- Tuesday, 31 July 2012
- Stuart Alan Becker
- Om Yentieng, president of the government’s Anti-Corruption Unit, speaks to a packed house last night at Sunway Hotel in Phnom Penh. Photograph: Heng Chivoan/Phnom Penh Post
- People who make illegal facilitation payments to get government services
will now face harsh penalties under Cambodia’s Anti-Corruption Law,
just as the government officials who receive the money face charges,
according to the President of Cambodia’s Anti-Corruption Unit.
Speaking to a packed house last night at Sunway Hotel, the President of Cambodia’s Anti-Corruption Unit Orm Yentieng said the law was on the ACU’s side and that corruption in Cambodia was going to be reduced over time.
“If you think your government salary is too low, you can get out of the position,” Orm Yentieng said, earning a round of applause.
During his speech and question-and-answer session at the CAMFEBA event, attended by many of Phnom Penh’s business leaders, the ACU chief reviewed one of the cases he had been working on, involving a US$200 payment to an official working for the Ministry of the Interior.
“If you agree to give $200, you are both going to be the victim, and you will be caught as well. The law is strict. If you do it wrong, you should be caught.”
The ACU president said that as part of the unit’s recent work, information had been disseminated to 1,700 communes around Cambodia assuring local government officials that they face punishment for corruption activities.
“Only a few ask for money. The rest cooperate with us,” he said.
“We tell them: do not take any more money, and if you take it you are facing consequences. The taker and giver of the money, both of you, will be punished,” he said. “If we are not strict, we won’t be able to deal with it.”
“If you are a government official and ask for money and they don’t it to give you, you will be caught, and this is printed out in big words in front of the commune offices. We did that on 1,700 communes. If we catch you doing that, we will send you to court. We are spreading, we can hear you, we can see you, and we’ve got more force coming up.”
Orm Yentieng said the ACU had been given special powers to record conversations and take photographs.
“It is not heartless on the part of the private sector not to pay facilitation payments. They have to do this. We’re not wasting time. We will push it, the faster the better. If the Ministry of Interior asks you for money, come and talk to me. He promised us in writing he will not take any money. Now is the time to enforce it. We will be waiting for you at ACU and we won’t step back.”
Orm Yentieng mentioned the Council for the Development of Cambodia (CDC) a few times during his speech.
“The CDC is not poor; everyone has a car and there’s hardly any space for parking. We spend an hour to find a parking space. We have much more parking at the Anti-Corruption Unit,” he said, getting another round of applause.
The ACU president said Minister of Economy and Finance Keat Chhon had agreed with the ACU that a list of formal facilitation fees would be prepared so that receipts of facilitation payments could be kept on record.
Comparing institutionalised corruption in Cambodia to a disease, the ACU president said people should take the medicine. “If you are sick, do you want to take the medicine or not? Do you want to die? We do not have a choice.”
He acknowledged that government salaries are low, but that they would rise slowly during the coming years.
“Tighten your seat belt,” he said.
One of the things business people in Cambodia should not have to pay for is a change of business address, which is a common occurrence when businesses expand.
“We should be thanking the private sector for providing us with the information. We should not be asking for money for these changes,” he said.
The ACU president appealed to the audience to “come quietly” to talk about cases.
“We can help you in any case. Come quietly and talk to us,” he said, adding that citizens with permission from the ACU could make recordings of conversations and take photographs that could later be used in court.
“If people from the private sector ask permission from the ACU, you can take pictures and make recordings. The ACU alone cannot find proof, but needs the cooperation from private sector and the cooperation is easier than doing it alone. The ACU needs to find new proof and evidence to present in court.” He added that sources would be protected.
AMCHAM and IBC Chairman Brett Sciaroni said he had known Orm Yentieng for 20 years and his job was the second most difficult in Cambodia, following that of Prime Minister Hun Sen.
“He is seriously committed to changing the mentality,” Sciaroni said.
Tuesday, 31 July 2012
Payments illegal, says ACU chief
Why Professional Development for Teachers is Critical
By Simon Quattlebaum | Substitute Teacher, New Jersey Public Schools
Educators must understand the concepts in processing professional development and what it means to education. The National Staff Development Council (2007) created a set of nine standards that all professional development should follow. They include content knowledge and quality teaching, research-basis, collaboration, diverse learning needs, student learning environments, family involvement, evaluation, data-driven design, and teacher learning.
However, it does not determine whether accountable measures are being gathered to determine if this information has benefited the education system as a whole.
Professional development refers to the development of a person in his or her professional role. According to Glattenhorn (1987), by gaining increased experience in one’s teaching role they systematically gain increased experience in their professional growth through examination of their teaching ability. Professional workshops and other formally related meetings are a part of the professional development experience (Ganzer, 2000). Much broader in scope than career development, professional development is defined as a growth that occurs through the professional cycle of a teacher (Glattenhorn, 1987). Moreover, professional development and other organized in-service programs are deigned to foster the growth of teachers that can be used for their further development (Crowther et al, 2000). One must examine the content of those experiences through which the process will occur and how it will take place (Ganzer, 2000; Guskey, 2000).
This perspective, in a way, is new to teaching in that professional development and in-service training simply consisted of workshops or short term courses that offered teachers new information on specific aspects of their work (Brookfield, 2005). Champion (2003) posited that regular opportunities and experiences for professional development over the past few years had yielded systematic growth and development in the teaching profession.
Many have referred to this dramatic shift as a new image or a new module of teacher education for professional development (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 2001: Walling & Lewis, 2000). In the past 15 years there have been standards-based movements for reform (Consortium for Policy Research in Education, 1993; Hord, 2004; Kedzior & Fifield, 2004: Sparks, 2002). The key component of this reform effort has been that effective professional development has created a knowledge base that has helped to transform and restructure quality schools (Guskey, 1995; Willis, 2000).
Much of the available research on professional development involves its relationship to student achievement. Researchers differ on the degree of this relationship. Variables are the school, teacher, student level related to the level of learning within the classroom, parent and community involvement, instructional strategies, classroom management, curriculum design, student background knowledge, and student motivation (Marzano, 2003). Based upon a review of several studies, Marzano (2003) concluded that the professional development activities experienced by teachers have a similar impact on student achievement to those of the aforementioned variables.
Opportunities for active learning, content knowledge, and the overall coherence of staff development are the top three characteristics of professional development. Opportunities for active learning and content specific strategies for staff development refer to a focus on teacher application of learned material. Overall coherence refers to the staff development program perceived as an integrated whole and development activities building upon each other in a consecutive fashion. Marzano (2003) warned, however, that standardized staff development activities which do not allow for effective application would be ineffective in changing teacher behavior.
Richardson, (2003) published a list of characteristics associated with effective professional development, stating that such programs would optimally be:
“statewide, long term with follow-up; encourage collegiality; foster agreement among participants on goals and visions; have a supportive administration; have access to adequate funds for materials, outside speakers, substitute teachers, and so on; encourage and develop agreement among participants; acknowledge participants existing beliefs and practices; and make use of outside facilitator/staff developers.” (p. 402)
Kedzior and Fifield (2004) described effective professional development as a prolonged facet of classroom instruction that is integrated, logical and on-going and incorporates experiences that are consistent with teachers’ goals; aligned with standards, assessments, other reform initiatives, and beset by the best research evidence. Elmore (2002) described professional development as sustained focus over time that is consistent with best practice.
- – - -
References
Brookfield, S. (2005). Power of critical theory for adult learning and teaching. Berkdire, Great Britain: McGraw-Hill Education.
Champion, R. (2003). Taking measure: The real measure of professional development program’s effectiveness lies in what participants learned. Journal of Staff Development, 24(1), 1–5.
Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (2001). Beyond certainty: Taking an inquiry stance on practice. In A. Lieberman & L. Miller (Eds.), Teachers caught in the action: Professional development that matters (pp. 45–61). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Elmore, R. (2002). Bridging the gap between standards and achievement: The imperative for professional development education [Brochure]. Washington, DC: Albert Shanker Institute.
Ganzer, T. (Ed.) (2000). Ambitious visions of professional development for teachers [Special Issue]. National Association for Secondary School Principals, (84)618
Glattenhorn, A. (1987). Cooperative professional development: Peer centered options for teacher growth. Educational Leadership, (3)45, 31-35.
Guskey, T. R. (1995). Professional development in action: New paradigms and practices. (T. R. Guskey & M. Huberman, Eds.) New York: Teachers College Press.
Guskey, T. R. (2000). Evaluating professional development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Hord, S. M. (Ed.). (2004). Learning together leading together: Changing schools through professional learning communities. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Kedzior, M., & Fifield, S. (2004). Teacher professional development. Education Policy Brief, 15(21), 76–97.
Marzano, R. J. (2003). What works in school: Translating research into action. Alexandria,, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Miles, K. H., Olden, A., Fermanich, M., & Archibald, S. (2004). Inside the blackbox of school spending on professional development: Lessons from comparing five urban districts. Journal of Education and Finance 30(1) 1-26.
Richardson, V. (2003). The dilemmas of professional development. Phi Delta Kappan, 84(5), 401–406.
National Staff Development Council (2001). NSDC’s Standards for Staff Development. Oxford, OH. Author.
National Staff Development Council (2007). Professional development. Retrieved
March 15, 2009, from http://www.NSDC.org/connect/about/index.cfm.
Walling, B., & Lewis, M. (2000). Development of professional development pre-service teachers: Longitudinal and comparative analysis. Action Teacher Education, 22(2a), 63-67
Educators must understand the concepts in processing professional development and what it means to education. The National Staff Development Council (2007) created a set of nine standards that all professional development should follow. They include content knowledge and quality teaching, research-basis, collaboration, diverse learning needs, student learning environments, family involvement, evaluation, data-driven design, and teacher learning.
However, it does not determine whether accountable measures are being gathered to determine if this information has benefited the education system as a whole.
Professional development refers to the development of a person in his or her professional role. According to Glattenhorn (1987), by gaining increased experience in one’s teaching role they systematically gain increased experience in their professional growth through examination of their teaching ability. Professional workshops and other formally related meetings are a part of the professional development experience (Ganzer, 2000). Much broader in scope than career development, professional development is defined as a growth that occurs through the professional cycle of a teacher (Glattenhorn, 1987). Moreover, professional development and other organized in-service programs are deigned to foster the growth of teachers that can be used for their further development (Crowther et al, 2000). One must examine the content of those experiences through which the process will occur and how it will take place (Ganzer, 2000; Guskey, 2000).
This perspective, in a way, is new to teaching in that professional development and in-service training simply consisted of workshops or short term courses that offered teachers new information on specific aspects of their work (Brookfield, 2005). Champion (2003) posited that regular opportunities and experiences for professional development over the past few years had yielded systematic growth and development in the teaching profession.
Many have referred to this dramatic shift as a new image or a new module of teacher education for professional development (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 2001: Walling & Lewis, 2000). In the past 15 years there have been standards-based movements for reform (Consortium for Policy Research in Education, 1993; Hord, 2004; Kedzior & Fifield, 2004: Sparks, 2002). The key component of this reform effort has been that effective professional development has created a knowledge base that has helped to transform and restructure quality schools (Guskey, 1995; Willis, 2000).
Much of the available research on professional development involves its relationship to student achievement. Researchers differ on the degree of this relationship. Variables are the school, teacher, student level related to the level of learning within the classroom, parent and community involvement, instructional strategies, classroom management, curriculum design, student background knowledge, and student motivation (Marzano, 2003). Based upon a review of several studies, Marzano (2003) concluded that the professional development activities experienced by teachers have a similar impact on student achievement to those of the aforementioned variables.
Opportunities for active learning, content knowledge, and the overall coherence of staff development are the top three characteristics of professional development. Opportunities for active learning and content specific strategies for staff development refer to a focus on teacher application of learned material. Overall coherence refers to the staff development program perceived as an integrated whole and development activities building upon each other in a consecutive fashion. Marzano (2003) warned, however, that standardized staff development activities which do not allow for effective application would be ineffective in changing teacher behavior.
Richardson, (2003) published a list of characteristics associated with effective professional development, stating that such programs would optimally be:
“statewide, long term with follow-up; encourage collegiality; foster agreement among participants on goals and visions; have a supportive administration; have access to adequate funds for materials, outside speakers, substitute teachers, and so on; encourage and develop agreement among participants; acknowledge participants existing beliefs and practices; and make use of outside facilitator/staff developers.” (p. 402)
Kedzior and Fifield (2004) described effective professional development as a prolonged facet of classroom instruction that is integrated, logical and on-going and incorporates experiences that are consistent with teachers’ goals; aligned with standards, assessments, other reform initiatives, and beset by the best research evidence. Elmore (2002) described professional development as sustained focus over time that is consistent with best practice.
- – - -
References
Brookfield, S. (2005). Power of critical theory for adult learning and teaching. Berkdire, Great Britain: McGraw-Hill Education.
Champion, R. (2003). Taking measure: The real measure of professional development program’s effectiveness lies in what participants learned. Journal of Staff Development, 24(1), 1–5.
Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (2001). Beyond certainty: Taking an inquiry stance on practice. In A. Lieberman & L. Miller (Eds.), Teachers caught in the action: Professional development that matters (pp. 45–61). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Elmore, R. (2002). Bridging the gap between standards and achievement: The imperative for professional development education [Brochure]. Washington, DC: Albert Shanker Institute.
Ganzer, T. (Ed.) (2000). Ambitious visions of professional development for teachers [Special Issue]. National Association for Secondary School Principals, (84)618
Glattenhorn, A. (1987). Cooperative professional development: Peer centered options for teacher growth. Educational Leadership, (3)45, 31-35.
Guskey, T. R. (1995). Professional development in action: New paradigms and practices. (T. R. Guskey & M. Huberman, Eds.) New York: Teachers College Press.
Guskey, T. R. (2000). Evaluating professional development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Hord, S. M. (Ed.). (2004). Learning together leading together: Changing schools through professional learning communities. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Kedzior, M., & Fifield, S. (2004). Teacher professional development. Education Policy Brief, 15(21), 76–97.
Marzano, R. J. (2003). What works in school: Translating research into action. Alexandria,, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Miles, K. H., Olden, A., Fermanich, M., & Archibald, S. (2004). Inside the blackbox of school spending on professional development: Lessons from comparing five urban districts. Journal of Education and Finance 30(1) 1-26.
Richardson, V. (2003). The dilemmas of professional development. Phi Delta Kappan, 84(5), 401–406.
National Staff Development Council (2001). NSDC’s Standards for Staff Development. Oxford, OH. Author.
National Staff Development Council (2007). Professional development. Retrieved
March 15, 2009, from http://www.NSDC.org/connect/about/index.cfm.
Walling, B., & Lewis, M. (2000). Development of professional development pre-service teachers: Longitudinal and comparative analysis. Action Teacher Education, 22(2a), 63-67
News from Europe: Continuing Higher Education as a Core Mission
By Robert S. Lapiner | Associate Vice Chancellor for Global Continuing Education, New York University
Until the expansion of the European Union in the late 1980’s, it would have been difficult to generalize about the place of post-tertiary education in European countries. Although each nation had its own expression of forms of adult learning—going back to diverse 19th-century models for worker education—many social, cultural and economic factors contributed to the absence of a developed continuing higher education infrastructure comparable to the U.S. and Canadian experience.
These included the historically small percentage of adults who completed university study; the large government sector comprising a higher percentage of the workforce than in North America, and traditions of employment continuity everywhere. As for those long-serving employees (including those in executive roles) needing to update their knowledge, in-service training delivered in-house had been normative. Perhaps most relevant, until the past three decades, voluntary job mobility was universally regarded as a somewhat alien, American concept. Thus there was not much demand from individuals seeking to access university-validated study opportunities that could help them position themselves for career change.
Moreover, the operational and academic structures that have existed for some time for adults seeking to earn their first degree were—outside of Britain and Soviet-dominated Europe—rarely found within traditional universities. As for non-degree learning opportunities, schools of commerce or of engineering and applied science have long organized programs for the benefit of their alumni (or for in-service training purposes for employees of their official quasi-governmental “industry sponsors”) but each operated generally in specific disciplinary niches and for narrowly defined institutionally affiliated communities.
Conditions have changed in the two short decades since the unification of Germany and the nearly doubling in size of the EU. European governments—singly and together under the EU banner—have marched sometimes fitfully and sometimes in remarkable concord toward greater convergence in many areas, most notably in matters of education, cross-border training and professional certification, within the broad framework of European social policy. Paralleling the earlier successful initiatives to encourage more traditional-age student mobility and facilitate credit-transfer within Europe (manifest in pioneering programs like ERASMUS and TEMPUS), the European Commission of Education and Culture and the Directorate for Education and Training have spearheaded a number of efforts modeling a fundamental commitment to the expansion of continuing education capabilities, by establishing coordinating bodies and funding incentives to facilitate relationships between higher education and industry (it is uplifting to see the leitmotif that Continuing Education is a key instrumentality for nurturing those vital relationships).
A CE leadership community has of course also emerged in Europe over the past few decades. Opportunities for professional development, promulgation of best practices, and inter-institutional and cross-border collaboration are fostered in relatively young organizations like the EUCON (European Union Continuing Education Association), the global ICDE (International Continuing and Distance Education Association), along with interest groups found within EAIE (the European Association of International Education) and the EUA (the European University Association). Brussels has been particularly assiduous in promoting inter-European cooperation among research institutes to study and measure the worlds of lifelong learning and continuing professional development, with the necessary goal of fostering a data framework for research, evaluation and assessment, as well to identify emerging best practices. A multitude of studies often aligned with OECD- and UNESCO-generated research reports, attest to these efforts (some are referenced below).
This blossoming of activity reflects the changing needs of society, of course, but it has not emerged only as a response to market opportunity. It has been accelerated by political initiatives: across the European Union, the education ministries of its 27 member governments (and those in the applicant queue, like Turkey) have all affirmed EU resolutions that lifelong learning and adult continuing higher education are among the fundamental responsibilities of higher education institutions (HEI’s). Because national governments establish educational policy and remain (for the time being) the principal funding sources of higher education across Europe, where private institutions are relatively few outside of self-standing professional schools, these widely shared affirmations come with formal expectations both of state investment and institutions providing evidence of demonstrated outcomes. The overarching commitment is legally enshrined in principles in the Lisbon Treaty (the governing set of laws for members of the European Union). Further, the EU has set specific goals as evidence of compliance: 12.5% of adults aged 25-64 shall be enrolled annually in forms of higher education-based continuing education or vocational training.
There is little doubt that the multi-national endorsements from EU member countries of these policy objectives are shaping the general direction of higher education across the Continent. They are not just well-intentioned pronouncements from government advisory panels or commissions of educational professionals and industry champions of higher education à la U.S. practice. They have the force of law.
Despite the diversity of needs and conditions across a broad landscape, it should be especially heartening for our professional community to note that insisting upon strengthened continuing education and lifelong learning capabilities have consistently emerged as critical elements of the anticipated role of HEI’s for the health of the “Europe of Knowledge” and in the promotion of social harmony—key issues of the Lisbon Treaty. In particular, the governments have articulated a clear correlation between the role CE programs can and should have at the macro level, in disseminating the products of university research labs to fuel the capacity of European industry and commerce to be at the forefront of innovation for high quality manufacturing and services in the global knowledge economy. And at the micro level, in keeping members of the demographically ageing European workforce of professionals informed about new methodologies, technologies, and other changing conditions, to help them stay up-to-date and productive—especially as Europeans are increasingly facing the need to remain actively employed far longer than recent generations.[1]
For these many reasons, it is not hard to understand the ways continuing education is seen as representing a structured higher educational expression of the “social dimension” of universities, as articulated in the Bologna Process. [2]
- – - -
References
[1] See Draft 2008 joint progress report of the Council and the Commission on the implementation of the ‘Education & Training 2010’ work programmer, “Delivering lifelong learning for knowledge, creativity and innovation.” Council of the European Union. No. Cion prop.: 15292/07 EDUC 211 SOC 460 + ADD 1. See also the conclusions of The Council of the European Union of 12 May 2009, regarding a strategic framework for European cooperation in education and training (‘ET 2020’), in Official Journal of the European Union, “Notices from European Institutions and Bodies,” May 28, 2009, pp. C 119/2-119/10.
[2] Cf. Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency. Modernisation of Higher Education in Europe: Funding and the Social Dimension. European Commission, 2011. Available at eacea.ec.europa.eu/education,eurydice
Until the expansion of the European Union in the late 1980’s, it would have been difficult to generalize about the place of post-tertiary education in European countries. Although each nation had its own expression of forms of adult learning—going back to diverse 19th-century models for worker education—many social, cultural and economic factors contributed to the absence of a developed continuing higher education infrastructure comparable to the U.S. and Canadian experience.
These included the historically small percentage of adults who completed university study; the large government sector comprising a higher percentage of the workforce than in North America, and traditions of employment continuity everywhere. As for those long-serving employees (including those in executive roles) needing to update their knowledge, in-service training delivered in-house had been normative. Perhaps most relevant, until the past three decades, voluntary job mobility was universally regarded as a somewhat alien, American concept. Thus there was not much demand from individuals seeking to access university-validated study opportunities that could help them position themselves for career change.
Moreover, the operational and academic structures that have existed for some time for adults seeking to earn their first degree were—outside of Britain and Soviet-dominated Europe—rarely found within traditional universities. As for non-degree learning opportunities, schools of commerce or of engineering and applied science have long organized programs for the benefit of their alumni (or for in-service training purposes for employees of their official quasi-governmental “industry sponsors”) but each operated generally in specific disciplinary niches and for narrowly defined institutionally affiliated communities.
Conditions have changed in the two short decades since the unification of Germany and the nearly doubling in size of the EU. European governments—singly and together under the EU banner—have marched sometimes fitfully and sometimes in remarkable concord toward greater convergence in many areas, most notably in matters of education, cross-border training and professional certification, within the broad framework of European social policy. Paralleling the earlier successful initiatives to encourage more traditional-age student mobility and facilitate credit-transfer within Europe (manifest in pioneering programs like ERASMUS and TEMPUS), the European Commission of Education and Culture and the Directorate for Education and Training have spearheaded a number of efforts modeling a fundamental commitment to the expansion of continuing education capabilities, by establishing coordinating bodies and funding incentives to facilitate relationships between higher education and industry (it is uplifting to see the leitmotif that Continuing Education is a key instrumentality for nurturing those vital relationships).
A CE leadership community has of course also emerged in Europe over the past few decades. Opportunities for professional development, promulgation of best practices, and inter-institutional and cross-border collaboration are fostered in relatively young organizations like the EUCON (European Union Continuing Education Association), the global ICDE (International Continuing and Distance Education Association), along with interest groups found within EAIE (the European Association of International Education) and the EUA (the European University Association). Brussels has been particularly assiduous in promoting inter-European cooperation among research institutes to study and measure the worlds of lifelong learning and continuing professional development, with the necessary goal of fostering a data framework for research, evaluation and assessment, as well to identify emerging best practices. A multitude of studies often aligned with OECD- and UNESCO-generated research reports, attest to these efforts (some are referenced below).
This blossoming of activity reflects the changing needs of society, of course, but it has not emerged only as a response to market opportunity. It has been accelerated by political initiatives: across the European Union, the education ministries of its 27 member governments (and those in the applicant queue, like Turkey) have all affirmed EU resolutions that lifelong learning and adult continuing higher education are among the fundamental responsibilities of higher education institutions (HEI’s). Because national governments establish educational policy and remain (for the time being) the principal funding sources of higher education across Europe, where private institutions are relatively few outside of self-standing professional schools, these widely shared affirmations come with formal expectations both of state investment and institutions providing evidence of demonstrated outcomes. The overarching commitment is legally enshrined in principles in the Lisbon Treaty (the governing set of laws for members of the European Union). Further, the EU has set specific goals as evidence of compliance: 12.5% of adults aged 25-64 shall be enrolled annually in forms of higher education-based continuing education or vocational training.
There is little doubt that the multi-national endorsements from EU member countries of these policy objectives are shaping the general direction of higher education across the Continent. They are not just well-intentioned pronouncements from government advisory panels or commissions of educational professionals and industry champions of higher education à la U.S. practice. They have the force of law.
Despite the diversity of needs and conditions across a broad landscape, it should be especially heartening for our professional community to note that insisting upon strengthened continuing education and lifelong learning capabilities have consistently emerged as critical elements of the anticipated role of HEI’s for the health of the “Europe of Knowledge” and in the promotion of social harmony—key issues of the Lisbon Treaty. In particular, the governments have articulated a clear correlation between the role CE programs can and should have at the macro level, in disseminating the products of university research labs to fuel the capacity of European industry and commerce to be at the forefront of innovation for high quality manufacturing and services in the global knowledge economy. And at the micro level, in keeping members of the demographically ageing European workforce of professionals informed about new methodologies, technologies, and other changing conditions, to help them stay up-to-date and productive—especially as Europeans are increasingly facing the need to remain actively employed far longer than recent generations.[1]
For these many reasons, it is not hard to understand the ways continuing education is seen as representing a structured higher educational expression of the “social dimension” of universities, as articulated in the Bologna Process. [2]
- – - -
References
[1] See Draft 2008 joint progress report of the Council and the Commission on the implementation of the ‘Education & Training 2010’ work programmer, “Delivering lifelong learning for knowledge, creativity and innovation.” Council of the European Union. No. Cion prop.: 15292/07 EDUC 211 SOC 460 + ADD 1. See also the conclusions of The Council of the European Union of 12 May 2009, regarding a strategic framework for European cooperation in education and training (‘ET 2020’), in Official Journal of the European Union, “Notices from European Institutions and Bodies,” May 28, 2009, pp. C 119/2-119/10.
[2] Cf. Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency. Modernisation of Higher Education in Europe: Funding and the Social Dimension. European Commission, 2011. Available at eacea.ec.europa.eu/education,eurydice
ការរិះគន់ពីគុណភាពនៃការបំពេញការងាររបស់មន្ត្រីរាជការ
ដោយ ទីន ហ្សាការីយ៉ា
ក្រុមអ្នកតាមដានសង្គម រិះគន់ការបំពេញការងាររបស់មន្ត្រីរាជការមួយចំនួន ថាធ្វើការបែបការិយាធិបតេយ្យ និងអសមត្ថភាពនៅក្នុងការគ្រប់គ្រងស្ថាប័ននីមួយៗ។
ក្រុមអ្នកស្រាវជ្រាវផ្នែកអភិវឌ្ឍន៍សង្គម បានលើកឡើងថា មន្ត្រីរាជការបម្រើការងារនៅតាមស្ថាប័នរដ្ឋ ធ្វើការបាត់បង់នូវក្រមសីលធម៌ វិជ្ជាជីវៈ និងគ្មានវិន័យ ពីព្រោះថា នៅតាមស្ថាប័នទាំងនោះ បុគ្គលិកនីមួយៗធ្វើការមិនបង្កភាពងាយស្រួលដល់អ្នកទៅទទួលសេវា នោះឡើយ។អ្នកស្រាវជ្រាវបានពន្យល់ថា មន្ត្រីរាជការទាំងអស់ ទោះបីជាបំពេញការងារប្រចាំថ្ងៃមិនសកម្ម មិនយកចិត្តទុកដាក់នឹងការងារយ៉ាងណាក៏ដោយ ក៏ពួកគេមិនប្រឈមនឹងការទទួលទោសកំហុសអ្វីដែរ ពិសេសមិនប្រឈមនឹងការដកចេញពីការងារដូចបុគ្គលិកបម្រើការងារនៅ ក្រុមហ៊ុនឯកជននោះទេ ដែលបញ្ហាទាំងនេះវារាំងស្ទះដល់ការអនុវត្តការងារឲ្យមាន ប្រសិទ្ធភាព។
អ្នកស្រាវជ្រាវផ្នែកអភិវឌ្ឍន៍សង្គម លោក កែម ឡី មានប្រសាសន៍ថា អស់រយៈពេលជាង ៣០ឆ្នាំកន្លងមកនេះ ទាំងរដ្ឋាភិបាល ទាំងប្រទេសជាម្ចាស់ជំនួយ បានមើលរំលងអំពីការបំពេញការងាររបស់មន្ត្រីរាជការដែលបម្រើការងារ នៅស្ថាប័នរដ្ឋ ពីព្រោះថា រដ្ឋាភិបាល ឬក្រសួងនីមួយៗ មិនមានតារាងវិភាគទៅលើតួនាទី និងភារកិច្ចរបស់មន្ត្រីនីមួយៗឲ្យបានច្បាស់លាស់។
លោក កែម ឡី៖ «រដ្ឋាភិបាលមិនហ៊ានធ្វើការវិភាគមុខងារ និងភារកិច្ចស៊ីជម្រៅ ទោះបីជាមានការជួយប្រាក់ឧបត្ថម្ភពីភ្នាក់ងារពិសេស PAC មានPOC មានជួយច្រើនក្ដី ហើយភ្នាក់ងារជាដៃគូជួយអភិវឌ្ឍក៏ទទួលស្គាល់ថា មិនមានប្រសិទ្ធភាពដែរ»។
ការបម្រើការងាររបស់មន្ត្រីរាជការនៅតាមស្ថាប័នរដ្ឋនីមួយៗ បានបង្កការលំបាកដល់ប្រជាពលរដ្ឋនៅពេលប្រជាពលរដ្ឋត្រូវការទៅ រត់ការឯកសារនានា ដូចជាការទៅបង់ពន្ធដីធ្លី ការរត់ការស្នើសុំបើកអាជីវកម្មផ្សេងៗ ប្រជាពលរដ្ឋត្រូវការរង់ចាំពេលវេលាច្រើនថ្ងៃ ពេលខ្លះត្រូវបង់លុយក្រោមតុជូន ឬសូកប៉ាន់ ជាថ្នូរនឹងការរត់ការលឿន ឬ ដើម្បីឲ្យគេយករៀបចំឯកសារជូនឲ្យបានឆាប់រហ័សជាដើម។
ប្រជាពលរដ្ឋនៅទីក្រុងភ្នំពេញ ឈ្មោះ មុន្នី បានឲ្យដឹងថា កាលពីសប្ដាហ៍មុនលោកបានទៅបង់ពន្ធរថយន្តនៅខណ្ឌទួលគោក ត្រូវចំណាយពេលចំនួនបីថ្ងៃទើបបង់ពន្ធបាន។ លោក មុន្នី អះអាងថា ប្រជាពលរដ្ឋភាគច្រើនដែលមិនដឹងរឿងអំពីការសូកប៉ាន់ ត្រូវឈររង់ចាំមន្ត្រីពន្ធដារទទួលយកឯកសាររបស់ខ្លួន ដែលចំណាយពេលទៅបង់ពន្ធជាច្រើនដង ប៉ុន្តែបើដឹងអំពីរបៀបបង់លុយក្រោមតុជូនគេ ទើបគេសម្រួលឯកសារបានលឿន។
លោក មុន្នី៖ «ដល់ពេលយើងដាក់ឯកសារ យើងដាក់ខាងមុខហ្នឹង យើងអត់ដឹងរឿងចេះតែចាំគេ ពីរបីថ្ងៃ ជួនកាលមន្ត្រីពន្ធដារប្រាប់ថា អស់ហើយក្រដាសពន្ធតំលៃ ២៥ម៉ឺនរៀល ១២ម៉ឺននោះ ខ្ញុំស្ដាប់ទៅវង្វេង។ ដល់ពេលចាំយូរពេក ខ្ញុំចុះមកកន្លែងផ្ញើម៉ូតូ សួរគេទៅ គេប្រាប់ឲ្យទៅបង់ខាងក្រោយ គេរត់ការឲ្យ ឲ្យគេ ២ម៉ឺន៥ពាន់ទៅ»។
ឆ្លើយតបទៅនឹងបញ្ហានេះ មន្ត្រីជាន់ខ្ពស់នៃគណបក្សប្រជាជនកម្ពុជា និងជាប្រធានគណៈកម្មការសេដ្ឋកិច្ច និងសវនកម្មនៃរដ្ឋសភា លោកបណ្ឌិត ជាម យៀប បានទទួលស្គាល់ថា កន្លងមកការអនុវត្តការងាររបស់មន្ត្រីរាជការខ្លះ ធ្វើការងារព្រងើយកន្តើយនឹងការងាររបស់ខ្លួនមែន។
លោកបណ្ឌិត ជាម យៀប បានបំភ្លឺថា បច្ចុប្បន្ននេះរដ្ឋាភិបាលមានវិធានការតឹងតែងចំពោះមន្ត្រីប្រព្រឹត្ត អំពើពុករលួយទាំងឡាយ ដោយរដ្ឋាភិបាលបានបង្កើតអង្គភាពប្រឆាំងអំពើពុករលួយជាដើម៖ «ឥឡូវ មន្ត្រីមួយចំនួនកំពុងដាក់នៅក្នុងការពិនិត្យរបស់រដ្ឋ អង្គភាពប្រឆាំងអំពើពុករលួយ ដែលគេចង់បាន អ៊ីចឹងយើងកំពុងរឹតត្បិត យើងមិនអាចព្រួញមួយបាញ់បានសត្វបានទាំងបីម្ដងបានទេ»។
ទោះបីជាយ៉ាងណាក៏ដោយ ក្រុមអ្នកវិភាគបានពន្យល់ថា ប្រព័ន្ធការងាររបស់មន្រ្តីរាជការបច្ចុប្បន្ននេះ បុគ្គលិករដ្ឋធ្វើការលឿន និងយកចិត្តទុកដាក់នោះ លុះត្រាណាបុគ្គលិកទាំងនោះធ្វើការនៅចំកន្លែងដែលមានលុយ។ មានន័យថា គេមានឱកាសដើម្បីទទួលសំណូកបាន ទោះបីជាកម្ពុជា មានស្ថាប័នប្រឆាំងអំពើពុករលួយក្ដី។ ក្រុមអ្នកវិភាគបានឲ្យដឹងថា ការអនុវត្តការងារនៅស្ថាប័នរដ្ឋ ជាការបង្កើតការិយាធិបតេយ្យនៅក្នុងស្ថាប័នរដ្ឋ។
អ្នកវិភាគឯករាជ្យ លោកបណ្ឌិត សុខ ទូច មានប្រសាសន៍ថា មន្ត្រីរាជការបម្រើការងារនៅស្ថាប័នរដ្ឋបច្ចុប្បន្នមានបញ្ហាជា ច្រើន ដែលរដ្ឋាភិបាលត្រូវតែពង្រឹងវិន័យឡើងវិញ ពីព្រោះថា មន្ត្រីរាជការមិនគោរពពេលវេលា វាខុសពីបុគ្គលិកធ្វើការនៅស្ថាប័នឯកជន រាល់ពេលបំពេញតួនាទី ឬផ្ដល់សេវាជូនប្រជាពលរដ្ឋទាល់តែមានលុយសូកពីប្រជាពលរដ្ឋ ទើបគេរហ័សរហួនធ្វើការ។
លោកបណ្ឌិត សុខ ទូច៖ «ការិយាធិបតេយ្យបង្កើតអន្ទាក់កាន់តែច្រើន ដើម្បីទទួលផល លាភពីភាពយឺតយ៉ាវហ្នឹង។ ទី២ នីតិវិធីនៃការបង្កភាពសាំញ៉ាំហ្នឹងកាន់តែច្រើន។ ឧទាហរណ៍ដូចជាបង់ពន្ធដី នីតិវិធីស្មុគស្មាញ ដែលប្រជាជនខ្មែរយើងមិនសូវចេះ ធ្វើឲ្យមានការលំបាក»។
អ្នកស្រាវជ្រាវផ្នែកអភិវឌ្ឍន៍សង្គម បានពន្យល់ទៀតថា មន្ត្រីរាជការគេកម្រឃើញត្រូវថ្នាក់លើរបស់ខ្លួនដាក់ពិន័យ ឬដកចេញពីតួនាទីនោះ ដោយសារវាជាប់ពាក់ព័ន្ធនឹងរឿងនយោបាយ។ មានន័យថា មន្ត្រីរាជការភាគច្រើនជាសមាជិកគណបក្សកាន់អំណាច និងជាប់សែស្រឡាយរបស់មន្ត្រីធំនៅក្នុងក្រសួង ឬស្ថាប័នទាំងនោះ។
ម្យ៉ាងវិញទៀត លោក កែម ឡី ជាអ្នកស្រាវជ្រាវផ្នែកអភិវឌ្ឍន៍សង្គម បានអះអាងថា មន្ត្រីរាជការថ្នាក់ក្រោមធ្វើការមិនមានប្រសិទ្ធភាពនោះ ក៏វាទាក់ទងទៅនឹងប្រាក់បៀវត្សនៅមានកម្រិតទាបដែរ។ លោកបញ្ជាក់ថា ទោះបីជារដ្ឋាភិបាលមានគោលនយោបាយដំឡើងប្រាក់បៀវត្សជូនមន្ត្រី រាជការក្នុង ១ឆ្នាំ ចំនួន ១៥% ក្ដី ប៉ុន្តែបើប្រៀបធៀបចំណូលថវិកាជាតិក្នុងឆ្នាំ១៩៩៣ មានប្រមាណ ៧០ ទៅ ៨០លានដុល្លារក្នុងមួយឆ្នាំ រីឯចំណូលថវិកាជាតិក្នុងឆ្នាំ២០១០ និងឆ្នាំ២០១១ មានជាង ១.៧០០លានដុល្លារ ដូច្នេះការដំឡើងប្រាក់ខែ ១៥% នេះ នៅមានកម្រិតទាបនៅឡើយ។
លោក កែម ឡី៖ «តែប្រាក់បៀវត្ស កាលពីឆ្នាំ១៩៩៣ មានតិចបំផុតពី ២០ដុល្លារ និង ៣០ដុល្លារ ប៉ុន្តែបច្ចុប្បន្នកំណើនសេដ្ឋកិច្ចឡើងច្រើនហើយ ប្រាក់បៀវត្សមានត្រឹម ៣០ដុល្លារ ឬ ៤០ដុល្លារទេ ដូច្នេះកំណើតសេដ្ឋកិច្ចបច្ចុប្បន្នឡើងលើសពីមុនប្រហែល ២០ដង ដូច្នេះរដ្ឋាភិបាលគួរតែពិចារណាឡើងវិញចំពោះបញ្ហានេះ»។
ដោយឡែកចំពោះអ្នកវិភាគឯករាជ្យ លោកបណ្ឌិត សុខ ទូច វិញ មានទស្សនៈថា ការអនុវត្តការងារមិនល្អរបស់បុគ្គលិករដ្ឋនោះ វាមិនជាប់ពាក់ព័ន្ធនឹងកម្រិតប្រាក់ខែទាបទាំងស្រុងនោះទេ សំខាន់បំផុតគឺស្ថិតនៅលើក្រមសីលធម៌ វិជ្ជាជីវៈរបស់មន្ត្រីរាជការ និងវិន័យ។
ក្រុមអ្នកវិភាគបានផ្ដល់អនុសាសន៍ថា ដើម្បីកែប្រែឲ្យមន្ត្រីរាជការអនុវត្តការងារមានប្រសិទ្ធភាព រដ្ឋាភិបាលត្រូវកំណត់ឲ្យមន្ត្រីរាជការមានក្រមសីលធម៌ វិជ្ជាជីវៈ និងគោរពវិន័យ រើសមនុស្សដាក់ធ្វើការឲ្យត្រូវជំនាញ និងមានសមត្ថភាព កុំជ្រើសរើសយកមនុស្សតែក្រុមបក្សខ្លួនឯង។
ឆ្លើយតបទៅនឹងបញ្ហានេះ លោកបណ្ឌិត ជាម យៀប បានពន្យល់ថា ប្រទេសកម្ពុជាបានឆ្លងកាត់របបកម្ពុជាប្រជាធិបតេយ្យ។ អ្នកចេះដឹងភាគច្រើនត្រូវគេកាប់សម្លាប់នៅក្នុងរបបខ្មែរក្រហម ដូច្នេះមន្ត្រីរាជការមួយចំនួនបម្រើការនៅស្ថាប័នរដ្ឋខ្វះ សមត្ថភាព។ ប៉ុន្តែលោកអះអាងថា បច្ចុប្បន្ននេះ រដ្ឋាភិបាលកំពុងកែទម្រង់បន្តិចម្ដងៗ និងមានវិធានការតឹងរ៉ឹងចំពោះមន្ត្រីរាជការដែលប្រព្រឹត្តអំពើ ពុករលួយនោះ៕
គុណភាពអប់រំនៅកម្ពុជាត្រូវតែពង្រឹង!
ទស្សនៈព្រឹត្តិការណ៍សេដ្ឋកិច្ចខ្មែរ
ដោយ គី សុខលីម
ពីមួយឆ្នាំទៅមួយឆ្នាំ ប្រទេសកម្ពុជាបានផលិតធនធានមនុស្សកាន់តែច្រើនឡើងៗ។ ជាក់ស្តែង សាលារៀនដែលជាថ្នាលបណ្តុះបណ្តាលធនធានមនុស្សបានបើកទ្វារកាន់តែ ច្រើនឡើងៗ ទាំងនៅក្នុងទីក្រុងភ្នំពេញ ទាំងនៅតាមបណ្តាខេត្តនានានៅក្នុងប្រទេស។
ក្នុងមួយឆ្នាំៗនិសិត្សច្រើនពាន់ម៉ឺននាក់បានចេញពីសាកល វិទ្យាល័យ។ ជាការពិត ជារៀងរាល់ឆ្នាំ មាននិសិ្សតច្រើនពាន់នាក់បានបញ្ចប់ការសិក្សាមែន ប៉ុន្តែសំណួរដែលកំពុងចោទឡើង គឺទាក់ទងទៅនឹងគុណភាពអប់រំ នៅក្នុងប្រទេសក្រីក្រមួយនេះ។ ប្រសិនបើគេនិយាយក្នុងក្របខណ្ឌក្នុងប្រទេស និងផ្អែកលើហេតុផលក្រោយរបបប៉ុលពត ជាការមិនអាចប្រកែកបានគឺថា គុណភាពអប់រំរបស់កម្ពុជាមានការរីកចម្រើនទៅមុខគួរសមមែន ប៉ុន្តែប្រសិនបើគេធ្វើការប្រៀបធៀបគុណភាពអប់រំរបស់កម្ពុជាជាមួយ ប្រទេសនៅក្នុងតំបន់ ឬប្រទេសអភិវឌ្ឍន៍ធំៗវិញ វិស័យអប់រំកម្ពុជាស្ថិតនៅឆ្ងាយដាច់ពីគេសឹងហៅមិនឮ។
តើមូលហេតុអ្វីបានជាវិស័យអប់រំកម្ពុជានៅទន់ខ្សោយ?
មូលហេតុមានច្រើន ប៉ុន្តែ បញ្ហាធំៗកត់សម្គាល់មានដូចជា៖ ទី១ គឺដោយសារប្រាក់ខែគ្រូបង្រៀននៅតាមសាលារដ្ឋមានចំនួនតិចតួច។ ប្រាក់ខែមិនអាចរស់បានធ្វើអោយគ្រូបង្រៀនគ្មានចំណង់នឹងបង្រៀន ឡើយ។
ទី២៖គឺដោយសារគ្រូបង្រៀនមួយចំនួនបាត់បង់ក្រមសីលធម៌ មានន័យថា ប្រាក់ខែរដ្ឋទាបមែន ប៉ុន្តែពួកគេអាចរកក្រៅបានគួរសម។ រកកម្រៃក្រៅផ្លូវការបានច្រើនហើយ ប៉ុន្តែពួកគេនៅតែគ្មានឆន្ទៈនឹងបង្រៀនដដែល។ នេះគឺដោយសារការបាត់បង់សតិសម្បជញ្ញៈក្នុងនាមជាអ្នកបណ្តុះបញ្ញា ញាណ។
បញ្ហាទី៣ដែលទាញទម្លាក់គុណភាពអប់រំដែរនោះ គឺគុណភាពគ្រូបង្រៀនតែម្តង។ គ្រូបង្រៀននៅតាមសាលារដ្ឋមួយចំនួនមិនមែនចេញមកពីសិស្សឆ្នើម ប្រចាំសាលាទេ។ ដោយសារប្រាក់ខែគ្រូបង្រៀនទាប សិស្សឆ្នើមភាគច្រើនមិនចង់ក្លាយខ្លួនទៅជាសាស្រ្តចារ្យឡើយ។
មូលហេតុទី៤ដែលរុញច្រានអោយគុណភាពអបរំមានកម្រិតទាបដែរនោះ គឺដោយសារសាកលវិទ្យាល័យមួយចំនួនគិតពីរឿងចំណេញប្រាក់កាសច្រើនជាង គិតពីគុណភាពសិក្សា។ សាកលវិទ្យាល័យខ្លះមិនហ៊ានរឹតបន្តឹងវិន័យខ្លាំងទេ ពីព្រោះពួកគេខ្លាចនិសិ្សតមិនចុះឈ្មោះរៀននៅទីនោះ។ ការគិតរបៀបនេះវានឹងរុញច្រានគុណភាពអប់រំខ្មែរអោយធ្លាក់ទៅរក មហន្តរាយថែមទៀត។
មូលហេតុចុងក្រោយដែលគ្រោះថ្នាក់ខ្លាំងដែរនោះ គឺការសូកប៉ាន់ ដើម្បីចៀសវាងការប្រឡងធ្លាក់ពីកម្រិតមួយទៅកម្រិតមួយ។
អ្នកតាមដានសភាពការណ៍សង្គមសេដ្ឋកិច្ចនៅក្នុងប្រទេសកម្ពុជាបាន អត្ថាធិប្បាយថា រដ្ឋាភិបាលគួរពិចារណាបន្ថែមទៀតពីរឿងគុណភាពអប់រំនេះ។ គុណភាពមនុស្សគឺជារឿងស្លាប់រស់របស់គ្រួសារ សហគមន៍ និងប្រទេសជាតិ។
កាលពីសម័យដើម កុលសម្ព័ន្ធនីមួយៗវាយប្រហារគ្នាតាមរយៈកម្លាំងបាយ ដើម្បីកាន់កាប់អំណាចនៅក្នុងតំបន់ណាមួយ។ ប៉ុន្តែក្នុងសម័យសតវត្សរ៍ទី២១នេះ សហគមន៍នីមួយៗ ឬប្រទេសនីមួយៗលែងប្រយុទ្ធគ្នាតាមកម្លាំងបាយទៀតហើយ។ តែជាការប្រយុទ្ធគ្នាដោយប្រើប្រាស់បញ្ញាញាណ។ តាមរយៈបញ្ញាញាណនេះ ប្រទេសខ្លះ ដូចជា ប្រទេសជប៉ុនជាដើម ធ្លាប់ក្លាយជាមហាអំណាចសេដ្ឋកិច្ចទី២ បន្ទាប់ពីសហរដ្ឋអាមេរិកមុននឹងផ្តល់តំណែងនេះទៅអោយប្រទេសចិនវិញ។
ឯាកមកនិយាយពីប្រទេសកម្ពុជាវិញ ប្រសិនបើកម្ពុជាចង់ក្លាយទៅជាប្រទេសមហាអំណាច ឬចង់ក្លាយខ្លួនទៅជាប្រទេសមួយដែលតំបន់ ឬពិភពលលោកទទួលស្គាល់នោះ ការផលិតធនធានមនុស្សដែលមានគុណភាពខ្ពស់គឺជារឿងចាំបាច់បំផុត។ ជាពិសេស នៅក្នុងបរិបទដែលប្រទេសកម្ពុជាត្រូវប្រកួតប្រជែងក្នុងក្របខណ្ឌ សហគមន៍អាស៊ាន រួមជាមួយប្រទេសដទៃទៀត នៅឆ្នាំ២០១៥ខាងមុខនេះ។
សូមកុំភ្លេចថា គ្រួសារមួយ សហគមន៍មួយ ប្រទេសជាតិមួយ ដែលសម្បូរទៅដោយមនុស្សមានចំណេះដឹងប្រកបដោយគុណភាពខ្ពស់ គ្រួសារនោះ សហគមន៍នោះ ប្រទេសនោះពិតជាអភិវឌ្ឍលឿនជាងគ្រួសារ សហគមន៍ឬប្រទេសដែលមិនសូវមានអ្នកចេះដឹង៕
ដោយ គី សុខលីម
ពីមួយឆ្នាំទៅមួយឆ្នាំ ប្រទេសកម្ពុជាបានផលិតធនធានមនុស្សកាន់តែច្រើនឡើងៗ។ ជាក់ស្តែង សាលារៀនដែលជាថ្នាលបណ្តុះបណ្តាលធនធានមនុស្សបានបើកទ្វារកាន់តែ ច្រើនឡើងៗ ទាំងនៅក្នុងទីក្រុងភ្នំពេញ ទាំងនៅតាមបណ្តាខេត្តនានានៅក្នុងប្រទេស។
ក្នុងមួយឆ្នាំៗនិសិត្សច្រើនពាន់ម៉ឺននាក់បានចេញពីសាកល វិទ្យាល័យ។ ជាការពិត ជារៀងរាល់ឆ្នាំ មាននិសិ្សតច្រើនពាន់នាក់បានបញ្ចប់ការសិក្សាមែន ប៉ុន្តែសំណួរដែលកំពុងចោទឡើង គឺទាក់ទងទៅនឹងគុណភាពអប់រំ នៅក្នុងប្រទេសក្រីក្រមួយនេះ។ ប្រសិនបើគេនិយាយក្នុងក្របខណ្ឌក្នុងប្រទេស និងផ្អែកលើហេតុផលក្រោយរបបប៉ុលពត ជាការមិនអាចប្រកែកបានគឺថា គុណភាពអប់រំរបស់កម្ពុជាមានការរីកចម្រើនទៅមុខគួរសមមែន ប៉ុន្តែប្រសិនបើគេធ្វើការប្រៀបធៀបគុណភាពអប់រំរបស់កម្ពុជាជាមួយ ប្រទេសនៅក្នុងតំបន់ ឬប្រទេសអភិវឌ្ឍន៍ធំៗវិញ វិស័យអប់រំកម្ពុជាស្ថិតនៅឆ្ងាយដាច់ពីគេសឹងហៅមិនឮ។
តើមូលហេតុអ្វីបានជាវិស័យអប់រំកម្ពុជានៅទន់ខ្សោយ?
មូលហេតុមានច្រើន ប៉ុន្តែ បញ្ហាធំៗកត់សម្គាល់មានដូចជា៖ ទី១ គឺដោយសារប្រាក់ខែគ្រូបង្រៀននៅតាមសាលារដ្ឋមានចំនួនតិចតួច។ ប្រាក់ខែមិនអាចរស់បានធ្វើអោយគ្រូបង្រៀនគ្មានចំណង់នឹងបង្រៀន ឡើយ។
ទី២៖គឺដោយសារគ្រូបង្រៀនមួយចំនួនបាត់បង់ក្រមសីលធម៌ មានន័យថា ប្រាក់ខែរដ្ឋទាបមែន ប៉ុន្តែពួកគេអាចរកក្រៅបានគួរសម។ រកកម្រៃក្រៅផ្លូវការបានច្រើនហើយ ប៉ុន្តែពួកគេនៅតែគ្មានឆន្ទៈនឹងបង្រៀនដដែល។ នេះគឺដោយសារការបាត់បង់សតិសម្បជញ្ញៈក្នុងនាមជាអ្នកបណ្តុះបញ្ញា ញាណ។
បញ្ហាទី៣ដែលទាញទម្លាក់គុណភាពអប់រំដែរនោះ គឺគុណភាពគ្រូបង្រៀនតែម្តង។ គ្រូបង្រៀននៅតាមសាលារដ្ឋមួយចំនួនមិនមែនចេញមកពីសិស្សឆ្នើម ប្រចាំសាលាទេ។ ដោយសារប្រាក់ខែគ្រូបង្រៀនទាប សិស្សឆ្នើមភាគច្រើនមិនចង់ក្លាយខ្លួនទៅជាសាស្រ្តចារ្យឡើយ។
មូលហេតុទី៤ដែលរុញច្រានអោយគុណភាពអបរំមានកម្រិតទាបដែរនោះ គឺដោយសារសាកលវិទ្យាល័យមួយចំនួនគិតពីរឿងចំណេញប្រាក់កាសច្រើនជាង គិតពីគុណភាពសិក្សា។ សាកលវិទ្យាល័យខ្លះមិនហ៊ានរឹតបន្តឹងវិន័យខ្លាំងទេ ពីព្រោះពួកគេខ្លាចនិសិ្សតមិនចុះឈ្មោះរៀននៅទីនោះ។ ការគិតរបៀបនេះវានឹងរុញច្រានគុណភាពអប់រំខ្មែរអោយធ្លាក់ទៅរក មហន្តរាយថែមទៀត។
មូលហេតុចុងក្រោយដែលគ្រោះថ្នាក់ខ្លាំងដែរនោះ គឺការសូកប៉ាន់ ដើម្បីចៀសវាងការប្រឡងធ្លាក់ពីកម្រិតមួយទៅកម្រិតមួយ។
អ្នកតាមដានសភាពការណ៍សង្គមសេដ្ឋកិច្ចនៅក្នុងប្រទេសកម្ពុជាបាន អត្ថាធិប្បាយថា រដ្ឋាភិបាលគួរពិចារណាបន្ថែមទៀតពីរឿងគុណភាពអប់រំនេះ។ គុណភាពមនុស្សគឺជារឿងស្លាប់រស់របស់គ្រួសារ សហគមន៍ និងប្រទេសជាតិ។
កាលពីសម័យដើម កុលសម្ព័ន្ធនីមួយៗវាយប្រហារគ្នាតាមរយៈកម្លាំងបាយ ដើម្បីកាន់កាប់អំណាចនៅក្នុងតំបន់ណាមួយ។ ប៉ុន្តែក្នុងសម័យសតវត្សរ៍ទី២១នេះ សហគមន៍នីមួយៗ ឬប្រទេសនីមួយៗលែងប្រយុទ្ធគ្នាតាមកម្លាំងបាយទៀតហើយ។ តែជាការប្រយុទ្ធគ្នាដោយប្រើប្រាស់បញ្ញាញាណ។ តាមរយៈបញ្ញាញាណនេះ ប្រទេសខ្លះ ដូចជា ប្រទេសជប៉ុនជាដើម ធ្លាប់ក្លាយជាមហាអំណាចសេដ្ឋកិច្ចទី២ បន្ទាប់ពីសហរដ្ឋអាមេរិកមុននឹងផ្តល់តំណែងនេះទៅអោយប្រទេសចិនវិញ។
ឯាកមកនិយាយពីប្រទេសកម្ពុជាវិញ ប្រសិនបើកម្ពុជាចង់ក្លាយទៅជាប្រទេសមហាអំណាច ឬចង់ក្លាយខ្លួនទៅជាប្រទេសមួយដែលតំបន់ ឬពិភពលលោកទទួលស្គាល់នោះ ការផលិតធនធានមនុស្សដែលមានគុណភាពខ្ពស់គឺជារឿងចាំបាច់បំផុត។ ជាពិសេស នៅក្នុងបរិបទដែលប្រទេសកម្ពុជាត្រូវប្រកួតប្រជែងក្នុងក្របខណ្ឌ សហគមន៍អាស៊ាន រួមជាមួយប្រទេសដទៃទៀត នៅឆ្នាំ២០១៥ខាងមុខនេះ។
សូមកុំភ្លេចថា គ្រួសារមួយ សហគមន៍មួយ ប្រទេសជាតិមួយ ដែលសម្បូរទៅដោយមនុស្សមានចំណេះដឹងប្រកបដោយគុណភាពខ្ពស់ គ្រួសារនោះ សហគមន៍នោះ ប្រទេសនោះពិតជាអភិវឌ្ឍលឿនជាងគ្រួសារ សហគមន៍ឬប្រទេសដែលមិនសូវមានអ្នកចេះដឹង៕
កម្ពុជាត្រូវសង់វត្តបន្ថែម ឬមជ្ឈមណ្ឌលស្រាវជ្រាវ-មន្ទីរពិសោធន៍?
- Tuesday, 31 July 2012
- ប៉ែន មីរ៉ាន់ដា
- វត្តអារាម ជាទីសក្ការរបស់ប្រជាពលរដ្ឋខ្មែរប្រមាណ ៩០ %
ដែលកាន់សាសនាព្រះពុទ្ធ ដែលជាសាសនារបស់រដ្ឋ។
យើងកត់សម្គាល់ឃើញថា ចំនួនព្រះសង្ឃ និងវត្តអារាម កំពុងតែកើនឡើង
ហើយការសាងសង់ ត្រូវបានយកចិត្តទុកដាក់ ដោយរាជរដ្ឋាភិបាល
និងសប្បុរសជននានា។ តែបើក្រឡេកមើលចំនួន
និងទំនើបកម្មមជ្ឈមណ្ឌលស្រាវជ្រាវ និងមន្ទីរពិសោធន៍វិញ
មិនមានការកើនឡើងគួរឲ្យកត់សម្គាល់ឡើយ។
ឈរលើគោលការណ៍អា ស៊ានដែលនឹងបង្កើតសមាគមសេដ្ឋកិច្ចអាស៊ាន (ASEAN Economic Community, AEC) ត្រឹមឆ្នាំ ២០១៥ និងគោលការណ៍សកលភាវូបនីយកម្ម កម្ពុជានឹងប្រឈមការប្រកួតប្រជែងផលិតផលទាំងបរិមាណនិងគុណភាពនៅលើ ទីផ្សារតំបន់ និងពិភពលោក។
តើកម្ពុជា ត្រូវត្រៀមលក្ខណៈបែបណាខ្លះ ដើម្បីកែប្រែការប្រឈមឲ្យទៅជាឱកាស ពាណិជ្ជកម្ម និងសេដ្ឋកិច្ច? តើរដ្ឋាភិបាល ឬសប្បុរសជន ពាណិជ្ជករ គួរប្រើថវិកាខ្លះ ដើម្បីការសាងសង់មជ្ឈមណ្ឌលស្រាវជ្រាវ និងមន្ទីរពិសោធន៍វិទ្យាសាស្ត្រដែរឬទេ?
ជាដំបូង តួនាទីវត្តអារាមពិតជាសំខាន់ណាស់ សម្រាប់ពលរដ្ឋខ្មែរដូចជា ការផ្តល់ពុទ្ធដីកា និងដំបូន្មាន របស់ព្រះសង្ឃ ដល់ពុទ្ធសាសនិក និងជាកន្លែងផ្ដល់ចំណេះដឹង។ វត្តអារាមក៏ជាទីស្នាក់អាស្រ័យ របស់និស្សិតបុរស ដែលមកពីទីជនបទដើម្បីបន្តការសិក្សាថ្នាក់ឧត្តមនៅទីក្រុង។ អត្ថបទមួយរបស់ Arnaldo Pellini (2004) ក៏បានបង្ហាញឧទាហរណ៍ របស់សមាគមវត្តអារាមក្នុងស្រុកស្ទោង ខេត្តកំពង់ធំ ដែលដើរតួនាទីជាសមាគម ថវិកា និងស្រូវសម្រាប់ប្រជាពលរដ្ឋ។ បើតាមស្ថិតិរបស់ក្រសួងធម្មការ និងសាសនា ដែលដកស្រង់ដោយសារព័ត៌មាន Xinhua គិតមកត្រឹមខែមេសាឆ្នាំ២០១០ មានវត្តអារាមចំនួន ៤៣៩២ និងព្រះសង្ឃច្រើនជាង ៥ ម៉ឺនអង្គ ក្នុងប្រទេសកម្ពុជា។ បើយើងគិតពីសមាមាត្រភាគរយព្រះសង្ឃ និងប្រជាជនសរុប ១៣,៣៩៥,៦៨២ (NIS, 2008) គឺស្មើ ០.៤ %។
ម្យ៉ាងវិញ ទៀត ថវិកា ដែលត្រូវសាងសង់វិហារ និងកុដិ ក្នុងវត្ត នីមួយៗយ៉ាងហោចក៏ត្រូវចំណាយពី ២០ ទៅ ៣០ ម៉ឺនដុល្លារអាមេរិកដែរ ហើយបើយើងមានមហិច្ឆតាដើម្បីធ្វើទំនើបកម្មវត្តទាំងអស់ដែលមាន ស្រាប់ យ៉ាងហោចណាស់ក៏ត្រូវការថវិកាជិតមួយកោដិដុល្លារអាមេរិកដែរ។ ការសាងសង់ទៀតសោត ពពាក់ពពូនគ្នានៅតែតំបន់ជិតៗ ហើយតំបន់ឆ្ងាយៗ ជាពិសេសតំបន់ព្រំដែនដែលត្រូវការប្រជាពលរដ្ឋរស់នៅឲ្យបានច្រើន នោះ ក៏មិនសូវជាមានដែរ។
តើយើងទទួលបានអ្វីខ្លះ ពីការអភិវឌ្ឍបែបនេះ? ពិតណាស់ ប្រជាពលរដ្ឋ មានទីវត្តអារាមទូលាយស្អាតបាត សម្រាប់ជួបជុំគ្នាពេលមានបុណ្យទានម្ដងៗ។ តែបើក្រឡេកមើលព្រះសង្ឃមួយចំនួនតូច បានបង្ហាញភាពឡូយឆាយដាក់ប្រជាពលរដ្ឋ និងវាយឫកស្មើគហិបតី សម័យទុំទាវ ដែលនេះ ជាការខកចិត្តរបស់ពុទ្ធសាសនិក ដែលចំណាយអស់កម្លាំងញើសឈាម ដើម្បីឧបត្ថម្ភ វិស័យពុទ្ធសាសនា។ ម្យ៉ាងទៀត បើក្រឡេកមើលទៅព្រះសង្ឃតាមវត្តអារាមក្នុងក្រុងភ្នំពេញ គេនឹងឃើញព្រះសង្ឃក្មេងៗជាច្រើនដែលរវល់ជជែកតាមទូរស័ព្ទសាធា រណៈក្បែររបងវត្ត។ តាមការពិតទៅ វ័យ ១៨-៣៥ ឆ្នាំ គឺជាវ័យដ៏សស្រាក់សស្រាំក្នុងការងារ ដើម្បីប្រយោជន៍គ្រួសារនិងសង្គមជាតិ ហើយបើយើងសម្លឹងមើល សីលធម៌សង្គមខ្មែរបច្ចុប្បន្ន ដែលកំពុងធ្លាក់ចុះ រួមមានទាំងការរំលោភសេពសន្ថវ: (កាមកិលេស) ការសម្លាប់វាយតប់ ដែលករណីខ្លះត្រឹមតែមើលមុខគ្នានោះ វាប្រាសចាកនឹងសីលប្រាំ សម្រាប់ពុទ្ធសាសនិកទូទៅ។
តាមពិតទៅ យើងគួរតែមិនមានក្ដីបារម្ភ ពីបញ្ហាសីលធម៌សង្គមទេ ព្រោះយើងមានព្រះសង្ឃយ៉ាងច្រើន ដែលជាអ្នកប្រដៅសាសនា ក្នុងសង្គមយើង តែហេតុអ្វីបានជាបទល្មើសទាំងនេះ នៅតែកើតមានឡើង និងកំពុងបន្តកើនឡើង? ឬមួយក៏អ្វីដែលយើងបានចំណាយយ៉ាងច្រើននោះមិនមានប្រសិទ្ធភាព?
បច្ចេក វិទ្យាក្នុងអត្ថបទនេះ មិនសំដៅទៅលើព័ត៌មានវិទ្យានោះទេ តែយើងចង់ផ្ដោតទៅលើបច្ចេកវិទ្យា កសិកម្ម និងចំណីអាហារដែលដើរតួសំខាន់សម្រាប់ខឿនសេដ្ឋកិច្ចជាតិ។
សម្តេច នាយករដ្ឋមន្ត្រី ហ៊ុន សែន ធ្លាប់មានប្រសាសន៍ថា៖«យើងគួរតែអភិវឌ្ឍបច្ចេកវិទ្យាកសិកម្មរបស់ យើងឲ្យបានដូចប្រទេស ដទៃ។ បើយើងនឹកពីប្រទេសបារាំង យើងនឹងស្គាល់ស្រាទំពាំងបាយជូរពី Bordeaux ប្រូមា និងថ្លើមក្ងានដ៏ថ្លៃ»។
តើយើងត្រូវការអ្វី ដើម្បីឈានទៅដល់ការអភិវឌ្ឍផលិតផល និងផលិតកម្មជាទ្រង់ទ្រាយធំ?
ចម្លើយ គឺ យើងត្រូវឆ្លងកាត់ការស្រាវជ្រាវនិងកែលម្អតាមបែបវិទ្យាសាស្ត្រនៅ ក្នុងមជ្ឈមណ្ឌលស្រាវជ្រាវ ឬមន្ទីរពិសោធន៍។
ឧទាហរណ៍ ប្រសិនបើយើងចង់ផលិតទឹកដោះគោ ដើម្បីបំពេញតម្រូវការទីផ្សារក្នុងស្រុក និងក្រៅស្រុក នៅប្រទេសកម្ពុជា ដែលមានអាកាសធាតុក្នុងតំបន់ត្រូពិកក្ដៅ-សើម យើងត្រូវប្រើពេលបង្កាត់ខ្វែងពូជគោទឹកដោះ និងពូជក្នុងស្រុក ដែលធន់នឹងស្រេ្តស ហើយបើយើងចង់បានសាច់គោ ដែលមានរសជាតិឆ្ងាញ់ ផលិតភាពខ្ពស់ ប្រើចំណីតិច យើងក៏ត្រូវបង្កាត់សម្រាំងពូជដោយត្រូវប្រើបច្ចេកទេស បង្កាត់សិប្បនិម្មិត ផ្ទេរអំប្រ៊ីយ៉ូ...។ល។ បើយើង ចង់បានពូជដំណាំ ដែលធន់នឹងភាពរាំងស្ងួត សត្វល្អិត ទិន្នផលខ្ពស់ គុណភាពល្អ យើងអាចប្រើបច្ចេកវិទ្យា Genetic Modified Organism (GMO) ការបណ្ដុះ ជាលិកា...។ល។
បច្ចេកវិទ្យាទាំងនេះ ក៏អាចប្រើដើម្បីការពារពូជសត្វកម្រនិងរុក្ខជាតិកម្រ ក្នុងប្រទេសកម្ពុជាបានដែរ។ តើយើងមានលទ្ធភាពពេញលេញសម្រាប់ការផ្លាស់ប្តូរនេះ ឬនៅ? ចមើ្លយគឺពិតជាមិនទាន់ទេ ហើយពិតណាស់ដើម្បីធើ្វវាបានយើងត្រូវការពេលវេលា ថវិកា ធនធានមនុស្ស និងទីកនែ្លង។
យើងមានមជ្ឈមណ្ឌលស្រាវជ្រាវ ឬមន្ទីរពិសោធន៍វិទ្យាសាស្រ្តតិចតួចណាស់ ខ្លះមិនដំណើរការទៀត បើតាមការប៉ាន់ស្មាន ការសាងសង់មជ្ឈមណ្ឌលស្រាវជ្រាវ ឬមន្ទីរពិសោធន៍វិទ្យាសាស្រ្ត ដោយបំពាក់ឧបករណ៍បរិក្ខារទំនើប អាចមានតមៃ្លថៃ្លជាងវត្តអារាម ពី ២ ទៅបីដង តែយើងក៏មិនត្រូវការរហូតដល់ទៅជិត ៥ ពាន់កនែ្លងនោះដែរ ត្រឹមតែ ១ ភាគ ៥០ នៃចំនួននេះ វាច្រើនពេកទៅហើយសម្រាប់កម្ពុជា។
បញ្ហា មួយទៀត ជម្រើសរបស់និសិ្សត សម្រាប់ការរៀនវិស័យកសិកម្ម ក្នុងប្រទេសកម្ពុជាក៏មានតិចទៅទៀត ខណៈដែលកម្ពុជា ជាប្រទេសកសិកម្មស្រាប់។ ដូចដែលធ្លាប់ឮមកហើយ ឪពុកម្តាយ បានឲ្យដំបូន្មានទៅកូនសម្រាប់ការជ្រើសរើសរៀនវិស័យណា ដែលពេលចេញទៅធ្វើការ មានម៉ាស៊ីនត្រជាក់ មិនហាលថ្ងៃនិងភ្លៀង និងកាប់ គាស់ដី។
ជាលទ្ធផល រៀងរាល់ឆ្នាំ មាននិសិ្សតដែលបញ្ចប់ឧត្តមសិក្សាផ្នែកគ្រប់គ្រង ព័ត៌មានវិទ្យា ធនាគារ ដែលធ្វើការមិនប្រើជំនាញទាំងនេះ។ ដូច្នោះ ការកសាង និងបង្កើនចំនួនមជ្ឈមណ្ឌលស្រាវជ្រាវ និងមន្ទីរពិសោធន៍វិទ្យាសាស្រ្តជាភាពចាំបាច់ ដែលនឹងបង្កើតការងារបន្ថែមដល់និស្សិត និងជួយជំរុញស្តង់ដារ វិទ្យាសាស្រ្ត និងគុណភាពផលិតផល ដើម្បីប្រកួតប្រជែង ជាមួយប្រជាជាតិដទៃ។
សរុបសេចក្តីមក ការបង្កើនសន្ទុះការសាងសង់វត្តអារាម ក្នុងប្រទេសកម្ពុជា នាពេលបច្ចុប្បន្ន គួរតែមិនមានភាពចាំបាច់ ជាងការអភិវឌ្ឍ និងស្រាវជ្រាវវិទ្យាសាស្រ្ត លើផ្នែកកសិកម្មទេ។ សិស្ស និងនិសិ្សតក៏គួរតែមិនចាំបាច់បារម្ភ និងរារែកចំពោះការជ្រើសរើស និងប្រឡូកក្នុងវិស័យកសិកម្ម និងការស្រាវជ្រាវវិទ្យាសាស្រ្ត លើផ្នែកនេះដែរ។
វាជាខឿនសេដ្ឋកិច្ចដ៏ចម្បង របស់ប្រទេសជាតិនាពេលបច្ចុប្បន្ន និងទៅអនាគត ហើយយើងគួរតែត្រៀមខ្លួន ពង្រឹងសមត្ថភាពបន្ថែមលើវិស័យនេះ ដែលយើងបានឈានជើងចូលអង្គការពាណិជ្ជកម្មពិភពលោក (WTO) ហើយនឹងឈានជើងចូលសមាគមសេដ្ឋកិច្ចអាស៊ាន (AEC) នាពេលខាងមុខ៕ ដោយ ប៉ែន មីរ៉ាន់ដា និស្សិតថ្នាក់បណ្ឌិត នៅសាកលវិទ្យាល័យ New England នៅប្រទេសអូស្ដ្រាលី
Sunday, 29 July 2012
Unscrupulous agents get Chinese students into US schools
Time 29 July 2012 Issue No:232
Because many Chinese students have trouble making sense of the American
admissions process, a huge industry of education agents has arisen in
China to help guide them – and, in some cases, to do whatever it takes
to get them accepted, writes Justin Bergman for Time.
This autumn, David Zhu will join an exodus of Chinese students boarding planes for the leafy, beer-soaked campuses of American colleges and universities, a dream his parents have had since they started saving a $157,000 nest egg for his education. The 21-year-old hired an education agent in China to clean up and ‘elaborate’ on the essay he submitted as part of his application.
Stories like Zhu’s are becoming increasingly common, and this has created a thorny ethical dilemma in the US. According to a 2010 report by the consultancy Zinch China, eight out of every 10 Chinese undergraduate students use an agent to file their applications. And with such intense competition among agents, cheating is rampant, the group says.
This autumn, David Zhu will join an exodus of Chinese students boarding planes for the leafy, beer-soaked campuses of American colleges and universities, a dream his parents have had since they started saving a $157,000 nest egg for his education. The 21-year-old hired an education agent in China to clean up and ‘elaborate’ on the essay he submitted as part of his application.
Stories like Zhu’s are becoming increasingly common, and this has created a thorny ethical dilemma in the US. According to a 2010 report by the consultancy Zinch China, eight out of every 10 Chinese undergraduate students use an agent to file their applications. And with such intense competition among agents, cheating is rampant, the group says.
This fall, David Zhu will join an exodus of Chinese students
boarding planes for the leafy, beer-soaked campuses of American colleges
and universities. Zhu, currently a student at Shanghai’s prestigious
Fudan University, will be enrolling at Oregon State University to pursue
a bachelor’s degree in business — a dream his parents have had since
they started saving a $157,000 nest egg for his education. But like many
Chinese students who don’t speak English fluently, Zhu might not have
been accepted without a little help. The 21-year-old hired an education
agent in China to clean up
and “elaborate” on the essay he submitted as part of his
application. “Actually, the agency helped my application to some
extent,” he says.
Stories like Zhu’s are becoming increasingly common as the ranks of Chinese students going abroad for college continue to swell. Because many Chinese students have only basic knowledge of foreign universities and have trouble making sense of complicated applications, a huge industry of education agents has arisen in the country to help guide them — and, in some cases, to do whatever it takes to get them accepted. This has created a thorny ethical dilemma in the U.S. While many American schools are elated by the influx of Chinese students as they’ve scrimped and saved to make ends meet in the economic downturn, some educators worry that the reliance of Chinese students on agents has led to some unintended — and troubling — consequences.
Stories like Zhu’s are becoming increasingly common as the ranks of Chinese students going abroad for college continue to swell. Because many Chinese students have only basic knowledge of foreign universities and have trouble making sense of complicated applications, a huge industry of education agents has arisen in the country to help guide them — and, in some cases, to do whatever it takes to get them accepted. This has created a thorny ethical dilemma in the U.S. While many American schools are elated by the influx of Chinese students as they’ve scrimped and saved to make ends meet in the economic downturn, some educators worry that the reliance of Chinese students on agents has led to some unintended — and troubling — consequences.
(MORE: Why Are China’s Universities Losing Their Star Students?)
Although Chinese students have been going to America to study for decades, their numbers have spiked dramatically in the past few years. In the 2010–11 school year, more than 157,000 Chinese students were enrolled at institutions of higher learning in the U.S. — a 22% increase over the previous year and tops among all countries. (Second-place India had just 104,000.) The largest increase has been among undergrads: China sent nearly 57,000 to the U.S. in 2010–11, up from 10,000 five years earlier. For the wealthy, an overseas education is becoming almost standard. A survey conducted by China’s Hurun Report found that 85% of rich Chinese parents planned to send their kids abroad to study. The U.S. is their preferred destination, followed by the U.K. and Canada.
While there are a host of reasons for this explosion, money and prestige appear to be the most important factors. Not only can more Chinese families now afford to pay the tuition at a foreign university, they also view it as a better investment in their children’s future. Universities in the West are revered in China, and homegrown schools — even the best ones — fail to measure up. “I think the college education in China is not very practical,” says Vincent Sun, another Fudan student who will be enrolling at MIT this fall to pursue a master’s degree in finance. “When I will be searching for a job, I think a degree from a very famous [foreign] university is a huge thing I think that will put me into a very good place.” Ironically, a foreign university can also be a fallback for Chinese students who don’t do well enough on the national exam, the gaokao, to get into a Chinese school — there’s always an American college willing to take their tuition dollars.
But many of these students would probably never make it to America without a middleman to pave the way. According to a 2010 report by Zinch China, a consultancy that advises U.S. colleges and universities on China, 8 out of every 10 Chinese undergraduate students use an agent to file their applications. And with such intense competition among agents — not to mention ambitious students and their overzealous parents — cheating is rampant, the group says. It estimates that 90% of recommendation letters from Chinese students are fake, 70% of college application essays are not written by the students, and half of all high school transcripts are falsified. “The world of higher education is becoming extremely competitive, much more so than it was even 10 years ago, and I think the kids are looking for an edge,” says Tom Melcher, chairman of Zinch China. “Everyone is looking around and saying, ‘Well, everyone else is cheating, why shouldn’t I?’”
(MORE: These Schools Mean Business)
Another issue that concerns some admissions officers in the U.S. is where the money is coming from. Not only are agents paid by families in China — up to $10,000 before bonuses, according to Zinch — some American schools also have contracts with agents that guarantee them a commission for each student they enroll. This practice constitutes a potential conflict of interest, says Philip Ballinger, head of a commission launched by the Washington-based National Association for College Admission Counseling (NACAC) to study the issue of foreign recruiting. “If money is first, then perhaps the interest of student or the person that’s involved is not first,” he says.
What’s desperately needed is greater oversight in China and the U.S. — something both sides are now trying to address. The Chinese government realizes that doctored transcripts are a problem: earlier this year, it launched a new service to verify students’ high school grades for foreign universities. But because there are literally thousands of agents operating in China, cheating will persist. “The Chinese kids, when I talk to them, they sort of think it’s the schools’ fault. The schools will say you have to have a recommendation letter from a guidance counselor, and Chinese kids don’t have guidance counselors,” Melcher says. Zhu, the student enrolling at Oregon State, says his agent didn’t falsify documents beyond the “elaborated” essay, but he believes doing so is sometimes a necessary evil. “Some schools in China test students by very hard questions beyond their abilities, so the scores students get are very low. So the students who want to go to the USA, they had to change their scores,” he says. “But the students are still very good students because they’re in the best schools in Shanghai.”
In the U.S., there are hopes that the NACAC committee investigating overseas recruiting practices will bring much needed clarity to a situation that has been a relative free-for-all in recent years. While federal law prohibits colleges and universities from paying commissions to recruit students in the U.S., there is no statute against doing it internationally. NACAC has a policy against it, but enforcement has been put on hold while its investigation is continuing. The group’s second meeting is set for this fall; recommendations are expected to come in 2013.
(MORE: Why Is College Enrollment Dropping?)
Although it acknowledges that fraud is a major concern, NACAC is focusing initially on the question of whether universities should be permitted to pay overseas recruiters commissions. Mitch Leventhal, vice chancellor for global affairs at the State University of New York (SUNY) and an outspoken pro-recruiter advocate, argues that agents can provide a legitimate and useful service for foreign students, provided they operate in a professional and transparent way. He says it’s ridiculous to suggest that universities should stop using agents. “That’s sticking your head in a hole. They’re not going to go away because market demand is there, so the best way to address it is to engage them and identify the good ones.”
Leventhal believes he’s found a way to do that. He’s founder of an organization called the American International Recruitment Council, which has developed a rigorous process for certifying international agents. Agents must volunteer and pay a fee for the service, which involves a third-party investigation of their business, an external review by two members of U.S. universities and a confidential complaint system. So far, the group has certified about 45 agents, who benefit, Leventhal says, from having increased access to U.S. schools. And after agents are thoroughly vetted, he sees nothing wrong with paying them commissions, so long as the schools are also transparent about it. At SUNY, the fee is 10% of the student’s first-year tuition. “No one likes to pay a commission to a real estate broker when we buy a house because it’s another expense,” he says. “But we don’t deny the fact that a real estate broker works on commission and deserves to earn something for their effort.”
This sentiment isn’t shared by everyone. Mark Sklarow, head of the Washington-based Independent Educational Consultants Association (IECA), says students in China are better served by so-called educational consultants, who are paid solely by families (not by U.S. universities) to find the best educational match for students. Dozens of consultants in China have applied to become IECA members, but the organization must first ensure they’ve never accepted money from a college or university and they’ve never engaged in fraudulent practices. He believes that as Chinese students become more familiar with the U.S. application process, they’ll increasingly turn to consultants like these to help them make decisions about colleges rather than put all their trust in agents.
Sklarow says the U.S. is at a turning point too. For the past five years, colleges and universities were “balancing their budgets on Chinese students,” but he thinks the pressure is now on them to find a way to regulate the system. “I think until American colleges stand up and say we need a way to guarantee that the students we accept, that the records we’re looking at are whole, complete and legitimate, the problem continues to grow.”
Although Chinese students have been going to America to study for decades, their numbers have spiked dramatically in the past few years. In the 2010–11 school year, more than 157,000 Chinese students were enrolled at institutions of higher learning in the U.S. — a 22% increase over the previous year and tops among all countries. (Second-place India had just 104,000.) The largest increase has been among undergrads: China sent nearly 57,000 to the U.S. in 2010–11, up from 10,000 five years earlier. For the wealthy, an overseas education is becoming almost standard. A survey conducted by China’s Hurun Report found that 85% of rich Chinese parents planned to send their kids abroad to study. The U.S. is their preferred destination, followed by the U.K. and Canada.
While there are a host of reasons for this explosion, money and prestige appear to be the most important factors. Not only can more Chinese families now afford to pay the tuition at a foreign university, they also view it as a better investment in their children’s future. Universities in the West are revered in China, and homegrown schools — even the best ones — fail to measure up. “I think the college education in China is not very practical,” says Vincent Sun, another Fudan student who will be enrolling at MIT this fall to pursue a master’s degree in finance. “When I will be searching for a job, I think a degree from a very famous [foreign] university is a huge thing I think that will put me into a very good place.” Ironically, a foreign university can also be a fallback for Chinese students who don’t do well enough on the national exam, the gaokao, to get into a Chinese school — there’s always an American college willing to take their tuition dollars.
But many of these students would probably never make it to America without a middleman to pave the way. According to a 2010 report by Zinch China, a consultancy that advises U.S. colleges and universities on China, 8 out of every 10 Chinese undergraduate students use an agent to file their applications. And with such intense competition among agents — not to mention ambitious students and their overzealous parents — cheating is rampant, the group says. It estimates that 90% of recommendation letters from Chinese students are fake, 70% of college application essays are not written by the students, and half of all high school transcripts are falsified. “The world of higher education is becoming extremely competitive, much more so than it was even 10 years ago, and I think the kids are looking for an edge,” says Tom Melcher, chairman of Zinch China. “Everyone is looking around and saying, ‘Well, everyone else is cheating, why shouldn’t I?’”
(MORE: These Schools Mean Business)
Another issue that concerns some admissions officers in the U.S. is where the money is coming from. Not only are agents paid by families in China — up to $10,000 before bonuses, according to Zinch — some American schools also have contracts with agents that guarantee them a commission for each student they enroll. This practice constitutes a potential conflict of interest, says Philip Ballinger, head of a commission launched by the Washington-based National Association for College Admission Counseling (NACAC) to study the issue of foreign recruiting. “If money is first, then perhaps the interest of student or the person that’s involved is not first,” he says.
What’s desperately needed is greater oversight in China and the U.S. — something both sides are now trying to address. The Chinese government realizes that doctored transcripts are a problem: earlier this year, it launched a new service to verify students’ high school grades for foreign universities. But because there are literally thousands of agents operating in China, cheating will persist. “The Chinese kids, when I talk to them, they sort of think it’s the schools’ fault. The schools will say you have to have a recommendation letter from a guidance counselor, and Chinese kids don’t have guidance counselors,” Melcher says. Zhu, the student enrolling at Oregon State, says his agent didn’t falsify documents beyond the “elaborated” essay, but he believes doing so is sometimes a necessary evil. “Some schools in China test students by very hard questions beyond their abilities, so the scores students get are very low. So the students who want to go to the USA, they had to change their scores,” he says. “But the students are still very good students because they’re in the best schools in Shanghai.”
In the U.S., there are hopes that the NACAC committee investigating overseas recruiting practices will bring much needed clarity to a situation that has been a relative free-for-all in recent years. While federal law prohibits colleges and universities from paying commissions to recruit students in the U.S., there is no statute against doing it internationally. NACAC has a policy against it, but enforcement has been put on hold while its investigation is continuing. The group’s second meeting is set for this fall; recommendations are expected to come in 2013.
(MORE: Why Is College Enrollment Dropping?)
Although it acknowledges that fraud is a major concern, NACAC is focusing initially on the question of whether universities should be permitted to pay overseas recruiters commissions. Mitch Leventhal, vice chancellor for global affairs at the State University of New York (SUNY) and an outspoken pro-recruiter advocate, argues that agents can provide a legitimate and useful service for foreign students, provided they operate in a professional and transparent way. He says it’s ridiculous to suggest that universities should stop using agents. “That’s sticking your head in a hole. They’re not going to go away because market demand is there, so the best way to address it is to engage them and identify the good ones.”
Leventhal believes he’s found a way to do that. He’s founder of an organization called the American International Recruitment Council, which has developed a rigorous process for certifying international agents. Agents must volunteer and pay a fee for the service, which involves a third-party investigation of their business, an external review by two members of U.S. universities and a confidential complaint system. So far, the group has certified about 45 agents, who benefit, Leventhal says, from having increased access to U.S. schools. And after agents are thoroughly vetted, he sees nothing wrong with paying them commissions, so long as the schools are also transparent about it. At SUNY, the fee is 10% of the student’s first-year tuition. “No one likes to pay a commission to a real estate broker when we buy a house because it’s another expense,” he says. “But we don’t deny the fact that a real estate broker works on commission and deserves to earn something for their effort.”
This sentiment isn’t shared by everyone. Mark Sklarow, head of the Washington-based Independent Educational Consultants Association (IECA), says students in China are better served by so-called educational consultants, who are paid solely by families (not by U.S. universities) to find the best educational match for students. Dozens of consultants in China have applied to become IECA members, but the organization must first ensure they’ve never accepted money from a college or university and they’ve never engaged in fraudulent practices. He believes that as Chinese students become more familiar with the U.S. application process, they’ll increasingly turn to consultants like these to help them make decisions about colleges rather than put all their trust in agents.
Sklarow says the U.S. is at a turning point too. For the past five years, colleges and universities were “balancing their budgets on Chinese students,” but he thinks the pressure is now on them to find a way to regulate the system. “I think until American colleges stand up and say we need a way to guarantee that the students we accept, that the records we’re looking at are whole, complete and legitimate, the problem continues to grow.”
Read more: http://world.time.com/2012/07/26/forged-transcripts-and-fake-essays-how-unscrupulous-agents-get-chinese-students-into-u-s-schools/?iid=tsmodule#ixzz221ym3E6F
Universities admit more poor students in China
Xinhuanet29 July 2012 Issue No:232
A little more than a month after sitting the gaokao, China's
college entrance exam, Zeng Mengyao is celebrating her results. She will
attend Xiamen University in China's eastern Fujian Province. Zeng's
dream to be admitted to a prestigious university would have been crushed
without the national preferential policy introduced by the Ministry of
Education this year, reports Xinhuanet.
According to this year's college admission plan, 12,100 higher education vacancies will be allocated to students from 680 poverty-stricken counties in 21 provincial areas. Residents in these counties had an annual per capita income of CNY2,676 (US$418) last year, about half the national average.
Statistics from the Ministry of Education show that the national average admission rate in some leading universities last year was 8.5%, while the number in the 680 impoverished counties was 5.7%. Zeng fell eight points short of the admission score set by Xiamen University, yet she will soon be heading there thanks to the new policy
According to this year's college admission plan, 12,100 higher education vacancies will be allocated to students from 680 poverty-stricken counties in 21 provincial areas. Residents in these counties had an annual per capita income of CNY2,676 (US$418) last year, about half the national average.
Statistics from the Ministry of Education show that the national average admission rate in some leading universities last year was 8.5%, while the number in the 680 impoverished counties was 5.7%. Zeng fell eight points short of the admission score set by Xiamen University, yet she will soon be heading there thanks to the new policy
UNITED KINGDOM Private college to award its own degrees
BBC News29 July 2012 Issue No:232
A private college in London has been given the power to award its own
degrees in a move the government says will increase competition in
England's higher education system, writes Angela Harrison for BBC News.
Regent's College, which is in London's Regent's Park, says it hopes to get university status in the near future. It is one of two private colleges being given degree-awarding powers this week and which are the first to get the right since the coalition government came to power. The identity of the second college has not yet been made public.
Until now, people studying at Regent's College have received degrees through its partnerships with various universities and institutions, including the Open University. Students study for British and American degrees at undergraduate and postgraduate level. Most pay fees of about £14,000 a year.
Regent's College, which is in London's Regent's Park, says it hopes to get university status in the near future. It is one of two private colleges being given degree-awarding powers this week and which are the first to get the right since the coalition government came to power. The identity of the second college has not yet been made public.
Until now, people studying at Regent's College have received degrees through its partnerships with various universities and institutions, including the Open University. Students study for British and American degrees at undergraduate and postgraduate level. Most pay fees of about £14,000 a year.
Yale stops sending students to Peking University
Yale Daily News29 July 2012 Issue No:232
Despite reaffirming its partnership with Peking University seven months
ago, Yale has decided this summer that it will not continue its
programme sending undergraduates to live and study at the Chinese
institution, citing low student enrolment, write Gavan Gideon, Daniel
Sisgoreo and Tapley Stephenson for Yale Daily News.
Yale College Dean Mary Miller, whose office recommended the programme’s cancellation, said the Peking University-Yale University Joint Undergraduate Programme in Beijing became financially unsustainable due to weak participation, with only four students signed up this autumn.
Though Yale President Richard Levin called the programme a “great success” when Yale renewed its commitment to the partnership in December, enrolment has consistently been below the level administrators had hoped for since the programme was launched in 2006. Miller said it was not sustainable to have staff outnumbering students.
Yale College Dean Mary Miller, whose office recommended the programme’s cancellation, said the Peking University-Yale University Joint Undergraduate Programme in Beijing became financially unsustainable due to weak participation, with only four students signed up this autumn.
Though Yale President Richard Levin called the programme a “great success” when Yale renewed its commitment to the partnership in December, enrolment has consistently been below the level administrators had hoped for since the programme was launched in 2006. Miller said it was not sustainable to have staff outnumbering students.
INDIA Online education market ‘to grow to $40 billion by 2017’
Press Trust of India29 July 2012 Issue No:232
India's online education market size is set to grow to US$40 billion by 2017 from the present US$20 billion, reports the Press Trust of India.
“We expect drastic changes in online education in the next two- to three-year period,” LoudCloud Systems Chief Technology Officer Anil Sonkar said.
India has one of the largest education systems in the world, with a network of more than a million schools and 18,000 higher education institutions. More than half of the country's 1.2 billion population falls in the target market for education and related services.
LoudCloud is engaged in providing e-learning technologies in India. It has roped in Odisha-based Centurion University of Technology and Management for their distance education branch, which is set to start in June 2013, he said.
“We expect drastic changes in online education in the next two- to three-year period,” LoudCloud Systems Chief Technology Officer Anil Sonkar said.
India has one of the largest education systems in the world, with a network of more than a million schools and 18,000 higher education institutions. More than half of the country's 1.2 billion population falls in the target market for education and related services.
LoudCloud is engaged in providing e-learning technologies in India. It has roped in Odisha-based Centurion University of Technology and Management for their distance education branch, which is set to start in June 2013, he said.
SOUTH KOREA Universities caught lying about graduate employment
The Korea Herald29 July 2012 Issue No:232
A number of South Korean universities have been falsifying graduate
employment data to raise funds and attract students, according to a
government investigation, writes Oh Kyu-wook for The Korea Herald.
The Ministry of Education, Science and Technology announced last Thursday after a two-month investigation that it found 28 universities across the country had falsely reported the employment rate for their graduates. The ministry report came as an increasing number of universities in the country face declining student enrolment and tightened budgets.
“The graduate employment rate is an important indicator when we value universities. So some of them tried to fake the numbers in order to receive funds from the government,” an official said. The ministry currently funds universities based on an annual evaluation, and the graduate employment rate is one of the most important points of the report, he added.
The Ministry of Education, Science and Technology announced last Thursday after a two-month investigation that it found 28 universities across the country had falsely reported the employment rate for their graduates. The ministry report came as an increasing number of universities in the country face declining student enrolment and tightened budgets.
“The graduate employment rate is an important indicator when we value universities. So some of them tried to fake the numbers in order to receive funds from the government,” an official said. The ministry currently funds universities based on an annual evaluation, and the graduate employment rate is one of the most important points of the report, he added.
Rankings – ‘Multi-dimensional’, ‘user-driven’ are the magic words
Frank Ziegele and Gero Federkeil29 July 2012 Issue No:232
In a recent article in University World News Phil Baty, editor of the Times Higher Education
World University Rankings, warned that rankings needed to be handled
with care. If we consider the impact international rankings have today,
we can only agree with Baty’s notion that “authority brings
responsibility”.
In more and more countries – Baty cited examples – a good league table position in the major global rankings plays a decisive role in policies of cooperation of universities with foreign institutions, as well as with regard to the recognition of foreign degrees and the portability of loans and scholarships.
These are clear signs of a dangerous overuse of rankings. No ranking has been introduced for these purposes and – hopefully – most producers of rankings would reject this role.
But we want to argue that ranking providers should not only object to misuses: it is more important to design rankings in a way that makes misuse difficult and guides users to apply rankings in an appropriate and meaningful way.
The ‘composite indicator’ problem
One of the major mistakes of rankings is the use of a ‘composite indicator’. A more or less broad variety of indicators is weighted and aggregated into an overall score for the whole university. One number is thus intended to measure the complex performance of a university!
If rankings provide information in this way, they seduce users into making decisions based on that one number. This is surely an oversimplification of quality in higher education.
Rankings can provide some quantitative information on particular aspects of the performance of universities – teaching and learning, research, international orientation and others. To do this, they have to focus on a limited number of selected dimensions and indicators, which means no ranking is able to reflect the full complexity of universities.
Some global rankings, which focus on reputation, measure nothing more than the strength of the universities’ global brand, which might not correlate to their performance. Yet their results are actually influencing that very reputation.
Other specialised rankings, for example Webometrics rankings, only measure the success of university policies in attaining web presence, but not their teaching or research performance. Despite this, the user is lured into believing s/he will be able to identify the best universities in the world with these kinds of rankings.
U-Multirank
How can we change this? The magic words are ‘multi-dimensional’ and ‘user-driven’ ranking.
The U-Multirank project, initiated by the European Commission, developed and tested the feasibility of such a system.
Different stakeholders and users have different ideas about what constitutes a high quality university and hence have different preferences and priorities with regard to the relevance of indicators. There are neither theoretical nor empirical arguments to assign a particular pre-defined weight to an indicator.
U-Multirank takes these points seriously by leaving the decision about the relevance of indicators to the users of the ranking. It presents a separate ranking list for every single indicator and suggests using an interactive internet tool, which allows people to choose the indicators that are most relevant to them.
Moreover, the set of indicators is not restricted to bibliometric research performance, but also includes dimensions such as teaching and learning, knowledge transfer, regional engagement and international orientation. This multi-dimensional approach is able to make the different institutional profiles and the particular strengths and weaknesses of universities transparent.
In combination with its grouping approach (building three to five performance groups instead of calculating a pseudo-exact league table), U-Multirank avoids the lure of oversimplification inherent in the attempts to crown the ‘best’ university in the world.
The provision of more differentiated and, admittedly, more complicated information decreases the pressure to change the methodology just to come up with a different list than in the year before. Since a major quality criterion for rankings is the stability of their methodology, this point further increases the value of the multi-dimensional approach.
The development of the U-Multirank model and the response to it from within higher education and among stakeholders has already stimulated a number of changes in the traditional global rankings. Some now also work on field-based rankings and some have started to include interactive elements to allow for user-driven elements.
However, they still stick to league tables and composite indicators instead of providing a really multi-dimensional and user-driven ranking. Let’s start the democratisation of rankings by leaving the choice completely to the user.
U-Multirank also looks for a broader and stakeholder-oriented approach in generating ranking data: the idea, which was tested in the feasibility study, is to combine international (bibliometric and patent) databases with the outcomes of institutional, student and alumni surveys.
This allows the comparison of, for instance, facts about study programmes (as U-Multirank provides a field-based ranking) with student satisfaction surveys, leading to a differentiated picture of performance.
If you only know the student-staff ratio, you can’t say if a high ratio means high quality in small groups or just a lack in demand due to bad quality. As soon as you can correlate the ratios to the students’ judgment of their contact with teachers, you will have a better impression of performance.
We have heard the objections against U-Multirank – “is this still a ranking?” or “will users understand this?” or “people still want to know who is number one!”
We would answer: as U-Multirank still shows vertical diversity by measuring performance, it is a ranking system. To make it understandable despite the complexity, the user-friendliness of the web portal will be of major importance. And, last but not least, we believe in intelligent users.
The next phase of the European Commission’s project has to demonstrate that all this can be implemented as a stable system.
* Professor Frank Ziegele is managing director and Gero Federkeil is manager in charge of rankings at the Centre for Higher Education Development in Germany.
In more and more countries – Baty cited examples – a good league table position in the major global rankings plays a decisive role in policies of cooperation of universities with foreign institutions, as well as with regard to the recognition of foreign degrees and the portability of loans and scholarships.
These are clear signs of a dangerous overuse of rankings. No ranking has been introduced for these purposes and – hopefully – most producers of rankings would reject this role.
But we want to argue that ranking providers should not only object to misuses: it is more important to design rankings in a way that makes misuse difficult and guides users to apply rankings in an appropriate and meaningful way.
The ‘composite indicator’ problem
One of the major mistakes of rankings is the use of a ‘composite indicator’. A more or less broad variety of indicators is weighted and aggregated into an overall score for the whole university. One number is thus intended to measure the complex performance of a university!
If rankings provide information in this way, they seduce users into making decisions based on that one number. This is surely an oversimplification of quality in higher education.
Rankings can provide some quantitative information on particular aspects of the performance of universities – teaching and learning, research, international orientation and others. To do this, they have to focus on a limited number of selected dimensions and indicators, which means no ranking is able to reflect the full complexity of universities.
Some global rankings, which focus on reputation, measure nothing more than the strength of the universities’ global brand, which might not correlate to their performance. Yet their results are actually influencing that very reputation.
Other specialised rankings, for example Webometrics rankings, only measure the success of university policies in attaining web presence, but not their teaching or research performance. Despite this, the user is lured into believing s/he will be able to identify the best universities in the world with these kinds of rankings.
U-Multirank
How can we change this? The magic words are ‘multi-dimensional’ and ‘user-driven’ ranking.
The U-Multirank project, initiated by the European Commission, developed and tested the feasibility of such a system.
Different stakeholders and users have different ideas about what constitutes a high quality university and hence have different preferences and priorities with regard to the relevance of indicators. There are neither theoretical nor empirical arguments to assign a particular pre-defined weight to an indicator.
U-Multirank takes these points seriously by leaving the decision about the relevance of indicators to the users of the ranking. It presents a separate ranking list for every single indicator and suggests using an interactive internet tool, which allows people to choose the indicators that are most relevant to them.
Moreover, the set of indicators is not restricted to bibliometric research performance, but also includes dimensions such as teaching and learning, knowledge transfer, regional engagement and international orientation. This multi-dimensional approach is able to make the different institutional profiles and the particular strengths and weaknesses of universities transparent.
In combination with its grouping approach (building three to five performance groups instead of calculating a pseudo-exact league table), U-Multirank avoids the lure of oversimplification inherent in the attempts to crown the ‘best’ university in the world.
The provision of more differentiated and, admittedly, more complicated information decreases the pressure to change the methodology just to come up with a different list than in the year before. Since a major quality criterion for rankings is the stability of their methodology, this point further increases the value of the multi-dimensional approach.
The development of the U-Multirank model and the response to it from within higher education and among stakeholders has already stimulated a number of changes in the traditional global rankings. Some now also work on field-based rankings and some have started to include interactive elements to allow for user-driven elements.
However, they still stick to league tables and composite indicators instead of providing a really multi-dimensional and user-driven ranking. Let’s start the democratisation of rankings by leaving the choice completely to the user.
U-Multirank also looks for a broader and stakeholder-oriented approach in generating ranking data: the idea, which was tested in the feasibility study, is to combine international (bibliometric and patent) databases with the outcomes of institutional, student and alumni surveys.
This allows the comparison of, for instance, facts about study programmes (as U-Multirank provides a field-based ranking) with student satisfaction surveys, leading to a differentiated picture of performance.
If you only know the student-staff ratio, you can’t say if a high ratio means high quality in small groups or just a lack in demand due to bad quality. As soon as you can correlate the ratios to the students’ judgment of their contact with teachers, you will have a better impression of performance.
We have heard the objections against U-Multirank – “is this still a ranking?” or “will users understand this?” or “people still want to know who is number one!”
We would answer: as U-Multirank still shows vertical diversity by measuring performance, it is a ranking system. To make it understandable despite the complexity, the user-friendliness of the web portal will be of major importance. And, last but not least, we believe in intelligent users.
The next phase of the European Commission’s project has to demonstrate that all this can be implemented as a stable system.
* Professor Frank Ziegele is managing director and Gero Federkeil is manager in charge of rankings at the Centre for Higher Education Development in Germany.
Higher education institutions need to rein in (especially internal) costs
William Patrick Leonard29 July 2012 Issue No:232
In an article in The Seattle Times last month, featured in University World News,
two members of the University of Washington’s board are quoted as
saying: “This is the fourth year in a row our students have seen a
double-digit tuition increase…It can’t go on.”
The University of Washington is not alone in facing declining external support. The American higher education community’s prospects for its own sustainability are questionable. It is unlikely to endure as we know it, with reliance on tuition fee and enrolment increases compensating for the failure to more rigorously control costs and balance budgets. Public and non-profit private institutions alike have focused for too long on short-term solutions.
Without a large endowment income cushion, the bulk of US public and non-profit private institutions have been focused on the short-term imperative of bringing revenues in line with an array of immediate, unavoidable and inflexible operating costs that these institutions bear.
Short-term remedies to balance institutional budgets present only a limited solution. Decades of relatively predictable government support appear to have engendered a sense of unquestioned entitlement, as institutions have added programmes and services on top of existing expenses.
There are three short-term internal tools for balancing institutional budgets. To date, only
two – increasing tuition fees and-or enrolment – have been regularly used.
Tuition fee increases have become an annual expectation. Conversely, increased admissions, while not often recognised as a revenue enhancement tool, have been used with equal frequency.
The former has been until recently grudgingly accepted by students and their benefactors. The latter has been widely accepted inside and applauded outside the academy as a means of expanding access to the American dream. Unfortunately, economies of scale aside, increasing the size of the student body tends to lead to future cost increases, as more faculty, staff and other resources are needed to support a larger student body.
An unsustainable cycle
Near-exclusive reliance on these two short-term remedies has trapped many of the nation’s public and non-profit private institutions in an unsustainable cycle.
After decades of tuition fee increases exceeding the Consumer Price Index, coupled with declining measures of value added, students and their benefactors are increasingly less tolerant of these annual increases. This disquiet has been exacerbated by mounting student debt and questions about the subsequent income students need to earn to settle the obligation.
Popular expressions of growing dissatisfaction have in turn prompted the steady decline of the once unquestioned support of elected officials. In recent years, state subsidies to public institutions have declined to the point that some flagship public institutions are publicly considering morphing into some form of non-profit status without any governmental support.
Enrolment and tuition fee increases appeal to institutional leaders. They have been perceived as far less internally contentious alternatives. Pushing for a higher enrolment gives the institution and the public a sense of positive momentum.
Increasing tuition fees has been received by students, parents, elected officials and the public at large as inevitable. The objections from external constituents have been met with the reminder that quality must be maintained, if not enhanced. Recently, the traditional grudging acceptance of the quality defence appears to have reached its limit.
Cutting costs avoided
The third internal budget balancing tool, cutting costs, has been the least favoured. It can negatively influence programmes and hence careers. I suggest that many institutions, large and small, have found it politically easier to increase revenue rather than control costs.
They have tended to resist seriously questioning the viability of ineffective or inefficient programmes and services. Simultaneously, many have increased their continuing cost burden by enhancing existing programmes and services as well as adding new ones.
Simplistically, institutional costs may be crudely subdivided into two categories – external and internal.
The external costs are composed of purchased goods and services. Unless the institution has the power to negotiate price, its utility, insurance, contracted services and consumable costs are largely beyond its control. External costs are strongly influenced by the internal costs that institutions should have more control over.
The place to start is internal costs. In American higher education internal costs are governed as much by unquestioned culture as by contractual obligations. Institutions have tended to regard the traditional mix of faculty, curriculum, calendar and infrastructure as immutable. This has been accompanied by an exaggerated sense of entitlement to external support.
The majority of US higher education institutions can no longer rely on the historic levels of government support or philanthropic largesse. Nor can they depend on the continued utility of tuition fees and enrolment increases to align revenue with their immutable culture-driven costs.
In order to endure, these institutions will have to restrict, rather than abandon, their dependence on external support. In the near term they should carefully assess the relevance, efficiency and effectiveness of each existing programme and service in their current cost portfolio.
To further dampen cost escalation in the longer term, they would be wise to recall that it is far less painful to stop a recommended programme or service addition before implementation than to subsequently terminate it.
Institutions must become much more responsible for the internal balancing of their budgets. Otherwise, their sustainability is questionable. Consistently demonstrating internal cost control could go a long way towards rebuilding external trust and funding.
* William Patrick Leonard is vice dean of SolBridge International School of Business in Daejeon, Republic of Korea.
The University of Washington is not alone in facing declining external support. The American higher education community’s prospects for its own sustainability are questionable. It is unlikely to endure as we know it, with reliance on tuition fee and enrolment increases compensating for the failure to more rigorously control costs and balance budgets. Public and non-profit private institutions alike have focused for too long on short-term solutions.
Without a large endowment income cushion, the bulk of US public and non-profit private institutions have been focused on the short-term imperative of bringing revenues in line with an array of immediate, unavoidable and inflexible operating costs that these institutions bear.
Short-term remedies to balance institutional budgets present only a limited solution. Decades of relatively predictable government support appear to have engendered a sense of unquestioned entitlement, as institutions have added programmes and services on top of existing expenses.
There are three short-term internal tools for balancing institutional budgets. To date, only
two – increasing tuition fees and-or enrolment – have been regularly used.
Tuition fee increases have become an annual expectation. Conversely, increased admissions, while not often recognised as a revenue enhancement tool, have been used with equal frequency.
The former has been until recently grudgingly accepted by students and their benefactors. The latter has been widely accepted inside and applauded outside the academy as a means of expanding access to the American dream. Unfortunately, economies of scale aside, increasing the size of the student body tends to lead to future cost increases, as more faculty, staff and other resources are needed to support a larger student body.
An unsustainable cycle
Near-exclusive reliance on these two short-term remedies has trapped many of the nation’s public and non-profit private institutions in an unsustainable cycle.
After decades of tuition fee increases exceeding the Consumer Price Index, coupled with declining measures of value added, students and their benefactors are increasingly less tolerant of these annual increases. This disquiet has been exacerbated by mounting student debt and questions about the subsequent income students need to earn to settle the obligation.
Popular expressions of growing dissatisfaction have in turn prompted the steady decline of the once unquestioned support of elected officials. In recent years, state subsidies to public institutions have declined to the point that some flagship public institutions are publicly considering morphing into some form of non-profit status without any governmental support.
Enrolment and tuition fee increases appeal to institutional leaders. They have been perceived as far less internally contentious alternatives. Pushing for a higher enrolment gives the institution and the public a sense of positive momentum.
Increasing tuition fees has been received by students, parents, elected officials and the public at large as inevitable. The objections from external constituents have been met with the reminder that quality must be maintained, if not enhanced. Recently, the traditional grudging acceptance of the quality defence appears to have reached its limit.
Cutting costs avoided
The third internal budget balancing tool, cutting costs, has been the least favoured. It can negatively influence programmes and hence careers. I suggest that many institutions, large and small, have found it politically easier to increase revenue rather than control costs.
They have tended to resist seriously questioning the viability of ineffective or inefficient programmes and services. Simultaneously, many have increased their continuing cost burden by enhancing existing programmes and services as well as adding new ones.
Simplistically, institutional costs may be crudely subdivided into two categories – external and internal.
The external costs are composed of purchased goods and services. Unless the institution has the power to negotiate price, its utility, insurance, contracted services and consumable costs are largely beyond its control. External costs are strongly influenced by the internal costs that institutions should have more control over.
The place to start is internal costs. In American higher education internal costs are governed as much by unquestioned culture as by contractual obligations. Institutions have tended to regard the traditional mix of faculty, curriculum, calendar and infrastructure as immutable. This has been accompanied by an exaggerated sense of entitlement to external support.
The majority of US higher education institutions can no longer rely on the historic levels of government support or philanthropic largesse. Nor can they depend on the continued utility of tuition fees and enrolment increases to align revenue with their immutable culture-driven costs.
In order to endure, these institutions will have to restrict, rather than abandon, their dependence on external support. In the near term they should carefully assess the relevance, efficiency and effectiveness of each existing programme and service in their current cost portfolio.
To further dampen cost escalation in the longer term, they would be wise to recall that it is far less painful to stop a recommended programme or service addition before implementation than to subsequently terminate it.
Institutions must become much more responsible for the internal balancing of their budgets. Otherwise, their sustainability is questionable. Consistently demonstrating internal cost control could go a long way towards rebuilding external trust and funding.
* William Patrick Leonard is vice dean of SolBridge International School of Business in Daejeon, Republic of Korea.
UK visa changes driving Indian students away
Alya Mishra and Yojana Sharma29 July 2012 Issue No:232
For Indian students, higher education in Britain is no longer an
attractive option owning to tougher visa rules and withdrawal of a
post-work visa option. According to consultants and students, the UK is
being replaced by Canada and Australia as the preferred destinations for
graduate study.
“The number of students going to study in the UK has declined sharply following the changes to the post-student work visa regulations,” said Naresh Gulati, CEO of Oceanic Consultants, a leading overseas education agency. “The number is likely to go down further if corrective action is not taken in the immediate future.
“Other countries such as Australia have gained after making some significant changes to visa regulations that seem to appeal to the Indian student,” Gulati said.
Study Overseas, a foreign education consultancy in New Delhi, confirmed the decline in the numbers of students heading for the UK in recent years. The number of students going to Britain through the agency has halved: for the September 2011 intake, it sent 40 students to UK universities as opposed to 80 in 2010.
Potential size of Indian market is huge
According to a Student Insight report on India, about to be released by the British Council’s Education Intelligence unit, 74% of those considering undergraduate study and 77% of those "seriously considering" foreign study at the time that they were asked, are “beyond making casual enquiries and instead are looking to plan and implement overseas study arrangements”.
The majority had never studied abroad, but were “flexible when it came to choosing countries and institutions in which to study”. The British Council's data were collected between 2007 and July 2012 with some 1,200 responses collected in May-July 2012.
It is an indication of the potential size of the Indian market as a source of foreign students, according to the British Council.
With the British government saying it is tightening its rules because too many students use the study-abroad route as a bridge to migration, the British Council report showed that only 3% of Indian students surveyed said they wanted to move overseas permanently.
Rather, respondents said that career prospects, the quality of courses and wanting the cultural experience of living overseas were by far the main drivers for both prospective undergraduate and postgraduate students.
“The overwhelming majority of students from India plan to return home after studying, with only a very small percentage saying they were thinking of using higher education as a springboard for migration,” the report said, adding to a highly polarised debate in the UK on whether students should be regarded by the government as potential migrants in deciding policy on international students.
Another report from the MigrationWatch think-tank, published on 23 July, found that the rate of potential refusals by the UK Border Agency for student visas was high for India – around 59%, compared to a reported 0% for the US and Canada and an overall average for main source countries of around 33%.
MigrationWatch suggested that a ‘credibility test’, which would ascertain English-language proficiency and intention to return to the home country, would help reduce the number of “bogus” applications.
Not being able to work is a major deterrent
After changes to UK visa rules, students can no longer remain in the country to work. This, according to Indian students, is a major deterrent.
“The fee for UK universities for a one-year postgraduate course is around £11,000 (US$17,000). An equal amount is needed for stay and food,” said Shrin Raghavan, a final-year student at Delhi University.
“It makes no sense to go to a UK university as it would be financially impractical to repay the student loan if I am not able to work there for two years post-studies.”
Raghavan, who would have liked to enrol at the London School of Economics, chose to go to Monash University in Australia. “I can work in Australia for two years after completing my studies," she said.
In Canada, a post-study work permit can be issued up to a maximum of three years, depending on the length of the study programme that the student completes.
Students also said that the visa changes by the UK made them feel unwelcome.
“For the UK, international students have become a means of income. They do not want anything to do with you once you have paid the fee,” said Anirudh Chail, who is scouting for countries in which to pursue an MBA.
Other countries filling the gap
According to Sikandar Singh, an independent career counsellor, the UK “cannot compete in a market where countries like Canada, Australia and others offered post-work visas.
“The UK needs to understand that a majority of Indian students belong to the rising middle class and for them higher education is a means to procure better jobs and career opportunities,” Singh said.
Australian universities have witnessed a surge in applications from Indian students, whose number has shot up by 16% and is expected to rise further. More than 32,500 student visa applications by Indians were filed from July 2011-March 2012, as compared to 28,067 during the corresponding period last year, according to latest official data.
Australia has been trying to streamline its international higher education sector, which was hit in recent years by a strong dollar value, tough visa norms and racial attacks on Indian students.
A new student visa processing system has been introduced, which a number of Australian universities recently signed up for with Australian Immigration.
The new system will allow students with certificates of enrolment from participating Australian universities to be treated as low-risk applicants when applying for student visas. The change was made to decrease visa waiting time and to help minimise tedious requirements regarding financial matters.
According to Naresh Gulati, the initiatives taken by the Australian government have ensured that false applicants are weeded out, while creating a positive environment for genuine students.
“This is an internal matter that the UK government needs to tackle. We don’t see any role for the Indian government,” Gulati said.
“The number of students going to study in the UK has declined sharply following the changes to the post-student work visa regulations,” said Naresh Gulati, CEO of Oceanic Consultants, a leading overseas education agency. “The number is likely to go down further if corrective action is not taken in the immediate future.
“Other countries such as Australia have gained after making some significant changes to visa regulations that seem to appeal to the Indian student,” Gulati said.
Study Overseas, a foreign education consultancy in New Delhi, confirmed the decline in the numbers of students heading for the UK in recent years. The number of students going to Britain through the agency has halved: for the September 2011 intake, it sent 40 students to UK universities as opposed to 80 in 2010.
Potential size of Indian market is huge
According to a Student Insight report on India, about to be released by the British Council’s Education Intelligence unit, 74% of those considering undergraduate study and 77% of those "seriously considering" foreign study at the time that they were asked, are “beyond making casual enquiries and instead are looking to plan and implement overseas study arrangements”.
The majority had never studied abroad, but were “flexible when it came to choosing countries and institutions in which to study”. The British Council's data were collected between 2007 and July 2012 with some 1,200 responses collected in May-July 2012.
It is an indication of the potential size of the Indian market as a source of foreign students, according to the British Council.
With the British government saying it is tightening its rules because too many students use the study-abroad route as a bridge to migration, the British Council report showed that only 3% of Indian students surveyed said they wanted to move overseas permanently.
Rather, respondents said that career prospects, the quality of courses and wanting the cultural experience of living overseas were by far the main drivers for both prospective undergraduate and postgraduate students.
“The overwhelming majority of students from India plan to return home after studying, with only a very small percentage saying they were thinking of using higher education as a springboard for migration,” the report said, adding to a highly polarised debate in the UK on whether students should be regarded by the government as potential migrants in deciding policy on international students.
Another report from the MigrationWatch think-tank, published on 23 July, found that the rate of potential refusals by the UK Border Agency for student visas was high for India – around 59%, compared to a reported 0% for the US and Canada and an overall average for main source countries of around 33%.
MigrationWatch suggested that a ‘credibility test’, which would ascertain English-language proficiency and intention to return to the home country, would help reduce the number of “bogus” applications.
Not being able to work is a major deterrent
After changes to UK visa rules, students can no longer remain in the country to work. This, according to Indian students, is a major deterrent.
“The fee for UK universities for a one-year postgraduate course is around £11,000 (US$17,000). An equal amount is needed for stay and food,” said Shrin Raghavan, a final-year student at Delhi University.
“It makes no sense to go to a UK university as it would be financially impractical to repay the student loan if I am not able to work there for two years post-studies.”
Raghavan, who would have liked to enrol at the London School of Economics, chose to go to Monash University in Australia. “I can work in Australia for two years after completing my studies," she said.
In Canada, a post-study work permit can be issued up to a maximum of three years, depending on the length of the study programme that the student completes.
Students also said that the visa changes by the UK made them feel unwelcome.
“For the UK, international students have become a means of income. They do not want anything to do with you once you have paid the fee,” said Anirudh Chail, who is scouting for countries in which to pursue an MBA.
Other countries filling the gap
According to Sikandar Singh, an independent career counsellor, the UK “cannot compete in a market where countries like Canada, Australia and others offered post-work visas.
“The UK needs to understand that a majority of Indian students belong to the rising middle class and for them higher education is a means to procure better jobs and career opportunities,” Singh said.
Australian universities have witnessed a surge in applications from Indian students, whose number has shot up by 16% and is expected to rise further. More than 32,500 student visa applications by Indians were filed from July 2011-March 2012, as compared to 28,067 during the corresponding period last year, according to latest official data.
Australia has been trying to streamline its international higher education sector, which was hit in recent years by a strong dollar value, tough visa norms and racial attacks on Indian students.
A new student visa processing system has been introduced, which a number of Australian universities recently signed up for with Australian Immigration.
The new system will allow students with certificates of enrolment from participating Australian universities to be treated as low-risk applicants when applying for student visas. The change was made to decrease visa waiting time and to help minimise tedious requirements regarding financial matters.
According to Naresh Gulati, the initiatives taken by the Australian government have ensured that false applicants are weeded out, while creating a positive environment for genuine students.
“This is an internal matter that the UK government needs to tackle. We don’t see any role for the Indian government,” Gulati said.
QS defends paid-for gold star addition to rankings
David Jobbins25 July 2012 Issue No:232
Quacquarelli Symonds Limited, publisher of the QS World University
Rankings, has defended the use of quality marks granted to universities
that have paid to go through an audit process.
Universities apply to be audited and pay for a process that judges them across 51 criteria that can lead to the awarding of up to five QS 'stars' that are visible against the institution’s entry in the ranking.
In contrast with the rankings, which draw on a small amount of globally available, largely public data, the QS stars system examines criteria such as facilities, access, engagement and innovation.
The stars appear seamlessly alongside the listing for each university on the World University Rankings, despite protestations from QS that the two are totally separate operations.
The UK magazine Private Eye reported in its current issue that two Irish universities – the University of Limerick and University College Cork, UCC – had paid “tens of thousands” of euro for their stars.
The magazine recorded that UCC had told the Irish Examiner that the €22,000 (US$26,600) cost of obtaining the stars was worthwhile, as it could be recouped through additional international student recruitment.
The total cost for the audit and a three-year licence is US$30,400, according to the scheme prospectus.
QS says the system is much more resource-intensive than the rankings and involves a great deal of guidance and support to draw out the correct data, compute the results and guide their interpretation.
QS concedes that some elite universities – Cambridge and Harvard among them – have not had to pay for the accreditation process for their five-star rating as their award is based on publicly available information.
Ben Sowter, director of research at QS, confirmed that “a few leading universities we used to test the measures” had not had to go through the accreditation process.
Private Eye reported that the University of Central Lancashire, which secured four stars after paying to go through the process, was ranked 601 in its World University Rankings.
Three other UK universities have been given stars, compared with 16 in the US (including the Ivy League institutions that escaped the accreditation process), 12 in Australia, and one – the Al-Farabi National Kazakh University – in Kazakhstan.
Sowter told University World News that the rankings gave a “broad brush insight into relative quality” but QS Stars “provides a more in-depth evaluation”.
He added: “Our concept for users is that, if they want more detail on universities in the rankings, then the stars, where available can provide that."
He conceded that rankings – not just those compiled by QS – had limitations.
“There are aspects of institutional quality that no organisation will ever be able to collect on a sufficiently comprehensive basis globally and in many cases the world’s top universities would all be sufficiently strong so as to offer little discernment.
“Because of the nature of QS Stars, the fact that it is a process we go through with the full support of the institution...means that we can respond to a great deal of criticism of rankings in a different context.”
Sowter accepted that not all the information on which the allocation of stars was based was published.
“QS stars are a rating and not a ranking...This is not intended to be a dismissal of the need for transparency, but at the same time the detailed view on accreditation results are rarely, if at all, made public.
“However, we do publish the performance of institutions in each individual category and we are talking with institutions about potentially publishing a richer data profile."
The 51 indicators can be seen both in the brochure and here.
“Many are self-reported and undergo a verification process, which is a major part of the workload that each audit demands,” said Sowter.
The QS World University Rankings lists just over 700 universities – about 3.5% of the world’s universities.
Sowter said: “In global terms, viewing the quality of world universities through a frame of reference defined by the likes of Cambridge and Harvard has limitations.
“With universities all over the world charging substantial fees to international students, an objective means of differentiating between the quality of the services they provide is indispensable. QS Stars allow students to make more informed choices, while also helping universities to recruit more effectively by providing independent verification of the areas in which they excel.”
To date, more than 100 institutions in 25 countries have adopted the stars and one-star and even zero-star results have been recorded.
“This is not a standard that is geared to enable everyone in the world to achieve top scores that are not justified by their genuine capabilities," Sowter said.
"It is designed to recognise that, for most, there is more to the decision of selecting a university than finding out who published the most journal articles, employed the most Nobel prize winners or attracted the most headlines."
Universities apply to be audited and pay for a process that judges them across 51 criteria that can lead to the awarding of up to five QS 'stars' that are visible against the institution’s entry in the ranking.
In contrast with the rankings, which draw on a small amount of globally available, largely public data, the QS stars system examines criteria such as facilities, access, engagement and innovation.
The stars appear seamlessly alongside the listing for each university on the World University Rankings, despite protestations from QS that the two are totally separate operations.
The UK magazine Private Eye reported in its current issue that two Irish universities – the University of Limerick and University College Cork, UCC – had paid “tens of thousands” of euro for their stars.
The magazine recorded that UCC had told the Irish Examiner that the €22,000 (US$26,600) cost of obtaining the stars was worthwhile, as it could be recouped through additional international student recruitment.
The total cost for the audit and a three-year licence is US$30,400, according to the scheme prospectus.
QS says the system is much more resource-intensive than the rankings and involves a great deal of guidance and support to draw out the correct data, compute the results and guide their interpretation.
QS concedes that some elite universities – Cambridge and Harvard among them – have not had to pay for the accreditation process for their five-star rating as their award is based on publicly available information.
Ben Sowter, director of research at QS, confirmed that “a few leading universities we used to test the measures” had not had to go through the accreditation process.
Private Eye reported that the University of Central Lancashire, which secured four stars after paying to go through the process, was ranked 601 in its World University Rankings.
Three other UK universities have been given stars, compared with 16 in the US (including the Ivy League institutions that escaped the accreditation process), 12 in Australia, and one – the Al-Farabi National Kazakh University – in Kazakhstan.
Sowter told University World News that the rankings gave a “broad brush insight into relative quality” but QS Stars “provides a more in-depth evaluation”.
He added: “Our concept for users is that, if they want more detail on universities in the rankings, then the stars, where available can provide that."
He conceded that rankings – not just those compiled by QS – had limitations.
“There are aspects of institutional quality that no organisation will ever be able to collect on a sufficiently comprehensive basis globally and in many cases the world’s top universities would all be sufficiently strong so as to offer little discernment.
“Because of the nature of QS Stars, the fact that it is a process we go through with the full support of the institution...means that we can respond to a great deal of criticism of rankings in a different context.”
Sowter accepted that not all the information on which the allocation of stars was based was published.
“QS stars are a rating and not a ranking...This is not intended to be a dismissal of the need for transparency, but at the same time the detailed view on accreditation results are rarely, if at all, made public.
“However, we do publish the performance of institutions in each individual category and we are talking with institutions about potentially publishing a richer data profile."
The 51 indicators can be seen both in the brochure and here.
“Many are self-reported and undergo a verification process, which is a major part of the workload that each audit demands,” said Sowter.
The QS World University Rankings lists just over 700 universities – about 3.5% of the world’s universities.
Sowter said: “In global terms, viewing the quality of world universities through a frame of reference defined by the likes of Cambridge and Harvard has limitations.
“With universities all over the world charging substantial fees to international students, an objective means of differentiating between the quality of the services they provide is indispensable. QS Stars allow students to make more informed choices, while also helping universities to recruit more effectively by providing independent verification of the areas in which they excel.”
To date, more than 100 institutions in 25 countries have adopted the stars and one-star and even zero-star results have been recorded.
“This is not a standard that is geared to enable everyone in the world to achieve top scores that are not justified by their genuine capabilities," Sowter said.
"It is designed to recognise that, for most, there is more to the decision of selecting a university than finding out who published the most journal articles, employed the most Nobel prize winners or attracted the most headlines."
Saturday, 28 July 2012
Former Khmer Rouge Want No More Cases at Tribunal
27 July 2012
One resident here in the district in Oddar Meanchey province, Um Mek, said he always wanted to see Khmer Rouge leaders held accountable for atrocities committed under their rule.
So, the father of three daughters said recently, bringing the top leaders to trial was the right thing to do. “The Khmer Rouge leaders then did the wrongdoings,” he said. “So they must now be brought to trial.”
He said he agrees with the ongoing atrocity crimes trial of Nuon Chea, the regime’s ideologue; Khieu Samphan, its head of state; and Ieng Sary, its foreign minister. But like many here in this remote part of northern Cambodia, Um Mek said he is uncomfortable with further prosecutions.
Students Forced to Pay Bribes
Cambodian students travel on boats to school through floodwaters in Kandal province, east of Phnom Penh, Oct. 3, 2011.
Reports of bribery in Cambodian schools underscore the country's uphill battle against corruption.
Cambodian schoolchildren are being forced to pay bribes to pass high school admissions tests, a senior local educator said on Thursday while calling on the country’s Ministry of Education to have students retake their most recent exams.
“These tests must be taken again, as the results of the previous tests are not valid,” Cambodian Independent Teachers’ Association president Rong Chhun told RFA in an interview.
Proctors and examiners for junior high school students are requiring payments of between U.S. $30 to U.S. $60 for a passing grade on high school entrance exams, Rong Chhun said, adding that “middlemen” are charging similar amounts for assurances the bribes will reach the right people.
“There is a price for middlemen between U.S. $30 to U.S. $50. I urge the Ministry of Education to work with local authorities to bring the suspects to justice,” Rong Chhun said.
Cambodian Minister of Education Im Sethy could not be reached for comment, but the reports of bribery in Cambodia’s schools underscore the country’s reputation, highlighted in a recent report by Berlin-based Transparency International, for widespread corruption in the public sector.
“This bribery takes place across the country,” Rong Chhun said.
Payment to proctors
Speaking on condition of anonymity, the parent of a student in Kandal province said that his son had been told to pay U.S. $30 to proctors at the Bun Rany Hun Sen High School Examination Center in order to pass his exam, held on July 16-17.
“All students were asked to pay at least U.S. $30 dollars, including my son. But my son gave only U.S. $25,” he said.
Results of the exam will be released on July 28, he said.
Berlin-based corruption watchdog Transparency International ranked Cambodia 164th worst out of 182 countries surveyed in its 2011 Corruption Perception Index.
Cambodia’s official Anti-Corruption Unit (ACU) launched an initiative in May to eliminate bribes solicited by local commune councilors for performing public services, with ACU deputy director Chhay Savuth declaring that “[Cambodia’s] culture of bribery has been in place for over 20 years.”
But international organizations have warned that the country’s graft-busting bodies will not be effective until they are free of government influence and control.
Reported by Den Ayuthya for RFA’s Khmer service. Translation by Samean Yun. Written in English by Richard Finney.
Defence teams press scholar
-
- Tuesday, 24 July 2012
- Bridget Di Certo
- American historian David Chandler testifies in Case 002 at the Khmer Rouge tribunal, on the outskirts of Phnom Penh. Photograph: ECCC/POOL
- It was historian David Chandler who appeared to be on trial yesterday at
the Khmer Rouge tribunal as defence teams spent the day putting
Chandler’s previous writings and testimony under the microscope.
Even co-accused Brother No 2 Nuon Chea had two questions of his own for the one-time US diplomat who has spent the better part of his academic career researching Cambodia and the Democratic Kampuchea period.
“From the very beginning until now,” Nuon Chea began, pausing to don thick reading glasses, “between the people of Cambodia and Vietnam, what has been the course of this dispute?”
“If one is looking for a phrase, I would say, a lot of history and mutual distrust,” Chandler answered, thanking Nuon Chea – “a person whom I do respect” – for his question.
Nuon Chea’s lawyers then attempted – unsuccessfully – to question Chandler on links between Khmer Rouge cadre and the current ruling Cambodian People’s Party.
American lawyer Andrew Ianuzzi, whom trial chamber judges have found guilty of courtroom misconduct in Case 002 proceedings, attempted to pose several questions to Chandler.
However, the expert witness was not allowed by chamber president Nil Nonn to answer any after repeated objections by the prosecution and civil party lawyers
Talking about the structure of the Khmer Rouge as a “pure party” – a government by and for a ruling party, Ianuzzi asked whether such an arrangement would “describe the state of political affairs in Cambodia today, more or less?”
The question was objected to and Ianuzzi moved on, later attempting to ask Chandler for his comment on a quote concerning an unnamed Cambodian politician.
“[He] is an extremely competent politician, the most competent politician in Cambodia … He’s also a thug. He’s got blood on his hands. He does things to people who get in his way that are not at all pleasant,” Ianuzzi quoted – but was cut off by an objection questioning the relevance of the question.
The quote read by Ianuzzi echoed a quote from Chandler in reference to Prime Minister Hun Sen in the documentary The Trap of Saving Cambodia.
“Thuggish behaviour is particularly relevant. Thuggish behaviour [would include] interference with the judiciary, and this is a major issue that needs to be addressed in this court,” Ianuzzi shot back.
Nuon Chea’s lawyers pushed the interference issue with Chandler, pressing him on an earlier comment he had made that Khmer Rouge-era documents had been “culled” under the supervision of the Vietnamese and the Vietnamese-backed government that overthrew the Khmer Rouge in 1979.
“There are collections of documents known to be in Vietnam that were taken from here and not available to anybody. That is the source of my use of the word ‘cull’,” Chandler explained, adding that documents could have been destroyed or stored elsewhere as well.
Dutch lawyer Jasper Pauw attempted to press Chandler on links between that Vietnamese-backed government and the current CPP government.
“Do you agree with the statement that a trial of the Khmer Rouge leaders might be embarrassing to the current regime of Cambodia,” Pauw asked.
Chandler, however, was instructed not to answer the question by the panel of judges.
Later, Pauw said he wanted to point out “for the record” that Chandler’s answer, not captured by his microphone, which was turned off, was “might be, yes”.
Tension increased as the lawyer for former Khmer Rouge Minister of Foreign Affairs Ieng Sary, Michael Karnavas, began his questioning of Chandler.
Frustrated gesticulations and terse smiles were symptomatic of the passive-aggressive exchange between the two.
In challenging Chandler’s biography of Pol Pot for its “poetic” writing, Karnavas asked the scholar: “Is this because you are trying to make history a popular read, as opposed to writing history?”
“I don’t like the implication that history is some unreadable pile of junk,” Chandler shot back, defending his intimate research into Pol Pot’s life.
Karnavas offered something of an apology afterward. “I hope I have not given the impression that history should be dull or a bunch of junk,” he said.
To contact the reporter on this story: Bridget Di Certo at bridget.dicerto@phnompenhpost.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
-
លោកនិពន្ធនាយកជាទីគោរពរាប់អាន! តាម ការពិនិត្យសង្កេតរបស់ខ្ញុំ មានប្រព័ន្ធផ្សព្វផ្សាយជាតិ និងអន្តរជាតិជាច្រើន បានច... -
Wachira Kigotho 09 May 2014 Issue No:319 Unequal access to university education is likely to persist in most countries globally ...
-
ការពិនិត្យមើលផលអាក្រក់កើតចេញពីវប្បធម៌ប៉ែងជើង ឬក្ដិចត្រួយគ្នា ដោយ កែវពេជ្រ មេត្តា 2011-11-03 ទម្លាប់នៃការប...
-
Chambers and Partners - Home 1 Bun & Associates THE FIRM Sources single out this firm as a market leader, highlighting its inc...
-
Combat Journalism: CQR Is reporting on global conflict worth the risk? By Frank Greve Introduction Chr...
-
ព្រះករុណាព្រះបាទសម្តេចព្រះនរោត្តម សីហនុ « ព្រះបរមរតនកោដ្ឋ » បានស្ថាបនាសាកលវិទ្យាល័យភូមិន្ទបាត់ដំបងតាមរយៈ ព្រះរាជក្រឹត្យលេខ ៣៤/៦៨.ប.រ ចុះថ្... -
By Sam Rany 1. There is a jump in higher education in Cambodia, what do you see from this development? Actually, I o...
-
https://www.box.com/files/0/f/0/1/f_2876428255#/files/0/f/0/1/f_2876428255 International Journal of Higher Education ISSN 1927-... -
Academic Adjustment Issues in a Malaysian Research University: The Case of Cambodian, Laotian, Burmese, and Vietnamese Postgraduat...
-
https://www.box.com/profile#/profile/183918435/page/1/1/2876421805 International Journal of Learning & Development ISSN 216...
