoceffort,withoutsufficientworkexertedat
theplanning stage, without clearly articulated goals and
out-comestatements,andwithoutanassessmentplaninplace.Furthermore,theinstitutionorprogrammaysimplyshelvethedataithascollected,claimingtohavedoneassessment,endingtheprocessthere,andrepeatingthisprocessagaininsubsequentyears,aslongasfundingorstaffingisavail-able.Theassessmentdataarerarelyprovidedback
to
thestudentsfortheirowncontinuedlearninganddevelopmentthatarecrucialininterculturallearning.Weoutlineseveralprinciplestoensurequalityassuranceinthestudentlearn-ingoutcomesassessmentpractice
in internationaleduca-tion.
A Road
MapHighereducationinstitutionsembarkingonassessmentef-fortswilloftenstartbyasking,“Whichtoolshouldweuse?”While
thismayseemlikea logicalplace tostart, it is im-portant
tofirstask“What is it thatwewanttomeasure?”This question will lead
to a closer examination of statedmission and goals that determine
the appropriate
assess-menttools.Whenconsideringanassessmentagendaforaninternationaleducationprogramor
initiative, it ishelpfulto stepbackand reflecton the following
threequestions,tohelpcreateanassessmentroadmap:
(1)Wherearewegoing?(mission/goals);(2)Howwillwegetthere?(objec-tives/outcomes);and(3)Howwillweknowwhenwehavearrived?
(evidence).Possibly, the evidence of student suc-cess goes beyond
counting numbers (which are the
out-puts)toperceptionsofstudents’learning(indirectevidencesuchasthroughsurveysorinventories)andactuallearning(directevidenceofstudentlearningsuchasassignmentsine-portfolios).Thiscrucialalignmentofmission,goals,andoutcomeswillnaturallypoint
towhich tools/methodsareneededtocollectevidencethat
theseoutcomeshavebeenachieved.
No Perfect ToolAssessment tools must be aligned with stated
objectives
andselectedbasedon“fitnessforpurpose,”ratherthanforreasonsofconvenienceorfamiliarity.Toooften,institutionsorprogramsseektheone“perfecttool,”whichsimplydoesnotexist,especiallyforinterculturallearning.Infact,whenassessingsomethingas
complexasglobal learningor
in-terculturalcompetencedevelopment,rigorousassessmentinvolves the
use of a multimethod, multiperspective
ap-proachthatgoesbeyondtheuseofonetool.Furthermore,itiscriticalthatinstitutionsthoroughlyexploreexistingtoolsintermsofexactlywhatthosemeasure(notjustwhattoolssay
theymeasure), the reliabilityandvalidityof the tools,thevalidityof
the tool in thatparticular
institutional/pro-grammaticcontext,thetheoreticalbasisofthetools,andin-cludinghowwellthetoolsalignwiththespecificoutcomesto
be assessed. The prioritized outcomes will vary by
theinstitution,sothereisnoone-size-fits-allapproachwhenitcomestoassessmenttools.
Astodecisionsaboutassessmentatpreliminary(“pre”)versusconcluding(“post”)stagesofaprogramorcourse,goodassessmentmeanseffortsarealso
ideally
integratedintoprogrammingonanongoingbasis,avoidingthereli-anceonsnapshotsonlyat
thebeginningand/orendofalearning experience. Furthermore, the most
meaningfuland useful assessment of intercultural learning
arguablycontainsalongitudinalcomponentandprovidesfeedbacktostudents.
Working From The PlanAnother key principle of good assessment is
that
effortsneedtobeholisticallydevelopedanddocumentedthroughanassessmentplan.Anassessmentplanoutlinesnotonlywhatwillbemeasuredandhowthedatawillbecollected,but
also details about who will be involved (which
needstobemorethanonepersonoroffice),thetimeline,imple-mentationdetails,andhowthedatawillbeusedandcom-municated.Thislastpointiscrucial:theremustbeauseforthedata(i.e.,forstudentfeedback,programimprovement,andadvocacy)orthereisnoneedtocollectthedata.Inpar-ticular,officesshouldnotbecollectingdataandthentrying
Then,theresultsofthefourselecteduniversityrank-ingsneedtobenormalizedatthecountrylevelsothatthesizeeffectisneutralized.Morespecifically,thenumberoftopuniversitiesineachcountryisweightedbythehighereducation–aged
population of the country. This indica-tor can be seen as
reflecting the “density” of world-classuniversities in each
country. First, there is no significantcorrelation between the
number of top universities in acountryand theirdensity.Second,
thenormalized resultsof the four-selected university rankings are
very similar;their methodologies differ substantially on some
pointsbutalsosharecommonfeatures.Third,countriesthatcanboastatleastoneofthetop400universitiesineachofthefourrankingsconstitutearatherhomogenouscluboflessthan40members,mostlyhigh-incomeeconomies.Acrossthefourrankings,densityoftopuniversitiesisthehighestinsmallandrichcountries—Denmark,Switzerland,Swe-den,andFinland,followedbyIreland,theNetherlands,andHongKong.
Similarity of
ResultsThefournormalizeduniversityrankings,producedbyU21(2012edition),leadstoaclearconclusion:astrongandpos-itivecorrelationbetweenthetwosetsofresults.Todoublecheck
thisfinding, correlationsarealsoexamined for
the2013editionsofbothShanghaiandU21rankings,andtheresultsshowanevenstrongerassociation.Afurthertestisadministered,correlatingtheresultsofeachofthefourU21categorieswiththoseofthemajoruniversityleagues.Thecorrelationsaresignificant,andtherelationshipis
largelypositive, regardless of the university league
considered(Shanghai first) and the U21 category selected
(resourcesand output strongest). The only noticeable exception
totheconvergenceofthetwotypesofrankingsistheUnitedStates, which
comes first under U21, but does not
showamongthewinnersoftheuniversityleagueswhenanalyzedintermsofdensity.
The Convergence of
ResultsThesecomparisonsmayleadtotheideathatahighdensityofworld-classuniversitiesguaranteesacountryasaworld-classhighereducationsystem.Theymayalsogivetheim-pressionthatthesimilarityofresultsbetweenU21anduni-versityrankingsmeansthattheformereffectsarenotmoreinformativethanthelatter.Threetypesofobservationssug-gest
that such conclusions arenotwarranted.Afirst
oneisthatU21selects50countriesamongtheG20membersandcountrieswhichperformbestintheNationalScienceFoundationinternationalrankingofresearchinstitutions:thus,althoughthepoolofU21countries
isslightly
largerthanthatof“thebigthree”universityrankings,themodeofselectionofthesecountriesconstitutesatwofoldbiasto-
wardwealthy countries and thoseheavily investing in
re-search.Second,U21incorporatessomeoftheindicatorsoftheuniversityrankings(ShanghaiandWebometrics)initsownmeasuresandevencountsthenumberofworld-classuniversitiesamongitsmeasuresofoutput,whichcertainlyexplainstheUSexception.Finally,areclassificationofall22measuresconfirmstheheavybiastowardresearch.There-fore,theconvergenceofthetwotypesofrankingsisalmostinevitableandisalogicalconsequenceofthemethodologyusedbyU21.Finally,acriticalelementtokeepinmindisthat
a world-class higher education system is an
elusiveconceptincludingmanydimensions,runningfromequityin access,
to internal efficiency, to teaching and learning,torelevancewithin
thesocioeconomic fabricof
thecoun-try,andtoexternalefficiency.Indeed,thesedimensionsaredifficulttocapture,anddespiteU21’slaudableattemptstoreflectseveralofthem,theyfallshortoffullyaccountforallthe
complexity and diversity of national higher educationsystems.
Room to
ImproveComparingnationalhighereducationsystemsacrosscoun-tries
remains a priority. U21 has taken bold steps in thatdirection but
needs to go further, to demonstrate its use-fulness.Two routesare
critical:first,digging further
intothestructureofthesystems,sothattherankingsarebettercontextualized;
second, expanding thenumber
anddiver-sityofthecountriestoberanked—datapermittingsothattheexercise
ismore inclusive.Taking these routeswouldcertainly lead to results
more clearly differentiated
fromthoseyieldedbyuniversityrankingsandwouldcontributetomeetingthehighexpectationscreatedbytheU21initia-tive.TheU21rankingsillustratethevastpotentialofsystemrankings,asimportantcomplementstouniversityrankingsandascontributorstobetterinformeddecisionsbyhighereducationpolicymakers.
OutcomesAssessmentinInternationalEducationDarla K. Deardorff
Darla K. Deardorff is executive director of the Association of
Interna-tional Education Administrators and a research scholar at
Duke Uni-versity, Durham, North Carolina, US. E-mail:
[email protected].
Duetothegrowingtrendinhighereducationaccount-ability,manypostsecondaryinstitutionsarenowmea-suringstudentlearningoutcomes,relatedtoglobalorinter-
International Issues International Issues
Far too often the assessment effort is an
afterthought or an ad hoc effort, without
sufficient work exerted at the planning
stage, without clearly articulated goals
and outcome statements, and without
an assessment plan in place.
-
I N T E R N A T I O N A L H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N10 I N T
E R N A T I O N A L H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N 11
Higher Education under Globalization: Joint Schools among APEC
(2004). More recently, China held an APEC semi-nar in Shanghai
followed by the report Capacity Building for Policies and
Monitoring of Cross-Border Education in the APEC Region(2011).
Whilecomingatthechallengeofgoverningcross-bor-derhighereducationfromoppositepoles,boththeAustra-lianandChinese-ledprojectsemphasizedthe
importanceof national regulation and quality assurance. In an
effortto develop such capacity across the region, Australia andthe
United States led APEC projects on the developmentof national
quality-assurance regimes in 2006 and 2011,respectively.
Thesevarious forumsandreportsprovidedsomeop-portunities for
information sharing between midrankingofficials fromacross the
region,whichmayhave
contrib-utedinsomesmallparttopolicyconvergence,especiallybyexposingofficialsinemergingeconomiestothepracticesofmoredevelopedsystems.However,suchconcernsdidnotfigurelargeontheagendaofAPEC’seducationministers.TherewasrarelyevenamentionofhighereducationinthestatementsofAPECEducationMinisterialMeetingsbefore2012.
What Is Going on in Vladivostok?In 2012, education ministers
agreed to ramp up APEC’srole in educational cooperation, dubbed the
“GyeongjuInitiative,”andimmediatelytheRussianFederationvolun-teeredtoleadahighereducationinitiativeduringtheyearin
which Russia assumed the rotating leadership of theorganization.
APEC trade ministers then called for bothexpanding “cross-border
trade in education services
anddeepeningeducationalcooperationintheAsia-Pacific”(myemphasis).Theyaskedofficialstoexaminewaysto“betterfacilitatemobilityofstudents,researchersandprovidersintheregion.”Amonth
later, theRussian-sponsoredhighereducation conference in
Vladivostok “Shaping EducationwithinAPEC”adoptedthetradeministers’
listandaddedtwomorepoints:“increasingtheinteractionbetweenhigh-ereducationinstitutionsandincreasingdatacollectionontradeineducationservices.”
Incommittingto“educationalcooperationandpromot-ingcross-borderexchangeineducationservices,”APEChaswiselyframedaspirationsintermsthatarebroadenoughtobemeaningfulwithinboththeeducationandtradesectors.TheseaspirationsweredulyendorsedbyAPECEconomicLeaders’
Meeting in Vladivostok in late 2012. Russia hadsince sponsored a
second APEC Conference on Coopera-tion in Higher Education in
Asia-Pacific Region early in2013,againinVladivostok.
So Russia seems to have very successfully put cross-border
higher education on the top of the APEC agenda.
Russia does host a large number of international
degreestudents,129,690in2010accordingtoUNESCOfigures;but a small
proportion of these are from APEC
membereconomies,withthevastmajoritycomingfromformerSo-viet
states.Also,Russiahasnotpreviouslybeenactive
inthisspacewithinAPEC.
The location may provide some clues. The
Leaders’SummittookplaceonthenewlybuiltislandcampusoftheFar Eastern
Federal University, which was constructed
intimetohostthesummitandwillthenprovidefacilitiesforthe university.
The university’s Web site states that
“ThemaintargetoftheFEFUStrategicProgramfor2010–2019,supportedbyextensive
federal funding, is tomakeFEFUaworld-classuniversity, integrated
into theeducation, re-search and innovation environment of the
Asia-Pacificregion.” So, the city of Vladivostok and this
internationaluniversity,inparticular,appearcentraltoRussia’seffortstoexpanditseducationalengagementwiththeregion.
Ongoing TensionsInAugust lastyear,I
facilitatedanAPECforuminKualaLumpur, Malaysia, sponsored by the
Australian Depart-ment of Foreign Affairs and Trade that brought
togethertradeandeducationofficials,scholars,andrepresentativesofeducationalinstitutionsfrom14countries.Muchofthediscussionfocusedonwaystoenhanceinstitutionalcapac-ity,tosupportawidespreaddesireforgreaterinternationalengagement—forrecruitinginternationaldegreestudents,engaginginexchangerelationships,collaboratingwithfor-eign
institutions to deliver international programs, inter-nationalizing
research, or teaching. However, in order
tofurtheropeningeducationsystemstoallowmoremobilityforstudents,scholars,andproviders,therearestillclearlysignificantdifferencesofopinionbetweenandwithincoun-tries.Severalparticipantsarguedthatbecauseofthediffer-entstagesofdevelopmentofnationalsystemsthereisnotalevelplayingfield;andthatintroducinggreaterinternation-al
competition for domestic providers would
underminetheirnationaldevelopmentstrategies.
It isnotuncommonfor incumbents
inanyprotectedindustrysectortoopposemeasuresthatwouldallowcom-petitorstoentertheirmarkets.Insomeways,universitiesbehavenodifferentlythantheeventsofotherservicepro-
todetermine“whattodowithit.”Spending10percentofthe time in
thebeginning
todevelopanassessmentplanandthinkingthroughtheseissuesistimewellinvestedinthelater90percentoftheeffortthatgoesintoassessment.
A Team EffortOften, assessment can seem quite overwhelming
anddaunting,especially ifonlyonepersonoroffice is
taskedwithdoingit.Effectiveassessmentactuallyinvolvesanin-trainstitutional
team of stakeholders, which is
comprisednotonlyofinternationaleducationexpertsbutalsoassess-mentexperts,students,faculty,andotherswhohaveastakein
international education outcomes. Senior leadershipand support play
a critical role in the success of
assess-mentefforts.Onceassembled,thisintrainstitutionalteamprioritizesoutcomes
tobe assessed, conducts anaudit ofassessment efforts already
underway, and adapts currentassessmentefforts to alignwithgoals
andoutcomes—noneedtoreinventassessmenteffortsoraddexpensiveoneswhentheymaynotbenecessary—beforeseekingaddition-alassessment
tools/methods
thatcollectevidenceneededtoaddressstatedgoalsandoutcomes.
Conclusion There are other principles of effective assessment
thatmight include utilizing a control group, best practices
intermsofsampling,theuseoflongitudinalstudies,andsoon.Thisarticlehasoutlineda
fewprinciplesasacall forfurtherreflectionanddiscussiononwhat
trulymakesforrigorousoutcomesassessmentininternationaleducation.Whileitiscommendableforinstitutionstobeengagedinoutcomesassessment,itisimportanttotakeacloserlookatthequalityoftheassessmentsbeingdone.Guidingques-tionscaninclude:Howwellareassessmenttools/methodsaligned
with mission and goals? (Exactly what do
thosetoolsmeasureandwhyaretheybeingused?)Istheremorethanonetoolbeingused?Is
thereanassessmentplaninplace? How are assessment efforts integrated
throughoutacourseorprogram,beyondpre/postefforts?Howarethedatabeingused?Ismorethanonepersonorofficeinvolvedinassessmentefforts?Is
theassessmentplanitselfbeingreviewedregularlyforimprovement?
If higher education institutions are serious about in-
ternationalization,assessment,andstudentlearning,sucheffortsareeffective,resultinginoutcomesthataremean-ingfulforallinvolved,includingourstudents.
APEC’sBoldHigherEduca-tionAgenda:WillAnyoneNotice?Christopher
Ziguras
Christopher Ziguras is deputy dean, at the School of Global,
Urban and Social Studies, RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia.
E-mail: [email protected].
SincetheAsiaPacificEconomicCooperationorganization(APEC)wasestablishedin1989tofostereconomicco-operationacrosstheAsiaPacificithasnotbeenparticularlyinterestedinhighereducation,butthatmightbechanging.DuringRussia’schairmanshipofAPECin2012,theorga-nization’s
leaders committing to promoting cross-bordercooperation,
collaboration, and networking. But
whethertheorganization’snewaspirationforregionalengagementcanbetranslatedintopracticalmeasuresthataffectinstitu-tions,studentsandeducatorsremaintobeseen.
A Trade Liberalization Meets Chinese RegulationSinceat least
themid-1990s,APECexpressedaninterestinexpandingforeigninvestmentineducationandtraining.Australia,akeyproviderofcross-borderhighereducationintheregion,wasthedrivingforcebehindearlyAPECin-ternationaleducationprojects,whileplayingasimilarrolewithintheWorldTradeOrganizationandtheOrganizationforEconomicCooperationandDevelopment.
InanefforttoengageAPECintheMillenniumRoundoftheGeneralAgreementonTradeinServicesnegotiations,itorganizeda
“ThematicDialogueonTrade inEducationServices”
inHanoiin2002andsponsoredaseriesofresearchprojects:Measures
Affecting Trade and Investment in Education Services in the
Asia-Pacific Region(withNewZealand,2001),APEC and International
Education (2008),andMeasures Affecting Cross-Border Exchange and
Investment in Higher Education in the APEC Region(2009).
China was much more interested in projects focus-ingoneffective
national regulationof cross-border
provi-sion.Afterintroducingnewguidelinesforforeignprovid-ersin2003,ChinasponsoredaprojectthatAustraliaandNew
Zealand were keen to partner in, culminating in anawkwardly
titledreport,Improving the Institute Capacity of
International Issues International Issues
Higher education institutions embark-
ing on assessment efforts will often
start by asking, “Which tool should we
use?”
Since at least the mid-1990s, APEC ex-
pressed an interest in expanding foreign
investment in education and training.
-
I N T E R N A T I O N A L H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N12 I N T
E R N A T I O N A L H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N 13China: English
and the Brain RaceChina: English and the Brain Race
removingEnglish fromgaokao as an
indicatorofChina’sculturalconfidence.
Mostdebatesfocusonwhetherornotthereformcouldrelievetheburdenofgaokao
andhowtodistributetimetostudythenativelanguageandaforeignone(English).HuRuiwen,whoisbasedatShanghaiInstituteforHumanRe-sourcesDevelopmentandamemberoftheNationalEduca-tionAdvisoryCommittee,
saidsuchachangewouldbeasignal to students that they shouldpaymore
attention
totheirmothertonguethanaforeignlanguage.Tohim,stu-dentsnowspend
toomuch
timestudyingEnglish.Thereisaneedforthemtolearntheirnativelanguagewell.HebelievesthechangeswillhelpstudentsbettertolearntheChineselanguage.
Cai Jigang, a professor at Fudan University’s
CollegeofForeignLanguagesandLiteratureandchairmanof
theShanghaiAdvisoryCommittee
forCollegeEnglishTeach-ingatTertiaryLevel,opposesanyplantoreducethestatusofEnglishlanguageinthecollegeentranceexambecauseitfailstotakeintoaccountChina’sdemandforforeign-lan-guageability—asameanstoacceptthechallengeofglobal-izationandtheinternationalizationofhighereducation.HeworriesthatChinesestudentsmaynolongerworkhardonEnglish,whichwillhaveanadverseeffectinthelongrun.
Missing the Point?The central emphasis on the strategic role of
English inthe modernization process and the high priority given
tothat language on the national agenda of educational
de-velopmenthasproventobebeneficial.China’seffortsarealready paying
off. The communicative and instrumentalfunction of English as a
global language has
acceleratedChina’sforeigntradeandhelpedChina’seconomicgrowthinthepastdecades.IthasalsopromotedChina’sexchangeswith
theoutsideworld.Chinese scholars andstudents inmajor universities
have little difficulty in communicatingwith international
scholars.TheirEnglishproficiencyhascontributedtoChina’scurrentfast,successfulengagementwiththeinternationalcommunity.Peer-reviewedpapersininternationaljournalswrittenbyChineseresearchersrose64-foldoverthepast30years.
China’s modernization began with foreign-languages
learning.Inconsequence,
itcouldbearguedthatattitudetowardforeignlanguagehasbeentheharbingerofChina’sinternationalization.Insteadofdemonstratingconfidence,the
decision reveals a degree of cultural indulgence.
Thegaokaoislikelytoremainthemostimportantindicatorforcollege
admissions: de-emphasizing English, rather
thantakingthechancetomakeitlesstest-based,withagreateremphasisonpracticalproficiency,willreduceschools’andstudents’
efforts to learn English, at a time of rising
de-mandforproficientEnglish-speakingChineseemployees.Ifthiswastheresult,woulditlimitthechanceforChinatocontinueitsrecentsuccessstory?
“EnglishFever”inChinaHasReachedaWatershedWang Xiaoyang and Li
Yangyang
Wang Xiaoyang is associate professor and director of Higher
Educa-tion Research Institute, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China.
E-mail: [email protected]. Li Yangyang is a graduate student
in the same institute.
Recently, several provinces in China have proposed aninitiative
for reforming the national college
entranceexamination(gaokao)—reducingtheimportanceoftheEng-lish-languagepartoftheexaminationasoneofthetargets.This
move has subsequently aroused extensive debate
inpublic,withbothsupportandopposeviews.Somesupport-ersarguethatEnglishteachingandlearninginprimaryandsecondaryschoolscosttoomuchofstudents’time,thusde-creasingthetimespentonChineselanguage,andthereforeagree
with lowering the English emphasis in the gaokao.
OthersarguethatEnglishisstillimportantforstudentstoread Western
scientific books and journals, participate
ininternationaleconomicactivitiesandexchanges,andthusopposeloweringthescoreofthatlanguageingaokao.TheJiangsuprovincewas
thefirst todeclarewithdrawing
theEnglishtestfromthegaokao.TheEnglishtestwillbegiventwiceayearanditsscorewillbeintheformoflettergrades.Beijinghasalsonowinvitedpubliccommentsonitsreformplan,whichproposesthatthefullmarkoftheEnglishtestwillbereducedfrom150to100pointsandthatofChinesetestwillbeincreasedfrom150to180points.WhydoestheEnglishscorefallwhiletheChinesescorerises?Has“Eng-lishfever”inChinareachedawatershed?
viders,suchasbanksorairlines.Buttheeducationsectorplaysauniqueroleandisofcriticalimportanceinfoster-ingsocialandeconomicdevelopment.Thus,governmentsare
wary of introducing changes that key institutions
seeasweakeningtheirpositions,especiallyifthoseinstitutionsareoperatedbytheministryofeducation.
WemaynotbeonthevergeofanotherBolognaDec-laration, but APEC’s
interest is one more indication of
agrowingpoliticalwilltointensifytheintegrationofhighereducationsystemsacrosstheregion.
China’sRemovalofEnglishfromGaokaoYang Rui
Yang Rui is professor and director, at the Comparative Education
Re-search Center, University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam Road, Hong
Kong, China. E-mail: [email protected].
EmbracingtheEnglishlanguageexemplifiesChina’svig-orousengagementwiththeoutsideworld,especiallyinrespect
to Western societies. The attitude is not only
un-precedentedinChinesemodernhistory,butisalsodiffer-entfromotherdevelopingcountries’interactionswiththedevelopedWesternworld.Atbothnational,andindividual,careerdevelopmentlevels,English-languageeducationhasbeenasubjectofparamountimportanceinChinasinceitsreopeningtotheoutsideworld.ProficiencyinEnglishhasbeen
widely regarded as a national, as well as a
personalasset.English-languageeducationhasbeenviewedbytheChinese,boththeleadershipandthepeople,ashavingavi-talroletoplayinnationalmodernizationanddevelopment.
Seeing thedominant
statusofEnglishasahistoricalfact,Chinahasinitiatedvariouspoliciestoadaptto
it,
in-steadofresistingit,inanefforttopromoteinternationaliza-tion.LearningEnglish
isno longer just importantwithinChina. It is the bare minimum for
any serious
student.ChinaishometomorespeakersofEnglishthananyothercountry.Examinations
inChinese schools at all levels
in-cludeEnglishproficiencytests.Englishiswidelyrequiredin the
professional promotions of academics,
includingmanywhoseworkrequires littleuseofEnglish.With theproposed
changes in the gaokao (China’s national collegeentrance
examination), the extraordinary phenomenon
ofahugeoptioninChinaoflearningEnglishislikelytofade.
The Reform
PlanAspartofChina’sreformplantochangeitsnotoriousonce-in-a-lifetimeexaminationsystem,theMinistryofEducationforeshadowedinlate2013thattheEnglishtestwillbere-movedfromthegaokaoby2020.Instead,testswillbeheldseveraltimesayearforstudentstochoosewhenandhowoftentheyachievetheexaminationsoastoalleviatestudypressure,
and only the highest score they obtain will
becounted.Itwillbepilotedinselectedprovincesandcitiesandpromotednationwidefrom2017,withanewexamina-tionandanadmissionsystemprojected
tobeestablishedby2020.
Even before the Ministry of Education’s release,
theBeijingMunicipalCommissionofEducationhadsaidthatthescoresforsubjectsinBeijing’sgaokaowillchangeasof2016.TheoverallscoreofEnglishlanguagewilldropfrom150to100,whilethetotalpointsforChineselanguagewillrisefrom150to180.Mathematicsremainsunchangedat150points.Artsandsciencesoverallincreasedfrom300to320points.TheEnglish-language
test canbe taken
twiceayear.Ifastudentgets100pointsinthefirstyearofhighschool,forexample,thensheorhecanbeexemptedfromEnglishcoursesinthesecondandthirdyears.
Otherregions,includingJiangsuandShandongprov-incesandShanghaimunicipality,arealsopreparing
theirowngaokaoreforms.ShandongwasreportedtocancelthelisteningpartoftheEnglish-languageexaminationinitsga-okao.InJiangsu,therehavebeendiscussionsofexcludingEnglishingaokaointhefuture.Whiledetailsremaintobefinalized,thegeneraldirectionisclear:lessEnglish,moreChineseforgaokao.
The
DebateThereforminitiativehaswonoverwhelmingsupportfromthegeneralpublic.Inasurveyofover220,000respondentsupdatedinDecember9lastyearbyPhoenixOnline,whenaskedabouttheirviewsonBeijing’sgaokaoreform,82.82percentsupporteditwhileonly13.55percentwereopposed.Similarly,whenasked
if theywouldsupport lowering
thepointvalueforEnglishlanguageandincreasingthepointvalue
forChinese
language,82.79percentsupportedand13.01percentopposed.
Incontrast,theplanhasdividededucationexperts,whodisagreeonwhetherplacinglessemphasisonEnglish-lan-guageskillsisagoodidea.Thedecisionhasarousedheateddiscussionsamongthosewhodoubtthereformwouldre-ducetheburdenoflearningEnglishorifthesubstitutetestcould
reflect a student’s English skills and help studentslearn English
better. An important aspect of the
reformliesinwhatandhowtotest,assuggestedbyYuLizhong,chancellor of
New York University Shanghai. The
educa-tionministryaddstothecomplexofthedebatebyviewing
English-language education has been
a subject of paramount importance in
China since its reopening to the outside
world.
-
I N T E R N A T I O N A L H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N14 I N T
E R N A T I O N A L H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N 15China: English
and the Brain RaceChina: English and the Brain Race
WillChinaExcelintheGlobalBrainRace?Qiang Zha
Qiang Zha is an associate professor at the Faculty of Education,
York University, Toronto, Canada. E-mail: [email protected].
Inthepastdecade,Chinaappears tohavebeentakingastrong position in
the global brain race. Following
thewell-known“ThousandTalentProgram”(including“Thou-sandYoungTalentProgram”and“ThousandForeignTalentProgram”),whichaimstolurebackexpatriateandinterna-tional
talent, the Chinese government recently launcheda “Ten Thousand
Talent Program.” This program, unlikethe former, focuses on home
talent and pledges to
selectandsupport10,000leadingscholarsinthenext10yearsinfieldsofsciences,engineering,andsocialsciences—amongwhomthetop100willbecompelledtoaimatseizingNobelprizes.So,Chinanowexplicitly
raised its ambitionup
tothestandardofaninnovationleader,torelymoreandmoreondomestictalent.Indeed,the“ThousandTalentProgram”didnotreallymeettheexpectations.Sofar,thehighcaliberexpatriatetalentdidnotgobacktoChinainalargescale.Amongthereturnees,thosepossessingdoctorate,master’s,andbachelor’sdegreesshowanoddratioof1:8:1.However,amajorityofreturneesarethosewhospentashortwhileoverseas,
to study for a master’s degree. Statistics
showthatover1.5millionChinesescholarsandstudentsremainabroad.WhatcausedChina’sglobalbrainstrategy(famousfor
handsome salaries, generous start-up packages,
andotherfinancialincentives)tonothaveproducedtheexpect-edoutcomes?
PerspectivesAn adoption of the views of human, cultural, and
socialcapital may offer an insightful interpretation of this
puz-zlingscenario.Forexample,animpetusthatinspiresChi-nese scholars
or students to go back to China might
bethelimitationassociatingwithhumancapitallogic,whichputsemphasisontechnicalandtangibleknowledgegainedfromvariouseducationandtraining.Supposedly,Chineseexpatriatesfeeltheyarelargelytreatedashumancapitalintheirhostcountriesandseefewopportunitiestofulfilltheircultural
and social capital in that specific context.
Then,dotheinitiativeslikethe“ThousandTalentProgram”pro-vide the
equivalent pull factor?—not necessarily, as
suchprogramsarealsoprimarilybasedonhumancapitallogic.ManyChineseexpatriatesmayseebetterchancestoenjoytheir
cultural capital back in China, which
distinguishesfromhumancapitalastheimplicitknowledgegainedfromtheculturaltraditionandenvironment,andoftendefinesa
higherstatusinsociety.However,whenitcomestoaccom-plishingsocialcapital,theywillfindtheyhave“ceilings”inChina,too.
Arguably, modern social capital conceptualization
at-tachesmoreimportancetoindividualfreechoice,inordertocreateamorecohesivesociety.IntheChinesesocialcon-text,however,socialcapitalhasbeencloselylinkedwiththeconcept
of guanxi (personalized networks of influence),in particular
connections with powerful bureaucrats.
Inthisregard,mostreturneesdonotenjoyanadvantagebutrathersufferadisadvantage,giventheirspatialseparationsfromChina(foracoupleofdecadesinsomecases).Thisisparticularly
true in recentyearswhen theChinesemodelfor development has
showcased some successful
aspects(Chinaquicklyrisesastheworld’ssecond-largesteconomy)and
garnered confidence (China is anticipated to
surpasstheUnitedStatesandbecomethewealthiestnationaround2020).Againstthisbackdrop,thosepoliciesandpracticesthatbeartheChinesecharacteristicsarehardlyallowedtobechangedbyideasandpersonnelfromtheoutside.
The Cases of Rao and Shi Reveals a Paradox Two prominent
returnee scientists were Rao Yi and
ShiYigong.RaoYiwasaprofessorofneurologyatNorthwest-ernUniversityintheUnitedStates.HereturnedtoPekingUniversityin2007totakeupthepositionofdeanoftheCol-legeofLifeScience.ShiYigongwastheWarner-Lambert/Parke-DavisprofessoratPrincetonUniversity.In2008,he
resigned his position at Princeton University and
startedpursuinghiscareeratTsinghuaUniversity—asthedeanoflifesciencethere.Theyarebothregardedasthetop-flighttalentluredbackbythe“ThousandTalentProgram.”
Apparently,bothRaoYiandShiYigongdidnotpreparetogobacktoChinaasapureresearcher.Rather,theywishtomakeadifferenceandtobetterChina’sresearchcultureanduniversityeducation,ridingontheirsocialcapital.Thisis
evident in their responses to questions as to why
theychosetogobacktoChina,aswellasintheirownwritings.Inacoauthoredarticlepublishedin2010inScience,ShiandRaoopenly
claimed thatChina’s current research
culture“wastesresources,corruptsthespirit,andstymiesinnova-
Why Does the Gaokao Reform Start with English?Concerning the
fact that English-language education
inChinaistimeconsumingandlowefficiency,reformingtheEnglishexamcaneasilybeunderstoodandsupportedbyboth
thepublic
individualsandeducators.Englisheduca-tioninChinaisnowbecomingmoretestoriented,whichurgently
requires reform.Chinesestudentshave
investedthemosttimeandeffortsinlearningEnglish;however,ithasnotyieldedpositiveresults.Manystudentshavebeenlearning
English for years, constantly memorizing
wordsanddoingexercises,butsofarhaveonlymanagedtolearnso-called“brokenEnglish.”
Now, far too few students can handle
cross-culturalcommunicationinafluentandconcisemanner.OneoftheaimsofthegaokaoreforminBeijingistodilutetheselec-tionfunctionoftheEnglishtestandrestorethefunctionofEnglishasatoolofcommunication.Therefore,asrevealedinthereformplan,Beijingdecidedtoincreasethepropor-tionofthelisteningcomprehensionintheEnglishtextin
gaokao;andthecontentofthetestwillbelimitedtobasicknowledge and
ability. Another important issue that
de-servesourattentionisthegovernment’sattitudetodeliverthepowerof
organizingexamination to third-party
socialinstitutions.Ifthereformplanisimplementednationally,theEnglishpartofgaokaowillbesponsoredbysocialinsti-tutions
like theEducationalTestingService in theUnitedStates,
twiceayearin2016.Studentswill thenbeabletoparticipate in up to six
times the exam in a high
schoolthree-yearperiod,whichgreatlyreducesthepressureoftak-ingtheexamandhopefullyleadsstudentstolearnEnglishforthecommunicativeuseratherthanjustpurelyforget-tingahigherscoreonanexamination.
Will the Importance of English Fall While that of Chinese
Rises?
Over the years, Chinese educators have been
concernedthatEnglishhas toomuch importanceattached
toeduca-tionandthatpeoplearesometimesoverlookingtheimpor-tanceofstudyingChinese.Giventhisworry,alongwithde-
creasingthescoreoftheEnglishexam,theBeijinggaokao
reformisdesignedtoincreasethescoreofChineseby30points,toemphasizethefundamentalroleofChineseasamothertongueandbasiccoresubject.ThegreatattentionpaidtoChineselanguageandculturebythepolicymakerisevidentlyexpressedinthereform.ComparedwithEnglish,itismoredemandingforteacherstoguidestudentstoap-preciatethecharmofChineseculture,asstudentsandpar-entshavebeenmoredevotedaboutlearningEnglishthanChinese.Asgaokaoisthebatonofprimaryandsecondaryeducation,policymakerswiselyuseittoguideteachingandlearning.
We believe by adjusting the weights of
EnglishandChinese,studentsandteacherscanbeguidedtofocusmoreonthelearningofChinesetoalargeextent.
“English Fever” at a Watershed in ChinaThe reform concerning
English in gaokao to some extentalso implies
that“Englishfever”hasreachedawatershedinChina.Sincethegaokaowasrestoredinthelate1970s,theimportanceofEnglishscoresingaokaohasbeengradu-allyraisedfrom30,100to150points,becomingoneofthethree-core
subjects together with mathematics and
Chi-nese.Correspondingly,awaveof“Englishfever”sweptthenation,andEnglishtraininghasbecomeahugeindustry.Now,Chinahastheworld’slargestEnglish-speakingpopu-lation.
In recent years, with the further build-up of
China’scomprehensivenationalstrength,Chinahasbeenincreas-ingtradeactivitieswithnationsaroundtheworld.Follow-ingthedevelopmentofthenation,therearemorestudentsaroundtheworldwhochoosetolearnChinese,includingPresident
Obama’s daughters and Vice President
Biden’sgranddaughter.AfterarecentvisittoChina,BritishPrimeMinisterDavidCameronindicatedthatschoolsintheUnit-edKingdomshouldnotteachkidssomuchFrenchandGer-man,butshouldratherfocusonChinese.Toaccommodatethis
need, strengthening cultural exchanges with foreigncountries and
trying to propagate Chinese language havebecome an increasingly
pressing issue. “Chinese
fever”abroadalsourgeseducationauthoritiestoreflectandadjustlanguageandcultureeducationpolicies,soastoenhancetheeducationofChineselanguageandculture,andtoacer-tainextentcooltheexcessive“Englishfever”athome.
“[T]o obtain major grants in China, it is
an open secret that doing good research
is not as important as schmoozing with
powerful bureaucrats and their favorite
experts.”
Compared with English, it is more de-
manding for teachers to guide students
to appreciate the charm of Chinese cul-
ture, as students and parents have been
more devoted about learning English
than Chinese.
In addition to our Web site and Facebook page, we are now
tweeting. We hope you will consider “following” us on Twitter!
-
I N T E R N A T I O N A L H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N16 I N T
E R N A T I O N A L H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N 17International
Student Flows
InCanada,pointsystemswereinitiatedin1967undertheImmigrationActof1952,asamethodforselectingim-migrants.Theoriginalpurposeofthissystemwastoaddresstheshortageofskilledlabor.PriortoJune11,2002,higherweightwasassignedtospecialvocationalpreparation.Thatmeans,ifanapplicanthasajobofferforapositionthatnoCanadianready,willing,andabletofill,theprobabilityforhim/hertoexceedthethreshold(70points)ishigher.Can-adachangeditspointsystemsinJune2002.Morepointsare
assigned to language,workingexperience, andabilityof integration
since then.This change canbe interpretedasanadjustmentto
thedemandofhighskilledinthe
la-bormarket.Undercurrentsystems,therearesixselectionfactors:education,language,experience,age,employment,and
adaptability. The maximum number of points that
apersoncanaccumulateis100,andthecurrentpassmarkis67.ThenumberofinternationalstudentsinCanadawasunder40,000in2002.Afterthehigh-skill-favoredpolicychangein2002,thatnumbertripledto125,000.Theaver-ageannualforeignstudentenrollmentintertiaryeducationfrom1998to2002is36,340.Thisaveragealsotripledafter2002.Asamatterof
fact,Canada’spointsystemdoesat-tractmore internationalstudents
toreceivehighereduca-tionsince2002.
Thepoint systems inAustralia
andNewZealandaresimilar.Thispaperuses
theAustraliansystemtodemon-strate thedesignofOceaniapoint
systems.Basedon theCanadian framework, Australia introduced the
AustralianGeneralSkilledMigrationprogramin1982.Thatprogram’smaincharacteristicisthatpointsareawardedaccordingtoSkilledOccupationList,whichisalistofoccupationsthatAustralianeedstofilljobshortages.Anapplicantmusthaverecentskilledworkexperience;otherwise,itisrelativediffi-cultforonetobeeligibleforimmigrationasaskilledwork-er.Intermsofinternationalstudents’flowtoAustralia,
itis hard to find a cutoff after 1998 since Australia’s
pointsystemremainsrelativelystablesincethe1980s.Theinter-nationalflowindicatedacleardroparound1990.ItturnedoutthattheMigrationAmendmentAct(1989)setthetalent
pool,which lowers
thepassingmarkatonehandandin-creasesthewaittimeattheotherhand.So,theamendmentindeedintimidatesprospectiveskilledimmigrants.
Evidence of Impact from Sending
CountriesAsthepointsystemsareinreceivingcountries,theimpactonsendingcountriesisusuallyambiguousandhardtodis-tinguishfromotherfactors.Inthissection,changeintheoutflowfromsendingcountriestotheUnitedKingdomandCanadaisusedasanindicatorofthepossibleimpact.
Chinaisthelargesthomecountryofinternationalstu-dents.UsingthedatafromChina’sMinistryofEducation,Icalculatedtheaverageannualoutflowofyearsbefore/afterthepolicytoseeifpolicymatters.ResultindicatesthattheaverageannualoutflowfromChinatoCanadadoubledafterCanada’srevisedpointsystem(from5,187to11,509).TheoutflowtotheUnitedKingdomaftertheHighlySkilledMi-grantProgramincreasesby18percent,aswell.
Indiaholdsthesecond-largestpopulation.Theprimarysourceofdataonstudents’outflowistheMinistryofLabor.Thenumberof
Indiansoutflow toboth theUnitedKing-dom and Canada increases after
the implementation
ofpointsystemsinthehostcountry.NumbersdoubledintheUnitedKingdomandtripledinCanada.
Russia is not a traditional sending country but
sig-nificantlyhassentstudentsabroadsince1990.Again,thebefore-aftercomparisonindicatesapositivechangeintheaverage
number of outflows from Russia to the
UnitedKingdomandCanada.Theincreaserateis25percenttotheUnitedKingdomand57percenttoCanada.
ConclusionAspolicyimplications,policymakersusuallyrefertoeither“braindrain”or“braingain,”whentheythinkaboutthemi-grationofinternationalstudentsorhighlyskilledworkers.Morerecently,someresearcherscoin“braincompetition.”
To put point systems into a larger picture, these sys-tems are
indeed a method of talent classification and
se-lection.Atnationallevel,acountryneedsaNationalTalentSystemtobuildupthenation’scorecompetitivenessintheglobalcompetition
for talent.Thecompetitioncould turnout to be “brain share” only if
universities, industry,
andthegovernmentworktogethertorecruittalentsworldwide.Meanwhile,governmentneeds
toworkontalentdevelop-mentofbothforeign-bornandnative-bornindividualssoastobuildupthenation’scompetitiveness.
tion.”Specifically, theycited thebureaucraticapproach
todecidingresearchfundingasthesourcethat“stiflesinnova-tionandmakescleartoeveryonethattheconnectionswithbureaucratsandafewpowerfulscientistsareparamount.”Theywentontodisclosethat“[T]oobtainmajorgrantsinChina,itisanopensecretthatdoinggoodresearchisnotasimportantasschmoozingwithpowerfulbureaucratsandtheir
favoriteexperts.”Theybecame frustrated
toobservethatsuchaproblematicresearchculture“evenpermeatesthe minds
of those who are new returnees from
abroad;theyquicklyadapttothelocalenvironmentandperpetuatetheunhealthyculture,”andcalledforameaningfulreforminordertobuildahealthyresearchculture.
WhileShiandRaoweredisturbedtoseethatmanycol-leagueschoosetobesilentinfaceofsuchan“unhealthycul-ture”forfearof“alosingbattle,”theyseemtohavebecomevictimsoftheirownproclaimedwaragainstaperceivedun-healthyacademicculture.Aftertwounsuccessfulattemptsinarow,Raoannouncedhisboycottofcompetingforafel-lowshipattheChineseAcademyofSciences,whileShiisstillwaitingfortheresultofhissecondbid.Ifprominentreturnees,likeRaoandShi,sufferedfromvulnerabilityoftheirsocialcapital
infaceof
thecorruptresearchculture,howcoulddomestictalentselectedbythe“TenThousandTalentProgram”beabletobreakit?
In thecasesofRaoandShi, theircultural
capitalap-pearstobeestrangedintopublicityresourceofthegovern-ment.Despitetheirfightagainstthebureaucracy,theyarenowoftencitedaspartofthesuccessofthe“ThousandTal-entProgram.”Inthecasesofmanyothers,theirsocialcapi-talismostlyassimilatedtothecurrentresearchcultureinChina,whichinturnpromptsthemtobecometheso-called“elegantegoists.”Inshort,withoutoverhaulingthecurrentresearchsystemandcultureinChina,itisnotaneasytaskfortheinitiativessuchasthe“ThousandTalentProgram”or
“Ten Thousand Talent Program” to accomplish theirgoals. Last but
not least, amessage could alsobe sent
toWesternsystemsthathavebeenabsorbingabulkofglobaltalent.Ifnosufficientattentionispaidtoculturalandso-cialcapitalofglobaltalent,thentherecouldbealoomingcrisisthatwillshakethemagnetpositionofthosesystemstoglobaltalent.
Note: On December 19, 2013, Shi Yigong was appointed a
newmemberoftheChineseAcademyofSciences,followinghiselec-tions into
both the US National Academy of Sciences and
theAmericanAcademyofArtsandSciencesinApril2013,asafor-eignassociateorforeignhonorarymember.
PointSystemsandInterna-tionalStudentFlowsJing Li
Jing Li is a doctoral student at Teachers College, Columbia
University, New York. E-mail: [email protected].
Themobilityofinternationalstudentsiscurrentlyanim-portantpolicyissueovertheworld.Partofthereasonisthatinternationalstudents,especiallythosewhoinscienceandengineeringfields,providea
stable
sourceofhumanresourcesinscienceandtechnology.Sincethe1960s,Can-adaandotherOrganizationforEconomicCooperationandDevelopment
countries started to use a point
system—ofevaluatingacademicachievement—toselecthighlyskilledimmigrants.Thesepointsystems,whichassign“points”toassessthequalityofapplicants,favorinternationalstudentswhoreceivedhighereducationinthehostcountry,andfa-cilitatethemforcitizenshipaftergraduation.Therefore,thepointsystemisbelievedtoattractpotentialstudentsfromabroad.
What Is a Point System? Asamethod for selecting immigrants,point
systemsareburgeoned in the United Kingdom, Canada,
Australia,andNewZealand.Basically,thisisasystemforevaluatingmeritsofimmigrantapplicantsbasedonawardingpoints.Three
key elements are included in the point-system
de-sign:criteria,weight,andthreshold.Criteriavarybycoun-tries,butfivemainsourcesarecommonlyused:education,occupation,
work experience, language, and age. Usually,theweight is
assignedwitha scale tomeasure that
crite-rion.Ifthemaximumscoreofthecriterionis100,weightcanbeevenlydistributedinascale.Finally,basedonpastexperienceand/orforecastingonthenumberofpotentialapplicants,onecansetapassmarkwithacertainpercentile(75%orabove).Applicantsawardedwithpointsabovethepassmarkareselected.
Evidence of Impact from Receiving
CountriesTheUnitedKingdomusedtohaveahighlyrestrictiveimmi-grationpolicyandinsomerespectsstilldoes.Before2008,therewere80differentroutesintotheUnitedKingdomtowork,
train,orstudy.These80entryschemesaremainlycategorizedintothreechannels:workpermitemployment;permit-free
employment; and the Highly Skilled
MigrantProgram.Beforetheprogram,thereare462,609nonciti-zenstudentsand341,791nonresidentstudentsenrolledinUnitedKingdom’s
tertiaryeducation.Oneyear
later,bothenrollmentsincreasedwithan8percentgrowthrate.
International Student Flows
These point systems, which assign
“points” to assess the quality of appli-
cants, favor international students who
received higher education in the host
country, and facilitate them for citizen-
ship after graduation.
-
I N T E R N A T I O N A L H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N18 I N T
E R N A T I O N A L H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N 19
ing numbers for degree mobility, credit mobility quotashave
stabilized at this level during the last decade.
ThismeansthatwhiletheEurope-widetarget(20%creditmo-bilegraduates
intheEuropeanHigherEducationArea in2020)hasalreadybeen reachedwith
regard
toGermany,thenationalmobilitygoaloftheJointScienceConferenceandtheGermanAcademicExchangeService(DAAD)(50%creditmobilegraduatesinthemidterm)remainstobeful-filled.
Finally, some important structural developments arelinked to
theBolognaprocess.Somestudentsnowspendtimeabroadatanearlierstage,stayforslightlyshorterperi-odsonaverage,andmakeuseoftheso-called“bridgemo-bility.”Thesearemobilityunitsinthephasebetweenbach-elor’sandmaster’sdegreesorbetweenmaster’sandPhD.Abridgemobilityunitcouldbedesigned,forexample,asayear-longdirectexchangeprogramwithapartner
institu-tion,whereeachpartnersendsone(orseveral)highlyquali-fiedstudentstotheotherinstitution.
Possible Further Promotion in GermanyWith its numerous programs,
the DAAD is
constantlyworkingtolowerthehurdlesforinternationalstudentmo-bility—the
main ones being funding problems, concernsabout losing studying
time, and difficulties reconciling avisit abroad with the
requirements of the study programat home. Two particularly
promising measures involveenhancing the number of programs with
double or
jointdegreesandintegratingso-called“mobilitywindows”—i.e.,timeslotsreservedformobility—intobachelor’sandmas-ter’sdegreeprograms.Combinedwithanadequatenum-berofscholarships,thesemeasuresshouldhelpGermanyrevivetheupwarddevelopmentforstudy-relatedvisitsthatwereobservedduringthe1990s.
Note:Togetherwith theGermanCentre
forResearchonHigherEducationandScienceStudies(DZHW),theDAADcompilesandpresentsdataonoutgoingandincoming,aswellasinternationalstudentmobility—ontheWebsitewissenschaft-weltoffen.de
(inGermanandEnglish)—addingfurther informationto
thecorre-spondentpublication.
Canada’sImmigrationPoli-ciestoAttractInternationalStudentsAnita
Gopal
Anita Gopal is a researcher at Queen’s University in Kingston,
Ontario, Canada. E-mail: [email protected].
Universities around the world engage in an intensecompetition to
compete in the knowledge
economyduetoglobalization.ThissituationhasservedasacatalystforCanadatoengageinimmigrationstrategiesandinitia-tivesdesignedtoattractandrecruitinternationalstudents.Asalsoanurgentneedforhighlyskilledindividuals,sincethereisaconcernthatoncebabyboomersretire,therewillbeseverelaborshortages,whichwillhavenegativeimpli-cations
for Canada’s growth and nation building. Attract-ingandretaining
internationalstudents isaway
toboostCanada’seconomy,whilepromotingawelcominginterna-tional
landscape. According to Citizenship and Immigra-tion Canada, the
government’s priority is to seek
highlyskilledindividuals(e.g.,India,China)whoarelikelytosuc-ceedinCanadaandtopromoteitseconomicgrowth,long-termprosperity,andglobalcompetitiveness.Internationalstudents,whopursuetheirstudiesinCanada,areanidealpopulationbecausetheywouldhavealreadybeenintegrat-edintoCanadiansociety.
Recognizing that international students are vital
toCanada’sgrowth,theCitizenshipandImmigrationCanadahassetout to
transformCanada’s immigrationsystemasone that is faster, more
flexible, and tailored to students’needs––a major distinguishing
factor from other coun-tries. Therefore, new immigration policies
and programshave been specifically created to make it easier for
inter-national students to study, work, and become
permanentresidents inCanada,especially
forgraduatestudents.Forinstance, international studentsarepermitted
toworkonandoffcampus,withoutaworkpermittoamaximumof20hoursperweek.TheycanalsoapplyforaPost-Gradu-ationWorkPermit,a
three-yearopenworkpermit,whichenablesstudentstoworkforanyCanadianemployerinanyindustry.
Internationalgraduatestudentscanapply to theProvincial Nomination
Program for permanent residenceinCanada—during
theirmaster’sordoctoralprogramoruponcompletionoftheirdegree.
Canadianuniversitiesarealsointerestedingainingits“marketshare”ofthebestandbrightestinternationalstu-dentsinscienceandtechnologyandacquiringacompeti-tiveadvantageovercountriessuchastheUnitedStatesandthe
United Kingdom, which are major destination coun-
GermanStudentsAbroadJan Kercher and Nicole Rohde
Jan Kercher and Nicole Rohde are experts for international
student mobility at the German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD),
Bonn, Germany. E-mail: [email protected] and [email protected].
InApril2013,thefederalandstategovernmentsadoptedacommonstrategyfortheinternationalizationoftheGer-manhighereducationinstitutions.Acentralgoaldefinedin
thisstrategy—albeitwithouta targetdate—is foreverysecond graduate
to gain study-related experience
abroadandforatleastoneinthreetocompleteavisitabroad,last-ingatleastthreemonths,and/orelicitingatleast15Euro-peanCreditTransferSystempoints.
Withthisnationalgoal,Germanyconsiderablyexceedsthemobility
targets set on theEuropean level:TheEuro-peanUnion and the
countries committed to theBolognaprocess set themselves the goal
that by 2020; at least
20percentofallgraduatesintheEuropeanHigherEducationArea should have
completed a study- or training-relatedvisitabroad.
Is Study Abroad Essential?Study abroad is considered to be very
beneficial to
driveself-development,toequipstudentswithinterculturalcom-petences.Thestudentsworkwithinaninternationallabormarket,aswellastopreparethemtoidentifyissuessharedacross
borders—such as, curing diseases, finding
energysolutions,andfightinghunger,andthustoknowhowtoen-gageinanincreasinglyglobalizedworkingworld.Accord-ing
toAllanE.Goodmanof theInstituteof
InternationalEducation,“globalizationisheretostay,andstudentswhowant
to work in our interconnected global world shouldstudyabroad.”
Studyabroadmeansleavingthecomfortzone,whichifdonecorrectlyempowersstudents.Empowermentmeansthatstudentslearnhowtotakeresponsibilityfortheirownlivesaswellasforsociety.Itisimportantforthemtoreal-ize
their role insocietyandhow toparticipateandshapeit. Therefore, the
German Academic Exchange Service(DAAD) is promoting the idea that
international
experi-encesshouldbecomeanessentialpartinhighereducationstudies.
International mobility is not only an asset to
thepersonalcurriculumvitaebutalsoauniqueexperienceandformativemoduleforone’sownpersonality.
International Student
MobilityTherearetwotypesofinternationalstudentmobility:short-termstays
(often referred toas creditmobility) and long-termstayswith
thepurposeofobtainingadegreeabroad
(oftenreferredtoasdegreemobility).Mobilitystudiesshowthat this
distinction is not only a terminological one:
ForsomeimportantaspectstheavailabledataforGermanstu-dentsshownoticeabledifferencesbetweenthetwotypesofmobility.Forexample,whileAustria,theNetherlands,andSwitzerland
are among the four most important
destina-tioncountriesfordegree-mobilestudents(togetherwiththeUnitedKingdom),theydonotplayamajorrolewhencon-sidering
temporary study-related visits abroad. Countriesthatplayan
important role
forcredit-mobilestudentsaretheUnitedKingdom,theUnitedStates,France,andSpain.Also,
while students of language and cultural studies
be-longtothemostmobilegroupreferringtotemporarystudy-relatedvisitsabroad,theyareunderrepresentedamongstu-dentsstudyingabroadtopursueaforeigndegree.
International Student Mobility in GermanyThe number and
proportion of degree-mobile
Germanstudentshaveincreasedsteadilysincetheearly1990s—inbothabsoluteandrelative
terms.Specifically,
thenumberofGermanstudentsenrolledabroadincreasedfromabout34,000in1991toabout134,000in2011.Interestingly,theincreaseindegree-mobilestudentsfromGermanyhasac-
celeratedsharplyduringthelastyears.Between2005und2011,thenumberofinternationallymobilestudentsfromGermany
rose by 10.6 percent on annual average.
Whilefrom1991to2004,themeangrowthperyearwasonlyhalfashigh(5.3%).However,in2011,thegrowthratewasonly4.6
percent, compared to 10.2 percent in 2010. The
nextyearswillshowifthisdeclineinthegrowthrateswasonlytemporaryorifthisisthebeginningofalong-termtrendoflowergrowthrates.
DataoncreditmobilityofGermanstudents,collectedin national
graduate surveys, show that about 30
percentofallgraduatesatGermanhighereducationinstitutionsin2010spentstudy-relatedaffairsabroad,withaminimumdurationofthreemonths.Incontrasttotheconstantlyris-
International Student FlowsInternational Student Flows
The European Union and the countries
committed to the Bologna process set
themselves the goal that by 2020; at
least 20 percent of all graduates in the
European Higher Education Area should
have completed a study- or training-re-
lated visit abroad.
In addition to our Web site and Facebook page, we are now
tweeting. We hope you will consider “following” us on Twitter!
-
I N T E R N A T I O N A L H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N20 21I N
T E R N A T I O N A L H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N
muchattentiontotheproblemofbraindrainandtheover-arching
consequences of luring highly talented
studentsfromdevelopingnationstodevelopedWesternnations.Forinstance,theUnitedNationsDevelopmentProgrampointsout
that brain drain has caused approximately 100,000of thebest
andbrightest Indianprofessionals tomove
toNorthAmericaeachyear,whichisestimatedtobea$2bil-lion loss for
India. As Canada continues to siphon
intel-lectualcapitalfromdevelopingregions,ithasneglectedtothinkaboutitsmoralresponsibilitytothesenationsorhowitcouldbeharmingtheireconomicgrowthandwell-being.Meanwhile,itisunclearashowdevelopingnationswillre-coverthelossoftheirhumancapital.
TrendsinHigherEducationRegulationinsub-SaharanAfricaA. B. K.
Kasozi
A. B. K. Kasozi is the founding Executive Director of Uganda’s
National Council for Higher Education, which he steered for 10
years, from 2002 to 2013. E-mail: [email protected].
Since 1980, many sub-Saharan African countries haveestablished
government funded, but also
semiautono-mous,highereducationregulatoryagenciestohelpgovern-mentsintheestablishment,management,andsupervisingof
higher education institutions. These agencies ensurethat citizens
receive quality higher education and institu-tions of higher
learning help to generate new knowledgefor the
improvementofhighereducation, innovationsys-tems, and economic
development. Experience has shownthat these agencies have minimized
direct governmentmicromanagement by acting as midway bodies
betweenthe state and the varioushigher education
institutionsofhigherlearning.
Maintenance of
QualityMostsub-SaharanAfricanEnglish-speakingcountrieshavedelegated
theresponsibilityof
themaintenanceofqualityhighereducationininstitutionsofhigherlearningtotheseagencies.Currentquality
assurancemechanisms
inmostAfricancountrieshavetwomajorcomponents:anexternalregulatorycomponentbasedonagovernment-funded,butautonomous
regulatory agency, and an institutional
com-ponentwithineachuniversity.Thetwocomponentsworktogetherbuttheagencyistheseniorpartner.Theexternal
(regulatoryagency)setsandenforcesuniformbenchmarksfor
alluniversity institutions.The internalunit,usually
aquality-assuranceofficewithin theuniversity,makes surethat the
benchmarks are implemented. Benchmarks de-signed by, and specific
to a given institution itself,
couldalsobeimplementedwithinthatinstitution.
The External and Internal ComponentThe regulatory frameworks at
the external national
levelsareenforcedbyregulatoryagencieswhichoverseethefol-lowing
areas: institutional accreditation, accreditation ofindividual
programs, merit-based admissions into highereducation institutions,
credit accumulation and
transfer,thequalityofteachingstaff;examinationregulations,stan-dardizationofacademicawards,researchandpublications,infrastructureofinstitutions,educationfacilities,andregu-latingcross-borderhighereducation.
Regulatory agencies realize that the maintenance
ofqualityisbestdonebytheinstitutionitself.Thus,institu-tions are
asked to have an administrative unit to
overseequalityinallthedivisionsofauniversityinstituition.Uni-versitiesareaskedtocarryoutinstitutionalauditsonareg-ularscheduleofabout3–5yearsineastandsouthernAfricatoassessperformance.Theseinternalauditsincludelook-ingatthefollowingareas:thegeneralaudits,institutionalgovernance,thequalityofteachingandlearning,thequal-ityoftheacademicstaff,sufficiencyofeducationfacilities,researchandpublications,thequalityofoutputs,financialmanagement,relationswith
thesurroundingcommunity,andotherpertinentitems.
Regulatory agencies, in cooperationwith
institutions,aresupposedtocarryoutanexternalinstitutionalauditaf-teraninstitutionhascompletedtheinternalone.Theaimoftheexternalauditistofillanyqualitygapsidentifiedbytheinternalaudit.Unfortunately,manyregulatoryagencieshavenotfulfilledtheirresponsibilitiesofconductingexter-nalinstitutionalaudits.
triesforinternationalstudents.Moreover,internationalstu-dentsgenerateasubstantialamountofrevenuetoCanada.AccordingtoareportconductedbytheDepartmentofFor-eignAffairsandInternationalTrade,in2010,internationalstudentsinCanadaspentinexcessofCan$7.7billionontu-ition,accommodationanddiscretionaryspending(upfromCan$6.5billionin2008).MorethanCan$6.9billionofthisrevenuewasgeneratedby
the218,200 long-terminterna-tional students in Canada. The report
also indicated
thattherevenuefrominternationalstudentspendinginCanadais greater
than the Canadian export value of unwroughtaluminum (Can$6
billion), or helicopters, airplanes,
andspacecraft(Can$6.9billion).
Immigration Policies in the United
StatesAfterthe9/11attacks,theUnitedStates’traditionalopen-door
policy for international students was curtailed.
Im-migrationpolicieshavebecomemorestringentduetothegovernment’s
tightening of the border and strict visa re-quirements. As outlined
in the 2013 International Student Mobility Trends report,
theUnitedStateshasbeenslowtorevisittheirimmigrationandvisapolicies.However,itstillremainsthetopchoiceforinternationalstudentstostudyduetoitsprestigiousuniversities’degreeprograms.
Unlike