China is redefining its universities, and, as a result, changing the landscape of International Higher Ed.
Indeed, this is early days, and most Chinese universities are still very traditional. But the game is changing, and it's time to pay heed.
There was a time when British Universities loved China. It meant exotic foreign tours for staff and faculty, eager partners lining up elaborate welcome ceremonies, relatively easily winnable contracts and student numbers, which made nice little case studies. And, it didn't matter how good or bad the university was: Anything British would have done the job (one needed ranking, sure, but it did not matter which ranking: As a Chinese academic once told me, as long as you are the second best university on your street, it would do!)
This seemingly unquenchable desire for foreign education came handy when the student numbers in the UK shrunk at the wake of immigration regime change under Theresa May's stewardship in 2011: As the Indian and African students melted away, the Chinese students more than made up for the decline, and the student numbers from China doubled over the five year period from 2011 to 2016. It seemed like the Chinese are loving the British Higher Education even more, and prodigally producing 'the best and the brightest' students that the Cameron administration wanted to bring to Britain.
What went unnoticed in this euphoria is that the Chinese Higher Education was evolving, and fast. The growth in numbers is perhaps the most obvious aspect - a jump from roughly 25 million students to 40 million students in Higher Education within a decade - but the new confidence and strategic pursuit of partnerships are also evident now. It is no longer any university that Chinese institutions are interested in: They are looking for only the world-class ones, and are far more conscious about their strategic priorities and alignments than they have ever been. And, the new confidence is also showing in other areas: The Chinese institutions are internationalising curriculum not just by importing certification, but by affecting change from inside; they are head-hunting researchers and university administrators by paying them a premium; and they are actively making their classrooms international, by attracting students from all over the world.
Thus far, International Higher Education was a field limited to a few European and North American countries, and Australia. Most students went to these four or five countries, with United States getting a lion's share, because of the sheer size and the diversity of its Higher Education system. The other countries, UK, Australia, Canada, set up a game of musical chairs between themselves, alternating their student visa regimes from soft to hard, going up and down the league tables. Indeed, there were others: Soviet Russia attracted medical and engineering students, but that ended as the state imploded; the French attracted the students from former colonies, Spain got them from all over Latin America though Brazilians went to Portugal. Netherlands and Germany were also attractive for students coming from countries such as Turkey, who already had a large diaspora in the respective countries.
With gradual restrictions being introduced on student movements by the leading Higher Ed destinations like UK and Australia, particularly from 2008, the landscapes were changing. Places like Malaysia and Mauritius built themselves up as regional hubs, but not so much by creating an indigenous system, but rather through liberal regulatory regimes that allowed foreign providers to set up institutions, or partnerships with local institutions, there. The strategy worked and these countries emerged as Regional Hubs for Higher Education, catering to the needs of poorer students and nearby countries. These, as well as various institutional experimentation with Online Higher Ed, were not game changers, but rather an extension of existing system of Global Higher Education.
But not so with China, which has the sheer scale, ambition and imagination to change the landscape altogether. There are important constraints - the restrictions on freedom of expression are significant constraints for building a world-class humanities education - but the Chinese Higher Ed offers an eclectic mix of Western and Eastern Higher Education, in which the standards are increasingly set in China. The structure of Chinese Higher Ed remains long and tedious, a legacy of thousands of years which may not be shaken away easily, but, on the other hand, many Asian and African students may be perfectly at home with this. And, Mandarin is a challenge and an opportunity, particularly for a young man or woman growing up in the Chinese sphere of influence, which is more or less everywhere except the North Atlantic.
What should India learn from this?
Indeed, India's Higher Education system, though large, is not really comparable to China's, in terms of ambition or sophistication. Higher Ed in India consists of mostly small, private institutions dependent on teaching revenues, and instead of expanding, India is currently reducing its capacity. It is also parochial and less engaged with the Global Higher Ed conversations than the Chinese are. Shaped by a generation of thinking about Labour Arbitrage in the IT services industry, Indians have, mistakenly, taken that as a general principle of organising all the sectors of life, including Education and Health: Headhunting high calibre researchers from Western Institutions would be unthinkable in India, as would be the creation of an alternative model of International Higher Education. Indian institutions want to bring foreign students as they pay more, not because they introduce an element of diversity in the classroom that Indian institutions need. India's research culture, despite its impressive achievements in many technology areas, is largely confined to a few government laboratories, and educational institutions are not a part of it: Indian academia is rather enthusiastically involved in the sham Conference culture (events organised around the world allowing the academics to claim travel money and take holidays) and in producing meaningless journals to maintain the appearance of academic activity. India is, in a sense, caught between Mauritius and China - too proud to give up the claim of distinctiveness, but not ambitious enough to come up its own agenda.
But India can and should learn, as it competes for influence in the region. Chinese Higher Ed is an integral part of Chinese soft power strategy, and increasingly, with its research capability, a part of its hard power too. Successive Indian governments have looked enviously at China's record of dramatically improving its infrastructure, and drawn the lesson that a modicum of authoritarianism is good for development. One would hope that with the emergence of Chinese Higher Ed from the shadows would now focus minds in India, and a recognition that a globally engaged and globally competitive Higher Education is an integral part of a 'big nation' strategy would mean a reorientation of policy priorities in Delhi.
Popular posts from this blog
A friend has recently forwarded me a quote from Lord Macaulay's speech in the British Parliament on 2nd February 1835. I reproduce the quote below: "I have traveled across the length and breadth of India and I have not seen one person who is a beggar, who is a thief. Such wealth I have seen in this country, such high moral values, people of such calibre, that I do not think we would ever conquer this country, unless we break the very backbone of this nation, which is her spiritual and cultural heritage, and, therefore, I propose that we replace her old and ancient education system, her culture, for if the Indians think that all that is foreign and English is good and greater than their own, they will lose their self-esteem, their native self-culture and they will become what we want them, a truly dominated nation." The email requested me to forward me to every indian I know. I was tempted, but there were two oddities about this quote. First, the language, which
Introduction : The Business of Gift Giving Business gift giving has always been common and contentious at the same time. Business gifts are usually seen as an ‘advertising, sales promotion and marketing communication medium’ (Cooper et al , 1991). Arunthanes et al (1994) points out that such gifting is practised usually for three reasons: (a) in appreciation for past client relationships, placing a new order, referrals to other clients, etc.; (b) in the hopes of creating a positive, first impression which might help to establish an initial business relationship; and (c) giving may be perceived as a quid Pro quo (i.e. returning a favour or expecting a favour in return for something). The practitioners of gift-giving generally argue that doing business is often an aggregation of personal interactions and relationships, and gift-giving should be seen as a natural way of maintaining and enhancing these relationships. ‘Business gifts, especially one given in the course of the festive s
Buzzwords have disadvantages. Right now, experiential learning is one, and that means we put the label on everything and it stops to mean anything. Also, this means reasonable conversation about experiential learning becomes difficult - at times such as this, either you preach experiential learning or you are traditional, antiquarian and hopelessly out of touch. But, overlooking the limitations of experiential learning can cause big problems. Experiential Learning does many things - putting practice at the heart of learning is an important paradigm shift - but not everything, and it is important to be aware what it does not do. Usually, we equate the terms Project-based Learning (the method) with Experiential Learning (the idea) and Learning from Experience (the ideal), treating them as one and the same and using the terms interchangeably. Any talk about distinctive meaning of these terms is usually seen as pedantic, but really represent very different ideas about education.
Today, Helen Goddard, 26, a highly popular music teacher of a City School for Girls, has been sentenced to 15 months in prison. Her crime was to carry out a year long lesbian affair with one of her pupils, who appeared in the court and admitted that the affair was consensual and it was she who pressured Helen into the affair. For Helen, a bright musician and a devout Chistian, this is an extraordinary lapse of judgement. Also, she was teaching in the £13,000 private girls only school in London. She was surely aware what the consequences of her action will be. The fact that she still could not stop herself tells us that lovers do not always act rationally, something we always knew. There is more in this affair than personal tragedies. For a start, this has all the dramatic elements: a bright, beautiful teacher more in Julia Roberts mould [as in Mona Lisa Smile], a stiff upper lip school [not unlike Wellesley] and a story like Notes On A Scandal with an added twist. Indeed, Helen
In most societies today, making profits are accepted as moral, if not especially praiseworthy. This was not as obvious as it appears today – people used to be embarrassed about making a profit not so long ago. Crazy as it seems today, it is worth thinking why it was so. Profits, as economists will put it, is the reward for risk-taking, for putting a business enterprise together in the pursuit of an objective. In this definition, remember, profits are not what it is commonly understood to be – the gross middle-line towards the bottom – but a figure net of entrepreneur’s earning [wages for his labour], dividends and interests on borrowed capital, and provisions for building and other physical assets [a sort of rent, offsetting what these assets could have earned if leased out]. This pure profit – surplus – accrues to a business as a reward to its organisation, for the act of entrepreneurship itself. Economists were divided on how this surplus comes about. The conventional wisdom was,
Introduction Erna Petri née Kürbs, a farmer’s daughter from Herressen in Thuringia, arrived in Ukraine with her three year old son to join her husband Horst in June 1942. Horst, an SS leader inspired by Nazi ideologue Dr Richard Walter Darré, settled in the plantation of Grzenda, just outside today’s Lviv, to become a German Gentleman-Farmer. Erna saw Horst beating and abusing the workers in the plantation within two days of arriving there, which was, as Horst explained, necessary for establishing authority. Erna joined in enthusiastically, settling into a combination of roles of ‘plantation mistress, prairie Madonna in apron-covered dress lording over slave labourers, infant-carrying, gun-wielding Hausfrau.’  However, there were clear rules in the plantation, and Erna was very much expected to play the woman’s role of being a Cake-and-Coffee hostess. When four Jews were caught in the estate while trying to escape from a transport to a death camp, Horst told Erna and her female
Introduction: Hastings in the history of Indian Education Whether or not one includes Warren Hastings in the history of Education in India is a matter of perspective. If writing the history of education means writing the history of schools, the impact of Hastings' administration would be quite limited. If anything, the rapid implosion of local rulers in Eastern, Southern and Northern India during Hastings' tenure had meant a bleak period for the indigenous education system, as patronage and funds would have dwindled away for many of them. The Company administration really concerned itself with the schooling of the natives only after 1813, as Nurullah and Naik rightly pointed out ( see my earlier post ) and one can legitimately start the story at this point. However, if history of Education in India is to encompass the transformation of Indian Scholarship, on which foundation the new, colonial, system of Education would be built, the story must start with Warren Hast
There is no other city like Kolkata for me: It is Home. The only city where I don't have to find a reason to go to, or to love. It is one city hardwired into my identity, and despite being away for a decade, that refuses to go away. People stay away from their homeland for a variety of reasons. But, as I have come to feel, no one can be completely happy to be away. One may find fame or fortune, love and learning, in another land, but they always live an incomplete life. They bring home broken bits of their homeland into their awkward daily existence, a cushion somewhere, a broken conversation in mother tongue some other time, always rediscovering the land they left behind for that brief moment of wanting to be themselves. The cruelest punishment, therefore, for a man who lives abroad is when his love for his land is denied. It is indeed often denied, because the pursuit of work, knowledge or love seemed to have gotten priority over the attraction of the land. This is particularly
I wrote a note on Kolkata, the city I come from and would always belong to, in July 2010. Since then, the post attracted many visitors and comments, mostly critical, as most people, including those from Kolkata, couldn't see any future for the city. My current effort, some 18 months down the line, is also prompted by a recent article in The Economist, The City That Got Left Behind , which echo the pessimism somewhat. I, at least emotionally, disagree to all the pessimism: After all Kolkata is home and I live in the hope of an eventual return. Indeed, some change has happened since I wrote my earlier post: The geriatric Leftist government that ruled the state for more than 30 years was summarily dispatched, and was replaced by a lumpen-capitalist populist government. Kolkata looked without a future with the clueless leftists at the helm; it now looks without hope. However, apart from bad governance, there is no reason why Kolkata had to be poor and hopeless. It sits right
The ‘Why’ Question? Adolf Hitler was appointed the German Chancellor by President Von Hindenburg on 30th January 1933. This was an extraordinary turn of events. Previously, President Von Hindenburg consistently refused to appoint Hitler the Chancellor, despite the impressive electoral performance of NSDAP in July 1932, Hitler’s uncompromising demand of the Chancellor’s post and a repeat election in November 1932 which failed to break the deadlock. Explaining his refusal, Hindenburg wrote in a letter on 24th November, “a presidential cabinet led by you would develop necessarily into a party dictatorship with all its consequences for an extraordinary accentuation of the conflicts in the German people.” The question ‘why’ Hitler was appointed Chancellor, despite the President being acutely aware of what might follow, is therefore a significant one. The NSDAP had election successes throughout 1932, and was already the biggest single party in the Reichstag and various Landtags acros
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.