Wednesday, 25 July 2012
ក្រសួងការបរទេសកម្ពុជាបំភ្លឺការចេញផ្សាយរបស់ភ្នំពេញប៉ុស្តិ៍
Tuesday, 24 July 2012 22:39
ដោយៈ DAP-Posted: ID-009
Tuesday, 24 July 2012
More universities sign on to free online course initiative
Alison Moodie19 July 2012 Issue No:231
A slew of new online course offerings from some of America’s most
prestigious universities could change the higher education landscape.
Elite institutions like Harvard and Stanford have rolled out
multimillion-dollar initiatives that allow anyone in the world to access
their courses, free of charge.
At Stanford, two computer science professors have created an online learning platform called Coursera, which offers courses from top universities in the US and Canada. Launched in April, the classes are available for free to anyone in the world with internet access.
In a similar fashion, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) has teamed up with Harvard to launch edX, a US$60 million online education hub that will include video lessons, online laboratories and opportunities for immediate feedback from professors.
The initiative, which will launch in the autumn, aims to build a global community of learners and provide high quality education to everyone.
“edX gives Harvard and MIT an unprecedented opportunity to dramatically extend our collective reach by conducting groundbreaking research into effective education and by extending online access to quality higher education,” said Harvard President Drew Faust in a statement.
Both initiatives represent a significant shift away from the traditional classroom learning model and a new embracing of online education.
In the past, online learning was met with scepticism thanks to the proliferation of low quality online offerings. Slowly, however, prestigious universities like Stanford cottoned on to the benefits of online learning and started offering high quality content that followed the same rigorous standards as their classroom courses.
This has led to a shift in how online education is perceived, said Daphne Koller, co-founder of Coursera.
“Now when you talk to an institution of higher education, even the best ones aren’t asking themselves whether they should engage [in online education], but rather how they should do it and how quickly they can get into it,” Koller told University World News.
This week, 12 universities signed agreements with Coursera, bringing the total to 16 participating institutions, including Duke University, the University of Pennsylvania and the University of Toronto in Canada.
The platform currently offers 45 courses online, with 680,000 students enrolled from more than 190 countries. More than 30,000 students sign up per week.
Koller said that having high quality online content does not threaten traditional classroom learning but it can teach it something.
“I think there is a tremendous value of people coming together in a single place, the serendipity of interaction, the ability to brainstorm; there is huge value in that.” Koller added that it’s also a transition point away from childhood into adult life.
What does need to change in the traditional classroom, she said, is the form of instruction, and it needs to reflect the use of technology. This means, for example, doing away with the traditional lecture format entirely, which favours a generally one-sided approach.
Technology, with its more interactive process, gives students the chance to learn at their own pace, pausing a lecture or seminar and taking notes. In a traditional setting, sometimes the professor might be speaking too fast and a student misses something.
Despite technology’s obvious perks, brick-and-mortar institutions are likely here to stay, said MIT President Susan Hockfield.
“The campus environment offers opportunities and experiences that cannot be replicated online,” said Hockfield in a statement. “edX is designed to improve, not replace, the campus experience.”
Unlike students attending universities, online users of either platform are not guaranteed a certificate upon completion of a course. Students learning via edX will receive certification if they are able to demonstrate mastery of the course material. At Coursera, certificates are handed out at the discretion of the university offering the course.
So, is higher education ready for this kind of technological change, and what will it mean for its future?
“Technology has revolutionised most markets, and now it’s about to enact a similar revolution [in education],” Daphne Koller said. “It will likely change the face of how we see education today.
At Stanford, two computer science professors have created an online learning platform called Coursera, which offers courses from top universities in the US and Canada. Launched in April, the classes are available for free to anyone in the world with internet access.
In a similar fashion, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) has teamed up with Harvard to launch edX, a US$60 million online education hub that will include video lessons, online laboratories and opportunities for immediate feedback from professors.
The initiative, which will launch in the autumn, aims to build a global community of learners and provide high quality education to everyone.
“edX gives Harvard and MIT an unprecedented opportunity to dramatically extend our collective reach by conducting groundbreaking research into effective education and by extending online access to quality higher education,” said Harvard President Drew Faust in a statement.
Both initiatives represent a significant shift away from the traditional classroom learning model and a new embracing of online education.
In the past, online learning was met with scepticism thanks to the proliferation of low quality online offerings. Slowly, however, prestigious universities like Stanford cottoned on to the benefits of online learning and started offering high quality content that followed the same rigorous standards as their classroom courses.
This has led to a shift in how online education is perceived, said Daphne Koller, co-founder of Coursera.
“Now when you talk to an institution of higher education, even the best ones aren’t asking themselves whether they should engage [in online education], but rather how they should do it and how quickly they can get into it,” Koller told University World News.
This week, 12 universities signed agreements with Coursera, bringing the total to 16 participating institutions, including Duke University, the University of Pennsylvania and the University of Toronto in Canada.
The platform currently offers 45 courses online, with 680,000 students enrolled from more than 190 countries. More than 30,000 students sign up per week.
Koller said that having high quality online content does not threaten traditional classroom learning but it can teach it something.
“I think there is a tremendous value of people coming together in a single place, the serendipity of interaction, the ability to brainstorm; there is huge value in that.” Koller added that it’s also a transition point away from childhood into adult life.
What does need to change in the traditional classroom, she said, is the form of instruction, and it needs to reflect the use of technology. This means, for example, doing away with the traditional lecture format entirely, which favours a generally one-sided approach.
Technology, with its more interactive process, gives students the chance to learn at their own pace, pausing a lecture or seminar and taking notes. In a traditional setting, sometimes the professor might be speaking too fast and a student misses something.
Despite technology’s obvious perks, brick-and-mortar institutions are likely here to stay, said MIT President Susan Hockfield.
“The campus environment offers opportunities and experiences that cannot be replicated online,” said Hockfield in a statement. “edX is designed to improve, not replace, the campus experience.”
Unlike students attending universities, online users of either platform are not guaranteed a certificate upon completion of a course. Students learning via edX will receive certification if they are able to demonstrate mastery of the course material. At Coursera, certificates are handed out at the discretion of the university offering the course.
So, is higher education ready for this kind of technological change, and what will it mean for its future?
“Technology has revolutionised most markets, and now it’s about to enact a similar revolution [in education],” Daphne Koller said. “It will likely change the face of how we see education today.
Rights group weighs into controversy over curbs on freedoms at Yale-NUS
Adele Yung20 July 2012 Issue No:231
Yale University’s acceptance of Singaporean government restrictions on
basic rights at the new Yale-National University of Singapore (NUS)
joint campus shows a disturbing disregard for free speech, association
and assembly, Human Rights Watch said this week.
“Yale is betraying the spirit of the university as a centre of open debate and protest by giving away the rights of its students at its new Singapore campus,” said Phil Robertson, deputy Asia director at the international rights organisation.
“Instead of defending these rights, Yale buckled when faced with Singapore’s draconian laws on demonstrations and policies restricting student groups,” he said in a statement released on Thursday.
Professor Pericles Lewis, the newly appointed president of the Yale-NUS liberal arts college in Singapore, told the media this month that students at the Singapore campus – expected to open in August 2013 – will be able to express their views but will not be allowed to organise political protests on campus or form political party student groups.
Students at Yale-NUS “are going to be totally free to express their views”, but they won't be allowed to organise political protests on campus, said Lewis in an interview with the Wall Street Journal that has caused an uproar among Yale faculty in the United States.
Although groups will be allowed to discuss political issues, Lewis was quoted as saying, “we won't have partisan politics or be forming political parties on campus”, including societies linked to local political groups.
Singapore's Ministry of Education has made it clear that faculty and students must comply with the laws of Singapore as well as university laws. Academics and students at higher education institutions in the city-state cannot participate in demonstrations and protests on campus without approval from the university management.
The Yale-NUS controversy has drawn attention to the wider problems of academic rights in the city-state. Chee Soon Juan, secretary-general of the Singapore Democratic Party who is currently barred from running for parliament, said in an open letter to Lewis on Wednesday:
“You can…well appreciate my disappointment when I learned that a revered institution like Yale University would acquiesce to an unreasonable, undemocratic and un-academic policy to ban political parties from engaging students at Yale-NUS.
“I have been stopped – twice – from meeting students at NUS. It is tragic that I will again be unwelcome at an academic institution in my own country.
“My colleagues and I in the Singapore Democratic Party have welcomed the setting up of Yale-NUS because we had hoped that the college would have the courage of its convictions to reject undemocratic rules regulating campus life,” Chee wrote.
“It seems now that instead of Yale opening up the minds of Singaporeans through academic inquiry and scholarship, it is the Singaporean government that will close the minds of the people running the college.”
Human Rights Watch said. “The Singapore government has long severely restricted the rights to freedom of expression, association and peaceful assembly, and has imposed harsh punishments on violators.
“Yale’s willingness to curtail rights on its Singapore campus lends credence to those who would deny the universality, inalienability and indivisibility of human rights on the basis of a country’s historical and cultural context and its economic development”, the rights group said.
“Many Singaporean laws are incompatible with the basic policies of a university such as Yale.”
Human Rights Watch outlined a number of laws restricting basic freedoms. Laws curtailing freedom of assembly include the 2009 Public Order Act, which requires a permit to meet for any “cause related activity”. Outdoor gatherings of five or more people require police permission, and the authorities may prohibit indoor meetings they judge to be too political or that take up religious issues.
Limited demonstrations and rallies are restricted to Singapore’s Speakers’ Corner. Moreover, associations of 10 or more members may be denied government approval to operate if the Registrar of Societies judges the organisation “prejudicial to public peace, welfare or good order”.
“Yale may find that many of the freedoms taken for granted over its 300-year history are against the law in Singapore,” Robertson said. “If it truly values those freedoms, and expects its students to, it will need to fight for them.”
In an interview with Yale Daily News on Wednesday, Lewis said students at Yale-NUS will be guaranteed “all forms of political expression consistent with Singaporean law” and that he did not expect any restrictions on freedom of expression to be “terribly constraining”.
But he was unable to say how he would handle political protests on campus if they occurred, saying only the policies will become public by the time the college opens in 2013. The Singaporean government, not Yale-NUS, will enforce any potential restrictions on political expression, he was reported as saying by Yale Daily News.
In a statement on Thursday, Yale President Richard C Levin said the university knew on entering into its agreement with the National University of Singapore to establish the jointly run college “that national laws concerning freedom of expression would place constraints on the civic and political behaviour of students and faculty.
“We’re operating in a different country with different laws, and we have to abide by their laws,” Levin said. “We negotiated and carved out guarantees of academic freedom and non-discrimination, and we’ve said that from the beginning.”
“Yale is betraying the spirit of the university as a centre of open debate and protest by giving away the rights of its students at its new Singapore campus,” said Phil Robertson, deputy Asia director at the international rights organisation.
“Instead of defending these rights, Yale buckled when faced with Singapore’s draconian laws on demonstrations and policies restricting student groups,” he said in a statement released on Thursday.
Professor Pericles Lewis, the newly appointed president of the Yale-NUS liberal arts college in Singapore, told the media this month that students at the Singapore campus – expected to open in August 2013 – will be able to express their views but will not be allowed to organise political protests on campus or form political party student groups.
Students at Yale-NUS “are going to be totally free to express their views”, but they won't be allowed to organise political protests on campus, said Lewis in an interview with the Wall Street Journal that has caused an uproar among Yale faculty in the United States.
Although groups will be allowed to discuss political issues, Lewis was quoted as saying, “we won't have partisan politics or be forming political parties on campus”, including societies linked to local political groups.
Singapore's Ministry of Education has made it clear that faculty and students must comply with the laws of Singapore as well as university laws. Academics and students at higher education institutions in the city-state cannot participate in demonstrations and protests on campus without approval from the university management.
The Yale-NUS controversy has drawn attention to the wider problems of academic rights in the city-state. Chee Soon Juan, secretary-general of the Singapore Democratic Party who is currently barred from running for parliament, said in an open letter to Lewis on Wednesday:
“You can…well appreciate my disappointment when I learned that a revered institution like Yale University would acquiesce to an unreasonable, undemocratic and un-academic policy to ban political parties from engaging students at Yale-NUS.
“I have been stopped – twice – from meeting students at NUS. It is tragic that I will again be unwelcome at an academic institution in my own country.
“My colleagues and I in the Singapore Democratic Party have welcomed the setting up of Yale-NUS because we had hoped that the college would have the courage of its convictions to reject undemocratic rules regulating campus life,” Chee wrote.
“It seems now that instead of Yale opening up the minds of Singaporeans through academic inquiry and scholarship, it is the Singaporean government that will close the minds of the people running the college.”
Human Rights Watch said. “The Singapore government has long severely restricted the rights to freedom of expression, association and peaceful assembly, and has imposed harsh punishments on violators.
“Yale’s willingness to curtail rights on its Singapore campus lends credence to those who would deny the universality, inalienability and indivisibility of human rights on the basis of a country’s historical and cultural context and its economic development”, the rights group said.
“Many Singaporean laws are incompatible with the basic policies of a university such as Yale.”
Human Rights Watch outlined a number of laws restricting basic freedoms. Laws curtailing freedom of assembly include the 2009 Public Order Act, which requires a permit to meet for any “cause related activity”. Outdoor gatherings of five or more people require police permission, and the authorities may prohibit indoor meetings they judge to be too political or that take up religious issues.
Limited demonstrations and rallies are restricted to Singapore’s Speakers’ Corner. Moreover, associations of 10 or more members may be denied government approval to operate if the Registrar of Societies judges the organisation “prejudicial to public peace, welfare or good order”.
“Yale may find that many of the freedoms taken for granted over its 300-year history are against the law in Singapore,” Robertson said. “If it truly values those freedoms, and expects its students to, it will need to fight for them.”
In an interview with Yale Daily News on Wednesday, Lewis said students at Yale-NUS will be guaranteed “all forms of political expression consistent with Singaporean law” and that he did not expect any restrictions on freedom of expression to be “terribly constraining”.
But he was unable to say how he would handle political protests on campus if they occurred, saying only the policies will become public by the time the college opens in 2013. The Singaporean government, not Yale-NUS, will enforce any potential restrictions on political expression, he was reported as saying by Yale Daily News.
In a statement on Thursday, Yale President Richard C Levin said the university knew on entering into its agreement with the National University of Singapore to establish the jointly run college “that national laws concerning freedom of expression would place constraints on the civic and political behaviour of students and faculty.
“We’re operating in a different country with different laws, and we have to abide by their laws,” Levin said. “We negotiated and carved out guarantees of academic freedom and non-discrimination, and we’ve said that from the beginning.”
Rights groups condemn controversial Obiang science award
Jane Marshall19 July 2012 Issue No:231
Seven human rights organisations have condemned Tuesday’s award by
UNESCO of a controversial science prize financed by Equatorial Guinea.
The award ceremony went ahead despite allegations of corruption against
the country’s leaders including President Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo,
who sponsored the prize.
The UNESCO-Equatorial Guinea International Prize for Research in the Life Sciences was awarded to three scientists – Maged Al-Sherbiny of Egypt, Felix Dapare Dakora of South Africa and Rossana Arroyo of Mexico – for their research into vaccine development, food scarcity in Africa and parasitic diseases, respectively. They each received US$100,000.
The presentation took place at UNESCO headquarters in Paris on 17 July.
France, which, like Spain and the United States is investigating allegations of corruption against the Obiang family, was among the countries that boycotted the ceremony.
Earlier this month, French magistrates issued a warrant for the arrest of Obiang’s son, Teodorin, who is suspected of embezzling millions of dollars.
Last week’s ceremony was the culmination of four years of internal disagreement within UNESCO over the prize, which was proposed by Obiang and was originally to be named after him. It was intended to reward up to three scientists for their scientific achievements that would "improve the quality of human life".
It was established by UNESCO’s executive board in 2008, financed by Obiang with a US$3 million endowment over five years. But attribution of the prize was postponed in 2010 following international protests over the connection with the Obiang regime.
Human rights organisations, academics, health workers and scientists wrote to UNESCO’s Director-general Irina Bokova, warning that the prize would irreparably harm the organisation’s reputation.
They condemned Obiang, who seized power in the oil-rich former Spanish colony in 1979, as a tyrannical dictator who had squandered the country’s wealth on himself, his family and his cronies.
Bokova opposed the award, and asked the board to withdraw it. But following a majority vote in March 2012 by the board in its favour under the new name, she was legally advised that she was required to follow the board’s directive.
A joint statement last week by seven rights organisations,* including Human Rights Watch, criticised UNESCO’s decision as “disappointing and irresponsible”.
Tutu Alicante, director of EG Justice, another of the groups, said: “It is shameful and utterly irresponsible for UNESCO to award this prize, given the litany of serious legal and ethical problems surrounding it.
“Beyond letting itself be used to polish the sullied image of Obiang, UNESCO also risks ruining its own credibility.”
* The statement was issued by: Association SHERPA, Committee to Protect Journalists, Corruption Watch, EG Justice, Global Witness, Human Rights Watch and ONE.
The UNESCO-Equatorial Guinea International Prize for Research in the Life Sciences was awarded to three scientists – Maged Al-Sherbiny of Egypt, Felix Dapare Dakora of South Africa and Rossana Arroyo of Mexico – for their research into vaccine development, food scarcity in Africa and parasitic diseases, respectively. They each received US$100,000.
The presentation took place at UNESCO headquarters in Paris on 17 July.
France, which, like Spain and the United States is investigating allegations of corruption against the Obiang family, was among the countries that boycotted the ceremony.
Earlier this month, French magistrates issued a warrant for the arrest of Obiang’s son, Teodorin, who is suspected of embezzling millions of dollars.
Last week’s ceremony was the culmination of four years of internal disagreement within UNESCO over the prize, which was proposed by Obiang and was originally to be named after him. It was intended to reward up to three scientists for their scientific achievements that would "improve the quality of human life".
It was established by UNESCO’s executive board in 2008, financed by Obiang with a US$3 million endowment over five years. But attribution of the prize was postponed in 2010 following international protests over the connection with the Obiang regime.
Human rights organisations, academics, health workers and scientists wrote to UNESCO’s Director-general Irina Bokova, warning that the prize would irreparably harm the organisation’s reputation.
They condemned Obiang, who seized power in the oil-rich former Spanish colony in 1979, as a tyrannical dictator who had squandered the country’s wealth on himself, his family and his cronies.
Bokova opposed the award, and asked the board to withdraw it. But following a majority vote in March 2012 by the board in its favour under the new name, she was legally advised that she was required to follow the board’s directive.
A joint statement last week by seven rights organisations,* including Human Rights Watch, criticised UNESCO’s decision as “disappointing and irresponsible”.
Tutu Alicante, director of EG Justice, another of the groups, said: “It is shameful and utterly irresponsible for UNESCO to award this prize, given the litany of serious legal and ethical problems surrounding it.
“Beyond letting itself be used to polish the sullied image of Obiang, UNESCO also risks ruining its own credibility.”
* The statement was issued by: Association SHERPA, Committee to Protect Journalists, Corruption Watch, EG Justice, Global Witness, Human Rights Watch and ONE.
Internationalisation in higher education – Rhetoric versus reality
Hans de Wit22 July 2012 Issue No:231
In 1998, Philip Altbach and Patti McGill Peterson wrote a critical assessment in Change
with the title “Internationalise American Higher Education? Not
exactly”. They observed a discrepancy between the optimistic rhetoric of
internationalisation and the reality of significant constraints.
Nearly 15 years later, the third study Mapping Internationalisation on US Campuses by the American Council on Education (ACE), which studied 1,041 institutions, confirms that this tendency is still prevalent in US higher education.
And I would be inclined to add – also elsewhere.
What lessons can be learned from the mapping exercise? Would similar studies in Europe and elsewhere come to similar results? Will the divide between research universities and other institutions of higher education with respect to internationalisation increase and in what way?
The results of the study by ACE are described in a positive way.
More institutions incorporate internationalisation into their mission statements and strategic plans. There are more assessment procedures for internationalisation in place. There is more attention paid to hiring faculty with international backgrounds, experience and interests.
Attention to mobility issues remains strong. Partnerships, cross-border delivery of education and joint degrees are on the rise. And in general there is an increase in funding, in particular for study abroad and recruitment.
Concerns
But the ACE report is also outspoken in its concerns.
According to the report, Altbach and McGill Peterson's observation is still valid today, in particular with regard to the issue of student learning.
It states: “Although many institutions indicated that the curriculum has been a particular focus of internationalisation efforts in recent years, overall this is not reflected in the general education requirements that apply to all students.”
And in a clear but harsh way the report concludes: “At their core, however, colleges and universities are about student learning; no matter what shape the internationalisation process takes at a given institution, student learning must remain a central core.”
It adds that this seems not to be the case in many institutions. In other words, higher education institutions should not only talk about the importance of internationalisation of the curriculum, but place it at the centre of their curriculum reforms and learning outcomes.
These findings coincide with the results from the third Global Survey by the International Association of Universities (IAU) in 2010.
Also in that survey, one can note a strong difference between what institutions say about the importance of internationalisation and its priority in practice – in particular where it concerns the curriculum – not only in the US but also in other regions.
So, this discrepancy is clearly not a purely American problem, but an issue that applies also to Europe and other parts of the world.
Much to be done
We may be positive about the increasing attention being paid to curriculum and learning outcomes instead of the quantitative focus on study abroad and recruitment of international students that is manifested in these studies. But there is still a lot to do to make the shift a reality.
Funding is not the main obstacle to internationalising the curriculum and learning outcomes.
The IAU survey indicates that faculty resistance and an inflexible curriculum are probably more important. So leadership can make a difference, but the impetus for change has to move down to the programme level – to deans, department heads, faculty and students – for change to be realised.
At a time when internationalisation has become more bureaucratic and focused on quantitative targets, this requires a substantive change of mentality and approach, as I wrote in my previous blog for University World News.
Another interesting finding of the ACE report relates to the differences in progress between doctoral universities and other higher education institutions in the US:
“Broadly speaking, the doctoral sector does better than all others on many of the internationalisation indicators in the Mapping Survey. While associate institutions have made progress in some areas, their overall levels of internationalisation are still below those of institutions in other sectors.”
The report correctly notes that approximately 40% of the student body in the US attends associate institutions, and calls for new innovative approaches to internationalisation since the classical focus on study abroad is not the most useful for students in this sector.
Nevertheless, we do not yet see many signs of innovation in that sector. Interestingly enough, I have the impression that innovative and comprehensive strategies for internationalisation seem to come more from the top, private research universities in the US, which until recently were not focusing much on internationalisation but now seem to be taking the lead.
International innovative initiatives by Yale, New York University, Cornell and Stanford are regularly in the news while smaller colleges and institutions mainly seem to feature due to scandals and problems in their international activities.
In Europe, where top research universities are publicly funded, this is not so much the case, maybe with the exception of Germany where the excellence initiatives and funds from DAAD [German Academic Exchange Service] are positive incentives for the extension and innovation of internationalisation.
In other countries, the economic crisis does not allow for much innovation and investment. It will be interesting to see if internationalisation becomes an elite enterprise of top private research universities again.
* Hans de Wit is director of the Centre for Higher Education Internationalisation at Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore in Milan, and professor of internationalisation at Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences. He is co-editor of the Journal of Studies in International education. Email: j.w.m.de.wit@hva.nl.
Nearly 15 years later, the third study Mapping Internationalisation on US Campuses by the American Council on Education (ACE), which studied 1,041 institutions, confirms that this tendency is still prevalent in US higher education.
And I would be inclined to add – also elsewhere.
What lessons can be learned from the mapping exercise? Would similar studies in Europe and elsewhere come to similar results? Will the divide between research universities and other institutions of higher education with respect to internationalisation increase and in what way?
The results of the study by ACE are described in a positive way.
More institutions incorporate internationalisation into their mission statements and strategic plans. There are more assessment procedures for internationalisation in place. There is more attention paid to hiring faculty with international backgrounds, experience and interests.
Attention to mobility issues remains strong. Partnerships, cross-border delivery of education and joint degrees are on the rise. And in general there is an increase in funding, in particular for study abroad and recruitment.
Concerns
But the ACE report is also outspoken in its concerns.
According to the report, Altbach and McGill Peterson's observation is still valid today, in particular with regard to the issue of student learning.
It states: “Although many institutions indicated that the curriculum has been a particular focus of internationalisation efforts in recent years, overall this is not reflected in the general education requirements that apply to all students.”
And in a clear but harsh way the report concludes: “At their core, however, colleges and universities are about student learning; no matter what shape the internationalisation process takes at a given institution, student learning must remain a central core.”
It adds that this seems not to be the case in many institutions. In other words, higher education institutions should not only talk about the importance of internationalisation of the curriculum, but place it at the centre of their curriculum reforms and learning outcomes.
These findings coincide with the results from the third Global Survey by the International Association of Universities (IAU) in 2010.
Also in that survey, one can note a strong difference between what institutions say about the importance of internationalisation and its priority in practice – in particular where it concerns the curriculum – not only in the US but also in other regions.
So, this discrepancy is clearly not a purely American problem, but an issue that applies also to Europe and other parts of the world.
Much to be done
We may be positive about the increasing attention being paid to curriculum and learning outcomes instead of the quantitative focus on study abroad and recruitment of international students that is manifested in these studies. But there is still a lot to do to make the shift a reality.
Funding is not the main obstacle to internationalising the curriculum and learning outcomes.
The IAU survey indicates that faculty resistance and an inflexible curriculum are probably more important. So leadership can make a difference, but the impetus for change has to move down to the programme level – to deans, department heads, faculty and students – for change to be realised.
At a time when internationalisation has become more bureaucratic and focused on quantitative targets, this requires a substantive change of mentality and approach, as I wrote in my previous blog for University World News.
Another interesting finding of the ACE report relates to the differences in progress between doctoral universities and other higher education institutions in the US:
“Broadly speaking, the doctoral sector does better than all others on many of the internationalisation indicators in the Mapping Survey. While associate institutions have made progress in some areas, their overall levels of internationalisation are still below those of institutions in other sectors.”
The report correctly notes that approximately 40% of the student body in the US attends associate institutions, and calls for new innovative approaches to internationalisation since the classical focus on study abroad is not the most useful for students in this sector.
Nevertheless, we do not yet see many signs of innovation in that sector. Interestingly enough, I have the impression that innovative and comprehensive strategies for internationalisation seem to come more from the top, private research universities in the US, which until recently were not focusing much on internationalisation but now seem to be taking the lead.
International innovative initiatives by Yale, New York University, Cornell and Stanford are regularly in the news while smaller colleges and institutions mainly seem to feature due to scandals and problems in their international activities.
In Europe, where top research universities are publicly funded, this is not so much the case, maybe with the exception of Germany where the excellence initiatives and funds from DAAD [German Academic Exchange Service] are positive incentives for the extension and innovation of internationalisation.
In other countries, the economic crisis does not allow for much innovation and investment. It will be interesting to see if internationalisation becomes an elite enterprise of top private research universities again.
* Hans de Wit is director of the Centre for Higher Education Internationalisation at Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore in Milan, and professor of internationalisation at Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences. He is co-editor of the Journal of Studies in International education. Email: j.w.m.de.wit@hva.nl.
Academic oncologist brings altruistic dynamism to Catholic university
Andrew Green22 July 2012 Issue No:231
Dr Charles Olweny, a globe-trotting oncologist who trained and worked on
four continents – including as a professor of medicine in Winnipeg –
decided seven years ago to leave Canada and return home to lead Uganda
Martyrs University, a private Catholic institution. His leadership
strategy is guided by five core principles, he told University World News.
Uganda is undergoing a higher education boom. The result of introducing universal primary education in 1997 and universal secondary education a decade later is a surplus of students looking for a university placement.
Uganda's 30 public and private universities offer 50,000 spots for qualified secondary school graduates. More than 102,000 secondary school students sat for qualifying exams this year. But the demand for higher education is tempered by harsh economic reality, and even as students graduate many are unable to find jobs.
No less a presence than Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni has laid the blame for the country’s high youth unemployment squarely at the feet of the higher education system.
The World Bank estimates that young people between 15 and 24 make up as much as 83% of the unemployed population. On a tour of the country last year, Museveni accused universities of not focusing on marketable skills, such as information technology and the sciences.
Since 2006 Dr Charles Olweny (72) has been trying to navigate this landscape.
As vice-chancellor of Uganda Martyrs University (UMU), he is responsible for strategically expanding his institution while maintaining a range of courses – some that meet the president’s definition of marketable, such as agriculture and science, and some, for instance development studies, that do not. Olweny said they are no less important, though.
Even as UMU is looking to develop two new campuses, he is also eager to experiment with new education models to ensure all of the university’s graduates are immediately employable.
It is a challenge Olweny relishes.
A trained oncologist, he built a career across four continents – Africa, Australasia, Europe and North America – as an administrator, researcher and academic. He took an 80% pay cut to return to his native Uganda from Canada and help establish UMU as “the benchmark of all institutions of higher learning, not just in Uganda, but in the entire Great Lakes region”. Click here for the video link.
The main campus of the 19-year-old Catholic university is Nkozi, west of the capital Kampala, just south of the equator. It also has a newer campus in the eastern town of Mbale.
There are more than 2,000 students, nearly 500 of them resident on the main campus, and the others on distance learning and part-time postgraduate courses around the country. Among a growing number of private higher education institutions, UMUis well established, respected, outward looking and focused on quality.
Olweny’s transition has come with some challenges. There were the expected ones – he is quick to highlight the constant search for funds – and those that he did not anticipate, including a battle to overcome institutional aversion to change.
In a wide-ranging and frequently funny discussion, Olweny spoke to University World News about the challenges for higher education in Uganda and how he is helping his institution to overcome them.
You trained as an oncologist and have spent your life all over the world in various positions. How did you end up in academia in Uganda?
As he describes it, Olweny’s first love was medicine, not academia. Growing up in the 1940s and 1950s when Uganda was still a British protectorate, he was responsible for keeping his family’s medical box – dispensing aspirin when people had headaches, or quinine when they developed fevers.
He went on to join the country’s first postgraduate programme in medicine at Kampala’s premier Makerere University. That was after he had already published four papers – two in peer-reviewed journals – during his undergraduate years at the institution. (He later got his MD from Makerere.)
Those articles “were in the area of oncology. And I didn’t quite know that was an area that would attract me. But it was soon after I had done my masters degree that the dean of the faculty of medicine called me to his office and said: ‘We all believe you have a lot of talent.’”
Olweny was offered a scholarship to study under Georg Klein – a cancer researcher and a member of the Nobel Committee – in Stockholm, Sweden.
That was the beginning of Olweny’s globe-trotting career. He worked and trained in the US, Zambia, Zimbabwe and Australia. He also served as director of Uganda’s Cancer Institute for more than a decade.
Before joining UMU, he had worked in Winnipeg, Canada, for 16 years, where he was a professor of medicine and head of the oncology department at St Boniface General Hospital.
It is a career that has consistently included work in academia, though Olweny is jokingly hard-pressed to explain why. “It’s almost like people are asking me, ‘Why did you ever leave Australia to go to Canada in that cold weather?’ My reaction, very often was, ‘I think I need my head examined.’”
But he said teaching had always attracted him, even as an undergraduate. So when an unexpected letter from UMU arrived in 2005, offering the deeply religious Olweny the vice-chancellorship of Uganda’s flagship Catholic university, he decided – after months of soul-searching and a heated family discussion – to move into academia fulltime.
What is your leadership strategy?
What Olweny calls his “guiding principles” are the stuff of legend at UMU. Carefully rationalised and easily presented, they have been widely adopted by the staff, alongside the university motto – ‘In virtue and wisdom lead the world’. Print-outs of his five-point list are hung on walls around the university.
“I think that essentially guides my way of doing things. I brought those five [principles to UMU] and they have remained.” Click here for the video link. Quality, Olweny, is a major preoccupation of the university, not the least because it relies heavily on student fees for its financial survival.
The other quality he espouses is hard work. It is evident in how he structures his day – starting at 08h00 every morning and not ending until at least 19h30 every night. And those days are filled with meetings. Meetings with students, faculty or one of the five national and international boards he sits on.
“One of my kids, when they were growing up, he used to say they thought their dad was always eating meat, because I said, ‘I’m going for this meeting. I’m going for that meeting.' They thought dad is always eating meat.”
He adopted his work habits while at university. A mentor at medical school once told Olweny that his day should only really begin when everyone else was going home.
“Usually, that’s the most productive two to three hours. Nobody knows you are in the office. No telephones ring. What I’m able to achieve between 16h30 and 19h30 is enormous. Very often it is much more than what I’ve achieved through the rest of the day.” Click here for the video link.
What major change have you brought to the university?
Immediately on arrival, Olweny upended UMU’s educational philosophy. From his years at universities around the world, he said he had learned that most universities have a standard set of priorities: teaching, research and, then, community service.
“We have rearranged that. We have put research and scholarship first. And our No. 2 is community engagement. Not service, engagement. And we put teaching at the bottom.
“The reason is, we believe anybody can teach. You don’t need to be a professor to be able to teach. But you need to be a researcher to be at a university and we need to engage the community.” Click here for the video link.
Less than a month into his tenure, Olweny established a community relations committee, which meets regularly to decide how the community and UMU can work together. The key product of that relationship has been an effort to lift a nearby village, Nindye, out of poverty.
“What we have done is every faculty has been told they must mainstream outreach into their curriculum.” Departments like health sciences and education consult with the community and brainstorm ideas to help improve the lives of people living in Nindye.
The faculty of agriculture, for instance, is helping farmers improve yields and market their goods. The endeavour is modelled on the Millennium Villages Project, but draws on research conducted by UMU.
If the effort, which is being run in partnership with the University of Notre Dame in Indiana, is successful, Olweny plans to export it to other communities. Click here for the video link.
How have you positioned the university both for international recognition and to prepare students for Uganda’s job market?
Nearly 25% of UMU’s students are international. Most are drawn from East Africa, but a handful comes from the United States, Canada and Belgium.
The international strategy capitalises on Olweny’s own experiences working abroad. At UMU, he has forged partnerships with universities like Notre Dame, and also recruits staff from around the world.
“That’s part of our strategy, just to be as international as we possibly can. We also take pride in forging strategic alliances…That gives us a fairly broad perspective.”
As UMU seeks to expand its international presence, though, it also has to tailor its educational experience to preparing Ugandan students to find positions in a difficult job market. That can require two very different kinds of courses.
Olweny is using planned university expansion – introducing new campuses in northern and western Uganda – to deploy an unusual strategy addressing just that problem. “Every campus must be unique in character and not merely a replica of what takes place at our main campus,” he said.
The plan is for the new eastern campus in Mbale to spearhead education. Gulu in the north will be a “hard work campus. In addition to regular academics, they will be doing hard work.” The western campus will be a polytechnic. “We’re thinking of motor vehicle mechanical engineering, medical equipment repair engineering, petroleum engineering and agricultural engineering.” Click here for the video link.
With campuses tailored to specific skills, UMU can continue to attract local and international students to its varied programmes at the main Nkozi campus, while also offering the kind of vocational training that will allow entrepreneurial students to take advantage of gaps in regional markets.
In that vein, UMU also launched the Student Training Entrepreneurial Promotion (STEP) programme to teach students how to start their own businesses.
The increase in vocational offerings is critical in Uganda’s current economic environment but, despite recent urgings from the president and others, it is not the only solution to graduating students who will be able to find jobs in Uganda.
Olweny keeps returning to another advantage that UMU graduates have over other university-educated job applicants. It starts with what he describes as a mythical radio station that everyone in Uganda listens to, calling it WIII FM – the What Is In It For Me station.
“That’s what is killing Uganda today. Everybody will [ask], what do I get out of this? That’s the first question…Until that radio station is closed, this country is doomed."
He continued: “I’ve been singing to everybody, to the students, to the staff, and hopefully if the change can start there, it will spread in concentric circles and eventually it will catch up with everyone.
“At least I now know that most of my students, when they graduate, they will be grabbed. Especially by banks and other financial institutions. They’ll say, 'Yes, those are guys with integrity.'” Click here for the video link.
What other challenges have you encountered as leader of UMU?
Like most private universities in Uganda, UMU has a constant struggle to raise enough money to cover its costs, while still offering an affordable education. The mantra Olweny shares with his staff is that “it’s not business as usual”.
That means more dialogue between different departments to guide financial decisions. He just finished hosting a conference that pulled together UMU’s deans, associate deans and department heads to instil this message.
The other major hurdle, he said, is an attitude of complacency. “People don’t want to change. They are happy with the status quo. You bring in a new idea, they think you are crazy.”
Each innovation he introduces – from outsourcing campus security to creating an advancement office that would build greater alumni support – has been greeted with resistance, he said.
“They are beginning to accept [change], but we just have to keep reminding them.” Click here for the video link.
What advice do you have for future academic leaders?
As with most of his answers, Olweny has a readymade list of advice for his successors. In essence, it boils down to three critical points:
“Do what you like to do. Do not do it because other people want you to do it. You would not succeed. You have to do what you want, what you like doing.”
He also emphasised the importance of working within a group of people who support the same vision and adhere to the same value.
And finally, “not to lose sight that, in fact, we’re training leaders of tomorrow”. He added, somewhat implausibly given his groundbreaking work at UMU: “Our time is gone. My time is gone.”
Uganda is undergoing a higher education boom. The result of introducing universal primary education in 1997 and universal secondary education a decade later is a surplus of students looking for a university placement.
Uganda's 30 public and private universities offer 50,000 spots for qualified secondary school graduates. More than 102,000 secondary school students sat for qualifying exams this year. But the demand for higher education is tempered by harsh economic reality, and even as students graduate many are unable to find jobs.
No less a presence than Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni has laid the blame for the country’s high youth unemployment squarely at the feet of the higher education system.
The World Bank estimates that young people between 15 and 24 make up as much as 83% of the unemployed population. On a tour of the country last year, Museveni accused universities of not focusing on marketable skills, such as information technology and the sciences.
Since 2006 Dr Charles Olweny (72) has been trying to navigate this landscape.
As vice-chancellor of Uganda Martyrs University (UMU), he is responsible for strategically expanding his institution while maintaining a range of courses – some that meet the president’s definition of marketable, such as agriculture and science, and some, for instance development studies, that do not. Olweny said they are no less important, though.
Even as UMU is looking to develop two new campuses, he is also eager to experiment with new education models to ensure all of the university’s graduates are immediately employable.
It is a challenge Olweny relishes.
A trained oncologist, he built a career across four continents – Africa, Australasia, Europe and North America – as an administrator, researcher and academic. He took an 80% pay cut to return to his native Uganda from Canada and help establish UMU as “the benchmark of all institutions of higher learning, not just in Uganda, but in the entire Great Lakes region”. Click here for the video link.
The main campus of the 19-year-old Catholic university is Nkozi, west of the capital Kampala, just south of the equator. It also has a newer campus in the eastern town of Mbale.
There are more than 2,000 students, nearly 500 of them resident on the main campus, and the others on distance learning and part-time postgraduate courses around the country. Among a growing number of private higher education institutions, UMUis well established, respected, outward looking and focused on quality.
Olweny’s transition has come with some challenges. There were the expected ones – he is quick to highlight the constant search for funds – and those that he did not anticipate, including a battle to overcome institutional aversion to change.
In a wide-ranging and frequently funny discussion, Olweny spoke to University World News about the challenges for higher education in Uganda and how he is helping his institution to overcome them.
You trained as an oncologist and have spent your life all over the world in various positions. How did you end up in academia in Uganda?
As he describes it, Olweny’s first love was medicine, not academia. Growing up in the 1940s and 1950s when Uganda was still a British protectorate, he was responsible for keeping his family’s medical box – dispensing aspirin when people had headaches, or quinine when they developed fevers.
He went on to join the country’s first postgraduate programme in medicine at Kampala’s premier Makerere University. That was after he had already published four papers – two in peer-reviewed journals – during his undergraduate years at the institution. (He later got his MD from Makerere.)
Those articles “were in the area of oncology. And I didn’t quite know that was an area that would attract me. But it was soon after I had done my masters degree that the dean of the faculty of medicine called me to his office and said: ‘We all believe you have a lot of talent.’”
Olweny was offered a scholarship to study under Georg Klein – a cancer researcher and a member of the Nobel Committee – in Stockholm, Sweden.
That was the beginning of Olweny’s globe-trotting career. He worked and trained in the US, Zambia, Zimbabwe and Australia. He also served as director of Uganda’s Cancer Institute for more than a decade.
Before joining UMU, he had worked in Winnipeg, Canada, for 16 years, where he was a professor of medicine and head of the oncology department at St Boniface General Hospital.
It is a career that has consistently included work in academia, though Olweny is jokingly hard-pressed to explain why. “It’s almost like people are asking me, ‘Why did you ever leave Australia to go to Canada in that cold weather?’ My reaction, very often was, ‘I think I need my head examined.’”
But he said teaching had always attracted him, even as an undergraduate. So when an unexpected letter from UMU arrived in 2005, offering the deeply religious Olweny the vice-chancellorship of Uganda’s flagship Catholic university, he decided – after months of soul-searching and a heated family discussion – to move into academia fulltime.
What is your leadership strategy?
What Olweny calls his “guiding principles” are the stuff of legend at UMU. Carefully rationalised and easily presented, they have been widely adopted by the staff, alongside the university motto – ‘In virtue and wisdom lead the world’. Print-outs of his five-point list are hung on walls around the university.
- Transparency
- Accountability
- Reliability
- Action based on institutional ethos
- Quality
“I think that essentially guides my way of doing things. I brought those five [principles to UMU] and they have remained.” Click here for the video link. Quality, Olweny, is a major preoccupation of the university, not the least because it relies heavily on student fees for its financial survival.
The other quality he espouses is hard work. It is evident in how he structures his day – starting at 08h00 every morning and not ending until at least 19h30 every night. And those days are filled with meetings. Meetings with students, faculty or one of the five national and international boards he sits on.
“One of my kids, when they were growing up, he used to say they thought their dad was always eating meat, because I said, ‘I’m going for this meeting. I’m going for that meeting.' They thought dad is always eating meat.”
He adopted his work habits while at university. A mentor at medical school once told Olweny that his day should only really begin when everyone else was going home.
“Usually, that’s the most productive two to three hours. Nobody knows you are in the office. No telephones ring. What I’m able to achieve between 16h30 and 19h30 is enormous. Very often it is much more than what I’ve achieved through the rest of the day.” Click here for the video link.
What major change have you brought to the university?
Immediately on arrival, Olweny upended UMU’s educational philosophy. From his years at universities around the world, he said he had learned that most universities have a standard set of priorities: teaching, research and, then, community service.
“We have rearranged that. We have put research and scholarship first. And our No. 2 is community engagement. Not service, engagement. And we put teaching at the bottom.
“The reason is, we believe anybody can teach. You don’t need to be a professor to be able to teach. But you need to be a researcher to be at a university and we need to engage the community.” Click here for the video link.
Less than a month into his tenure, Olweny established a community relations committee, which meets regularly to decide how the community and UMU can work together. The key product of that relationship has been an effort to lift a nearby village, Nindye, out of poverty.
“What we have done is every faculty has been told they must mainstream outreach into their curriculum.” Departments like health sciences and education consult with the community and brainstorm ideas to help improve the lives of people living in Nindye.
The faculty of agriculture, for instance, is helping farmers improve yields and market their goods. The endeavour is modelled on the Millennium Villages Project, but draws on research conducted by UMU.
If the effort, which is being run in partnership with the University of Notre Dame in Indiana, is successful, Olweny plans to export it to other communities. Click here for the video link.
How have you positioned the university both for international recognition and to prepare students for Uganda’s job market?
Nearly 25% of UMU’s students are international. Most are drawn from East Africa, but a handful comes from the United States, Canada and Belgium.
The international strategy capitalises on Olweny’s own experiences working abroad. At UMU, he has forged partnerships with universities like Notre Dame, and also recruits staff from around the world.
“That’s part of our strategy, just to be as international as we possibly can. We also take pride in forging strategic alliances…That gives us a fairly broad perspective.”
As UMU seeks to expand its international presence, though, it also has to tailor its educational experience to preparing Ugandan students to find positions in a difficult job market. That can require two very different kinds of courses.
Olweny is using planned university expansion – introducing new campuses in northern and western Uganda – to deploy an unusual strategy addressing just that problem. “Every campus must be unique in character and not merely a replica of what takes place at our main campus,” he said.
The plan is for the new eastern campus in Mbale to spearhead education. Gulu in the north will be a “hard work campus. In addition to regular academics, they will be doing hard work.” The western campus will be a polytechnic. “We’re thinking of motor vehicle mechanical engineering, medical equipment repair engineering, petroleum engineering and agricultural engineering.” Click here for the video link.
With campuses tailored to specific skills, UMU can continue to attract local and international students to its varied programmes at the main Nkozi campus, while also offering the kind of vocational training that will allow entrepreneurial students to take advantage of gaps in regional markets.
In that vein, UMU also launched the Student Training Entrepreneurial Promotion (STEP) programme to teach students how to start their own businesses.
The increase in vocational offerings is critical in Uganda’s current economic environment but, despite recent urgings from the president and others, it is not the only solution to graduating students who will be able to find jobs in Uganda.
Olweny keeps returning to another advantage that UMU graduates have over other university-educated job applicants. It starts with what he describes as a mythical radio station that everyone in Uganda listens to, calling it WIII FM – the What Is In It For Me station.
“That’s what is killing Uganda today. Everybody will [ask], what do I get out of this? That’s the first question…Until that radio station is closed, this country is doomed."
He continued: “I’ve been singing to everybody, to the students, to the staff, and hopefully if the change can start there, it will spread in concentric circles and eventually it will catch up with everyone.
“At least I now know that most of my students, when they graduate, they will be grabbed. Especially by banks and other financial institutions. They’ll say, 'Yes, those are guys with integrity.'” Click here for the video link.
What other challenges have you encountered as leader of UMU?
Like most private universities in Uganda, UMU has a constant struggle to raise enough money to cover its costs, while still offering an affordable education. The mantra Olweny shares with his staff is that “it’s not business as usual”.
That means more dialogue between different departments to guide financial decisions. He just finished hosting a conference that pulled together UMU’s deans, associate deans and department heads to instil this message.
The other major hurdle, he said, is an attitude of complacency. “People don’t want to change. They are happy with the status quo. You bring in a new idea, they think you are crazy.”
Each innovation he introduces – from outsourcing campus security to creating an advancement office that would build greater alumni support – has been greeted with resistance, he said.
“They are beginning to accept [change], but we just have to keep reminding them.” Click here for the video link.
What advice do you have for future academic leaders?
As with most of his answers, Olweny has a readymade list of advice for his successors. In essence, it boils down to three critical points:
“Do what you like to do. Do not do it because other people want you to do it. You would not succeed. You have to do what you want, what you like doing.”
He also emphasised the importance of working within a group of people who support the same vision and adhere to the same value.
And finally, “not to lose sight that, in fact, we’re training leaders of tomorrow”. He added, somewhat implausibly given his groundbreaking work at UMU: “Our time is gone. My time is gone.”
Taking on corruption in international higher education
Philip G Altbach22 July 2012 Issue No:231
A spectre of corruption is haunting the global campaign towards higher
education internationalisation. An overseas degree is increasingly
valuable, so it is not surprising that commercial ventures have found
opportunities in the internationalisation landscape.
New private actors have entered the sector, with the sole goal of making money. Some of them are less than honourable. Some universities look at internationalisation as a contribution to the financial ‘bottom line’, in an era of financial cutbacks.
The rapidly expanding private higher education sector globally is largely for-profit. In a few cases, such as Australia and increasingly the United Kingdom, national policies concerning higher education internationalisation tilt towards earning income for the system.
Countries whose academic systems suffer from elements of corruption are increasingly involved in international higher education – sending large numbers of students abroad, establishing relationships with overseas universities and other activities.
Corruption is not limited to countries that may have a reputation for less than fully circumspect academic practices, but that problem occurs globally.
Recent scandals
Several scandals have recently been widely reported in the United States, including the private unaccredited ‘Tri-Valley University’, a sham institution that admitted and collected tuition fees from foreign students.
That institution did not require students to attend class, but rather funnelled them into the labour market, under the noses of US immigration authorities. In addition, several public universities have been caught admitting students with sub-standard academic qualifications.
Quality assurance agencies in the UK have uncovered problems with ‘franchised’ British-degree programmes, and similar scandals have occurred in Australia.
A prominent example is the University of Wales, which was the second largest university in the UK, with 70,000 students enrolled in 130 colleges around the world. It had to close its highly profitable degree validation programme, which accounted for nearly two-thirds of institutional revenue.
With international higher education now a multibillion-dollar industry around the world – with individuals, countries and institutions depending on its income, prestige and access – it is not surprising that corruption is a growing problem.
If something is not done to ensure probity in international relationships in higher education, an entire structure – built on trust, a commitment to mutual understanding and benefits for students and researchers – a commitment built informally over decades, will collapse. There are signs that the structure is already in deep trouble.
Unscrupulous agents
A serious and unsolved problem is the prevalence of unscrupulous agents and recruiters funnelling unqualified students to universities worldwide.
A recent example was featured in Britain’s Daily Telegraph in late June of an agent in China caught on video, offering to write admissions essays and to present other questionable help in admission to prominent British universities.
No one knows the extent of the problem, although consistent news reports indicate that it is widespread, particularly in countries that send large numbers of students abroad, including China and India.
Without question, agents now receive millions of dollars in commissions paid by universities and, in some egregious cases, money from the clients as well. In the University of Nottingham’s case the percentage of students recruited through agents has increased from 19% of the intake in 2005 to 25% in 2011, with more than £1 million (US$1.5 million) going to the agents.
Altered and fake documents
Altered and fake documents have long been a problem in international admissions. Computer design and technology exacerbate it. Fraudulent documents have become a minor industry in some parts of the world, and many universities are reluctant to accept documents from institutions that have been tainted with incidents of counterfeit records.
For example, a number of American universities no longer accept applications from some Russian students because of widespread perceptions of fraud, document tampering and other problems.
Document fraud gained momentum due to commission-based agents who have an incentive to ensure that students are ‘packaged’ with impressive credentials, as their commissions depend on successful student placement.
Those responsible for checking the accuracy of transcripts, recommendations and degree certificates face an increasingly difficult task. Students who submit valid documentation are placed at a disadvantage since they are subjected to extra scrutiny.
Examples of tampering with and falsifying results of the Graduate Record Examination and other commonly required international examinations used for admissions have resulted in the nullifying of scores, and even cancelling examinations in some countries and regions, as well as rethinking whether online testing is practical.
This situation has made it more difficult for students to apply to foreign universities and has made the task of evaluating students for admission more difficult.
Several countries, including Russia and India, have announced that they will be using the Times Higher Education and Academic Ranking of World Universities (Shanghai rankings) as a way of determining the legitimacy of foreign universities for recognising foreign degrees, determining eligibility for academic collaborations and other aspects of international higher education relations.
This is unfortunate, since many excellent academic institutions are not included in these rankings, which mostly measure research productivity. No doubt, Russia and India are concerned about the quality of foreign partners and find the rankings convenient.
Visa rules
Several ‘host’ countries have tightened up rules and oversight of cross-border student flows in response to irregularities and corruption.
The US Department of State announced in June 2012 that visa applicants from India would be subjected to additional scrutiny as a response to the ‘Tri-Valley scandal’. Earlier both Australia and Britain changed rules and policy.
Corruption is making internationalisation more difficult for the entire higher education sector. It is perhaps significant that continental Europe seems to have been less affected by shady practices – perhaps in part because international higher education is less commercialised and profit driven.
The internet has become the ‘Wild West’ of academic misrepresentation and chicanery. It is easy to set up an impressive website and exaggerate the quality or lie about an institution.
Some institutions claim accreditation that does not exist. There are even ‘accreditation mills’ to accredit universities that pay a fee. A few include pictures of impressive-looking campuses that are simply photoshopped from other universities.
What can be done?
With international higher education now big business and with commercial gain an ever-increasing motivation for international initiatives, the problems mentioned are likely to persist. However, a range of initiatives can ameliorate the situation.
The higher education community can recommit to the traditional ‘public good’ values of internationalisation, although current funding challenges may make this difficult in some countries.
The International Association of Universities’ recent report, Affirming Academic Values in Internationalisation of Higher Education, is a good start. The essential values of the European Union’s Bologna Initiatives are also consistent with the best values of internationalisation.
Accreditation and quality assurance are essential for ensuring that basic quality is recognised. Agencies and the international higher education community must ensure that universities are carefully evaluated and that the results of assessment are easily available to the public and to international stakeholders.
Governmental, regional and international agencies must coordinate their efforts and become involved in maintaining standards and protecting the image of the higher education sector.
Contradictions abound. For example, the US Department of State’s Education USA seeks to protect the sector, while the Department of Commerce sees higher education just as an export commodity. Government agencies in the UK and Australia seem also to be mainly pursuing commercial interests.
Consciousness-raising about ethics and good practice in international higher education and awareness of emerging problems and continuing challenges deserve continuing attention.
Prospective students and their families, institutional partners considering exchanges and research, and other stakeholders must be more sophisticated and vigilant concerning decision-making.
The Boston College Center for International Higher Education’s Corruption Monitor is the only clearinghouse for information relating directly to corrupt practices; additional sources of information and analysis would be helpful.
The first step in solving a major challenge to higher education internationalisation is recognition of the problem itself.
The higher education community is by no means united, and growing commercialisation makes some people reluctant to act in ways that may threaten profits. There are individuals within the academic community who lobby aggressively to legitimise dubious practices.
Yet, if nothing is done, the higher education sector worldwide will suffer and the impressive strides taken toward internationalisation will be threatened.
* Philip G Altbach is Monan professor and director of the Center for International Higher Education at Boston College in the United States. Email: Altbach@bc.edu. The author acknowledges comments from Rahul Choudaha and Liz Reisberg.
New private actors have entered the sector, with the sole goal of making money. Some of them are less than honourable. Some universities look at internationalisation as a contribution to the financial ‘bottom line’, in an era of financial cutbacks.
The rapidly expanding private higher education sector globally is largely for-profit. In a few cases, such as Australia and increasingly the United Kingdom, national policies concerning higher education internationalisation tilt towards earning income for the system.
Countries whose academic systems suffer from elements of corruption are increasingly involved in international higher education – sending large numbers of students abroad, establishing relationships with overseas universities and other activities.
Corruption is not limited to countries that may have a reputation for less than fully circumspect academic practices, but that problem occurs globally.
Recent scandals
Several scandals have recently been widely reported in the United States, including the private unaccredited ‘Tri-Valley University’, a sham institution that admitted and collected tuition fees from foreign students.
That institution did not require students to attend class, but rather funnelled them into the labour market, under the noses of US immigration authorities. In addition, several public universities have been caught admitting students with sub-standard academic qualifications.
Quality assurance agencies in the UK have uncovered problems with ‘franchised’ British-degree programmes, and similar scandals have occurred in Australia.
A prominent example is the University of Wales, which was the second largest university in the UK, with 70,000 students enrolled in 130 colleges around the world. It had to close its highly profitable degree validation programme, which accounted for nearly two-thirds of institutional revenue.
With international higher education now a multibillion-dollar industry around the world – with individuals, countries and institutions depending on its income, prestige and access – it is not surprising that corruption is a growing problem.
If something is not done to ensure probity in international relationships in higher education, an entire structure – built on trust, a commitment to mutual understanding and benefits for students and researchers – a commitment built informally over decades, will collapse. There are signs that the structure is already in deep trouble.
Unscrupulous agents
A serious and unsolved problem is the prevalence of unscrupulous agents and recruiters funnelling unqualified students to universities worldwide.
A recent example was featured in Britain’s Daily Telegraph in late June of an agent in China caught on video, offering to write admissions essays and to present other questionable help in admission to prominent British universities.
No one knows the extent of the problem, although consistent news reports indicate that it is widespread, particularly in countries that send large numbers of students abroad, including China and India.
Without question, agents now receive millions of dollars in commissions paid by universities and, in some egregious cases, money from the clients as well. In the University of Nottingham’s case the percentage of students recruited through agents has increased from 19% of the intake in 2005 to 25% in 2011, with more than £1 million (US$1.5 million) going to the agents.
Altered and fake documents
Altered and fake documents have long been a problem in international admissions. Computer design and technology exacerbate it. Fraudulent documents have become a minor industry in some parts of the world, and many universities are reluctant to accept documents from institutions that have been tainted with incidents of counterfeit records.
For example, a number of American universities no longer accept applications from some Russian students because of widespread perceptions of fraud, document tampering and other problems.
Document fraud gained momentum due to commission-based agents who have an incentive to ensure that students are ‘packaged’ with impressive credentials, as their commissions depend on successful student placement.
Those responsible for checking the accuracy of transcripts, recommendations and degree certificates face an increasingly difficult task. Students who submit valid documentation are placed at a disadvantage since they are subjected to extra scrutiny.
Examples of tampering with and falsifying results of the Graduate Record Examination and other commonly required international examinations used for admissions have resulted in the nullifying of scores, and even cancelling examinations in some countries and regions, as well as rethinking whether online testing is practical.
This situation has made it more difficult for students to apply to foreign universities and has made the task of evaluating students for admission more difficult.
Several countries, including Russia and India, have announced that they will be using the Times Higher Education and Academic Ranking of World Universities (Shanghai rankings) as a way of determining the legitimacy of foreign universities for recognising foreign degrees, determining eligibility for academic collaborations and other aspects of international higher education relations.
This is unfortunate, since many excellent academic institutions are not included in these rankings, which mostly measure research productivity. No doubt, Russia and India are concerned about the quality of foreign partners and find the rankings convenient.
Visa rules
Several ‘host’ countries have tightened up rules and oversight of cross-border student flows in response to irregularities and corruption.
The US Department of State announced in June 2012 that visa applicants from India would be subjected to additional scrutiny as a response to the ‘Tri-Valley scandal’. Earlier both Australia and Britain changed rules and policy.
Corruption is making internationalisation more difficult for the entire higher education sector. It is perhaps significant that continental Europe seems to have been less affected by shady practices – perhaps in part because international higher education is less commercialised and profit driven.
The internet has become the ‘Wild West’ of academic misrepresentation and chicanery. It is easy to set up an impressive website and exaggerate the quality or lie about an institution.
Some institutions claim accreditation that does not exist. There are even ‘accreditation mills’ to accredit universities that pay a fee. A few include pictures of impressive-looking campuses that are simply photoshopped from other universities.
What can be done?
With international higher education now big business and with commercial gain an ever-increasing motivation for international initiatives, the problems mentioned are likely to persist. However, a range of initiatives can ameliorate the situation.
The higher education community can recommit to the traditional ‘public good’ values of internationalisation, although current funding challenges may make this difficult in some countries.
The International Association of Universities’ recent report, Affirming Academic Values in Internationalisation of Higher Education, is a good start. The essential values of the European Union’s Bologna Initiatives are also consistent with the best values of internationalisation.
Accreditation and quality assurance are essential for ensuring that basic quality is recognised. Agencies and the international higher education community must ensure that universities are carefully evaluated and that the results of assessment are easily available to the public and to international stakeholders.
Governmental, regional and international agencies must coordinate their efforts and become involved in maintaining standards and protecting the image of the higher education sector.
Contradictions abound. For example, the US Department of State’s Education USA seeks to protect the sector, while the Department of Commerce sees higher education just as an export commodity. Government agencies in the UK and Australia seem also to be mainly pursuing commercial interests.
Consciousness-raising about ethics and good practice in international higher education and awareness of emerging problems and continuing challenges deserve continuing attention.
Prospective students and their families, institutional partners considering exchanges and research, and other stakeholders must be more sophisticated and vigilant concerning decision-making.
The Boston College Center for International Higher Education’s Corruption Monitor is the only clearinghouse for information relating directly to corrupt practices; additional sources of information and analysis would be helpful.
The first step in solving a major challenge to higher education internationalisation is recognition of the problem itself.
The higher education community is by no means united, and growing commercialisation makes some people reluctant to act in ways that may threaten profits. There are individuals within the academic community who lobby aggressively to legitimise dubious practices.
Yet, if nothing is done, the higher education sector worldwide will suffer and the impressive strides taken toward internationalisation will be threatened.
* Philip G Altbach is Monan professor and director of the Center for International Higher Education at Boston College in the United States. Email: Altbach@bc.edu. The author acknowledges comments from Rahul Choudaha and Liz Reisberg.
Subscribe to:
Comments (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...
