InternatIonalHIgHereducatIonT H E B O S T O N C O L L E G E C E N T E R F O R I N T E R N A T I O N A L H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N

International Higher Education is the quarterly publication of the Center for International Higher Education.

The journal is a reflection of the Center’s mission to en-courage an international per-spective that will contribute to enlightened policy and prac-tice. Through International Higher Education, a network of distinguished international scholars offers commentary and current information on key issues that shape higher education worldwide. IHE is published in English, Chinese, Russian, Portuguese, and Spanish. Links to all editions can be found at www.bc.edu/cihe.

Number 75: SpriNg 2014

International Issues

2 DiplomacyandEducation:AChangingGlobalLandscape Patti McGill Peterson3 HowCorruptionPutsHigherEducationatRisk

Stephen P. Heyneman5 MOOCsasNeocolonialism:WhoControlsKnowledge?

Philip G. Altbach7 TopUniversitiesorTopHigherEducationSystems?

Benoît Millot8 OutcomesAssessmentinInternationalEducation

Darla K. Deardorff10 APEC’sBoldHigherEducationAgenda:WillAnyoneNotice?

Christopher Ziguras

China: English and the Brain Race

12 China’sRemovalofEnglishfromtheGaokao Yang Rui13 “EnglishFever”inChina:AWatershed

Wang Xiaoyang and Li Yangyang15 WillChinaExcelintheGlobalBrainRace?

Qiang Zha

International Student Flows

16 PointSystemsandInternationalStudentFlows Jing Li18 GermanStudentsAbroad

Jan Kercher and Nicole Rohde19 Canada’sImmigrationPoliciestoAttractInternationalStudents

Anita Gopal

Africa: Quality Assurance and Regulation

21 TrendsinRegulationinsub-SaharanAfrica A. B. K. Kasozi22 PrivateHigherEducation’sQualityAssuranceinGhana

Linda Tsevi

Focus on Ukraine

24 Ukraine’sTestingInnovation Eduard Klein25 InternationalizationinPost-SovietUkraine

Valentyna Kushnarenko and Sonja Knutson

Departments

28 NewPublications31 NewsoftheCenter

I N T E R N A T I O N A L H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N2 I N T E R N A T I O N A L H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N 3International IssuesInternational Issues

Whenagreementsforacademiccooperationaresignedbyuniversitypresidents,thesettingandformalitieshaveallthetrappingsofaninternationalagreement.Thesigning,aswithalltreaties,representssignificantgroundworklaidbyinstitutionalrepresentatives.Thecelebratorymomentisnotalwaysfollowedbysustainablerelationships,andexpec-tationsaresometimesmetwithdeepdisappointment.Theresult canhaveanegative impacton institutional aswellasnational relations,although the lattermaybeanunin-tendedconsequence.

Whilecollegesanduniversitiesmustadheretonationallawsandarewise tobewell-awareof local customs, theyoperatemainlyon theirown reconnaissancewhenagree-mentsaresigned.Inthisdimension,theyaremovingbe-yondsovereigntybuttheymaystillberegardedasnationalrepresentatives.Forthisveinofpublicdiplomacy,it isex-tremely important, just as in official diplomatic negotia-tions,sothatinstitutionsdevelopprotocolsthatrecognizeallthedetails,promises,andexpectationsthatarecriticaltobothpartiesbeforesigning.Andwhenunexpecteddevelop-mentscausetensions,itwillbeequallyimportanttohavewaystoadjudicatetheseissues.

Sound Diplomacy for Strong RelationshipsIt would be safe to say that in most educational diplo-macy there are mixed motives for seeking engagement.Thesearchforfee-payingstudentsisaleadingreasonforgreatercross-borderactivity.Institutionsandgovernmentsincountrieswithwell-developedhighereducationarecre-atinginitiativestoreceivestudentsfrommanydevelopingcountries.Someuniversitiesinspiteoflesswell-developedhighereducationseekrelationshipswithotherinstitutionstheyviewasmoreprestigioustoincreasetheirchancesofahigherdegreeinglobalrankings.

Counteringthesemorenarrowmotivationsforengage-ment, many institutions are developing broader interna-tionalizationstrategies,toseekcooperativeagreementsthatdefinethemselvesasglobalinstitutions.Theymaywanttopursueavarietyofgoals throughengagement—toenrichtheiracademicprograms,enlargetheknowledgeandexpe-riencebasefortheirstudents,hostamoreinternationallydiversestudentbodyandfaculty,providemoreopportuni-tiesfortheirfacultytojoininternationalresearchnetworks,

andultimatelytodevelopawidespectrumofjointactivitythatwillbenefitbothpartners.Aswithallsustainablerela-tionships,thecharacterofthepartiesandtheethicalframe-workinwhichtheyoperateareallimportant.Countriesandinstitutionsengagingineducationaldiplomacyhaveanob-ligationtoconsiderthebenefits—notmerelytothemselvesbutalsototheirpartners.Thiswillbeinthebestspiritofin-ternationalrelationsandinternationalizationofhigheredu-cation.Ifdonewell,itwillbearisingtidethatliftsallships.

HowCorruptionPutsHigherEducationatRiskStephen P. Heyneman

Stephen P. Heyneman is professor of international education policy at Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee. E-mail: s.heyneman@vanderbilt.edu.

Competitionforresourcesandfameplacepressuresonhighereducationinstitutions.Weaker institutionsaremore prone to corruption. In some instances, corruptionhas invaded university systems and threatens the reputa-tion of research products and diplomas. Where this hasoccurred,corruptionhasreducedtheindividualandsocialeconomicrateofreturnonhighereducationinvestments.Some countries have acquired a reputation for academ-ic dishonesty, raising questions about all graduates anddoubtsaboutallinstitutions.

Corruptioncanariseat theearlystageofrecruitmentandadmission.Studentsmayfeeltheyhavetopayashad-owprice,tobeadmittedtoaparticularuniversityprogram.Somestudentspaybribesasaninsurancepolicy,becausetheydonotwanttobeleftbehindfornotpayingabribe.

Financialfraudremainsamajorchallenge.Reductionsinpublicfinancehaveaffectedsystemsofinternalcontroltoprevent fraud.Becauseeach facultymayhave separatecostcenters,financialmonitoringmaybedifficult.Nor isiteasytomonitorstudentassociationsthathandlemoneyseparatelyfromtheuniversityadministration.

Directlyrelatedtotheglobalinternet,accessisanava-lanche of so-called “degree mills”—thousands of them,locatedinallregions.ThereisaWikipediapagethat listshousepetsthathaveearneddegrees.Howmightonerec-ognizeadegreemill?Theyoftenpromiseadegreewithinashortamountoftimeandwithlowcosts;theygivecreditfornonacademicexperience;theirWebsitesoftenlisttheiraddressesasbeingapostbox.Equally,problematicarefake

DiplomacyandEducation:AChangingGlobalLandscapePatti McGill Peterson

Patti McGill Peterson is presidential advisor for internationalization and global engagement at the American Council on Education, Wash-ington, DC. E-mail: PPeterson@acenet.edu.

Diplomacy—theartofinternationalrelations—wasoncetheprovinceofheadsofstateortheirappointedrepre-sentatives.Over the last century, itsparametersexpandedto include the concept of “public diplomacy,” a term thatcoverstheactionsofawide-arrayofactorsandactivitiesin-tendedtopromotefavorablerelationsamongnations.

In the practice of diplomacy as well as domination,countries have extended their national interests througheducation.Itplayedacentralroleinthelonghistoryofco-lonialismbythosewishingtoinfluencelocalpopulations.In thepostcolonialera,educationstillplaysan importantroleintheadvancementofnationalinfluence.

Higher Education and Soft PowerInmorerecentyears, theroleofeducationandacademicexchangeinbuildinginternationalrelationshipshasbeencharacterizedbythetermof“softpower.”Ratherthanem-ploying force, softpower isdependenton thestrengthofideasandculture,toinfluencethefriendshipanddisposi-tionofothers.Highereducationisanidealvehicleforsoftpower.

TheFulbrightProgram—sponsoredbytheUSDepart-mentofState—isanexcellentexampleofpublicdiplomacy,being furthered through higher education. Its principalgoalistofostermutualunderstandingbetweenpeopleandnations,andtheprogramhasalwaysbeenamixofgovern-mentandpeople-generatedsoftpower.Itclaimsthelargestmovementofstudentsandscholarsacross theworld thatanynationhaseversponsored.Governmentofficialsoftencite it asoneof thegreatdiplomaticassetsof theUnitedStates. Citizens and leaders of other countries who haveparticipated inFulbright frequentlyproclaima familiaritywith anda fondness for theUnitedStates and itspeopleduetotheirexperiences—aresultthatgeneratesgoodwillfortheUnitedStatesabroad.

WhileFulbrighthasnotbeenreplicatedbyothercoun-tries, there are other well-organized efforts to extend na-tional diplomacy through education. The British Councilisaprimeexample.Withofficesaroundtheworld,some-times operating as an affiliate of British embassies, theBritish Council describes itself as the United Kingdom’sinternational organization for educational opportunities

andculturalrelations.AlongtheFulbrightmodel,itoffersscholarshipsforstudyintheUnitedKingdomandsponsorseducational exchanges between higher education institu-tionsthereandinothercountries.

TheGermanAcademicExchangeServiceplaysasimi-larbutlessextensiverole;andveryimportantly,non-West-ern countries have followed with their diplomatic efforts.China emerged with an idea for its own brand of educa-tionaldiplomacy,in2004.ItsConfuciusInstitutesarede-signedtopromoteChineselanguageandcultureabroad.By2011,therewere353ConfuciusInstitutesin104countriesandregions.

Diplomacy or HegemonySoft power relationships, informed by enlightened self-interest,oftensignalunequalrelationships.ThisissuehasbeenraisedparticularlywithregardtoEast-WestandNorth-Southcooperation.Giventhedemandforhighereducationin developing countries, they are unwilling to discouragethosewhowishtohelpeitherthroughscholarshipsoras-sistancewiththeformationofinstitutions.Inthebestofallpossibleworlds,theseofferscancreatedevelopmentforthereceivingcountryasawaytobuildhumancapacity.How-ever,countriesthatarerecipientsofeducationaldiplomacyneed to understand the motivations of those wishing tobuildrelationships.

Asweenteraperiodofacceleratedglobalengagement,country-to-countryeducationaldiplomacyisbeingovertak-enbyinstitution-to-institutionrelationshipsandabroadar-rayofactors.Thismakestheeducationaldiplomacyscenar-ioevenmorecomplicated for thoseon thereceivingend.Italsomeans thatgovernmentsarenot theprimeactors.Whilegovernmentsmayviewcollegeanduniversitycross-borderactivityasanimportantpartoftheirdiplomaticef-forts,institutionsareincreasinglyoperatingbeyondsover-eignty,basedontheirownstrategiesandmotivations.

Beyond Sovereignty? AreportonglobalhighereducationengagementfromtheAmerican Council on Education depicted institutions asactingsimultaneouslyonthemesofcompetitionandcoop-eration.Whileitdidnotdisputetheroleofhighereducationinpublicdiplomacy,thereportfocusedmoreontheneedforcollegesanduniversitiestodeveloptheirownengage-ment strategies. This can lead to direct relationships andnegotiations,notjustwitheducationalinstitutionsoutsidetheUnitedStates,butalsowithgovernmentsthemselves.WhenthepresidentsofAmericanuniversitiestraveltoIn-dia, China, or any number of other countries, they oftenmeetwithgovernmentofficialsaspartoftheirefforts—tobuildeducationalrelationshipswiththosecountries.

In the practice of diplomacy as well as

domination, countries have extended

their national interests through educa-

tion.

I N T E R N A T I O N A L H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N4 I N T E R N A T I O N A L H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N 5International Issues

batcorruption.Developmentassistanceagenciesalsohaveimportantroles.Amongcriteriaforproject,approvalmightbe thecorruption infrastructurenotedabove.Inaddition,countriesmightbeheld accountable for their anticorrup-tion performance, based on the evidence that corruptionhaddeclined,thattheleveloftransparencyhadincreased,and that the public perception of corruption had shifteddownward.

Inregularsurveys,TransparencyInternationalhasas-sistedtheunderstandingofgeneralcorruptionbygaugingthedegreetowhichanation’sbusinessandgovernmentarebelievedtobecorrupt.Asimilarsetofindicatorscouldbeusedonhighereducation.Itcouldbeamatterofpride,tofindthatthelevelofparticipationandthepublicperceptionof corruption are on the decline. If governments encour-agesuchsurveys,itisahealthysign;ifgovernmentsforbidsuchsurveys,itisasignthattheyhavenotyetunderstoodthelevelofriskinvolvedbybeingpassive.

Perception is all-important. It is common to denywrongdoing.“Whereistheevidence?”onemightask.Thisisthewrongapproach.Whenaninstitutionisperceivedtobecorrupt, thedamage isalreadydone.Perception is theonlyevidenceneededforharmfuleffectstooccur.Thisisone reason why all world-class universities post anticor-ruption efforts on their Web sites. This implies that anyuniversity, in any culture, that has ambitions to becomeworldclassisrequiredtoerectasimilarethicalinfrastruc-ture.Thismayrequireachangeofattitudeonthepartofmanyrectorsanduniversityadministrators.Itmayrequirethemtoshiftfromamodeofself-protectionanddenialtoamodeoftransparencyandactiveengagement,evenwhentheevidencemaybedisturbingand/orpainful.Ifthebestuniversitiesintheworldsubmitthemselvestosuchethicalinspections,thentheotherscantoo.

MOOCsasNeocolonialism:WhoControlsKnowledge?Philip G. Altbach

Philip G. Altbach is research professor and director of the Center for International Higher Education at Boston College. E-mail: altbach@bc.edu.

Massiveopenonlinecourses,orMOOCs,arethelatesteffort to harness information technology for highereducation.The concept takesadvantageof the significant

advancements in technology thatpermitsmuchmore in-teractivepedagogyaswellasmoresophisticateddeliveryofcontent.WhileMOOCsare still in anascent stageofde-velopment, theirsponsorsaswellasmanycommentatorsandpolicymakersareenthusiastic,andseethemasanin-expensiveandinnovativewayofdeliveringcontenttovastaudiences,whileothersseepotentialforprofits.

OneaspectoftheMOOCmovementhasnotbeenfullyanalyzed—whocontrolstheknowledge.ConsideringwherethecontentandthetechnologythatsupportMOOCsorigi-nate,theanswerisclear.MOOCsarelargelyanAmerican-led effort and themajority of the courses available so farcomefromuniversitiesintheUnitedStatesorotherWest-erncountries.Themainprovidersarealso in the techno-logically advanced countries. The technology in use wasdevelopedinSiliconValley,KendallSquareinCambridge,Massachusetts,andotherhubsof informationtechnologyinnovation.Earlyadoptershaveasignificantadvantageinthis arena. While globalization has increased the sway oftheacademiccenters ineconomicallypowerfulcountries,MOOCs promise to enhance this higher education hege-monybyharnessingtechnologytotheexistingknowledgenetwork.

Others, in diverse and less-developed regions of theworld, are joining the MOOC bandwagon, but it is likelythat theywillbeusing technology,pedagogical ideas,andmuchofthecontentdevelopedelsewhere.Inthisway,theonlinecoursesthreatentoexacerbatetheworldwideinflu-enceofWesternacademe,bolstering itshighereducationhegemony.

Two of the original MOOC sponsors, Coursera andEdX,areAmerican initiatives—thefirst foundedbyStan-ford professors and based in Silicon Valley in Californiaand the second established by Harvard University andthe Massachusetts Institution of Technology. Many othertopuniversities,mainly in theUnitedStates,have joinedtheseefforts.Courseraoffers535coursesinmanyfieldsofstudy—24percentofthecoursesoriginatefromoutsidetheUnitedStates,Canada, theUnitedKingdom, andAustra-lia;EdXprovides91courses—19ofwhicharefromoutsideNorth America and the United Kingdom. Some of thesecoursesenrollasmanyas300,000students,withaverageenrollmentsof approximately20,000.The largemajorityofstudentscomefromoutsidetheUnitedStates.Comple-tionratesseemtobelow—mostlessthan13percent.ManyintheMOOCmovementareseekingtoearnprofitsfromMOOCs—agoalsofarunmet.

Who Controls Knowledge and Why Does It Matter?The large majority of MOOCs are created and taught byprofessors in theUnitedStates.Companiesanduniversi-

accreditation agencies, promising quick assessments andpermanentaccreditation.

Cross-bordereducationalprogramsraisequestions inthreeareas: therecognitionofdegrees, theuseofrecruit-mentagents toencourage internationalstudents,and theestablishmentofprogramsabroadbyinstitutionsofdubi-ousreputation.Thoughcross-borderprovisionraisesnewrisksofcorruption,itmayalsobeaconduitforcross-borderintegrity.Cross-borderprovisionofexcellenceinhighered-ucationcanofferarareopportunityforlocalstudentsandinstitutionstoobservehowacorrupt-freeinstitutionoper-ates.

To attract students, institutions may exaggerate thesuccessof theirgraduates.Thismaybeaparticularprob-lemwiththefor-profitinstitutionsandwithparticularlow-qualityprogramsinthevocations.Academicintegritycon-sistsofhonesty, trust,respect,fairness,andresponsibilityand is fundamental to thereputationofacademic institu-tions.Alackofintegrityincludesthepracticeofplagiarism,cheating,unauthorizeduseofothers’work,payingforas-signmentsclaimedasone’sown, the falsificationofdata,

downloadingassignmentsfromtheinternet,themisrepre-sentationofrecords,andfraudulentpublishing.Italsoin-cludespayingforgradeswithgifts,money,orsexualfavors.

Areas Needing Careful DiscussionDefinitional limits.Whenuniversitiesarenotmanaged

well,somesuggestthatitisasignofcorruption.Inefficien-cy,aconcentrationofpower,slownessinmakingdecisions,andareluctancetoshareconfidentialinformationarenotsigns of corruption. When educational institutions seeknontraditionalsourcesof income,somemayconfusethatwithcorruption—althoughwhereverlegal,itisnot.

Differences in corruption levels.Thereareinstancesofcorruptionineverycountry,butthisdoesnotmeanthatcor-ruptionisdistributedidentically.Insomecircumstancesitisendemic,affectingtheentiresystem;inothercasesitisoccasional.Insomecircumstancesitismonetaryinnature;

inothersittendstocenteronprofessionaltransgressions,such as plagiarism. Where international students intendtostudyisrelevant.Ingeneral,studentsacttoleaveplaceswherecorruptionisrampantandprefer tostudywhere itisminor.

Differences between institutional and individual cor-ruption. Causes and solutions need to be differentiated.Institutional corruption—financial fraud, the illegal pro-curement of goods and services, and tax avoidance—areproblemsthatcanbehandledthroughtheenforcementoflegislation. Individual corruption—including faculty mis-behavior, cheating on examinations, plagiarism, the falsi-fication of research results—constitutes transgressions ofcodesofprofessionalconduct.Inthefirst,themaincontrolisthroughlegislationandenforcementincourt.Inthesec-ond,controlisinternaltotheuniversity.Legislationshouldnotattempttoincludeinfractionsofindividualcorruption,onbehalfofindividualstudentsandfaculty.

The Environment and CorruptionThoughcompetitionforrevenuesplacespressuresonfac-ulty,itisinsufficienttousesuchpressuresasanexcusetoengageincorruptpractices.Nor,isitsufficienttosuggestthat,becausecorruptbehavioriscommon,one’sownpar-ticipationcanbeexcused.Eveninenvironmentsinwhichcorruptionisvirtuallyuniversalthereare“resisters”tocor-ruption.

Are Anticorruption Measures International?Some individuals suggest that anticorruption measuresshouldbebasedondomesticvaluesandlaws.Althoughnu-merousinstancesseemcorrect,thereappeartobesomein-stancesinwhichuniversalmeasuresarealreadythenorm.Forinstance,inthecaseofuniversitiesrankedbytheTimes Higher Educationmagazineacross40countries,98percentethicalinfrastructureelements—ontheirWebsites—codesofconductforfaculty,students,andadministratorshonorscouncils.

Future WorkInternational agencies have an important role. Findingwaystocombathighereducationcorruptionisaviablecan-didate for theUnitedNationsEducational,Scientific, andCulturalOrganization’sattentionandextrabudgetarysup-port.UNESCOcouldassistcountriestoestablishstrategiescoveringexaminationprocedures,accountabilityandtrans-parencycodes,andadjudicationstructures,suchasstudentandfacultycourtsofconduct.

TheCouncilofEuropeandtheEuropeanUnionhaveimportant roles. To participate in the Bologna process,universities and the countries seek tobe recognized.Therecognitionprocedurecouldincludemechanismstocom-

International Issues

Cross-border educational programs

raise questions in three areas: the rec-

ognition of degrees, the use of recruit-

ment agents to encourage international

students, and the establishment of pro-

grams abroad by institutions of dubious

reputation.

I N T E R N A T I O N A L H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N6 I N T E R N A T I O N A L H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N 7

cultures,thelocationofthemaincreatorsanddissemina-torsofMOOCs,andtheorientationofmostofthosecreat-ing and teaching MOOCs ensures the domination of thelargelyEnglish-speakingacademicsystems.Themillionsofstudents choosing toparticipate inMOOCs fromallovertheworlddonotseemtobeconcernedaboutthenatureoftheknowledgeorthephilosophyofpedagogythattheyarestudying.Universitiesinthemiddle-incomeanddevelop-ingworlddonotseemconcernedabouttheoriginsorori-entationsoftheknowledgeprovidedbytheMOOCsortheeducationalphilosophiesbehindMOOCpedagogy.

Idonotmeanto implyanyuntowardmotivesbytheMOOCcommunity. I amnotarguing that thecontentormethodologiesofmostcurrentMOOCsarewrongbecausethey are based on the dominant Western academic ap-proaches.ButIdobelieveitisimportanttopointoutthatapowerfulemergingeducationalmovement, theMassiveOpenOnlineCourses,strengthensthecurrentlydominantacademicculture,perhapsmakingitmoredifficultforal-ternativevoicestobeheard.

TopUniversitiesorTopHigherEducationSystems?Benoît Millot

Benoît Millot is an independent consultant. He is a former education economist at the World Bank. E-mail: benoitmillot2013@gmail.com.

Internationaluniversityrankingshavebecomeafamiliarcharacteronthehighereducationscene.Astheirimpacthas grown, reactions have followed suite, running fromenthusiastic adherence, to passive resistance, and also tooutrightcriticism.Thankstothelatter,methodologiesareimproving—guidelinesandsafeguardsarebeingdeveloped(e.g.,BerlinPrinciples)andfollowedup(e.g.,InternationalRankingExpertGroup).Yet,seriouscriticismsrelatetothefactthat,bydefinition,theserankingsfocusexclusivelyonindividualinstitutions—theworld-classuniversities—tobefoundonlyinasmallclusterofcountries.Thus,universityrankingsignorethevastmajorityofinstitutionsworldwidethatcannotcompeteonthesameplayingfieldasworld-classuniversities.Inturn,policymakerstendtoprioritizeasmallnumberofinstitutionsinordertoimprovetheircountry’sposition in the rankings, often at the expense of the restofthecountry’shighereducationsystem.Tocountertheseunexpectedandperverseeffects,attemptsarebeingmade

tomeasure,rank,andcomparenationalhighereducationsystems, rather than individual institutions.Tofigureoutwhethertheseattemptsaresuccessful,thisnotecomparestheirresultswiththoseobtainedbyuniversityrankings.

The Two Types of RankingsAsafirststepinthecomparison,universityrankingsandsystem rankings need to be selected. Regarding the Aca-demic Ranking of World Universities, usually referred toas the Shanghai rankings, Times Higher Education, andthe QS rankings are selected for being the most popularand well-established league tables. Because of its innova-tiveaspect,theWebometricsrankingisaddedtothese“bigthree.”Asfarassystemrankingsareconcerned,thechoiceislimited,andUniversitas21(U21,ledbytheUniversityofMelbourne,Australia)standsoutasanobviouspick,withcurrently no real competitor, even though earlier workshaveexploredwaystoassessentiresystems.U21uses22measures(“desirableattributes”)groupedintofourcatego-riesormodules:resources,environment,connectivity,andoutputsweighted,respectively(25%,20%,15%,and40%).

Most measures draw from conventional and verifiablesources (OrganizationforEconomicCooperationandDe-velopment,UniversityInformationSystems,andSCImagodata, etc.), and theyprovide a comprehensive viewof themostimportantfacetsofhighereducationsystems.Particu-larlyinterestingistheinclusionoftheunemploymentratesof university graduates to reflect external efficiency (evenifthemeasureneedssomefine-tuning).Anotherwelcomefeatureistheefforttoreflecttheregulatoryenvironmentofhighereducationsystems.However,themodalitiestocomeupwithanindicatorforthisdimensionareelusiveandrelyonacombinationofsources—asurveyamongU21institu-tions,datafromrenownedinstitutions,andfromWebsites.Finally, theuseof an “overall” indicatorbuilt on the fourmodulesindicatorsishighlydependentontheweightsofits components and, therefore, remains controversial be-causeofthearbitrarinessofsuchweights—apitfallsharedbyuniversityrankings.

tieswith thefunds todevelopgoodMOOCcourses—andwith high development costs—are American. Udacity, anAmericanMOOCprovider,estimatesthatcreatingasinglecoursecosts$200,000,andisincreasingto$400,000.TheUniversity of California, Berkeley, estimates developmentcostsatbetween$50,000and$100,000,withaccesstoso-phisticatedtechnologyrequired.

For the most part, MOOC content is based on theAmericanacademicexperienceandpedagogical ideas.Byand large, the readings required by most MOOC coursesareAmericanorfromotherWesterncountries.ManyofthecoursesareinEnglish,andevenwhenlecturesandmateri-alsare translated intoother languages thecontent largelyreflectstheoriginalcourse.ThevastmajorityofinstructorsareAmerican.Itislikelythatmorediversitywilldevelopbutthebasiccontentwillremain.

Approachestothecurriculum,pedagogy,andtheover-allphilosophyofeducationdifferaccordingtonationaltra-ditionsandpractices, andmaynot reflect theapproachesprovided by most MOOC instructors or the companiesand universities providing MOOC content and pedagogy.No doubt, those developing MOOCs will claim that theirmethodsarebestandreflectthemostadvancedpedagogicalthinking.Perhaps,therearearangeofapproachestolearn-ingandmanytraditions.

Why is this important? Neither knowledge nor peda-gogy are neutral. They reflect the academic traditions,methodologicalorientations,andteachingphilosophiesofparticularacademicsystems.Suchacademicnationalismisespecially evident in many social science and humanitiesfields,butitisnotabsentinthesciences.WhileacademicswhodevelopMOOCcoursesarenodoubtmotivatedbyadesiretodothebestjobpossibleandtocatertoawideau-dience,theyaretoasignificantextentboundbytheirownacademicorientations.

Since the vast majority of material used comes fromWestern academic systems, examples used in sciencecoursesarelikelytocomefromAmericaorEuropebecausethesecountriesdominate the literatureandarticles in in-fluentialjournals,andaretaughtbywell-knownprofessorsfromhigh-profileuniversities.ModesofinquiryreflecttheWesternmainstream.Whilethisknowledgebaseandpeda-gogicalorientationnodoubt reflect current ideasofgoodpractice,theymaynotbetheonlyapproachtogoodscien-tificinquiryorcontent.

These issuescomeintoevensharperfocus in theso-cial sciences and humanities. In fields such as literatureand philosophy, most courses reflect Western traditionsof knowledge, theWestern literature canon, andWesternphilosophical assumptions. The social sciences reflectWestern methodologies and basic assumptions about the

essentialsofscientificinquiry.Mainstreamideasandmeth-ods infields fromanthropology to sociology reflectWest-erntrends,especiallytheAmericanacademiccommunity.Themajoracademicjournals,editors,andeditorialboards,bigacademicpublishersarelocatedintheglobalcentersofknowledge, likeBoston,NewYork,andLondon.It is,un-der these circumstances, natural that the dominant ideasfromthesecenterswilldominateacademicdiscourse,andwillbereflectedinthethinkingandorientationsofmostofthoseplanningandteachingMOOCs.MOOCgatekeepers,suchasCoursera,Udacity, andothers,will seek tomain-tainstandardsastheyinterpretthem,andthiswillnodoubtstrengthen the hegemony of Western methodologies andorientations.

English not only dominates academic scholarship inthe21stcentury,butalso theMOOCs.English is the lan-guage of internationally circulated academic journals; re-searchers in non-English-speaking environments are in-creasingly using English for their academic writings andcommunication. Major academic Web sites tend to be inEnglishaswell.BecauseEnglishisthelanguageofschol-arly communication, the methodological and intellectualorientationsoftheEnglish-speakingacademiccultureholdswayglobally.

Theimplicationsfordevelopingcountriesareserious.MOOCs produced in the current centers of research areeasytoaccessandinexpensivefortheuser,butmayinhibittheemergenceofalocalacademicculture,localacademiccontent,andcoursestailoredspeciallyfornationalaudienc-es.MOOCshavethepotentialtoreachnoneliteaudiences,thusextendingtheinfluenceofthemainacademiccenters.

The Neocolonialism of the WillingThose responsible for creating, designing, and deliveringMOOCcoursesinallfieldsareingeneralpartoftheaca-demiccultureofmajoruniversitiesintheEnglish-speakingcountries.Theydonotseektoimposetheirvaluesormeth-odologies on others, influence happens organically andwithoutconspiracies.Acombinationofpowerfulacademic

International Issues International Issues

The large majority of MOOCs are creat-

ed and taught by professors in the Unit-

ed States. Companies and universities

with the funds to develop good MOOC

courses—and with high development

costs—are American. In turn, policymakers tend to prioritize

a small number of institutions in order

to improve their country’s position in

the rankings, often at the expense of the

rest of the country’s higher education

system.

I N T E R N A T I O N A L H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N8 I N T E R N A T I O N A L H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N 9

culturallearning.However,acloserlookisrequiredatthoseassessmentefforts,whichalthoughgrowinginpopularityarenotalwaysdesignedwell,executedeffectively,orlever-agedtomaximumeffect.

Oftentimes,institutionsengagedinoutcomesassess-mentwithininternationaleducationwilldothefollowing:Have one person or one office “do the assessment”; useonlyoneassessmenttool(usuallyapre/posttool);andusethatparticulartoolbecauseanotheruniversityoralluniver-sitiesinacertaingroupareusingit.Sometimesaninstitu-tionwillevendesigntheirowntool,oftennotvettingitforreliabilityorvalidity.

Fartoooftentheassessmenteffort isanafterthoughtoranadhoceffort,withoutsufficientworkexertedat theplanning stage, without clearly articulated goals and out-comestatements,andwithoutanassessmentplaninplace.Furthermore,theinstitutionorprogrammaysimplyshelvethedataithascollected,claimingtohavedoneassessment,endingtheprocessthere,andrepeatingthisprocessagaininsubsequentyears,aslongasfundingorstaffingisavail-able.Theassessmentdataarerarelyprovidedback to thestudentsfortheirowncontinuedlearninganddevelopmentthatarecrucialininterculturallearning.Weoutlineseveralprinciplestoensurequalityassuranceinthestudentlearn-ingoutcomesassessmentpractice in internationaleduca-tion.

A Road MapHighereducationinstitutionsembarkingonassessmentef-fortswilloftenstartbyasking,“Whichtoolshouldweuse?”While thismayseemlikea logicalplace tostart, it is im-portant tofirstask“What is it thatwewanttomeasure?”This question will lead to a closer examination of statedmission and goals that determine the appropriate assess-menttools.Whenconsideringanassessmentagendaforaninternationaleducationprogramor initiative, it ishelpfulto stepbackand reflecton the following threequestions,tohelpcreateanassessmentroadmap: (1)Wherearewegoing?(mission/goals);(2)Howwillwegetthere?(objec-tives/outcomes);and(3)Howwillweknowwhenwehavearrived? (evidence).Possibly, the evidence of student suc-cess goes beyond counting numbers (which are the out-puts)toperceptionsofstudents’learning(indirectevidencesuchasthroughsurveysorinventories)andactuallearning(directevidenceofstudentlearningsuchasassignmentsine-portfolios).Thiscrucialalignmentofmission,goals,andoutcomeswillnaturallypoint towhich tools/methodsareneededtocollectevidencethat theseoutcomeshavebeenachieved.

No Perfect ToolAssessment tools must be aligned with stated objectives

andselectedbasedon“fitnessforpurpose,”ratherthanforreasonsofconvenienceorfamiliarity.Toooften,institutionsorprogramsseektheone“perfecttool,”whichsimplydoesnotexist,especiallyforinterculturallearning.Infact,whenassessingsomethingas complexasglobal learningor in-terculturalcompetencedevelopment,rigorousassessmentinvolves the use of a multimethod, multiperspective ap-proachthatgoesbeyondtheuseofonetool.Furthermore,itiscriticalthatinstitutionsthoroughlyexploreexistingtoolsintermsofexactlywhatthosemeasure(notjustwhattoolssay theymeasure), the reliabilityandvalidityof the tools,thevalidityof the tool in thatparticular institutional/pro-grammaticcontext,thetheoreticalbasisofthetools,andin-cludinghowwellthetoolsalignwiththespecificoutcomesto be assessed. The prioritized outcomes will vary by theinstitution,sothereisnoone-size-fits-allapproachwhenitcomestoassessmenttools.

Astodecisionsaboutassessmentatpreliminary(“pre”)versusconcluding(“post”)stagesofaprogramorcourse,goodassessmentmeanseffortsarealso ideally integratedintoprogrammingonanongoingbasis,avoidingthereli-anceonsnapshotsonlyat thebeginningand/orendofalearning experience. Furthermore, the most meaningfuland useful assessment of intercultural learning arguablycontainsalongitudinalcomponentandprovidesfeedbacktostudents.

Working From The PlanAnother key principle of good assessment is that effortsneedtobeholisticallydevelopedanddocumentedthroughanassessmentplan.Anassessmentplanoutlinesnotonlywhatwillbemeasuredandhowthedatawillbecollected,but also details about who will be involved (which needstobemorethanonepersonoroffice),thetimeline,imple-mentationdetails,andhowthedatawillbeusedandcom-municated.Thislastpointiscrucial:theremustbeauseforthedata(i.e.,forstudentfeedback,programimprovement,andadvocacy)orthereisnoneedtocollectthedata.Inpar-ticular,officesshouldnotbecollectingdataandthentrying

Then,theresultsofthefourselecteduniversityrank-ingsneedtobenormalizedatthecountrylevelsothatthesizeeffectisneutralized.Morespecifically,thenumberoftopuniversitiesineachcountryisweightedbythehighereducation–aged population of the country. This indica-tor can be seen as reflecting the “density” of world-classuniversities in each country. First, there is no significantcorrelation between the number of top universities in acountryand theirdensity.Second, thenormalized resultsof the four-selected university rankings are very similar;their methodologies differ substantially on some pointsbutalsosharecommonfeatures.Third,countriesthatcanboastatleastoneofthetop400universitiesineachofthefourrankingsconstitutearatherhomogenouscluboflessthan40members,mostlyhigh-incomeeconomies.Acrossthefourrankings,densityoftopuniversitiesisthehighestinsmallandrichcountries—Denmark,Switzerland,Swe-den,andFinland,followedbyIreland,theNetherlands,andHongKong.

Similarity of ResultsThefournormalizeduniversityrankings,producedbyU21(2012edition),leadstoaclearconclusion:astrongandpos-itivecorrelationbetweenthetwosetsofresults.Todoublecheck thisfinding, correlationsarealsoexamined for the2013editionsofbothShanghaiandU21rankings,andtheresultsshowanevenstrongerassociation.Afurthertestisadministered,correlatingtheresultsofeachofthefourU21categorieswiththoseofthemajoruniversityleagues.Thecorrelationsaresignificant,andtherelationshipis largelypositive, regardless of the university league considered(Shanghai first) and the U21 category selected (resourcesand output strongest). The only noticeable exception totheconvergenceofthetwotypesofrankingsistheUnitedStates, which comes first under U21, but does not showamongthewinnersoftheuniversityleagueswhenanalyzedintermsofdensity.

The Convergence of ResultsThesecomparisonsmayleadtotheideathatahighdensityofworld-classuniversitiesguaranteesacountryasaworld-classhighereducationsystem.Theymayalsogivetheim-pressionthatthesimilarityofresultsbetweenU21anduni-versityrankingsmeansthattheformereffectsarenotmoreinformativethanthelatter.Threetypesofobservationssug-gest that such conclusions arenotwarranted.Afirst oneisthatU21selects50countriesamongtheG20membersandcountrieswhichperformbestintheNationalScienceFoundationinternationalrankingofresearchinstitutions:thus,althoughthepoolofU21countries isslightly largerthanthatof“thebigthree”universityrankings,themodeofselectionofthesecountriesconstitutesatwofoldbiasto-

wardwealthy countries and thoseheavily investing in re-search.Second,U21incorporatessomeoftheindicatorsoftheuniversityrankings(ShanghaiandWebometrics)initsownmeasuresandevencountsthenumberofworld-classuniversitiesamongitsmeasuresofoutput,whichcertainlyexplainstheUSexception.Finally,areclassificationofall22measuresconfirmstheheavybiastowardresearch.There-fore,theconvergenceofthetwotypesofrankingsisalmostinevitableandisalogicalconsequenceofthemethodologyusedbyU21.Finally,acriticalelementtokeepinmindisthat a world-class higher education system is an elusiveconceptincludingmanydimensions,runningfromequityin access, to internal efficiency, to teaching and learning,torelevancewithin thesocioeconomic fabricof thecoun-try,andtoexternalefficiency.Indeed,thesedimensionsaredifficulttocapture,anddespiteU21’slaudableattemptstoreflectseveralofthem,theyfallshortoffullyaccountforallthe complexity and diversity of national higher educationsystems.

Room to ImproveComparingnationalhighereducationsystemsacrosscoun-tries remains a priority. U21 has taken bold steps in thatdirection but needs to go further, to demonstrate its use-fulness.Two routesare critical:first,digging further intothestructureofthesystems,sothattherankingsarebettercontextualized; second, expanding thenumber anddiver-sityofthecountriestoberanked—datapermittingsothattheexercise ismore inclusive.Taking these routeswouldcertainly lead to results more clearly differentiated fromthoseyieldedbyuniversityrankingsandwouldcontributetomeetingthehighexpectationscreatedbytheU21initia-tive.TheU21rankingsillustratethevastpotentialofsystemrankings,asimportantcomplementstouniversityrankingsandascontributorstobetterinformeddecisionsbyhighereducationpolicymakers.

OutcomesAssessmentinInternationalEducationDarla K. Deardorff

Darla K. Deardorff is executive director of the Association of Interna-tional Education Administrators and a research scholar at Duke Uni-versity, Durham, North Carolina, US. E-mail: d.deardorff@duke.edu.

Duetothegrowingtrendinhighereducationaccount-ability,manypostsecondaryinstitutionsarenowmea-suringstudentlearningoutcomes,relatedtoglobalorinter-

International Issues International Issues

Far too often the assessment effort is an

afterthought or an ad hoc effort, without

sufficient work exerted at the planning

stage, without clearly articulated goals

and outcome statements, and without

an assessment plan in place.

I N T E R N A T I O N A L H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N10 I N T E R N A T I O N A L H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N 11

Higher Education under Globalization: Joint Schools among APEC (2004). More recently, China held an APEC semi-nar in Shanghai followed by the report Capacity Building for Policies and Monitoring of Cross-Border Education in the APEC Region(2011).

Whilecomingatthechallengeofgoverningcross-bor-derhighereducationfromoppositepoles,boththeAustra-lianandChinese-ledprojectsemphasizedthe importanceof national regulation and quality assurance. In an effortto develop such capacity across the region, Australia andthe United States led APEC projects on the developmentof national quality-assurance regimes in 2006 and 2011,respectively.

Thesevarious forumsandreportsprovidedsomeop-portunities for information sharing between midrankingofficials fromacross the region,whichmayhave contrib-utedinsomesmallparttopolicyconvergence,especiallybyexposingofficialsinemergingeconomiestothepracticesofmoredevelopedsystems.However,suchconcernsdidnotfigurelargeontheagendaofAPEC’seducationministers.TherewasrarelyevenamentionofhighereducationinthestatementsofAPECEducationMinisterialMeetingsbefore2012.

What Is Going on in Vladivostok?In 2012, education ministers agreed to ramp up APEC’srole in educational cooperation, dubbed the “GyeongjuInitiative,”andimmediatelytheRussianFederationvolun-teeredtoleadahighereducationinitiativeduringtheyearin which Russia assumed the rotating leadership of theorganization. APEC trade ministers then called for bothexpanding “cross-border trade in education services anddeepeningeducationalcooperationintheAsia-Pacific”(myemphasis).Theyaskedofficialstoexaminewaysto“betterfacilitatemobilityofstudents,researchersandprovidersintheregion.”Amonth later, theRussian-sponsoredhighereducation conference in Vladivostok “Shaping EducationwithinAPEC”adoptedthetradeministers’ listandaddedtwomorepoints:“increasingtheinteractionbetweenhigh-ereducationinstitutionsandincreasingdatacollectionontradeineducationservices.”

Incommittingto“educationalcooperationandpromot-ingcross-borderexchangeineducationservices,”APEChaswiselyframedaspirationsintermsthatarebroadenoughtobemeaningfulwithinboththeeducationandtradesectors.TheseaspirationsweredulyendorsedbyAPECEconomicLeaders’ Meeting in Vladivostok in late 2012. Russia hadsince sponsored a second APEC Conference on Coopera-tion in Higher Education in Asia-Pacific Region early in2013,againinVladivostok.

So Russia seems to have very successfully put cross-border higher education on the top of the APEC agenda.

Russia does host a large number of international degreestudents,129,690in2010accordingtoUNESCOfigures;but a small proportion of these are from APEC membereconomies,withthevastmajoritycomingfromformerSo-viet states.Also,Russiahasnotpreviouslybeenactive inthisspacewithinAPEC.

The location may provide some clues. The Leaders’SummittookplaceonthenewlybuiltislandcampusoftheFar Eastern Federal University, which was constructed intimetohostthesummitandwillthenprovidefacilitiesforthe university. The university’s Web site states that “ThemaintargetoftheFEFUStrategicProgramfor2010–2019,supportedbyextensive federal funding, is tomakeFEFUaworld-classuniversity, integrated into theeducation, re-search and innovation environment of the Asia-Pacificregion.” So, the city of Vladivostok and this internationaluniversity,inparticular,appearcentraltoRussia’seffortstoexpanditseducationalengagementwiththeregion.

Ongoing TensionsInAugust lastyear,I facilitatedanAPECforuminKualaLumpur, Malaysia, sponsored by the Australian Depart-ment of Foreign Affairs and Trade that brought togethertradeandeducationofficials,scholars,andrepresentativesofeducationalinstitutionsfrom14countries.Muchofthediscussionfocusedonwaystoenhanceinstitutionalcapac-ity,tosupportawidespreaddesireforgreaterinternationalengagement—forrecruitinginternationaldegreestudents,engaginginexchangerelationships,collaboratingwithfor-eign institutions to deliver international programs, inter-nationalizing research, or teaching. However, in order tofurtheropeningeducationsystemstoallowmoremobilityforstudents,scholars,andproviders,therearestillclearlysignificantdifferencesofopinionbetweenandwithincoun-tries.Severalparticipantsarguedthatbecauseofthediffer-entstagesofdevelopmentofnationalsystemsthereisnotalevelplayingfield;andthatintroducinggreaterinternation-al competition for domestic providers would underminetheirnationaldevelopmentstrategies.

It isnotuncommonfor incumbents inanyprotectedindustrysectortoopposemeasuresthatwouldallowcom-petitorstoentertheirmarkets.Insomeways,universitiesbehavenodifferentlythantheeventsofotherservicepro-

todetermine“whattodowithit.”Spending10percentofthe time in thebeginning todevelopanassessmentplanandthinkingthroughtheseissuesistimewellinvestedinthelater90percentoftheeffortthatgoesintoassessment.

A Team EffortOften, assessment can seem quite overwhelming anddaunting,especially ifonlyonepersonoroffice is taskedwithdoingit.Effectiveassessmentactuallyinvolvesanin-trainstitutional team of stakeholders, which is comprisednotonlyofinternationaleducationexpertsbutalsoassess-mentexperts,students,faculty,andotherswhohaveastakein international education outcomes. Senior leadershipand support play a critical role in the success of assess-mentefforts.Onceassembled,thisintrainstitutionalteamprioritizesoutcomes tobe assessed, conducts anaudit ofassessment efforts already underway, and adapts currentassessmentefforts to alignwithgoals andoutcomes—noneedtoreinventassessmenteffortsoraddexpensiveoneswhentheymaynotbenecessary—beforeseekingaddition-alassessment tools/methods thatcollectevidenceneededtoaddressstatedgoalsandoutcomes.

Conclusion There are other principles of effective assessment thatmight include utilizing a control group, best practices intermsofsampling,theuseoflongitudinalstudies,andsoon.Thisarticlehasoutlineda fewprinciplesasacall forfurtherreflectionanddiscussiononwhat trulymakesforrigorousoutcomesassessmentininternationaleducation.Whileitiscommendableforinstitutionstobeengagedinoutcomesassessment,itisimportanttotakeacloserlookatthequalityoftheassessmentsbeingdone.Guidingques-tionscaninclude:Howwellareassessmenttools/methodsaligned with mission and goals? (Exactly what do thosetoolsmeasureandwhyaretheybeingused?)Istheremorethanonetoolbeingused?Is thereanassessmentplaninplace? How are assessment efforts integrated throughoutacourseorprogram,beyondpre/postefforts?Howarethedatabeingused?Ismorethanonepersonorofficeinvolvedinassessmentefforts?Is theassessmentplanitselfbeingreviewedregularlyforimprovement?

If higher education institutions are serious about in-

ternationalization,assessment,andstudentlearning,sucheffortsareeffective,resultinginoutcomesthataremean-ingfulforallinvolved,includingourstudents.

APEC’sBoldHigherEduca-tionAgenda:WillAnyoneNotice?Christopher Ziguras

Christopher Ziguras is deputy dean, at the School of Global, Urban and Social Studies, RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia. E-mail: chris.ziguras@rmit.edu.au.

SincetheAsiaPacificEconomicCooperationorganization(APEC)wasestablishedin1989tofostereconomicco-operationacrosstheAsiaPacificithasnotbeenparticularlyinterestedinhighereducation,butthatmightbechanging.DuringRussia’schairmanshipofAPECin2012,theorga-nization’s leaders committing to promoting cross-bordercooperation, collaboration, and networking. But whethertheorganization’snewaspirationforregionalengagementcanbetranslatedintopracticalmeasuresthataffectinstitu-tions,studentsandeducatorsremaintobeseen.

A Trade Liberalization Meets Chinese RegulationSinceat least themid-1990s,APECexpressedaninterestinexpandingforeigninvestmentineducationandtraining.Australia,akeyproviderofcross-borderhighereducationintheregion,wasthedrivingforcebehindearlyAPECin-ternationaleducationprojects,whileplayingasimilarrolewithintheWorldTradeOrganizationandtheOrganizationforEconomicCooperationandDevelopment. InanefforttoengageAPECintheMillenniumRoundoftheGeneralAgreementonTradeinServicesnegotiations,itorganizeda “ThematicDialogueonTrade inEducationServices” inHanoiin2002andsponsoredaseriesofresearchprojects:Measures Affecting Trade and Investment in Education Services in the Asia-Pacific Region(withNewZealand,2001),APEC and International Education (2008),andMeasures Affecting Cross-Border Exchange and Investment in Higher Education in the APEC Region(2009).

China was much more interested in projects focus-ingoneffective national regulationof cross-border provi-sion.Afterintroducingnewguidelinesforforeignprovid-ersin2003,ChinasponsoredaprojectthatAustraliaandNew Zealand were keen to partner in, culminating in anawkwardly titledreport,Improving the Institute Capacity of

International Issues International Issues

Higher education institutions embark-

ing on assessment efforts will often

start by asking, “Which tool should we

use?”

Since at least the mid-1990s, APEC ex-

pressed an interest in expanding foreign

investment in education and training.

I N T E R N A T I O N A L H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N12 I N T E R N A T I O N A L H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N 13China: English and the Brain RaceChina: English and the Brain Race

removingEnglish fromgaokao as an indicatorofChina’sculturalconfidence.

Mostdebatesfocusonwhetherornotthereformcouldrelievetheburdenofgaokao andhowtodistributetimetostudythenativelanguageandaforeignone(English).HuRuiwen,whoisbasedatShanghaiInstituteforHumanRe-sourcesDevelopmentandamemberoftheNationalEduca-tionAdvisoryCommittee, saidsuchachangewouldbeasignal to students that they shouldpaymore attention totheirmothertonguethanaforeignlanguage.Tohim,stu-dentsnowspend toomuch timestudyingEnglish.Thereisaneedforthemtolearntheirnativelanguagewell.HebelievesthechangeswillhelpstudentsbettertolearntheChineselanguage.

Cai Jigang, a professor at Fudan University’s CollegeofForeignLanguagesandLiteratureandchairmanof theShanghaiAdvisoryCommittee forCollegeEnglishTeach-ingatTertiaryLevel,opposesanyplantoreducethestatusofEnglishlanguageinthecollegeentranceexambecauseitfailstotakeintoaccountChina’sdemandforforeign-lan-guageability—asameanstoacceptthechallengeofglobal-izationandtheinternationalizationofhighereducation.HeworriesthatChinesestudentsmaynolongerworkhardonEnglish,whichwillhaveanadverseeffectinthelongrun.

Missing the Point?The central emphasis on the strategic role of English inthe modernization process and the high priority given tothat language on the national agenda of educational de-velopmenthasproventobebeneficial.China’seffortsarealready paying off. The communicative and instrumentalfunction of English as a global language has acceleratedChina’sforeigntradeandhelpedChina’seconomicgrowthinthepastdecades.IthasalsopromotedChina’sexchangeswith theoutsideworld.Chinese scholars andstudents inmajor universities have little difficulty in communicatingwith international scholars.TheirEnglishproficiencyhascontributedtoChina’scurrentfast,successfulengagementwiththeinternationalcommunity.Peer-reviewedpapersininternationaljournalswrittenbyChineseresearchersrose64-foldoverthepast30years.

China’s modernization began with foreign-languages

learning.Inconsequence, itcouldbearguedthatattitudetowardforeignlanguagehasbeentheharbingerofChina’sinternationalization.Insteadofdemonstratingconfidence,the decision reveals a degree of cultural indulgence. Thegaokaoislikelytoremainthemostimportantindicatorforcollege admissions: de-emphasizing English, rather thantakingthechancetomakeitlesstest-based,withagreateremphasisonpracticalproficiency,willreduceschools’andstudents’ efforts to learn English, at a time of rising de-mandforproficientEnglish-speakingChineseemployees.Ifthiswastheresult,woulditlimitthechanceforChinatocontinueitsrecentsuccessstory?

“EnglishFever”inChinaHasReachedaWatershedWang Xiaoyang and Li Yangyang

Wang Xiaoyang is associate professor and director of Higher Educa-tion Research Institute, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China. E-mail: wangxy@tsinghua.edu.cn. Li Yangyang is a graduate student in the same institute.

Recently, several provinces in China have proposed aninitiative for reforming the national college entranceexamination(gaokao)—reducingtheimportanceoftheEng-lish-languagepartoftheexaminationasoneofthetargets.This move has subsequently aroused extensive debate inpublic,withbothsupportandopposeviews.Somesupport-ersarguethatEnglishteachingandlearninginprimaryandsecondaryschoolscosttoomuchofstudents’time,thusde-creasingthetimespentonChineselanguage,andthereforeagree with lowering the English emphasis in the gaokao. OthersarguethatEnglishisstillimportantforstudentstoread Western scientific books and journals, participate ininternationaleconomicactivitiesandexchanges,andthusopposeloweringthescoreofthatlanguageingaokao.TheJiangsuprovincewas thefirst todeclarewithdrawing theEnglishtestfromthegaokao.TheEnglishtestwillbegiventwiceayearanditsscorewillbeintheformoflettergrades.Beijinghasalsonowinvitedpubliccommentsonitsreformplan,whichproposesthatthefullmarkoftheEnglishtestwillbereducedfrom150to100pointsandthatofChinesetestwillbeincreasedfrom150to180points.WhydoestheEnglishscorefallwhiletheChinesescorerises?Has“Eng-lishfever”inChinareachedawatershed?

viders,suchasbanksorairlines.Buttheeducationsectorplaysauniqueroleandisofcriticalimportanceinfoster-ingsocialandeconomicdevelopment.Thus,governmentsare wary of introducing changes that key institutions seeasweakeningtheirpositions,especiallyifthoseinstitutionsareoperatedbytheministryofeducation.

WemaynotbeonthevergeofanotherBolognaDec-laration, but APEC’s interest is one more indication of agrowingpoliticalwilltointensifytheintegrationofhighereducationsystemsacrosstheregion.

China’sRemovalofEnglishfromGaokaoYang Rui

Yang Rui is professor and director, at the Comparative Education Re-search Center, University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong, China. E-mail: yangrui@hku.hk.

EmbracingtheEnglishlanguageexemplifiesChina’svig-orousengagementwiththeoutsideworld,especiallyinrespect to Western societies. The attitude is not only un-precedentedinChinesemodernhistory,butisalsodiffer-entfromotherdevelopingcountries’interactionswiththedevelopedWesternworld.Atbothnational,andindividual,careerdevelopmentlevels,English-languageeducationhasbeenasubjectofparamountimportanceinChinasinceitsreopeningtotheoutsideworld.ProficiencyinEnglishhasbeen widely regarded as a national, as well as a personalasset.English-languageeducationhasbeenviewedbytheChinese,boththeleadershipandthepeople,ashavingavi-talroletoplayinnationalmodernizationanddevelopment.

Seeing thedominant statusofEnglishasahistoricalfact,Chinahasinitiatedvariouspoliciestoadaptto it, in-steadofresistingit,inanefforttopromoteinternationaliza-tion.LearningEnglish isno longer just importantwithinChina. It is the bare minimum for any serious student.ChinaishometomorespeakersofEnglishthananyothercountry.Examinations inChinese schools at all levels in-cludeEnglishproficiencytests.Englishiswidelyrequiredin the professional promotions of academics, includingmanywhoseworkrequires littleuseofEnglish.With theproposed changes in the gaokao (China’s national collegeentrance examination), the extraordinary phenomenon ofahugeoptioninChinaoflearningEnglishislikelytofade.

The Reform PlanAspartofChina’sreformplantochangeitsnotoriousonce-in-a-lifetimeexaminationsystem,theMinistryofEducationforeshadowedinlate2013thattheEnglishtestwillbere-movedfromthegaokaoby2020.Instead,testswillbeheldseveraltimesayearforstudentstochoosewhenandhowoftentheyachievetheexaminationsoastoalleviatestudypressure, and only the highest score they obtain will becounted.Itwillbepilotedinselectedprovincesandcitiesandpromotednationwidefrom2017,withanewexamina-tionandanadmissionsystemprojected tobeestablishedby2020.

Even before the Ministry of Education’s release, theBeijingMunicipalCommissionofEducationhadsaidthatthescoresforsubjectsinBeijing’sgaokaowillchangeasof2016.TheoverallscoreofEnglishlanguagewilldropfrom150to100,whilethetotalpointsforChineselanguagewillrisefrom150to180.Mathematicsremainsunchangedat150points.Artsandsciencesoverallincreasedfrom300to320points.TheEnglish-language test canbe taken twiceayear.Ifastudentgets100pointsinthefirstyearofhighschool,forexample,thensheorhecanbeexemptedfromEnglishcoursesinthesecondandthirdyears.

Otherregions,includingJiangsuandShandongprov-incesandShanghaimunicipality,arealsopreparing theirowngaokaoreforms.ShandongwasreportedtocancelthelisteningpartoftheEnglish-languageexaminationinitsga-okao.InJiangsu,therehavebeendiscussionsofexcludingEnglishingaokaointhefuture.Whiledetailsremaintobefinalized,thegeneraldirectionisclear:lessEnglish,moreChineseforgaokao.

The DebateThereforminitiativehaswonoverwhelmingsupportfromthegeneralpublic.Inasurveyofover220,000respondentsupdatedinDecember9lastyearbyPhoenixOnline,whenaskedabouttheirviewsonBeijing’sgaokaoreform,82.82percentsupporteditwhileonly13.55percentwereopposed.Similarly,whenasked if theywouldsupport lowering thepointvalueforEnglishlanguageandincreasingthepointvalue forChinese language,82.79percentsupportedand13.01percentopposed.

Incontrast,theplanhasdividededucationexperts,whodisagreeonwhetherplacinglessemphasisonEnglish-lan-guageskillsisagoodidea.Thedecisionhasarousedheateddiscussionsamongthosewhodoubtthereformwouldre-ducetheburdenoflearningEnglishorifthesubstitutetestcould reflect a student’s English skills and help studentslearn English better. An important aspect of the reformliesinwhatandhowtotest,assuggestedbyYuLizhong,chancellor of New York University Shanghai. The educa-tionministryaddstothecomplexofthedebatebyviewing

English-language education has been

a subject of paramount importance in

China since its reopening to the outside

world.

I N T E R N A T I O N A L H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N14 I N T E R N A T I O N A L H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N 15China: English and the Brain RaceChina: English and the Brain Race

WillChinaExcelintheGlobalBrainRace?Qiang Zha

Qiang Zha is an associate professor at the Faculty of Education, York University, Toronto, Canada. E-mail: qzha@edu.yorku.ca.

Inthepastdecade,Chinaappears tohavebeentakingastrong position in the global brain race. Following thewell-known“ThousandTalentProgram”(including“Thou-sandYoungTalentProgram”and“ThousandForeignTalentProgram”),whichaimstolurebackexpatriateandinterna-tional talent, the Chinese government recently launcheda “Ten Thousand Talent Program.” This program, unlikethe former, focuses on home talent and pledges to selectandsupport10,000leadingscholarsinthenext10yearsinfieldsofsciences,engineering,andsocialsciences—amongwhomthetop100willbecompelledtoaimatseizingNobelprizes.So,Chinanowexplicitly raised its ambitionup tothestandardofaninnovationleader,torelymoreandmoreondomestictalent.Indeed,the“ThousandTalentProgram”didnotreallymeettheexpectations.Sofar,thehighcaliberexpatriatetalentdidnotgobacktoChinainalargescale.Amongthereturnees,thosepossessingdoctorate,master’s,andbachelor’sdegreesshowanoddratioof1:8:1.However,amajorityofreturneesarethosewhospentashortwhileoverseas, to study for a master’s degree. Statistics showthatover1.5millionChinesescholarsandstudentsremainabroad.WhatcausedChina’sglobalbrainstrategy(famousfor handsome salaries, generous start-up packages, andotherfinancialincentives)tonothaveproducedtheexpect-edoutcomes?

PerspectivesAn adoption of the views of human, cultural, and socialcapital may offer an insightful interpretation of this puz-zlingscenario.Forexample,animpetusthatinspiresChi-nese scholars or students to go back to China might bethelimitationassociatingwithhumancapitallogic,whichputsemphasisontechnicalandtangibleknowledgegainedfromvariouseducationandtraining.Supposedly,Chineseexpatriatesfeeltheyarelargelytreatedashumancapitalintheirhostcountriesandseefewopportunitiestofulfilltheircultural and social capital in that specific context. Then,dotheinitiativeslikethe“ThousandTalentProgram”pro-vide the equivalent pull factor?—not necessarily, as suchprogramsarealsoprimarilybasedonhumancapitallogic.ManyChineseexpatriatesmayseebetterchancestoenjoytheir cultural capital back in China, which distinguishesfromhumancapitalastheimplicitknowledgegainedfromtheculturaltraditionandenvironment,andoftendefinesa

higherstatusinsociety.However,whenitcomestoaccom-plishingsocialcapital,theywillfindtheyhave“ceilings”inChina,too.

Arguably, modern social capital conceptualization at-tachesmoreimportancetoindividualfreechoice,inordertocreateamorecohesivesociety.IntheChinesesocialcon-text,however,socialcapitalhasbeencloselylinkedwiththeconcept of guanxi (personalized networks of influence),in particular connections with powerful bureaucrats. Inthisregard,mostreturneesdonotenjoyanadvantagebutrathersufferadisadvantage,giventheirspatialseparationsfromChina(foracoupleofdecadesinsomecases).Thisisparticularly true in recentyearswhen theChinesemodelfor development has showcased some successful aspects(Chinaquicklyrisesastheworld’ssecond-largesteconomy)and garnered confidence (China is anticipated to surpasstheUnitedStatesandbecomethewealthiestnationaround2020).Againstthisbackdrop,thosepoliciesandpracticesthatbeartheChinesecharacteristicsarehardlyallowedtobechangedbyideasandpersonnelfromtheoutside.

The Cases of Rao and Shi Reveals a Paradox Two prominent returnee scientists were Rao Yi and ShiYigong.RaoYiwasaprofessorofneurologyatNorthwest-ernUniversityintheUnitedStates.HereturnedtoPekingUniversityin2007totakeupthepositionofdeanoftheCol-legeofLifeScience.ShiYigongwastheWarner-Lambert/Parke-DavisprofessoratPrincetonUniversity.In2008,he

resigned his position at Princeton University and startedpursuinghiscareeratTsinghuaUniversity—asthedeanoflifesciencethere.Theyarebothregardedasthetop-flighttalentluredbackbythe“ThousandTalentProgram.”

Apparently,bothRaoYiandShiYigongdidnotpreparetogobacktoChinaasapureresearcher.Rather,theywishtomakeadifferenceandtobetterChina’sresearchcultureanduniversityeducation,ridingontheirsocialcapital.Thisis evident in their responses to questions as to why theychosetogobacktoChina,aswellasintheirownwritings.Inacoauthoredarticlepublishedin2010inScience,ShiandRaoopenly claimed thatChina’s current research culture“wastesresources,corruptsthespirit,andstymiesinnova-

Why Does the Gaokao Reform Start with English?Concerning the fact that English-language education inChinaistimeconsumingandlowefficiency,reformingtheEnglishexamcaneasilybeunderstoodandsupportedbyboth thepublic individualsandeducators.Englisheduca-tioninChinaisnowbecomingmoretestoriented,whichurgently requires reform.Chinesestudentshave investedthemosttimeandeffortsinlearningEnglish;however,ithasnotyieldedpositiveresults.Manystudentshavebeenlearning English for years, constantly memorizing wordsanddoingexercises,butsofarhaveonlymanagedtolearnso-called“brokenEnglish.”

Now, far too few students can handle cross-culturalcommunicationinafluentandconcisemanner.OneoftheaimsofthegaokaoreforminBeijingistodilutetheselec-tionfunctionoftheEnglishtestandrestorethefunctionofEnglishasatoolofcommunication.Therefore,asrevealedinthereformplan,Beijingdecidedtoincreasethepropor-tionofthelisteningcomprehensionintheEnglishtextin

gaokao;andthecontentofthetestwillbelimitedtobasicknowledge and ability. Another important issue that de-servesourattentionisthegovernment’sattitudetodeliverthepowerof organizingexamination to third-party socialinstitutions.Ifthereformplanisimplementednationally,theEnglishpartofgaokaowillbesponsoredbysocialinsti-tutions like theEducationalTestingService in theUnitedStates, twiceayearin2016.Studentswill thenbeabletoparticipate in up to six times the exam in a high schoolthree-yearperiod,whichgreatlyreducesthepressureoftak-ingtheexamandhopefullyleadsstudentstolearnEnglishforthecommunicativeuseratherthanjustpurelyforget-tingahigherscoreonanexamination.

Will the Importance of English Fall While that of Chinese Rises?

Over the years, Chinese educators have been concernedthatEnglishhas toomuch importanceattached toeduca-tionandthatpeoplearesometimesoverlookingtheimpor-tanceofstudyingChinese.Giventhisworry,alongwithde-

creasingthescoreoftheEnglishexam,theBeijinggaokao reformisdesignedtoincreasethescoreofChineseby30points,toemphasizethefundamentalroleofChineseasamothertongueandbasiccoresubject.ThegreatattentionpaidtoChineselanguageandculturebythepolicymakerisevidentlyexpressedinthereform.ComparedwithEnglish,itismoredemandingforteacherstoguidestudentstoap-preciatethecharmofChineseculture,asstudentsandpar-entshavebeenmoredevotedaboutlearningEnglishthanChinese.Asgaokaoisthebatonofprimaryandsecondaryeducation,policymakerswiselyuseittoguideteachingandlearning. We believe by adjusting the weights of EnglishandChinese,studentsandteacherscanbeguidedtofocusmoreonthelearningofChinesetoalargeextent.

“English Fever” at a Watershed in ChinaThe reform concerning English in gaokao to some extentalso implies that“Englishfever”hasreachedawatershedinChina.Sincethegaokaowasrestoredinthelate1970s,theimportanceofEnglishscoresingaokaohasbeengradu-allyraisedfrom30,100to150points,becomingoneofthethree-core subjects together with mathematics and Chi-nese.Correspondingly,awaveof“Englishfever”sweptthenation,andEnglishtraininghasbecomeahugeindustry.Now,Chinahastheworld’slargestEnglish-speakingpopu-lation.

In recent years, with the further build-up of China’scomprehensivenationalstrength,Chinahasbeenincreas-ingtradeactivitieswithnationsaroundtheworld.Follow-ingthedevelopmentofthenation,therearemorestudentsaroundtheworldwhochoosetolearnChinese,includingPresident Obama’s daughters and Vice President Biden’sgranddaughter.AfterarecentvisittoChina,BritishPrimeMinisterDavidCameronindicatedthatschoolsintheUnit-edKingdomshouldnotteachkidssomuchFrenchandGer-man,butshouldratherfocusonChinese.Toaccommodatethis need, strengthening cultural exchanges with foreigncountries and trying to propagate Chinese language havebecome an increasingly pressing issue. “Chinese fever”abroadalsourgeseducationauthoritiestoreflectandadjustlanguageandcultureeducationpolicies,soastoenhancetheeducationofChineselanguageandculture,andtoacer-tainextentcooltheexcessive“Englishfever”athome.

“[T]o obtain major grants in China, it is

an open secret that doing good research

is not as important as schmoozing with

powerful bureaucrats and their favorite

experts.”

Compared with English, it is more de-

manding for teachers to guide students

to appreciate the charm of Chinese cul-

ture, as students and parents have been

more devoted about learning English

than Chinese.

In addition to our Web site and Facebook page, we are now tweeting. We hope you will consider “following” us on Twitter!

I N T E R N A T I O N A L H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N16 I N T E R N A T I O N A L H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N 17International Student Flows

InCanada,pointsystemswereinitiatedin1967undertheImmigrationActof1952,asamethodforselectingim-migrants.Theoriginalpurposeofthissystemwastoaddresstheshortageofskilledlabor.PriortoJune11,2002,higherweightwasassignedtospecialvocationalpreparation.Thatmeans,ifanapplicanthasajobofferforapositionthatnoCanadianready,willing,andabletofill,theprobabilityforhim/hertoexceedthethreshold(70points)ishigher.Can-adachangeditspointsystemsinJune2002.Morepointsare assigned to language,workingexperience, andabilityof integration since then.This change canbe interpretedasanadjustmentto thedemandofhighskilledinthe la-bormarket.Undercurrentsystems,therearesixselectionfactors:education,language,experience,age,employment,and adaptability. The maximum number of points that apersoncanaccumulateis100,andthecurrentpassmarkis67.ThenumberofinternationalstudentsinCanadawasunder40,000in2002.Afterthehigh-skill-favoredpolicychangein2002,thatnumbertripledto125,000.Theaver-ageannualforeignstudentenrollmentintertiaryeducationfrom1998to2002is36,340.Thisaveragealsotripledafter2002.Asamatterof fact,Canada’spointsystemdoesat-tractmore internationalstudents toreceivehighereduca-tionsince2002.

Thepoint systems inAustralia andNewZealandaresimilar.Thispaperuses theAustraliansystemtodemon-strate thedesignofOceaniapoint systems.Basedon theCanadian framework, Australia introduced the AustralianGeneralSkilledMigrationprogramin1982.Thatprogram’smaincharacteristicisthatpointsareawardedaccordingtoSkilledOccupationList,whichisalistofoccupationsthatAustralianeedstofilljobshortages.Anapplicantmusthaverecentskilledworkexperience;otherwise,itisrelativediffi-cultforonetobeeligibleforimmigrationasaskilledwork-er.Intermsofinternationalstudents’flowtoAustralia, itis hard to find a cutoff after 1998 since Australia’s pointsystemremainsrelativelystablesincethe1980s.Theinter-nationalflowindicatedacleardroparound1990.ItturnedoutthattheMigrationAmendmentAct(1989)setthetalent

pool,which lowers thepassingmarkatonehandandin-creasesthewaittimeattheotherhand.So,theamendmentindeedintimidatesprospectiveskilledimmigrants.

Evidence of Impact from Sending CountriesAsthepointsystemsareinreceivingcountries,theimpactonsendingcountriesisusuallyambiguousandhardtodis-tinguishfromotherfactors.Inthissection,changeintheoutflowfromsendingcountriestotheUnitedKingdomandCanadaisusedasanindicatorofthepossibleimpact.

Chinaisthelargesthomecountryofinternationalstu-dents.UsingthedatafromChina’sMinistryofEducation,Icalculatedtheaverageannualoutflowofyearsbefore/afterthepolicytoseeifpolicymatters.ResultindicatesthattheaverageannualoutflowfromChinatoCanadadoubledafterCanada’srevisedpointsystem(from5,187to11,509).TheoutflowtotheUnitedKingdomaftertheHighlySkilledMi-grantProgramincreasesby18percent,aswell.

Indiaholdsthesecond-largestpopulation.Theprimarysourceofdataonstudents’outflowistheMinistryofLabor.Thenumberof Indiansoutflow toboth theUnitedKing-dom and Canada increases after the implementation ofpointsystemsinthehostcountry.NumbersdoubledintheUnitedKingdomandtripledinCanada.

Russia is not a traditional sending country but sig-nificantlyhassentstudentsabroadsince1990.Again,thebefore-aftercomparisonindicatesapositivechangeintheaverage number of outflows from Russia to the UnitedKingdomandCanada.Theincreaserateis25percenttotheUnitedKingdomand57percenttoCanada.

ConclusionAspolicyimplications,policymakersusuallyrefertoeither“braindrain”or“braingain,”whentheythinkaboutthemi-grationofinternationalstudentsorhighlyskilledworkers.Morerecently,someresearcherscoin“braincompetition.”

To put point systems into a larger picture, these sys-tems are indeed a method of talent classification and se-lection.Atnationallevel,acountryneedsaNationalTalentSystemtobuildupthenation’scorecompetitivenessintheglobalcompetition for talent.Thecompetitioncould turnout to be “brain share” only if universities, industry, andthegovernmentworktogethertorecruittalentsworldwide.Meanwhile,governmentneeds toworkontalentdevelop-mentofbothforeign-bornandnative-bornindividualssoastobuildupthenation’scompetitiveness.

tion.”Specifically, theycited thebureaucraticapproach todecidingresearchfundingasthesourcethat“stiflesinnova-tionandmakescleartoeveryonethattheconnectionswithbureaucratsandafewpowerfulscientistsareparamount.”Theywentontodisclosethat“[T]oobtainmajorgrantsinChina,itisanopensecretthatdoinggoodresearchisnotasimportantasschmoozingwithpowerfulbureaucratsandtheir favoriteexperts.”Theybecame frustrated toobservethatsuchaproblematicresearchculture“evenpermeatesthe minds of those who are new returnees from abroad;theyquicklyadapttothelocalenvironmentandperpetuatetheunhealthyculture,”andcalledforameaningfulreforminordertobuildahealthyresearchculture.

WhileShiandRaoweredisturbedtoseethatmanycol-leagueschoosetobesilentinfaceofsuchan“unhealthycul-ture”forfearof“alosingbattle,”theyseemtohavebecomevictimsoftheirownproclaimedwaragainstaperceivedun-healthyacademicculture.Aftertwounsuccessfulattemptsinarow,Raoannouncedhisboycottofcompetingforafel-lowshipattheChineseAcademyofSciences,whileShiisstillwaitingfortheresultofhissecondbid.Ifprominentreturnees,likeRaoandShi,sufferedfromvulnerabilityoftheirsocialcapital infaceof thecorruptresearchculture,howcoulddomestictalentselectedbythe“TenThousandTalentProgram”beabletobreakit?

In thecasesofRaoandShi, theircultural capitalap-pearstobeestrangedintopublicityresourceofthegovern-ment.Despitetheirfightagainstthebureaucracy,theyarenowoftencitedaspartofthesuccessofthe“ThousandTal-entProgram.”Inthecasesofmanyothers,theirsocialcapi-talismostlyassimilatedtothecurrentresearchcultureinChina,whichinturnpromptsthemtobecometheso-called“elegantegoists.”Inshort,withoutoverhaulingthecurrentresearchsystemandcultureinChina,itisnotaneasytaskfortheinitiativessuchasthe“ThousandTalentProgram”or “Ten Thousand Talent Program” to accomplish theirgoals. Last but not least, amessage could alsobe sent toWesternsystemsthathavebeenabsorbingabulkofglobaltalent.Ifnosufficientattentionispaidtoculturalandso-cialcapitalofglobaltalent,thentherecouldbealoomingcrisisthatwillshakethemagnetpositionofthosesystemstoglobaltalent.

Note: On December 19, 2013, Shi Yigong was appointed a newmemberoftheChineseAcademyofSciences,followinghiselec-tions into both the US National Academy of Sciences and theAmericanAcademyofArtsandSciencesinApril2013,asafor-eignassociateorforeignhonorarymember.

PointSystemsandInterna-tionalStudentFlowsJing Li

Jing Li is a doctoral student at Teachers College, Columbia University, New York. E-mail: jing.li@tc.columbia.edu.

Themobilityofinternationalstudentsiscurrentlyanim-portantpolicyissueovertheworld.Partofthereasonisthatinternationalstudents,especiallythosewhoinscienceandengineeringfields,providea stable sourceofhumanresourcesinscienceandtechnology.Sincethe1960s,Can-adaandotherOrganizationforEconomicCooperationandDevelopment countries started to use a point system—ofevaluatingacademicachievement—toselecthighlyskilledimmigrants.Thesepointsystems,whichassign“points”toassessthequalityofapplicants,favorinternationalstudentswhoreceivedhighereducationinthehostcountry,andfa-cilitatethemforcitizenshipaftergraduation.Therefore,thepointsystemisbelievedtoattractpotentialstudentsfromabroad.

What Is a Point System? Asamethod for selecting immigrants,point systemsareburgeoned in the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia,andNewZealand.Basically,thisisasystemforevaluatingmeritsofimmigrantapplicantsbasedonawardingpoints.Three key elements are included in the point-system de-sign:criteria,weight,andthreshold.Criteriavarybycoun-tries,butfivemainsourcesarecommonlyused:education,occupation, work experience, language, and age. Usually,theweight is assignedwitha scale tomeasure that crite-rion.Ifthemaximumscoreofthecriterionis100,weightcanbeevenlydistributedinascale.Finally,basedonpastexperienceand/orforecastingonthenumberofpotentialapplicants,onecansetapassmarkwithacertainpercentile(75%orabove).Applicantsawardedwithpointsabovethepassmarkareselected.

Evidence of Impact from Receiving CountriesTheUnitedKingdomusedtohaveahighlyrestrictiveimmi-grationpolicyandinsomerespectsstilldoes.Before2008,therewere80differentroutesintotheUnitedKingdomtowork, train,orstudy.These80entryschemesaremainlycategorizedintothreechannels:workpermitemployment;permit-free employment; and the Highly Skilled MigrantProgram.Beforetheprogram,thereare462,609nonciti-zenstudentsand341,791nonresidentstudentsenrolledinUnitedKingdom’s tertiaryeducation.Oneyear later,bothenrollmentsincreasedwithan8percentgrowthrate.

International Student Flows

These point systems, which assign

“points” to assess the quality of appli-

cants, favor international students who

received higher education in the host

country, and facilitate them for citizen-

ship after graduation.

I N T E R N A T I O N A L H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N18 I N T E R N A T I O N A L H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N 19

ing numbers for degree mobility, credit mobility quotashave stabilized at this level during the last decade. ThismeansthatwhiletheEurope-widetarget(20%creditmo-bilegraduates intheEuropeanHigherEducationArea in2020)hasalreadybeen reachedwith regard toGermany,thenationalmobilitygoaloftheJointScienceConferenceandtheGermanAcademicExchangeService(DAAD)(50%creditmobilegraduatesinthemidterm)remainstobeful-filled.

Finally, some important structural developments arelinked to theBolognaprocess.Somestudentsnowspendtimeabroadatanearlierstage,stayforslightlyshorterperi-odsonaverage,andmakeuseoftheso-called“bridgemo-bility.”Thesearemobilityunitsinthephasebetweenbach-elor’sandmaster’sdegreesorbetweenmaster’sandPhD.Abridgemobilityunitcouldbedesigned,forexample,asayear-longdirectexchangeprogramwithapartner institu-tion,whereeachpartnersendsone(orseveral)highlyquali-fiedstudentstotheotherinstitution.

Possible Further Promotion in GermanyWith its numerous programs, the DAAD is constantlyworkingtolowerthehurdlesforinternationalstudentmo-bility—the main ones being funding problems, concernsabout losing studying time, and difficulties reconciling avisit abroad with the requirements of the study programat home. Two particularly promising measures involveenhancing the number of programs with double or jointdegreesandintegratingso-called“mobilitywindows”—i.e.,timeslotsreservedformobility—intobachelor’sandmas-ter’sdegreeprograms.Combinedwithanadequatenum-berofscholarships,thesemeasuresshouldhelpGermanyrevivetheupwarddevelopmentforstudy-relatedvisitsthatwereobservedduringthe1990s.

Note:Togetherwith theGermanCentre forResearchonHigherEducationandScienceStudies(DZHW),theDAADcompilesandpresentsdataonoutgoingandincoming,aswellasinternationalstudentmobility—ontheWebsitewissenschaft-weltoffen.de (inGermanandEnglish)—addingfurther informationto thecorre-spondentpublication.

Canada’sImmigrationPoli-ciestoAttractInternationalStudentsAnita Gopal

Anita Gopal is a researcher at Queen’s University in Kingston, Ontario, Canada. E-mail: anita.gopal@gmail.com.

Universities around the world engage in an intensecompetition to compete in the knowledge economyduetoglobalization.ThissituationhasservedasacatalystforCanadatoengageinimmigrationstrategiesandinitia-tivesdesignedtoattractandrecruitinternationalstudents.Asalsoanurgentneedforhighlyskilledindividuals,sincethereisaconcernthatoncebabyboomersretire,therewillbeseverelaborshortages,whichwillhavenegativeimpli-cations for Canada’s growth and nation building. Attract-ingandretaining internationalstudents isaway toboostCanada’seconomy,whilepromotingawelcominginterna-tional landscape. According to Citizenship and Immigra-tion Canada, the government’s priority is to seek highlyskilledindividuals(e.g.,India,China)whoarelikelytosuc-ceedinCanadaandtopromoteitseconomicgrowth,long-termprosperity,andglobalcompetitiveness.Internationalstudents,whopursuetheirstudiesinCanada,areanidealpopulationbecausetheywouldhavealreadybeenintegrat-edintoCanadiansociety.

Recognizing that international students are vital toCanada’sgrowth,theCitizenshipandImmigrationCanadahassetout to transformCanada’s immigrationsystemasone that is faster, more flexible, and tailored to students’needs––a major distinguishing factor from other coun-tries. Therefore, new immigration policies and programshave been specifically created to make it easier for inter-national students to study, work, and become permanentresidents inCanada,especially forgraduatestudents.Forinstance, international studentsarepermitted toworkonandoffcampus,withoutaworkpermittoamaximumof20hoursperweek.TheycanalsoapplyforaPost-Gradu-ationWorkPermit,a three-yearopenworkpermit,whichenablesstudentstoworkforanyCanadianemployerinanyindustry. Internationalgraduatestudentscanapply to theProvincial Nomination Program for permanent residenceinCanada—during theirmaster’sordoctoralprogramoruponcompletionoftheirdegree.

Canadianuniversitiesarealsointerestedingainingits“marketshare”ofthebestandbrightestinternationalstu-dentsinscienceandtechnologyandacquiringacompeti-tiveadvantageovercountriessuchastheUnitedStatesandthe United Kingdom, which are major destination coun-

GermanStudentsAbroadJan Kercher and Nicole Rohde

Jan Kercher and Nicole Rohde are experts for international student mobility at the German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD), Bonn, Germany. E-mail: kercher@daad.de and rohde@daad.de.

InApril2013,thefederalandstategovernmentsadoptedacommonstrategyfortheinternationalizationoftheGer-manhighereducationinstitutions.Acentralgoaldefinedin thisstrategy—albeitwithouta targetdate—is foreverysecond graduate to gain study-related experience abroadandforatleastoneinthreetocompleteavisitabroad,last-ingatleastthreemonths,and/orelicitingatleast15Euro-peanCreditTransferSystempoints.

Withthisnationalgoal,Germanyconsiderablyexceedsthemobility targets set on theEuropean level:TheEuro-peanUnion and the countries committed to theBolognaprocess set themselves the goal that by 2020; at least 20percentofallgraduatesintheEuropeanHigherEducationArea should have completed a study- or training-relatedvisitabroad.

Is Study Abroad Essential?Study abroad is considered to be very beneficial to driveself-development,toequipstudentswithinterculturalcom-petences.Thestudentsworkwithinaninternationallabormarket,aswellastopreparethemtoidentifyissuessharedacross borders—such as, curing diseases, finding energysolutions,andfightinghunger,andthustoknowhowtoen-gageinanincreasinglyglobalizedworkingworld.Accord-ing toAllanE.Goodmanof theInstituteof InternationalEducation,“globalizationisheretostay,andstudentswhowant to work in our interconnected global world shouldstudyabroad.”

Studyabroadmeansleavingthecomfortzone,whichifdonecorrectlyempowersstudents.Empowermentmeansthatstudentslearnhowtotakeresponsibilityfortheirownlivesaswellasforsociety.Itisimportantforthemtoreal-ize their role insocietyandhow toparticipateandshapeit. Therefore, the German Academic Exchange Service(DAAD) is promoting the idea that international experi-encesshouldbecomeanessentialpartinhighereducationstudies. International mobility is not only an asset to thepersonalcurriculumvitaebutalsoauniqueexperienceandformativemoduleforone’sownpersonality.

International Student MobilityTherearetwotypesofinternationalstudentmobility:short-termstays (often referred toas creditmobility) and long-termstayswith thepurposeofobtainingadegreeabroad

(oftenreferredtoasdegreemobility).Mobilitystudiesshowthat this distinction is not only a terminological one: ForsomeimportantaspectstheavailabledataforGermanstu-dentsshownoticeabledifferencesbetweenthetwotypesofmobility.Forexample,whileAustria,theNetherlands,andSwitzerland are among the four most important destina-tioncountriesfordegree-mobilestudents(togetherwiththeUnitedKingdom),theydonotplayamajorrolewhencon-sidering temporary study-related visits abroad. Countriesthatplayan important role forcredit-mobilestudentsaretheUnitedKingdom,theUnitedStates,France,andSpain.Also, while students of language and cultural studies be-longtothemostmobilegroupreferringtotemporarystudy-relatedvisitsabroad,theyareunderrepresentedamongstu-dentsstudyingabroadtopursueaforeigndegree.

International Student Mobility in GermanyThe number and proportion of degree-mobile Germanstudentshaveincreasedsteadilysincetheearly1990s—inbothabsoluteandrelative terms.Specifically, thenumberofGermanstudentsenrolledabroadincreasedfromabout34,000in1991toabout134,000in2011.Interestingly,theincreaseindegree-mobilestudentsfromGermanyhasac-

celeratedsharplyduringthelastyears.Between2005und2011,thenumberofinternationallymobilestudentsfromGermany rose by 10.6 percent on annual average. Whilefrom1991to2004,themeangrowthperyearwasonlyhalfashigh(5.3%).However,in2011,thegrowthratewasonly4.6 percent, compared to 10.2 percent in 2010. The nextyearswillshowifthisdeclineinthegrowthrateswasonlytemporaryorifthisisthebeginningofalong-termtrendoflowergrowthrates.

DataoncreditmobilityofGermanstudents,collectedin national graduate surveys, show that about 30 percentofallgraduatesatGermanhighereducationinstitutionsin2010spentstudy-relatedaffairsabroad,withaminimumdurationofthreemonths.Incontrasttotheconstantlyris-

International Student FlowsInternational Student Flows

The European Union and the countries

committed to the Bologna process set

themselves the goal that by 2020; at

least 20 percent of all graduates in the

European Higher Education Area should

have completed a study- or training-re-

lated visit abroad.

In addition to our Web site and Facebook page, we are now tweeting. We hope you will consider “following” us on Twitter!

I N T E R N A T I O N A L H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N20 21I N T E R N A T I O N A L H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N

muchattentiontotheproblemofbraindrainandtheover-arching consequences of luring highly talented studentsfromdevelopingnationstodevelopedWesternnations.Forinstance,theUnitedNationsDevelopmentProgrampointsout that brain drain has caused approximately 100,000of thebest andbrightest Indianprofessionals tomove toNorthAmericaeachyear,whichisestimatedtobea$2bil-lion loss for India. As Canada continues to siphon intel-lectualcapitalfromdevelopingregions,ithasneglectedtothinkaboutitsmoralresponsibilitytothesenationsorhowitcouldbeharmingtheireconomicgrowthandwell-being.Meanwhile,itisunclearashowdevelopingnationswillre-coverthelossoftheirhumancapital.

TrendsinHigherEducationRegulationinsub-SaharanAfricaA. B. K. Kasozi

A. B. K. Kasozi is the founding Executive Director of Uganda’s National Council for Higher Education, which he steered for 10 years, from 2002 to 2013. E-mail: abkkasozi@yahoo.com.

Since 1980, many sub-Saharan African countries haveestablished government funded, but also semiautono-mous,highereducationregulatoryagenciestohelpgovern-mentsintheestablishment,management,andsupervisingof higher education institutions. These agencies ensurethat citizens receive quality higher education and institu-tions of higher learning help to generate new knowledgefor the improvementofhighereducation, innovationsys-tems, and economic development. Experience has shownthat these agencies have minimized direct governmentmicromanagement by acting as midway bodies betweenthe state and the varioushigher education institutionsofhigherlearning.

Maintenance of QualityMostsub-SaharanAfricanEnglish-speakingcountrieshavedelegated theresponsibilityof themaintenanceofqualityhighereducationininstitutionsofhigherlearningtotheseagencies.Currentquality assurancemechanisms inmostAfricancountrieshavetwomajorcomponents:anexternalregulatorycomponentbasedonagovernment-funded,butautonomous regulatory agency, and an institutional com-ponentwithineachuniversity.Thetwocomponentsworktogetherbuttheagencyistheseniorpartner.Theexternal

(regulatoryagency)setsandenforcesuniformbenchmarksfor alluniversity institutions.The internalunit,usually aquality-assuranceofficewithin theuniversity,makes surethat the benchmarks are implemented. Benchmarks de-signed by, and specific to a given institution itself, couldalsobeimplementedwithinthatinstitution.

The External and Internal ComponentThe regulatory frameworks at the external national levelsareenforcedbyregulatoryagencieswhichoverseethefol-lowing areas: institutional accreditation, accreditation ofindividual programs, merit-based admissions into highereducation institutions, credit accumulation and transfer,thequalityofteachingstaff;examinationregulations,stan-dardizationofacademicawards,researchandpublications,infrastructureofinstitutions,educationfacilities,andregu-latingcross-borderhighereducation.

Regulatory agencies realize that the maintenance ofqualityisbestdonebytheinstitutionitself.Thus,institu-tions are asked to have an administrative unit to overseequalityinallthedivisionsofauniversityinstituition.Uni-versitiesareaskedtocarryoutinstitutionalauditsonareg-ularscheduleofabout3–5yearsineastandsouthernAfricatoassessperformance.Theseinternalauditsincludelook-ingatthefollowingareas:thegeneralaudits,institutionalgovernance,thequalityofteachingandlearning,thequal-ityoftheacademicstaff,sufficiencyofeducationfacilities,researchandpublications,thequalityofoutputs,financialmanagement,relationswith thesurroundingcommunity,andotherpertinentitems.

Regulatory agencies, in cooperationwith institutions,aresupposedtocarryoutanexternalinstitutionalauditaf-teraninstitutionhascompletedtheinternalone.Theaimoftheexternalauditistofillanyqualitygapsidentifiedbytheinternalaudit.Unfortunately,manyregulatoryagencieshavenotfulfilledtheirresponsibilitiesofconductingexter-nalinstitutionalaudits.

triesforinternationalstudents.Moreover,internationalstu-dentsgenerateasubstantialamountofrevenuetoCanada.AccordingtoareportconductedbytheDepartmentofFor-eignAffairsandInternationalTrade,in2010,internationalstudentsinCanadaspentinexcessofCan$7.7billionontu-ition,accommodationanddiscretionaryspending(upfromCan$6.5billionin2008).MorethanCan$6.9billionofthisrevenuewasgeneratedby the218,200 long-terminterna-tional students in Canada. The report also indicated thattherevenuefrominternationalstudentspendinginCanadais greater than the Canadian export value of unwroughtaluminum (Can$6 billion), or helicopters, airplanes, andspacecraft(Can$6.9billion).

Immigration Policies in the United StatesAfterthe9/11attacks,theUnitedStates’traditionalopen-door policy for international students was curtailed. Im-migrationpolicieshavebecomemorestringentduetothegovernment’s tightening of the border and strict visa re-quirements. As outlined in the 2013 International Student Mobility Trends report, theUnitedStateshasbeenslowtorevisittheirimmigrationandvisapolicies.However,itstillremainsthetopchoiceforinternationalstudentstostudyduetoitsprestigiousuniversities’degreeprograms.

Unlike