GLOBAL: MOOCs make waves in higher education worldwide

Karen MacGregor21 September 2013 Issue No:288

 

The development of MOOCs – massive open online courses – outside the ‘Anglo-centric hothouse’ of the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom and Australia is “characterised by strong involvement with professional needs, wide experimentation and enthusiastic engagement in all significant geographies”, according to a British government review.

An annex to the main report published last week, The Maturing of the MOOC – Literature review of massive open online courses and other forms of online distance learning, finds that opinions on the role of MOOCs in development have polarised.

While many identify MOOCs as providing direct access to global high quality education, others “detect a new form of cultural imperialism”.

The report, published by the UK Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, points out that initiatives using open learning to address developing world needs have a significant heritage. It cites Open University initiatives in delivering healthcare and teacher skills in Africa.

“Literature considering MOOCs in a global development context points to two sides of an issue of access and equity.

“On one side, MOOCs are hailed as a cost-free access to excellent resources and learning experiences for students in less educationally privileged geographies, notably India, China and Africa,” the report says.

“Alternatively MOOCs, with their high demands for connectivity, online literacy and English language skills, may be excluding developing world students and privileging learners from the most highly developed educational environments.”

What reviewers say

The report looks at the findings of experts and academics, including Michael Trucano, the World Bank’s education technology specialist, who has reviewed the relevance of MOOCs from a development and developing country perspective.

“He describes the emerging response to the phenomenon in less developed countries, and identifies more risks than upside,” the report says.

“On the upside, Trucano says MOOC formats may offer developing world universities a means to unbundle ‘long-standing dissatisfactions of various sorts with the current educational status quo at the higher education level’. These include access to other learners, learning materials, experts and respected qualifications.

“Reporting the risks, Trucano identifies critics who have expressed fears that MOOCs may be ‘yet another wave in cultural imperialism from the North and the West crashing across borders, washing over (or possibly washing out) local educational institutions, cultural norms and educational traditions’.”

Also, Trucano wrote “of a markedly two-tier system of global higher education, with a small number of elites able to participate in education the 'old-fashioned way' in small, intimate, face-to-face groups in close physical contact with their professors, while the vast majority of students, especially those in developing countries, have to make do with participating in a watered down, inferior educational experience delivered through MOOCs”.

Writing in the MIT Technology Review, Jessica Leber noted the apparent potential of MOOCs to ‘democratise’ education with the promise of free access to top courses by elite global institutions, the report says.

However, she also identified technical obstacles – mainly lack of computing infrastructure and bandwidth – and cultural barriers. To deliver on the needs of learners in less developed countries, “MOOCs would need to be tailored to a more diverse worldwide audience, not the Westernised Anglophones currently served”, says the report.

Leber highlighted attempts to tackle such problems – tweaks being made to MOOC platforms to enable developing country learners to download instead of stream course content.

“EdX is reported to be exploring ways to open source its software, allowing more universities to post online courses and customise interfaces in a way that reflects the technological affordances of their locales. Efforts are underway to launch French-speaking courses for Francophone Africa, led by the École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne in Switzerland,” says the report.

In India, Leber reported a ‘hybrid’ classroom model of MOOC application being used, with MOOCs “mined as repositories of lectures and quizzes” for engineering students at different institutions.

“In Rwanda, the establishment of an entirely MOOC-based university is being attempted, in which students could access modules from a Harvard social justice MOOC, and an Edinburgh critical-thinking MOOC.”

Europe, Germany and France

In Continental Europe, the report finds, MOOC activity has been aggressive in some centres although it is not visible on a Europe-wide scale.

“The innovations in these settings have been primarily pedagogical but have also made headway in terms of business model and technology. The display of flexibility, simplicity and self-organising among professional MOOCs is instructive.”

Individual MOOCs have been run in Europe since early 2012, the report notes, and some centres are well advanced.

For instance, Helsinki University presented its 41st MOOC in July 2013. École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, or EPFL, in Switzerland, launched a MOOC on Coursera on programming skills in March, offers four other Coursera MOOCs and by May this year had another 15 in development. The courses are in English.

“With 150,000 students having registered for its MOOCs to date, EPFL has emerged as a focal point for debate about a European stance on MOOCs and is proposing in the first EuroMOOC conference to investigate whether ‘Europe needs its own MOOC platform’.”

One of the EPFL MOOC professors reported that the MOOC had been completed by 400 EPFL and 3,600 outside students. The outcome for external students was that 70 sat the final exam and 40 passed it, 15 with distinction.

“A survey of the EPFL students showed that a majority welcomed the MOOC but a quarter did not wish [for] any more of them. Nevertheless, EPFL is committed to further MOOCs and will explore in particular how the internal EPFL students can receive a differentiated course which is better than the free and openly offered version,” the report says.

The first – and thus far the only – French MOOC to be completed is a course on improving techniques in online learning, which ran late last year and was completed by 1,000 learners.

A listing site for upcoming French MOOCs, including Canadian MOOCs in French, “shows that the emerging French language MOOC offer has a decidedly vocational spin”, says the report. IT, finance and project management are represented, and most of a dozen courses listed for summer 2013 have professional themes.

More recently, the European Association of Distance Teaching Universities, or EADTU, has joined with partners in 11 countries to launch the first pan-European MOOC platform – OpenupEd – supported by the European Commission.

“At the platform’s launch towards the end of April 2013, partner institutions (mostly open universities) were drawn from France, Italy, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Portugal, Slovakia, Spain, the UK, Russia, Turkey and Israel. A further nine institutions from six other countries are expected to join.”

As elsewhere, there is a wide range of disciplines available. But unlike the case with US platforms, courses are offered via institutions’ own learning platforms, with the OpenupEd website acting as a portal.

OpenupEd, says the report, has suggested that all its courses may lead to recognition, “for example with a completion certificate or a credit certificate that may count towards a degree”. There will be costs attached to credit certificates, ranging from €25 to €400 (US$540), depending on the course length and institution.

“Courses are provided in the 11 languages of the initial partners, plus Arabic. However, of the 61 courses listed in OpenupEd at the time of writing, nearly 70% are either in English (23) or Spanish (19), largely drawn from two large distance-teaching institutions – the Open University and Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia.

Elsewhere

Microsoft has adopted MOOC formats for professional training, mostly outside the US and the UK.

Microsoft Germany has launched a Windows-8 MOOC, and is launching a pilot MOOC at Visvesvaraya Technological University in India, offering free teaching in analysis and algorithms that leads to a certificate.

“This focus on core theoretical skills, rather than applied business techniques, suggests a clear role for MOOC formats in complementing higher education content,” says the report.

Microsoft Research India has extended the pilot across 27 technical universities, and is offering a prize of 10 internships to the best students. “The connection of MOOCs to recruitment, an approach mooted in US but not yet delivered at scale, is noted.”

The report was unable to identify China’s official position on MOOCs in academic literature, but referred to a report in University World News about Coursera’s planned Chinese-language MOOCs from National Taiwan University and the Chinese University of Hong Kong.

“This report confirmed that Coursera had held discussions with Chinese Universities, and Coursera’s Andrew Ng has addressed Beijing University on the topic of MOOCs. However, political control was potentially a show-stopper.”

Hong Kong University of Science and Technology has committed to MOOCs with Coursera, in the English language. “Development seems likely in the course of 2013-14, as China has a thriving e-learning industry which is keen to globalise,” the report concludes.
 

បែកធ្លាយបញ្ជី ឈ្មោះក្រៅផ្លូវការ គណៈរដ្ឋមន្ដ្រី សម្រាប់ អាណត្ដិទី៥

សូមចុចត្រង់នេះដើម្បីមើលព៌តមានដើមពី គេហទំព័រ ប្រភព ដើមអម្ពិល

ភ្នំពេញ ៖ បញ្ជីឈ្មោះក្រៅផ្លូវការ សម្រាប់ គណៈរដ្ឋមន្ដ្រី អាណត្ដិទី៥ ដែលគេដឹងថា ពិតភាគច្រើន ត្រូវបានបែកធ្លាយជាសាធារណៈ នៅលើបណ្ដាញទំនាក់ទំនង ហ្វេសប៊ុក នៅព្រឹក ថ្ងៃទី១៨ ខែកញ្ញា ឆ្នាំ២០១៣នេះ ។

យោងតាមបញ្ជីឈ្មោះក្រៅផ្លូវការ នៃសមាជិក គណៈរដ្ឋមន្រ្តីអាណត្តិទី៥ខាងមុខនេះ តំណែង​ឧបនាយករដ្ឋមន្ដ្រី ទេសរដ្ឋមន្ដ្រី រដ្ឋមន្ដ្រី និងរដ្ឋលេខាធិការ  បានបង្ហាញឱ្យឃើញថា មានការផ្លាស់ប្ដូរ រដ្ឋមន្ដ្រីមួយចំនួនតូច ខណៈដែលរដ្ឋលេខាធិការ ក៏ត្រូវបានតែងតាំងបន្ថែម និងកាត់បន្ថយ នៅតាមក្រសួង ទាំងនោះផងដែរ ។

យ៉ាងណាក៏ដោយ នេះគ្រាន់តែជាបញ្ជី ឈ្មោះក្រៅផ្លូវការប៉ុណ្ណោះ សម្រាប់ អាណត្ដិទី៥ ប៉ុន្ដែវាអាចជាការពិតភាគច្រើន។

យោងតាមបញ្ជី ឈ្មោះទាំងនេះ ឧបនាយក រដ្ឋមន្ដ្រី មានចំនួន៩រូប ដូចអាណត្ដិទី៤ ដែរ រួមមានលោក ស ខេង លោកសុខ អាន លោកទៀ បាញ់ លោកគាត ឈន់ លោក ហោ ណាំហុង លោកស្រី ម៉ែន សំអន លោក ប៊ិន ឈិន លោកយឹម ឆៃលី និងលោកកែ គឹមយ៉ាន ។ ដោយឡែកទេសរដ្ឋមន្ដ្រី ទទួល បន្ទុកបេសកកម្មពិសេស មានចំនួន១១រូប រួមមាន លោកញឹម វណ្ណដា លោកឃុន ហាំង លោកលី ធុជ លោកច័ន្ទ សារុន លោកឱម យ៉ិនទៀង លោកអៀង ម៉ូលី លោក វ៉ា គឹម ហុង លោក យឹម ណុលឡា លោកសេរី កុសល លោកហ៊ឹម ឆែម និងលោក ជិន ប៊ុនសៀន។

សម្រាប់ក្រសួងការពារជាតិ រួមមាន ៖

លោកទៀ បាញ់ ជារដ្ឋមន្ដ្រី អមដោយ រដ្ឋលេខាធិការ ៥រូប រួមមាន លោកចាយ សាំងយុន លោកម៉ឹង សំផន លោកនាង ផាត លោកឯល វ៉ាន់ សារ៉ាត និងលោកស្រី ប៉ា ដាវីនី ។

ក្រសួងការបរទេស និងកិច្ចសហប្រតិបត្ដិការអន្ដរជាតិ មានលោកហោ ណាំហុង ជារដ្ឋមន្ដ្រី អមដោយរដ្ឋលេខាធិការ ៥រូប រួមមាន លោកឡុង វីសាលោ លោកអ៊ុច បូរិទ្ធ លោកកៅ គឹមហួន លោកអ៊ុង ស៊ាន និងលោកសឿង រដ្ឋថាវី ។

ក្រសួងសេដ្ឋកិច្ចនិងហិរញ្ញវត្ថុ មានលោក អូន ព័ន្ធមុនីរ័ត្ន ជារដ្ឋមន្ដ្រីអមដោយរដ្ឋលេខា ធិការ ៦រូប រួមមាន លោក វង្សី វិស្សុត លោក ជូ វិចិត្រ លោកងួន សុខា លោកហ៊ាន សាហ៊ីប លោកងី តាយី លោកជូ គឹមឡេង។

ក្រសួងកសិកម្មរុក្ខាប្រមាញ់និងនេសាទ មានលោក អ៊ុក រ៉ាប៊ុន ជារដ្ឋមន្ដ្រី អមដោយ រដ្ឋលេខាធិការ ៥រូប រួមមានលោកយុទ្ធ ភូថង លោកទឹម គឹមស៊ា លោកទី សុគន្ធ លោកម៉ម អំណត់ និងលោកហោ ម៉ាស៊ីង ។

ក្រសួងមហាផ្ទៃ មានលោក ស ខេង ជារដ្ឋមន្ដ្រី អមដោយរដ្ឋលេខាធិការ ១០រូប រួមមាន លោកឯម សំអាន លោកព្រុំ សុខា លោកនុត សាអាន លោកសក់ សេដ្ឋា លោកងី ច័ន្ទ្រផល លោក ស្រីជូ ប៊ុនអេង លោកប៉ុល លឹម លោកតេង សាវង្ស លោកឌុល គឿន និងលោកអ៊ុក គឹមលេខ ។

ទីស្ដីការគណៈរដ្ឋមន្ដ្រី មានលោក សុខ អាន ជារដ្ឋមន្ដ្រី អមដោយរដ្ឋលេខាធិការ ១៦រូប រួមមានលោក ប៊ុន អ៊ុយ លោកស៊ូ ភិរិន្ទ លោកស្រី ឆាយ វ៉ាន់ឌឿន លោកចាន់ តានី លោកស្វាយ ស៊ីថា លោកសុខ ផេង លោកឃឹម បូ លោកជ្រា សុចិន្ដា លោកផៃ ស៊ីផាន លោកអ៊ិន វិរៈជាតិ លោកហ៊ឹង ថូរស៊ី លោកតឹក រ៉េតសម្រេច លោកកែវ រ៉េមី លោកប៊ុន សំបូរ លោកឃឹម រុស្ស៊ីដា និង លោកង៉ោ ហុងលី ។

ក្រសួងទេសចរណ៍ មានលោកថោង ខុន ជារដ្ឋមន្ដ្រី អមដោយរដ្ឋលេខាធិការ ៦រូប រួមមានលោក ស៊ូ ម៉ាត់ លោកលី ប៊ុនធឿន លោកគោស៊ុំ សារឿត លោកស្រី សម មុន្នីការ លោកទឹក ចិន្ដា និងលោកជា បូរ៉ា ។

ក្រសួងធម្មការ និងសាសនា មានលោក មិន ឃិន ជារដ្ឋមន្ដ្រី អមដោយរដ្ឋលេខាធិការ ៤រូប រួមមានលោក ផ្លោក ផន លោកសុះ មុះសិន លោករាវ រតនវឌ្ឍនោ លោកស្រី ទូច សារ៉ុម ។

ក្រសួងកិច្ចការនារី មានលោកស្រី អ៊ឹង កន្ថាផាវី ជារដ្ឋមន្ដ្រី អមដោយរដ្ឋលេខាធិការ ៨រូប រួមមានលោកស្រី ខេង សំរ៉ាថា លោក ស្រី ឃឹម ចំរើន លោកស្រី ចាន់ សូរីយ៍ លោក ស្រី អ៊ឹម ស៊ីថៃ លោកស្រី ស៊ី តេហ្វីន លោក ស្រី សាន អារុន  លោកកុប ម៉ារីយ៉ាស់ និង លោកស្រី ហ៊ូ សាមិត្ដ ។

ក្រសួងការងារនិងបណ្ដុះបណ្ដាលវិជ្ជាជីវៈ មានលោកអ៊ិត សំហេង  ជារដ្ឋមន្ដ្រី អម ដោយរដ្ឋលេខាធិការ ៤រូប រួមមានលោក ពេជ សោភ័ន លោកអូស្មាន ហាស្សាន់ លោក កាន់ ម៉ន និងលោកស្រីសឿង សរសុចិន្ដា។

ក្រសួងប្រៃសណីយ៍ និងទូរគមនាគមន៍ មានលោក ប្រាក់ សុខុន ជារដ្ឋមន្ដ្រី អម ដោយរដ្ឋលេខាធិការ ៦រូប រួមមានលោក សារ៉ាក់ខាន់ លោកខាយ ឃុនហេង លោក ឯក វណ្ណឌី លោកស្រីរស់ សូរុក្ខា លោកកាន ច័ន្ទមេត្ដា និងលោកស្រី ប្រាក់ ចាន់ណយ។

ក្រសួងសុខាភិបាល មានលោកម៉ម ប៊ុន ហេង ជារដ្ឋមន្ដ្រី អមដោយរដ្ឋលេខាធិការ ចំនួន៨រូប រួមមានលោក ហេង តៃគ្រី លោក អ៊ឹង ភិរុន លោកអេង ហួត លោកសុខ ផេង លោកស្រី តាន់ វួចឆេង លោកតែ គុយស៊ាង លោកជូ យិនស៊ីម និងលោកធា គ្រុយ ។

ក្រសួងសាធារណការនិងដឹកជញ្ជូន មាន លោកត្រាំ អ៊ីវតឹក ជារដ្ឋមន្ដ្រី អមដោយ រដ្ឋលេខាធិការ ៦រូប រួមមានលោក តូច ចាន់ កុសល លោកសួន រចនា លោកលឹម ស៊ីដេនីន លោកនូ សុវត្ថិ លោកសុខុម ភគវន្ដមុនី និង លោកស្រីមិន មាសាវី ។

ក្រសួងវប្បធម៌ និងវិចិត្រសិល្បៈ មាន លោកស្រី ភឿង លក្ខិណា ជារដ្ឋមន្ដ្រី អម ដោយរដ្ឋលេខាធិការ ៥រូប រួមមានលោក ឃឹម សារិទ្ធ លោកជុច ភឿង លោកមិញ កុលឌីវ៉ាន់ លោកអ៊ុក សុជាតិ និងលោកសោម សុគន្ធ ។

ក្រសួងអប់រំ យុវជននិងកីឡា មានលោក ហង់ ជួនណារ៉ុង ជារដ្ឋមន្ដ្រី អមដោយរដ្ឋ លេខាធិការ ៦រូប រួមមានលោក ពិត ចំណាន លោកណាត ប៊ុនរឿន លោកស្រីគឹម សេដ្ឋានី លោកស៊ាន បូរ៉ាត លោកអ៊ឹម កុដ លោកយក់ ង៉ុយ ។

ក្រសួងសង្គមកិច្ច អតីតយុទ្ធជននិងយុវ នីតិសម្បទា មានលោក វង សូត ជារដ្ឋមន្ដ្រី  រួមមានរដ្ឋលេខាធិការចំនួន៨រូប លោកនឹម ថូត លោកយី យ៉ុន លោកសយ ស៊ីផុន លោក មុត ខៀវ លោកសែម សុខា លោកអាម៉ាត់ យ៉ះ យ៉ា លោកឃួន រ៉ាឌីន លោកស្រីខៀវ បុរី ។

ក្រសួងរៀបចំដែនដីនគរូបនីយកម្មនិង សំណង់ មានលោកអ៊ឹម ឈុនលឹម ជារដ្ឋមន្ដ្រី អមដោយរដ្ឋលេខាធិការ៦រូប រួមមានលោក ឆាន់ សាផាន់ លោកលឹម វ៉ាន់ លោកស្រី អ៊ូ វិឌី លោកភឿង សុភ័ណ្ឌ លោកសរ សុវណ្ណ និងលោកប៉ែន សុផល ។

ក្រសួងបរិស្ថាន មានលោកសាយ សំអាល់ ជារដ្ឋមន្ដ្រី អមដោយរដ្ឋលេខាធិការ ៤រូប រួមមានលោក ខៀវ មុត លោកយិន គឹម ស៊ាន លោកសាបូ អូស្សាណូ និងលោកឃុន លក្ខ្សី ។

ក្រសួងធនធានទឹក និងឧតុនិយម មាន លោកលឹម គានហោ ជារដ្ឋមន្ដ្រី អមដោយ រដ្ឋលេខាធិការ ៥រូប  លោកវ៉េង សាខុន លោកតន់ វ៉ាន់ថារ៉ា លោកប៊ុន ហ៊ាន លោក ស្រី សេង វ៉ាន់សាយ  និងលោកថោ ជេដ្ឋា។

ក្រសួងព័ត៌មាន មានលោកខៀវ កាញារីទ្ធ ជារដ្ឋមន្ដ្រី អមដោយរដ្ឋលេខាធិការ ៧រូប រួមមាន លោកអ៊ុក ប្រាថ្នា លោកម៉ៅ អាយុទ្ធ លោកថាច់ ផែន លោកនូវ សុវត្ថិរ៉ូ លោកហោ សុភាព លោកជា ច័ន្ទបរិបូរណ៍ និងលោកស្រី ច័ន្ទ ធី ។

ក្រសួងយុត្ដិធម៌ មានលោកអង្គវង្ស វឌ្ឍានា ជារដ្ឋមន្ដ្រី អមដោយរដ្ឋលេខាធិការ ៥រូប រួមមានលោកហ៊ី សោភា លោកស្រី ច័ន្ទ សុធាវី លោកង៉ោ សុវណ្ណ លោកព្រហ្ម សិទ្ធត្រា និងលោកកើត រិទ្ធ ។

ក្រសួងទំនាក់ទំនងជាមួយព្រឹទ្ធសភា រដ្ឋ សភា និងអធិការកិច្ច មានលោកស្រី ម៉ែន សំអន ជារដ្ឋមន្ដ្រី អមដោយរដ្ឋលេខាធិការ ៦រូប រួមមាន លោកឆេង សារឿន លោក កង ណែម លោកលោកថាច់ ឃន លោកឌុច សុវណ្ណរី លោកស្រី សុភ័គ្គ ថាវី លោកស្រី សុខ វីឡាយ ។

ក្រសួងមុខងារសាធារណៈ មានលោក ពេជ្រ ប៊ុនធិន ជារដ្ឋមន្ដ្រី អមដោយរដ្ឋលេខា ធិការ ៤រូប រួមមានលោកយូ ស៊ុនឡុង លោក ប៉ុល ពិទូ លោកស្រី វ៉ាន់ ម៉ារ៉ា និងលោក យក់ ប៊ុណ្ណា ។

ក្រសួងពាណិជ្ជកម្ម មានលោកស៊ុន ចាន់ ថុល ជារដ្ឋមន្ដ្រី អមដោយរដ្ឋលេខាធិការ ៧រូប រួមមានលោក កឹម ស៊ីថន លោកប៉ាន សូស័ក្ដិ លោកអោក ប៊ុង លោកម៉ៅ ថូរ៉ា លោកឈួន ដារ៉ា លោកឌិត ទីណា លោកស្រី តឹក រ៉េតកម្រង ។

ក្រសួងឧស្សាហកម្មរ៉ែនិងថាមពល មាន លោកចម ប្រសិទ្ធ ជារដ្ឋមន្ដ្រី អមដោយ រដ្ឋលេខាធិការ៧រូប រួមមានលោកអ៊ិត ប្រាំង លោកសាត សាម៉ី លោកភោគ សុវណ្ណរិទ្ធ លោកឯក ស៊ុនចាន់ លោកហេង សុខគង់ លោកស្រី ឡាយ ណារិន និងលោកគឹម ទូច។

ក្រសួងផែនការ មានលោកឆាយ ថន ជា រដ្ឋមន្ដ្រី អមដោយរដ្ឋលេខាធិការ ៦រូប រួម មានលោក ហ៊ូ កាំងអេង លោកឆៃ វីរៈ លោកសន ស៊ីថន លោកទូច ថាវរៈ លោក ស្រី ប៉ែន សុភា និងលោកប៉ាន ប៊ុនធឿន ។

រដ្ឋលេខាធិការអាកាសចរណ៍ មានលោក ម៉ៅ ហាវ៉ាន់ណាល់ ជារដ្ឋលេខាធិការ ។

ក្រសួងអភិវឌ្ឍន៍ជនបទ មានលោក ជា សុផារ៉ា ជារដ្ឋមន្ដ្រី ៕

Good Luck IELTS - Advice, Tips, and Guides to the IELTS Exam

Good Luck IELTS - Advice, Tips, and Guides to the IELTS Exam

MALAYSIA: Coercion will not aid student learning

Aerie Rahman31 August 2013 Issue No:285

 

When it was announced that the Islamic and Asian Civilisation Studies, or TITAS, course would be made compulsory to students in private universities in Malaysia, it provoked a huge controversy.

Public universities in Malaysia are already mandated to teach TITAS to all of their students. The move to extend this to private universities was contentious as private universities are considered to have more autonomy.

TITAS is a course that teaches about the Islamic, Malay, Indian, Chinese and Western civilisations – reflecting the ethnic configuration in Malaysia (except the Western part). The content is historical, talking about ‘how we got here’ – which is supposed to be covered in high school.

Surprisingly, certain opposition members such as the mercurial Rafizi Ramli, not only acquiesced but blatantly supported the move, citing the need for greater intercultural understanding in multi-ethnic Malaysia.

Ironically, most politicians who support the mandatory implementation of TITAS are those who studied in the West – where forced courses, other than the ones integral to a degree, are unheard of.

The TITAS debate is crucial because it represents to what extent the government is able to intervene in the workings of private tertiary institutions.

If the government is empowered to force private universities such as University of Nottingham’s Malaysia campus to compel all students – including foreign students – to do this course, it will erode the autonomy of private institutions and, perhaps even more importantly, of students.

Such a threat to student freedom would be unthinkable in any Western nation and would probably be met by street protests, just as when tuition fees were hiked in the UK. In quiescent Malaysia, it was met by lacklustre debates.

Without any public consultation, it appears that the obdurate Malaysian government has set the deal in stone.

A cosmetic solution

The glaring point about TITAS is that it is a smokescreen for the underlying, fundamental issues that beleaguer this nation. It is essential that we take a brief look at Malaysia’s structural problems.

Affirmative action policies benefiting the Bumiputera – sons of the soil, a term used to denote the Malay race and other indigenous peoples of South East Asia – still endure, despite being imposed since the 1970s, almost 40 years ago.

Racial inequality in terms of wealth is still pervasive. Vernacular schools – a bastion of segregation – are alive and well. The civil service is bloated with one ethnic group. Deserving secondary students are unscrupulously denied places in local universities by virtue of their ethnicity.

Against this backdrop, the implementation of TITAS is a mockery of all the ethnic problems that Malaysia is facing. What is taught in the classroom does not accord with lived reality.

Instead of trying to initiate a discourse on the problems that we have, we force students to feel they should embrace one another, while knives are still sticking in our backs. Real understanding only comes through trying to solve our structural issues.

A course that relies on compulsion for existence

When I was at law school at a public university in Malaysia, I had to undergo TITAS. The course lasted two hours every week and there was a written exam. Like any compulsory course, failure to pass meant you could not graduate. I hear that there will be no exam for the newly revamped TITAS. I hated the course, and still do – which is why I’m writing this article.

The problem with the course is not only the content, which plunges into essentialisms about the cultures of the ‘other’. I also loathed it because it destroyed any modicum of autonomy that I was supposed to have as a student.

I don’t mind if TITAS is introduced as an optional course, which a person who wishes to learn more about Islamic and Asian civilisations can take of his or her own volition. But forcing it upon students who are adults is akin to insulting our intelligence.

Let’s not start with the minimal utility that TITAS has to offer students. The primary reason why students attend universities is because they want to get a job. At university they accumulate the necessary skills to make them marketable. I have no idea how knowledge on Islamic and Asian civilisations would help one operate a Large Hadron Collider at CERN.

The argument that TITAS fosters greater intercultural understanding is, of course, made in good faith. Who doesn’t want a more harmonious Malaysia, where every ethnic group can live in peaceful coexistence?

However, as the timeless saying goes, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. We must not only look at its aims, but also the means to that goal. In this case the means – compulsion – is undesirable.

I believe that when you start shoving things down people’s throats, you won’t achieve the goal that you desire. In fact, the inverse is true. University students aren’t stupid and won’t trot along unquestioningly like sheep being guided by a shepherd.

In Weapons of the Weak: Everyday forms of resistance, James Scott postulated that the subordinates (peasants) won’t fully accept what the dominants (bourgeoisie) feeds them. Students won’t take kindly to being forced to attend a course that they didn’t choose. They’ll resist in subtle ways.

People will drag their feet to the dreaded TITAS class. Students will trivialise and ridicule the subject. In order to pass the time in class, while bored, students won’t pay attention and take proper account of what is being taught to them. This will only mean that the subject itself is devalued and seen as inferior by students.

I know I did that.

Formally, for sure, the government will be able to record that 100% of students are learning TITAS. But the number of people internalising what they learn will be minimal. Even those who have taken it in, will only have done so to pass the exam and when that’s over, they will forget about it. There’s no incentive to follow up on what you learn so what you learn is eroded over time.

Forcing people to study something is like treating university students as if they’re children. Please. The fact is, we need to accord students a certain degree of respect and let them choose what they want to learn.

Quo vadis, Malaysia?

I firmly believe that the state should only play a supervisory role and not an authoritarian one in society. Sincere understanding comes from a bottom-up and not a top-down approach. Campaigns, optional courses and inter-ethnic dialogues are catalysts to greater understanding. Not compulsion.

Universities in the West are doing well in the world rankings precisely because they are given the freedom to teach what they believe is best for their students. It is little wonder that there are no universities in Malaysia that have ever reached the top 50 in world rankings.

University can be the best time of any individual’s life. Don’t mar that by disrespecting the choices that they want to make.

* Aerie Rahman is pursuing an MA in social anthropology at the School of Oriental and African Studies, or SOAS, and was formerly a law student at Universiti Teknologi MARA in Malaysia

'Mooc' makes Oxford online dictionary

28 August 2013 | By Chris Parr

The acronym Mooc has made the Oxford Dictionaries Online – a web-based lexicon of current English by the publishers of the Oxford English Dictionary

Defined as “a course of study made available over the Internet without charge to a very large number of people”, the word Mooc has become commonplace in academia over the last 18 months, after many higher education institutions began offering such courses.

The phrase can be traced back to 2008, when a group of Canadian scholars developed a course called Connectivism and Connective Knowledge, which was delivered to more than 2,000 online students.

However, it was in late 2011 when the Stanford University Mooc “Introduction to Artificial Intelligence” attracted around 160,000 enrolments that massive open online courses became more widely known.

Angus Stevenson, head of dictionary projects at Oxford Dictionaries, said: “New words, senses, and phrases are added when we have gathered enough independent evidence from a range of sources to be confident that they have widespread currency in English.”

Mooc is not the only education-related word to be making its debut in the online dictionary. BYOD, an abbreviation of “bring your own device” has also been added. It refers to the practice of people using their own computers, smartphones, or other devices for work purposes, and is increasingly being used in universities, with lecturers encouraging students to use their own gadgets during class.

Each month, Oxford Dictionaries adds around 150 million words to its central database of English usage examples, and approximately 1,000 of these are added to Oxford Dictionaries Online each year.

chris.parr@tsleducation.com

UNITED STATES: Online lecture prompts legal fight on copyright

The Boston Globe31 August 2013 Issue No:285

 

Famed Harvard legal professor Lawrence Lessig may be the last guy you would want to pick a fight with over copyright issues over the internet, writes Michael B Farrell for The Boston Globe.

But that is exactly what Australian record company Liberation Music did when it threatened to sue Lessig, a leading scholar of internet law and an advocate for fewer copyright restrictions, for allegedly violating its rights by using music from the hit song “Lisztomania”, by French pop band Phoenix, during a lecture.

Liberation Music claimed to own the licence for the 2009 song, which became so popular that fans, college students, and choruses from around the world made their own dance videos to the music and posted them on YouTube, creating something of a global internet phenomenon. Lessig used the phenomenon and excerpts from the dance videos in a 2010 lecture that he recorded and also posted to YouTube, prompting the legal warning from Liberation Music. Now, Lessig is fighting back with his own legal action.
Full report on The Boston Globe site 

AUSTRALIA: In the court of academia

Paul De Frijters31 August 2013 Issue No:285

 

One of the stranger beasts to emerge from education reform in recent decades has been the Australian university. Although there are still about 38 of them left in the wild, they are nevertheless endangered.

Indeed, their survival is threatened by self-harm – which can extend as far as their taking the axe to perfectly healthy faculties and schools within their domain; for instance, the axing of the arts faculty at the Queensland University of Technology, whose underlying budget at the time was in the black, and where its many students were transferred to other faculties with otherwise low numbers; or the move of the school of economics at the University of Sydney from the business faculty to the arts faculty.

Both happened against the express wishes of the schools, faculties and general academic opinion. What are we to think about these social organisms? Do they operate like a business, where the threat of bankruptcy and competition keeps the hierarchy in check and determines their wages? Or are they ministries, answerable to politicians?

The truth, alas, is that Australian universities resemble neither firms nor ministries. In fact, they operate more like the old royal courts of Europe, Asia and Africa.

Like its counterparts of old, the Australian university has a king. Although these kings have far more power than their North American and European kinsmen, they spend most of their time securing their power base and the compliance of their liegemen, and so have little time to really understand what most of the underlings are doing.

To save himself this trouble, the king surrounds himself with a court of high-level administrators, whose role it is to vie for access to the royal presence and whisper in his ear the things he wants to hear, always with a view to strengthening their own positions within the realm.

The king and his earls and counts receive petitioners from the outer reaches of the realm where production takes place. These petitioners usually come to beg for a share of the kingdom’s resources: administrators seeking finance to subsidise their latest ventures; academics petitioning for positions; and students seeking help in their fights with other students and academics.

The regal council has the power to pass judgement on these minor squabbles, granting or withholding favours in a manner that keeps everyone hopeful and in line without bankrupting the court.

Money

The economy of the royal domains is quite intricate: on the one hand, the money stream on which the court floats comes from local student numbers determined by the broader imperial bureaucracies, within which each of the constituent educational mini-kingdoms sits.

However, so parsimonious have the imperial bureaucracies become that the kingdom is increasingly dependent on another source of income – that produced by a rising tide of international students who come to learn English and perhaps procure a visa that will give them future access to the realm’s riches.

The fees to be paid for this privilege are high and to ensure the continued flow of these funds, ambassadors are sent to foreign lands to establish ties with other courts, to their mutual benefit.

Nevertheless, the Courts of Academe must also ensure that they remain on good terms with the domestic bureaucracies that are directly responsible for the money flows – the departments deciding on HECS [student loans] places, accreditation, research funds and special state interests such as defence or agriculture from which there is potential money to be had.

This is an intricate and delicate game that entails singing a recurring refrain of being ‘starved for cash’ while, at the same time, having pretensions to be ‘world-beating’.

In addition to their principal sources of income, the courts need to keep an eye on the general levies imposed on all activities within the realm. Anyone making any money in the realm is taxed to give the king his due.

Many of these money-generating activities, though, are hidden, so the king finds himself in a murky legal area having to grapple with the arcana of patent laws, intellectual property rights, definitions of ‘consultancy’ and other legally pliable distinctions between university and residential property.

The king is forever having to deal with troublesome academics who hide their ‘IP’ from him, property developers who want to build something in the realm (and with whom deals can be made), internal accountants who ensure that the individual territories (known as ‘faculties’) pay their dues, and lawyers brought in to protect him from outside forces.

Self-serving nobility

A recurring characteristic of this royal court system is the self-serving behaviour of all its nobility. The various dukes, earls and barons forever endeavour to pay less to the king than is due from their individual fiefdoms, abusing the loopholes that the central tax-gatherers have left open. They also try to pinch business from one another by advertising their wares among commoners (‘students’) in a bid to lure them to their particular faculties.

Not surprisingly, perhaps, the central court bureaucracy is a similarly peculiar creature. It comprises men (and the occasional woman) of ambition, who build their own little empires using the argument that activities are best organised centrally because of the famed (though infrequently sighted) ‘synergies’ and ‘network externalities’ that can be brought to bear by doing so.

They preside over burgeoning bureaucracies that vie with the other bureaucracies for roles and resources, the golden rule of their employment being to shore up their own universities as interests while promoting the ambitions of their masters.

The time-honoured and celebrated ‘suck up, kick down’ principle is innate in the culture of the royal courts. Another noteworthy aspect of these royal courts is their penchant for luxury items and pageantry. This love of pageantry is evident even in the outer halls, where attractive secretaries ensure that all visitors have to wait before their arrival is announced with the fanfare that is due their rank.

The royalty enjoys huge personal working and reception rooms with expensive paintings; executive yachts; CEO retreats; and other displays of wealth. These visible ornaments to their prestige are boosted by the celebrated academics they are able to attract to the realm, and are another principal means by which kings try to outdo one another.

The celebrity professors can be a bit noisy and self-centred, but their employers have learned that this is the nature of this particular ornament and that there are enough of them in the world to ensure that the more irksome specimens can be replaced easily enough.

Now and then, of course, the king must be seen by his subjects and allow for grievances (though none pertaining to his royal person) to be brought before him. To this end, he occasionally travels to the outer reaches of the realm, delivering lofty speeches and inviting selected academics to ask him anodyne questions of no significance, and ignoring the occasional outcry of disgruntled subjects.

The pinnacle of such events is the ‘strategic retreat’, a once-a-year event in which the top 200 bureaucrats and academics are invited to come and pay their respects to the king in a series of private audiences wherein due deference can be shown and favours can be asked.

What is not commonly understood about these royal courts, particularly by those outside the palace gates, is that the royal court itself is a snake-pit – where the barons eye and vie with one another for the top spots, particularly the throne itself.

The king and his closest advisors are thus forever watching their backs for ambitious court members seeking to unseat them through adverse media coverage or accusations of wrongdoing.

Paranoia is never too far beneath the highly polished surfaced: potentially, these confidantes and close advisors present the greatest threat to the throne and he must always keep an eye open for any sign of disloyalty, treachery or overweening ambition.

Distraction

Another imperative not commonly understood is the need of the king to keep everyone – knights, earls and commoners alike – busy by focusing on projects and ‘strategic visions’. There must be an infinite succession of visions and plans that involve as many of the potential lower-order troublemakers (academics and top bureaucrats) as possible.

Assurance of learning programmes, research excellence drives, teaching evaluations, equity programmes and the like are all designed to engage the underlings in activities that reinforce loyalty. They give the royal bureaucracy a common goal and a common enemy as they measure and bully the truly independent potential troublemakers: the academics.

What is not widely understood is that the potential troublemakers lower down – academics – are generally harmless creatures, quite oblivious to what is going on around them. For the most part, they keep their noses out of the big fights, concentrating instead on their own little battles with their peers, scrapping for scarce resources.

They find pride and self-esteem in their lecturing and latest research programmes, forever congratulating themselves on their achievements and manoeuvrings. As long as they don’t truly challenge royalty, they are tolerated. Occasionally, when some of the more politically savvy (or greedy) present a problem to the court, they can always be assimilated into the ranks of the royals.

Resources

What is commonly understood, though, is that royal courts grab as many resources as they can. The university senates, which are nominally sovereign, comprise people closely aligned to the court, and invariably include no more than one academic.

The royal stipends (a system of huge salaries and bonuses) are similarly organised as an agreement between the constituent members of the royal court: the one thing they can invariably agree on is how deserving they are of the court’s largesse. One upshot is that kings (and their accommodating bureaucratic underlings) are rewarded with immense salaries.

The main danger that the royals face, apart from each other, is the outside media. Since the royal realms are not self-sufficient and exist by the grace of the imperial bureaucracies, it is in their best interests to ensure that the imperial bureaucracy is not alerted to any problems within the realm.

Thus, the king and nobles are devoted to the maintenance of good relations towards the outside world, particularly the media. There is therefore an extreme aversion to bad press. To ensure that nothing untoward reaches the wrong ears, the university’s public image is very tightly controlled. What is true of the empire’s constituent kingdoms is also true of the empire.

The ultimate aim of all is to protect themselves from their rivals while seeking to expand into the territories of others. To this end, there is a perennial stream of initiatives to prevent losses and initiate expansion.

The battleground includes research assessment exercises, new laws on student loans, new rules on delineations between disciplines, and new pots of money for particular purposes – ‘research priorities’. This squares the circle and means that in any individual realm even the well-meaning realise they really do need a king to do their bidding in these territorial disputes.

* Paul De Frijters is with the University of Queensland: email: p.frijters@uq.edu.au. This article was first published as “Universities as Royal Courts: A fable” by the Australian National University.

MALAYSIA: Medical school opens branch campus in London

Emilia Tan31 August 2013 Issue No:285

 

A private medical school in Malaysia, Allianze University College of Medical Sciences or AUCMS, is to expand to Europe with the purchase of a major university site in London.

The 32-hectare park and buildings, which previously housed Middlesex University’s Trent Park campus, attracted international attention when it was acquired by AUCMS for £30 million (US$46.5 million) this year.

It was put up for sale last year after Middlesex University moved all its operations to a single site in Hendon, North London.

The site comes complete with a lake and nine buildings, including student accommodation, dining halls and lecture theatres.

A further £10 million to £20 million is expected to be spent on renovations – a historic protected building, Mansion House, sits on the site. But some facilities need little work, with amenities and equipment already in place.

Around 300 students are expected to be on campus by October.

AUCMS, based in Penang, has five specialist medical schools and around 3,500 students. It has also been expanding into business studies, accounting and hospitality.

While it aims to secure accreditation as a British university in order to be able to enrol British students, for the time being existing AUCMS students from Malaysia will spend time there.

In August, a UK private non-profit institution, the University of Buckingham, became the first private university in the country to be authorised to offer medical degrees. It will be allowed to exceed strict quotas imposed on public universities by the authorities in England on the number of international students who may be enrolled for medical degrees.

For a private university to grant medical degrees in the UK is an uphill struggle. The General Medical Council, or GMC, must still approve the University of Buckingham course which, according to reports from London, is likely to adopt an Australian curriculum.

The UK government has also tightened its system of accrediting overseas institutions wanting to set up in England.

AUCMS has been offering a medical degree in Malaysia, in collaboration with Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, and one in conjunction with Indonesia’s Universitas Sumatera Utara. It is planning to build two hospitals in Penang by 2015.

The university has been trying to attract more foreign students to its Malaysian campus, mainly from Indonesia, Thailand and the Middle East.

AUCMS Chair Zainuddin Md Wazir said earlier: “With this campus we hope to expand our educational programmes, not only to our students in Malaysia, but also to international students.

"However, in the initial stages, we will have a credit transfer programme so our students in Malaysia will have opportunities to study here for three to six months in another environment. This will enable them to enjoy a totally different experience and will give them further exposure under the guidance of foreign experts.”

He said the university also has plans to expand in South East Asia – including in Cambodia and Laos – and in Central Asia.

Another private institution, Limkokwing University of Creative Technology, was the first Malaysian university to set up a London campus in 2007. Limkokwing has branch campuses in Bali, Botswana, Lesotho, Swaziland, China and Cambodia.