Showing posts with label Education. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Education. Show all posts

China-Oz Trade War: Higher Ed Next?

♠ Posted by Emmanuel in , at 5/12/2021 06:00:00 PM

Will PRC students soon be an increasingly rare sight on Aussie campuses?

Just when you thought China-Australia relations could get no worse, it seems they find something new to quarrel about. Perhaps the last golden goose Australia has left is its higher education sector, which still (rather amazingly) attracts scores of PRC students. That said, there appears movement afoot in China for recruiters to not promote Australia as a higher education. Anticipating matters may get worse (which is likely given how things are going between these two), Aussie universities are setting their sights on diversifying their international student base. 

Researchers from the Australia National University in Canberra are urging the government to get moving in making their country's universities less reliant on Chinese students:

Dr Dirk van der Kley and Dr Benjamin Herscovitch argue education is Australia’s only remaining export valued over $10 billion annually which is “both reliant on China and which Beijing can target without significant self-harm”. The industry employs thousands of Australians, and is closely linked to the country’s technological competitiveness, the pair say.

Coercion against the sector would significantly impact Australia’s prosperity. “If there was a significant drop in students from China, the revenue and research loss would be impossible to fully replace through other international markets because China is the largest source of globally mobile students,” the authors write. The government would not be able to step in and fill that gap, they say.

Speaking of which, the Chinese government holds more cards in being able to harm Australia's economy given the economic importance of higher education service exports to the PRC and other nations:

The pair point out that media reports already indicate education agents in some Chinese cities were discouraged from promoting Australia as an education destination. Beijing could go further, by fostering negative views of Australia and its universities via the state-controlled media or even ceasing to recognise some or all Australian qualifications.

By recruiting more students from other locations, Australia could safeguard itself from Chinese coercion to a degree.

With both countries apparently not keen on talking with each other to resolve economic and other differences, it will probably happen all of a sudden and without much warning if the PRC starts discouraging its students from going to Australia.

 

Thanks to Immigration, Bet on Canada's Future

♠ Posted by Emmanuel in , at 1/03/2019 02:59:00 PM
Skilled migrants are driving Canada's G7-leading population growth.
Back to our coverage of international higher education in the new year: I've featured how the United States is becoming a non-destination for international students, mainly for the reason that the Trump administration is limiting their prospects for future post-educational work in the United States due to ultra-nationalist / racist immigration policies. Hard as it is for some Yanquis to understand, though, the world of higher education is much broader than the United States. There is a bona fide winner in this story of American educational and demographic decline as result of a failure to attract international talent given falling birth rates at home--Canada.

It is not hard to make the argument that many of those who would have otherwise studied in the US have gone to Canada instead due to Trump's blatantly racist immigration policies:
[Ayesha] Chokhani had her pick of elite schools. She turned down Cornell and Duke in the U.S. Her reasons were clear: The anti-immigrant rhetoric from the Trump administration made her nervous. And Canada had an additional draw: She can stay up to three years after she graduates and doesn’t need a job offer to apply for a work permit. “I wanted to be sure that wherever I go to study, I have the opportunity to stay and work for a bit,” she says.
The numbers don't lie. Canada is not only attracting international students but is also hoping that more than a few remain to deal with its shortfalls in domestic birth rates and the usual need to remain competitive in the modern world economy:
In August, there were about 570,000 international students in Canada, a 60 percent jump from three years ago. That surge is helping power the biggest increase in international immigration in more than a century. The country took in 425,000 people in the 12 months through September, boosting population growth to a three-decade high of 1.4 percent, the fastest pace in the Group of Seven club of industrialized nations.

Canada’s immigration system has long targeted the highly skilled. More than 65 percent of foreign-born adults had a post-secondary degree in 2017, the highest share tracked by members of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. “We are the biggest talent poachers in the OECD,” says Stéfane Marion, chief economist of the National Bank of Canada. As a result, he says, the country is better equipped to deal with globalization and technological change—“it’s a massive, massive advantage.”
To be sure, there are xenophobic political parties in the Canadian polity. However, the significant difference is that while they constitute a fringe minority in Canada, they are the ruling Republican Party in the United States thanks to Trump. 

Make no mistake: American decline and Trumpian xenophobia go hand in hand. Instead of evaluating people based on what they can get done, you do so based on irrelevant criteria like the color of their skin. Ultimately, it's America's loss for pandering to such racism. 

...There are Still Foreign Students in the US?

♠ Posted by Emmanuel in , at 12/22/2018 06:50:00 PM

There's an interesting article over at Politico about how Trump's nativist / white supremacist / neo-apartheidist rhetoric and policies have impacted not only illegal but, perhaps more importantly, legal migration. While all of it is certainly worth reading, let's focus on something I've been quite curious about: international students going to the United States to learn. After all, why would you want to go and give money to a country whose leader disparages you for your race, color, creed or "foreignness"? Trump whipping up anti-immigrant fervor against Muslims, Latinos and anyone who isn't a white Trump voter isn't going to enhance your safety against rising hate crimes, either.

So today's "no sh-t, Sherlock" moment is finding that international student visas being issued by the United States are cratering for apparent reasons:
Student visas under Trump have fallen, too. The State Department issued roughly 363,000 F-1 student visas in fiscal year 2018, according to a POLITICO analysis of State Department data. That represents a 23 percent decline from fiscal year 2016. The number of foreign students enrolled for the first time in U.S. colleges and universities declined in 2017 for the second year in a row, according to a report released in November. The report, based on an annual survey by the nonprofit Institute of International Education, calculated that new enrollment dropped nearly 7 percent compared with the previous year.

Leaders of universities and colleges blame Trump’s immigration tactics for the slowdown as the administration has moved to toughen standards for foreign students. “Many of our most successful companies are based on the talents of those international students,” said Janet Napolitano, president of the University of California system and a former Homeland Security secretary to President Barack Obama. “It just seems not wise, to put it mildly, to discourage that kind of international talent from coming to the United States.”
To help make matters worse, the Trump administration has just introduced policies designed to make life even harder for international students:
A new USCIS policy announced in October threatens to saddle international students with an immigration penalty if they remain in the country beyond the term of their visa, a hard-line move to compel students without authorization to depart the country quickly.
So why exactly would any sane prospective student want to go to America? The dollar is very strong, making it an expensive destination. So you're paying top dollar to be scapegoated and racially abused by Trump and people who think like him.

For many who considered studying Stateside, those Trump-alikes are far too many, and personal safety is certainly not guaranteed at this time when they're whipping up fervor against foreigners. This outcome is, regrettably, far too sensible. As the title suggests, the interesting observation may be that there are still any international students at all.

Trump to Foreign Students: “Get Lost”

♠ Posted by Emmanuel in , at 11/26/2018 03:19:00 PM
AMERICA FIRST = COLOREDS OUT in plain English...and that includes foreign students.
It should be of no particular surprise that the United States is becoming an increasingly unattractive place for foreign students to study in. On the financial side, a strong US dollar is making other Anglophone countries comparatively attractive like Australia, New Zealand, and Canada. I've always been bemused by Brexit plunging the British pound to recent depths and in the process benefiting UK educational institutions. On the security side, the mountebank President Trump's barely-concealed hatred for all things foreign--and foreigners themselves--has understandably caused apprehension among would-be students in the US. Recent numbers of new students tell the tale:
[T[he number of students enrolling for the first time at American colleges in fall 2017 dropped nearly 7 percent compared to the previous year, according to the 2018 Open Doors Report on International Educational Exchange, an annual survey taken by the Institute of International Education. New foreign student enrollment in the U.S. dropped by 3 percent during the 2016-17 school year.
American officials at the State Department [surprise!] emphasize competitive factors for the slowdown in new foreign students:
The authors of the report, which has been supported by the State Department since 1972, downplayed the role of politics — including Trump’s policies — in the slowdown. They instead blamed intensifying competition from universities in other countries and the rising cost of college in the U.S. “We’re not hearing that students feel they can’t come here,” said Allan Goodman, president and CEO of IIE. “We’re hearing that they have choices. We’re hearing that there’s competition from other countries.”
However, American universities are more willing to pin blame on the real culprit here: Trump and his xenophobic rhetoric and policies. To no one's real surprise, Anglophone competitors for international students are really happy about this state of affairs:
American colleges have largely blamed Trump because foreign competitors use the president’s anti-immigration rhetoric to aggressively recruit international students and faculty who would have typically come to the United States for their higher education. Universities in Canada, China, New Zealand, Japan and Spain all have seen gains.

Phil Honeywood — CEO of the international education association in Australia, one of America’s biggest competitors — told POLITICO earlier this year that “We don’t actually need to be negative about the American academy, as President Trump is doing more damage to ‘brand America’ on his own than any competitor country ever could.”
Make no mistake, big money is at stake here should Trump target foreign students directly like Chinese students accused of being spies for the PRC. As bad as things are for American universities no thanks to Trump, they can get even worse:
The new student enrollment slowdown could pose economic risks. International students at U.S. colleges and universities contributed $39 billion to the U.S. economy and supported more than 455,622 jobs during the 2017-18 school year, according to a separate report released Tuesday by NAFSA: Association of International Educators...

China yet again sent the most students in 2017 — 363,341, nearly a third of all international students in the U.S. That marked a 3.6 percent enrollment bump, even as the Trump administration has been especially aggressive toward China, going so far as to consider banning student visas for Chinese nationals. 

Trump: Chinese Students in US are [PRC] Spies

♠ Posted by Emmanuel in ,, at 8/14/2018 05:34:00 PM
Trump to Chinese students in America: You ain't nuthin' but PRC spies.
Donald Trump loves a conspiracy theory: Ted Cruz's dad was involved in the assassination of John F. Kennedy. Global warming is a hoax invented by the Chinese to make US manufacturing non-competitive. Ever so fond of bashing China in any way, shape or form, a recent gathering of executives from America's largest multinational corporations (and some Trump toadies besides) represented a reversion to Trump's mean. Instead of discussing ways to stop Trump's trade war--fat chance of that--they were instead subjected to another of his lunatic rantings:
The president entertained a group of 15 CEOs and senior White House staff at a dinner in the middle of his annual working vacation. The dinner was billed as “an opportunity for the president to hear how the economy is doing ... and what their priorities and thoughts are for the year ahead...”

At one point during the dinner, Trump noted of an unnamed country that the attendee said was clearly China, “almost every student that comes over to this country is a spy.”
Unsurprisingly, the United Chinese Americans (UCA) are up in arms over Trump's racist characterizations. Not that Trump is the only white guy in government insulting Chinese students...
The United Chinese Americans (UCA), a leading federation of Chinese American organizations across the country, is greatly disturbed by multiple news reports that, at a private dinner with corporate executives in New Jersey on August 7, President Donald Trump spoke in alarming terms about Chinese students studying in America as mostly spies for China... 

Recent reported remarks by President Trump, FBI Director Christopher Wray, and Senator Marco Rubio, who has characterized persons of Chinese origin in the United States as a national security threat, are unjustified and deeply offensive. The United Chinese Americans calls on the White House to clarify the President's reported disparagement of Chinese students.

We also call on the Chinese American community and other Americans of conscience to contact the White House, their Members of Congress and their local news media outlets to protest these negative portrayals of Chinese students. And we call on all Americans to continue the fine American tradition of welcoming all international students and scholars to our shores.
Fat chance of that as well for as long as Trump perceives there is political capital to be made from characterizing Chinese students Stateside as spies. There may, however, be economic fallout from this latest bout of Trump's white supremacy. Insofar as Chinese students represent the largest group of international students, payback would be substantial if these students decided to go elsewhere:
There are more than 350,000 Chinese students studying at U.S. universities -- the largest group of international students by far -- and Chinese students earned about 10 percent of all doctorates awarded by American universities in 2016.

"Generations of foreign policy leaders agree that international students and scholars are one of America’s greatest foreign policy assets," Jill Welch, NAFSA's [National Association of Foreign Student Advisers] deputy executive director for public policy, said in a statement about what the president reportedly said. "Blanket generalizations about students from any country will undoubtedly make international students think twice before choosing the United States as their destination. If students, particularly from strategic regions around the world, no longer come here, America will lose the ability to build relationships with future leaders abroad and strengthen our own national security."

"Chinese students contribute $12 billion to the U.S. economy, alongside countless other benefits, so even a modest reduction in Chinese enrollment would be devastating, and virtually every community in America would feel the impact if Chinese students decided not to study in the United States," Welch added. "To make America more secure and welcoming to international students and scholars the president must avoid unwelcoming rhetoric and policies. We are already in a global competition for talent, and students around the world pay close attention to the policies and rhetoric emanating from the White House. In order to avoid a further chilling effect in the United States, it is incumbent upon policy leaders to act boldly and decisively to let students know that they are welcome here and that we value their contributions."
For someone presumably wanting to increase American exports, the idiot Trump probably doesn't realize that higher education is its sixth-largest service export, worth over $43 billion. Already, Trump is phasing in limits on those studying STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) disciplines over fears that the United States is giving away its competitive edge in these key areas of the future to Communist interlopers. I am 100% certain that discouraging its young people from studying in America is one of the actions that the Chinese government is considering should the US-China trade war get worse. At this rate, don't count such a possibility out by any means.

Trump's Bigotry & Disappearing US Int’l Students

♠ Posted by Emmanuel in , at 11/22/2017 05:25:00 PM
Make America White Again, university without diversity edition. 
Commentators often use "nativism" as a euphemism to describe Trump's apparent self-superiority over non-white people. Often couched by fellow bigots in terms of "preserving cultural identity" or "protecting national security," this irrational fear of others who do not look like you is dragging an entire country into the mud in more ways than one. The United States' global reputation is taking a hit worldwide as only 22% of the rest of the world has confidence in the America Firster. At least Trump knows what his base looks like.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, would-be international students studying in the United States are now keeping away in droves--and this is only his first year in office. I can only imagine how up to (heaven forbid) four more years of Trump's homophobic, racist and xenophobic discourse and policy will affect those previously intending to study Stateside. The cheek of these uppity coloreds aspiring to a tertiary degree, Trump likely thinks...
The number of newly arriving international students declined an average 7 percent in fall 2017, with 45 percent of campuses reporting drops in new international enrollment, according to a survey of nearly 500 campuses across the country by the Institute of International Education. Experts cited an uncertain social and political climate in the United States as part of the reason for the decline in enrollment.

“It’s a mix of factors,” said Rajika Bhandari, head of research for the institute, which collects data on international students in cooperation with the State Department. “Concerns around the travel ban had a lot to do with concerns around personal safety based on a few incidents involving international students, and a generalized concern about whether they’re safe.”
Whether justified or not, safety perceptions are on the wane. For instance, Indian students who've been plentiful in recent years are now thinking twice, especially after the murder of a US-educated compatriot working Stateside:
Dr. Godard said fewer students came from India partly because of a currency crisis in the country, but also because of concerns about the Trump administration’s travel ban affecting Muslim countries. India was not on that list, but Dr. Godard said many of the university’s Indian students were from Muslim areas of the country and were concerned about the ban.

“Although India wasn’t listed as one of the countries, certainly feeling welcome and safe and all those things is important,” he said. “It would be naïve to say that wasn’t a contributing factor.” Prospective students from India — interviewed shortly after last year’s presidential election — have expressed fears about the racial climate in the United States, concerns that might have been heightened after the shooting death in February of an Indian engineer in a suburban Kansas City bar.
With so many other options at the present time--Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the "discounted" UK with its weak currency post-Brexit referendum, why go to Trump's America for the privilege of paying top dollar for racial abuse? Sure, there are white supremacists in all those other countries as well, but the difference is that the government isn't actively trying to make you uncomfortable.

Make no mistake: international students paying full fees help keep any number of US educational institutions afloat. Couple the loss of such students from Trump's hardly-concealed white supremacy with reduced funding for universities due to his ongoing "war on science" and I'd bet their global standing will take a hit over the next few godforsaken years.

But hey, there's a bright side to the story: the Canadians seem to be doing rather better as sensible international students go there instead to avoid TrumpLand:
Some of Canada's biggest universities are beginning the new school year with a record number of international students on campus. The steady upswing in foreign applicants began several years ago, then started to spike after the U.S. presidential election in 2016. The challenge for the Canadian government now is to maintain that trend amid competing countries, and to encourage more from the talented pool to stay on as permanent residents.

The University of Toronto, Canada's top draw for international students, enrolled 17,452 international students in undergraduate and graduate programs last year, making up about 20 per cent of the overall student body. That compares to 7,380 international students comprising about 10 per cent of the total student population a decade ago, in 2007.
There's no missing the Trump factor here:
The university's steady increase became a spike after U.S. President Donald Trump was elected." Clearly there are things about the international situation — worries about stability, Brexit and the U.S. political environment — that have changed or increased international students' interest in looking beyond their own countries and beyond the U.S.," said Richard Levin, executive director of enrolment services and university registrar.

"Now in places like that, students are looking for alternatives and Canada is presenting as a good one in terms of stability, safety and inclusiveness." According to data provided by Universities Canada there has been a sharp increase in both applications and website traffic from the U.S. and abroad since the 2016 U.S. election, with many seeing a 20 per cent jump or more in applications.

Did Uber Kill London Cabbies' Need for "Knowledge"?

♠ Posted by Emmanuel in , at 11/02/2015 11:57:00 AM
London black cab drivers must famously have memorized the streets of central London by acquiring "The Knowledge." Without it, they cannot acquire a license to drive a taxi in that world-famous city. Unless you've been hiding under a cave, the emergence of Uber--the ride-sharing service--has dented the business of licensed taxi drivers the world over. After all, why spend so much time (3-5 years), effort and expense to acquire a license when some joker with a smartphone and Uber can do exactly the same sort of thing?

As it so happens, the largest cabbie school in London is closing its doors--mostly due to the Uber phenomenon:
Malcolm Linskey expects tears. The 70-year-old will retire soon, an event hastened by falling demand for the business he started 30 years ago, Knowledge Point, a training school for London black cab drivers. “It’s crazy, we’re going to be brushed aside,” he says. The cabby school, London’s largest, is to close its doors in December on the building it has occupied for 26 years in Islington, north London, blaming the twin pressures of Uber and increased property prices. 
Time moves on:
Mr Linskey says it will continue to produce and sell taxi driver training materials in print and online supplemented by training sessions in church halls and community centres. Uber, the cut-price taxi app that started in San Francisco, has sparked protests of unfair competition from cab drivers across the world. In May, parts of London were in gridlock following a demonstration by taxi drivers who felt the lack of regulation favoured such “e-hailing” apps.

London cabbies must study “the Knowledge”, learning their way round 25,000 streets as well as all the twists and turns of dead-ends and one-way roads. Before obtaining the green badge, which will license them to pick up fares in London, they will be tested on routes, for example from Manor House to Gibson Square. The school helps aspiring drivers reduce the time — on average about three and a half years — it takes to learn the various routes. 
Is this progress? It's true that many taxi drivers around the world are incompetent and unprofessional, but those in London are less likely to be so. Regardless, they too are as vulnerable to the winds of "creative destruction" as their peers elsewhere.

About Time: Rewriting College Economics Textbooks

♠ Posted by Emmanuel in at 11/26/2014 01:30:00 AM
To paraphrase anti-globalization protesters, is another kind of Econ textbook possible?
I needn't rehearse the argument made by critics of the social science of economics that the global financial crisis of 2008-2009 revealed the emperor's clothes. Leftists declared economics as "bunk" that led us into disaster. Rightists on the other hand, said that economic principles were not correctly applied, leading us into disaster. (It was "moral hazard" writ large instead.) So many years on, we are no nearer "consensus" save for the general agreement that economics education should be made more applicable to real-life situations to maintain relevance in the higher education curriculum. Writers of mainstream economics textbooks like Greg Mankiw have borne the brunt of this criticism as the world seeks more "relevant" textbooks.
The CORE project aims to salvage economics.
But how are we to go about this task? Should we introduce "heterodox" theories favored by leftists? Or, should we draw more real-life examples to illuminate economics principles? Figuring out this task has been the lot of the multi-country, multi-university CORE project, whose tagline is "teaching economics as if the last three decades happened." Ouch. Anyway, the gist of the exercise is to introduce recent innovations in economic research to introductory courses such as concepts of cognitive biases (as opposed to the machine-like rationality of homo economicus) and the interaction between markets and morality:
But economics is not fighting the last war. In the past three decades, experimental methods have shown that people are more fair-minded and moral, and less calculating than the so called Economic Man of the textbooks. The fact that we are nicer and not quite as clever as economists once assumed has direct implications for policies to address problems of financial instability, climate change, and economic disparity. The new research greatly expands the set of politically viable and economically effective policies to ensure a sustainable planet and to level the economic playing field.

Another example: improved techniques for computer modelling of complex interactions among millions of economic actors can help design policies to address financial volatility and environmental degradation. For our students, though – especially those in the core courses of the curriculum – this is all a well-kept secret. We impose a curriculum that is increasingly remote from what economists now know, and more distant still from the pressing problems that drew our students to economics in the first place.
The immediate cause of this move to rewrite introductory textbooks is of course the global financial crisis:
Since the financial crisis, student groups have attacked economics departments for failing to deal with the world’s most pressing social issues, including inequality and global warming. They have also criticised professors’ reluctance to teach a range of economic theories, with courses instead focusing on neoclassical models which they claim do little to explain the 2008 meltdown...

Robert Johnson, INET’s president, said: “There’s a problem that undergraduate courses don’t reflect the research of senior economists. There’s also an issue that the examples that we use in textbooks are often based on US data and institutions and don’t produce much excitement elsewhere, particularly in the emerging economies. We’re trying to address that.”
Take that, Greg Mankiw! You need to get a move on development economics. That said, a number of critics are still not convinced that minor tweaks here and there to include real-life cases are sufficient to update the introductory economics curriculum. Rather, a major overhaul is necessary:
Louison Cahen-Fourot, a doctoral student at Paris XIII university who has also been involved with PEPS, a French group advocating more pluralism in economics, said: “The problem is [CORE] is not really pluralism,” Mr Cahen-Fourot, said. “It’s very much mainstream and it does not meet what we would like to see at PEPS, such as more alternative voices or methodologies. We also would like to see more openness to [methods from] other social sciences,” he said.

Rafe Martyn, a doctoral student at the University of Cambridge, said: “It’s sensible to do what CORE is trying to do and base teaching in empirics and to bring the content more into line of current research. There’s a fear that CORE just wants to present the theory it thinks is right, but the people involved are diverse and it’s a work in progress.”

The plan is for the ebook to be modified by online crowdsourcing of student and faculty comments, as well as by other economists. The final version is expected at the start of the 2016 academic year.
My personal opinion is that there already are alternatives to mainstream neoclassical economics that provide an informed analysis of global financial crises, markets and morality, and so on. You have the community of IPE scholars, for instance. You also have folks who study questions from the perspective of economic sociology. In other words, there already is a plurality of perspectives on economic phenomena. Admittedly, however, IPE has not made that much inroads into the mainstream--and the same generally. holds true for economic sociology. 

Oh, for IPE to reach mainstream consciousness!

UPDATE: Speaking of the economics of textbooks, Mankiw is also a well-known price gouger. Aside from the content of these things, they have outrageous prices to answer for--especially Stateside.

Dr. Dre's $70M USC Innovation School, Gangstas & Race

♠ Posted by Emmanuel in ,, at 11/08/2014 01:30:00 AM
Dig USC President Max Nikias trying to get down with Dre.
This is an interesting idea for innovation in higher education: is gangsta rap impresario Dr. Dre your idea of a college benefactor? He doesn't have a doctorate as his name would suggest or even a college degree, but then again, nor do Steve Jobs, Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg--who nonetheless gained ideas for their companies from attending college. As pop music listeners of a certain age know, the mean streets of Compton, CA were his university of life. Nor is he politically correct since he helped establish the template for gangsta rap which glorifies ostentatious displays of wealth obtained by means fair and foul, maltreatment of women, violence towards police, gang violence, drive-by shootings and the copious consumption of hallucinogenics. What sort of "higher education" does gangsta rap impart, exactly?

And so it was with great interest that I came across a WSJ article discussing the $70 million "Jimmy Iovine and and Andre Young Academy for Arts, Technology and the Business of Innovation," funded by the sale of the Dr. Dre Beats headphone brand to Apple. How gangsta rap culture has moved into the mainstream is an interesting phenomenon. Together with legendary pop producer Jimmy Iovine, they claim to reinvent innovation studies:
Iovine and Dre know about changing the game. For two and a half decades, Iovine, 61, was the head of Interscope Records (later Interscope Geffen A&M), where he helped oversee the careers of U2, Lady Gaga, Gwen Stefani and the Black Eyed Peas. Dr. Dre, 49, is a legendary producer with six Grammys and hundreds of millions in sales to his name, who has helped guide proteges such as Snoop Dogg, 50 Cent and Eminem. Together, they launched their company, Beats Electronics, in 2008, building it from a start-up headphone manufacturer with cool celebrity endorsements into a technology brand so lucrative that Apple recently paid $3 billion for it. Now Dre and Iovine are using $70 million to fund their school.

As Iovine explains it, the school is as much an investment in their own future as it is philanthropy. “We wanted to build a school that we feel is what the entertainment industry needs right now,” he says. “There’s a new kid in town, and he’s brought up on an iPad from one and a half years old. But the problem with some of the companies up north [in Silicon Valley] is that they really are culturally inept. I’ve been shocked at the different species in Northern and Southern California—we don’t even speak the same language. The kid who’s going to have an advantage in the entertainment industry today is the kid who speaks both languages: technology and liberal arts. That’s what this school is about.

“The problem with the school system is that a lot of it’s cookie-cutter,” he adds, “so what we’re trying to do is disrupt it a bit.” In other words: They’ve revolutionized hip-hop. They’ve revolutionized headphones. Now can they revolutionize college?
I. In a celebrity-obsessed age, I doubt that being a gangsta rap star is a useful credential for teaching "innovation." After all, what is so innovative about being misanthropic and misogynistic? Such attitudes have been around since the time of the cavemen. Then there are Dr. Dre Beats headphones themselves. While their bottom-heavy sound is popular with the rap crowd, they are strictly speaking not "high fidelity" electronics that advance the state of consumer electronics but marketing-heavy gimmicks. They are exactly like those boomy subwoofers on annoying cars that go to 120 dB. They are certainly L-O-U-D but quite inaccurate. If Dr. Dre is "innovative" because of something you and I can easily do by turning the "bass" knob all the way, what's next, Justin Bieber teaching marriage and family therapy at USC? He has even better credentials since he has more Twitter followers and has pics with Floyd Mayweather Jr. in them, right?

II. There is also the thorny matter of the host institution itself, the University of Southern California. The neighborhood of USC is a rough-and-tumble sort which has gained recent attention for the fatal beating of a Chinese student. (Compton is also nearby.) In response, the USC campus is being highly securitized to guard against precisely the sorts of downtrodden gangstas Dre used to rap about before "going legit." It's one thing to act white, but it's another thing to give millions to those who represent an establishment more interested in isolating USC from gangstas instead of promoting community outreach. After all, Dre's bio proudly proclaims on this school's website:
Born Andre Young in Compton, Calif., artist, producer and entrepreneur Dr. Dre began his career as a member of the World Class Wreckin’ Cru. In 1986, he co-founded N.W.A. [Niggaz Wit Attitude] and won critical and commercial acclaim with the group’s 1988 landmark rap album Straight Outta Compton. In 1992, Dre released his solo debut, the G-Funk masterpiece The Chronic, which Rolling Stone hailed as one of the greatest albums ever made. In 1993, Dre produced the solo debut of rapper Snoop Dogg, which spawned the worldwide hip-hop hit, “Gin and Juice.”
How things change when the guy who co-penned "F--k the Police" about shooting cops is now helping fund the same cops who do their best to keep brothers from the 'hood away from the USC campus. If rapping about killing law enforcers is a laudable item on the CV, why is he showering money on USC of all places which symbolizes racial divides in Los Angeles?
The questions become even more poignant in light of complaints from USC students about racial profiling occurring on campus.   During a recent campus party, the LAPD sent nearly 80 police officers in riot gear with a helicopter to break up an event that was full of African Americans.  The police were responding to noise complaints and are not known to have ever responded with this much force to a white party on campus.  Even the white students at a similar party across the street were stunned to see their fellow students in handcuffs.
The African-American community did not receive this news so well, either. What sort of precedent Dr. Dre sets is unclear. Despite his faults, Barack Obama set a positive role model in staying away from drugs and crime while working and studying hard to reach the pinnacle of American society. Dr. Dre, on the other hand, glorifies black-on-black crime, the murder of police, physical abuse of women, drug use and so forth. By taking so much of Dre's money, does USC condone the actions Dre raps about? Conversely, has Dr. Dre "sold out" to the white establishment? Having come from an academic institution that has had its name sullied by money taken from dubious sources, all I can say is that they've both been warned. As one of the rapper's most popular numbers went:

A young nigga on the warpath
And when I'm finished, it's gonna be a bloodbath
Of cops dying in LA
Yo Dre I got something to say

BTW: those interested in accurate-sounding music playback do not take Dr. Dre Beats with their boompa-boompa sound any more seriously than gangsta rap lyrics.

Will Malala Attend My Uni (Across Her High School)?

♠ Posted by Emmanuel in , at 10/28/2014 01:30:00 AM
Edgbaston High School for Girls is literally a stone's throw away.
I obtained my doctorate in Political Science way back in 2008 at the University of Birmingham, in the UK's second largest city by population. A year before that, I began writing this blog which still survives (and thrives!) somehow. Despite three or four changes of academic affiliation since, the blog lives. However I am not exactly the most famous person associated with Birmingham, writing a blog in a somewhat obscure academic discipline. After being shot by crazed Taliban assassins in Pakistan while on board a school bus, Malala Yousafzai became a heroine to women being persecuted for desiring an education. A few days ago, she became the youngest Nobel laureate for winning the Peace Prize at age 17. It's a feelgood story Westerners like.

Going home being deemed to dangerous, Malala has since resettled in Birmingham, UK. I was of course aware of this, but what I was not aware of was how Malala is attending secondary school near the campus of the University of Birmingham at Edgbaston High School.
Pakistani schoolgirl Malala Yousafzai, who was shot in the head by the Taliban after campaigning for girls' rights to education, has attended her first day at school in the UK. The 15-year-old was shot on a school bus in Pakistan in October. She has now recovered following treatment at Birmingham's Queen Elizabeth Hospital.

She described starting at the city's Edgbaston High School for Girls as "the most important day" of her life. She said: "I think it is the happiest moment that I'm going back to school, this is what I dreamed, that all children should be able to go to school because it is their basic right. "I am so proud to wear the uniform because it proves I am a student and that I am living my life and learning." Malala is in year nine and will start her GCSE curriculum next year. She said she was looking forward to learning about politics and law. 
Those of you who've been to Brum (our affectionate nickname for the town) know that Edgbaston is the more upscale, tonier part of the rather expansive University of Birmingham campus. The other part, Selly Oak, is the more--how do I put this--proletarian part of town. It is also where I stayed in student residence. One of the more curious memories I have about its location is that a fellow student from Pakistan also staying at Jarratt Hall was concerned about the security situation there [!] But hey, don't feel too sorry for us; another resident loved it so much that he's titled his latest trance album after our beloved student residence.

At any rate, the University of Birmingham was named "University of the Year" in 2013-2014. It's been trying to drum up attention in recent years and increase its academic rankings in the process--we're one of the world's top 100 universities in most surveys. Malala should consider that our rankings for the disciplines she's interested in are not too shabby, either: Brum ranks 13th in Political Science and 17th in Law.

Certainly, there's a hard-nosed persistence bred through living in a city lacking glamor--think of it as the Houston of the UK and you wouldn't be far off the mark. Yet, we thrive. It would also complete the circle for Malala: she received treatment for her injuries at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital on campus grounds and attends high school across the grounds of the aforementioned university. The only thing left for her is to study law or political science at the University of Birmingham ;-)

Can German-Style Apprenticeships Save America?

♠ Posted by Emmanuel in ,, at 9/15/2014 01:30:00 AM
Stamping out ignorance and providing work is the German way.
There's an excellent feature in the WSJ on German firm Festo, a supplier to German firms like VW and Mercedes-Benz, following these MNCs Stateside. Not only is it bringing manufacturing know-how to the US but also vocational knowledge in the form of the German apprenticeship model. The latter has proven to be more successful in avoiding the job-skill mismatches prevalent in US higher education. Festo even has a specialized unit dedicated to training. After all, what is the point of having an ever-increasingly expensive college degree in the face of ever-decreasing job opportunities?

Unfortunately, most Anglophone universities haven't bothered answering this question, staffed as they are by inveterate rent-seekers with a vested interest in propagating the College Myth. So, it's up to prospective employers from more enlightened parts of the world to pick up the slack. Just in time, the Germans are here to help the Yanks:
German robotics company Festo AG wants to make American factory workers more tech-savvy. As robotics take an ever more prominent role on factory floors, training workers and keeping their skills up-to-date has grown in importance. The German company sees in the U.S. "a mismatch in the labor market between what businesses need and the kind of education young people are getting," said Nader Imani, chief executive of Festo Didactic, the company's stand-alone education division. 
Labor economists see things the German way. Instead of all this guff about the knowledge economy and other vapid American happy talk only nitwits buy into, the truth is that many jobs of the future will require skills somewhere between a high school and a college degree. It is, quite frankly, financially insensible to pay for a college degree without any idea of what sorts of jobs they will help you get afterwards. Consider the US labor market going forward:
Anthony Carnevale, a labor economist who runs Georgetown University's Center on Education and the Workforce, says roughly two million U.S. jobs go unfilled because of shortfalls in skills, training or education. Of those, roughly 600,000 are jobs that require more than a high-school diploma but less than a bachelor's degree. Mr. Carnevale predicts roughly one-third of U.S. job openings through 2020 will require such middle skills, with a vocational certificate, industry-based certification, some college credits or an associate degree—but not a classic four-year college degree.

American training in these areas has deteriorated since the early 1980s, he said. German companies with operations in the U.S. have complained for years that factory workers lack specific skills they require to get the job done. Executives and American policy makers have said the U.S. could benefit from Germany's approach to apprenticeships and on-the-job training. "The German system coordinates employees need with what employers want pretty well," said Joseph Parilla of the Brookings Institution, an expert on competitiveness. 
Americans have a deservedly bad rap for the quality of their education. Spend a lot and get little and return is the operative principle. Instead of copying the American uni-jobless model, there is a much better case for the rest of the world to copy the German apprenticeship model. The world's young people deserve so much better since the honest truth is that not everybody is going to be the next Silicon Valley billionaire. Rather, most would be quite happy to receive the appropriate training for jobs that actually exist instead of going on a wild goose chase with an uncertain ending.

Unfortunately, the latter represents the state of US higher education as far as employment opportunities are concerned replicated the world over. Let Germany show us the way.

PRC Higher Ed: German Model 1, US Model 0

♠ Posted by Emmanuel in , at 6/25/2014 07:14:00 PM
Some assembly required...but not vision in putting engines together.
As we await the outcome of the upcoming World Cup match between Germany and the United States, it appears that the Europeans have already won out in another respect: China is moving away from prioritizing university education to prioritizing technical/vocational education. This is a follow-up to a recent post I made on how the Western-style university system is taking a beating even in China for not providing graduates of much worth in the job market. In the parlance of us educators who actually give a damn about whether our students find work after graduation, it's called the "job-skill mismatch." Quite frankly it reflects poorly on educators and parents alike who delude themselves into thinking that college is so great when it really isn't. That said, it's certainly true that the Chinese have some Western envy when it comes to higher education. Witness the now-famous Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU) compiled by Shanghai Jiao Tong University.

To make a long story short, after an aborted effort to model Chinese universities after those in the United States, they appear to be changing course. I believe the moribund US jokeonomy has played its part in dissuading the Chinese about the foolhardiness of copying America's education system: shrinking -2.9% in the most recent quarter doesn't inspire confidence in the US. Witness much higher targets now being placed for technical/vocational education:
A guideline issued by China’s State Council on Sunday aims to increase the number of students in vocational educational institutions from 29.34 million now, to 38.3 million by 2020. The total that year will be made up of 23.5 million studying at vocational high schools and 14.8 million in vocational colleges; the latter usually run programs lasting two to three years.
Where will the resources come from for much-expanded technical/vocational education? They are going to convert a lot of universities in China into vocational colleges. There will be no doubt where the PRC's priorities lie if this comes to fruition:
Some 600 universities could be converted into vocational colleges, adding to the 1,300 China already has, which graduated around 6 million students last year. While China already has the world’s largest number of vocational institutes (13,600 schools and colleges), they are underfunded, need upgraded facilities, and suffer faculty shortages, according to Ge Daokui, the director responsible for vocational studies at the education ministry.
Is it going to be a straight-up copy of the German apprenticeship model which is usually the one that comes to mind when discussing successful technical/vocational systems? Not really. Especially since PRC corporations aren't as well-established or as proven in training young people, it will be, ah, technical/vocational education with Chinese characteristics:
Liu Qiaoli, a researcher at the National Institute of Education Sciences, said traditional Chinese thought values people's morality more than skills, which makes the country's modern vocational education deficient at the start. "Now the top leadership, including Premier Li Keqiang, are redefining modern vocational education. He connects it with improving people's livelihoods and the country's development, and he acknowledges the essential role of vocational education," she said.

Liu said most of the vocational schools in China still take the initiative in teaching and in course planning, rather than using the models of foreign countries, such as Germany, that rely on industry-school cooperation. "In many cases, education-related organizations are the ones that care about improving vocational education. Companies and employers don't have strong motives. It is important for them to recognize the importance of developing vocational education. It means a lot to the companies and the country."
It's a massive vote of no confidence by the world's largest nation in the increasingly irrelevant American model of higher education. Like in so many other things, it's better to follow Germany than the US.

A College Degree is Wasteful...Even in China

♠ Posted by Emmanuel in , at 6/09/2014 01:00:00 AM
I have written at some length about the crisis in higher education that is occurring in its heartlands of North America and Europe [1, 2]. To make a long story short, a university education is costing more and more--far outstripping the rate of inflation--while earnings of college graduates are becoming less and less. With US college debt surpassing $1.2 trillion and counting, the next crisis to hit the American financial system may come from students overleveraging themselves. College boosters will of course say that employment and earnings prospects for graduates are significantly better than those of non-graduates, but few will argue that the cost/benefit ratio is falling rather quickly. Graduates have it hard nowadays.

Apparently, this is not just a debate confined to American and British institutions of higher learning. Even in the developing world, the same questions are being rehearsed time and again. Over the past few years, PRC leaders have encouraged higher enrollments at state universities (which is nearly all of them). Alike in the West, however, there is growing public resistance to the often questionable platitudes that college is the key to future success. From out favorite official publication, the China Daily:
At least seven provinces and one region did not meet their recruitment goals in 2013, according to the College Enrollment Report released on Wednesday by eol.cn, one of the country's largest education portals. The provinces are Henan, Shandong, Fujian, Anhui, Hebei, Guizhou and Qinghai, along with the Xinjiang Uygur autonomous region. They are the only areas that have disclosed such figures in the past year, eol.cn reported [my emphasis; so that's everyone observed].
What's to blame? Partly it's demographics and the reluctance of parents to shell out serious cash for uncertain returns:
Chen Zhiwen, editor-in-chief of eol.cn and one of the report's authors, said the situation was caused by a drop in the birth rate. "The number of newborns has been falling after peaking at 20 million in 1990 and dropped to 12 million around 2000. This is to say that the number of people aged 18 - the age when most students in China start college - will continue to drop before reaching the bottom in around 2018," Chen said. Chen also said some students and their parents had been disappointed with higher education in China and had abandoned the opportunity to go to college even after being admitted, which was a significant factor in the current situation.

Last year, a series of cases were reported in which parents opposed their children going to college. This sparked heated debate over the necessity to receive a higher education. In September, a father in Chengdu, Sichuan province, objected to his daughter's decision to go to college, saying it was a waste of time and money as employment prospects for college graduates were not good. He said it was more sensible to find work after graduating from high school. In an online survey, more than 70 percent of the 10,000-plus respondents supported the father. "The case indicates that students and parents are losing their confidence in a college education," Chen said. "Universities, education specialists and officials should pay great attention to such cases, reflect on higher education and improve the situation to help people regain confidence."
The worrying thing for educators form a neoclassical economic perspective is that returns to human capital should become higher as developing countries like China move up the value-added ladder. Consequently,  young people and their parents should respond to these signals. However, this may not be happening (yet) as enrollments continue to fall in China. It's in part likely that Chinese universities do not provide skills required by employers (job-skill mismatches).

Many Chinese, especially those outside of major urban centers, are practically-oriented and see more value in the employment prospects from education instead of the college experience by itself. Me? As I've said before, the German apprenticeship system certainly looks attractive to those valuing employment prospects above all. It certainly beats the US/UK uni-jobless system if you ask me, and is something I would advise China and other developing countries to consider before the Anglophone model for obvious, instrumental reasons.The US needs an overhaul, and its system of higher education would be an excellent place to start since others have come up with rather better solutions to providing employment for young people.

Is IPE in Decline as a Field of Study?

♠ Posted by Emmanuel in at 6/01/2014 02:00:00 AM
Out of curiosity, I used the Google Ngram Viewer which records the number of instances a term appears in the books cataloged by the search giant (from the description, it works like a quantitative content analysis across all volumes indexed by Google). Here we can partially deduce the general awareness and popularity of "international political economy" as a field of study relative to closely related ones. I chose to compare IPE with "international politics "and "international economics." Meanwhile, I began the search from 1970 since most accounts date the emergence of the discipline to the first oil crisis of 1973.

Not to any real surprise, IPE still lags behind international politics and international economics in terms of book mentions (see chart below). As an IPE blogger, I myself understand that popular awareness of the discipline is, well, next to non-existent and I thus need to constantly explain what the field is about to those who stumble upon this blog somehow. Perhaps more troubling for us IPE scholars, book mentions of IPE have been falling since around 2002 as a percentage of all cataloged works. This is certainly an investigable question: why isn't IPE making more of a popular impact? Small-but-growing would have been nice; small-and-shrinking isn't. I would put it down to a lack of diversity in viewpoints among general IPE scholarship. For a discipline that considers itself both "interdisciplinary" and "international," it tends to feature too much output from the white malestream--what I call "White PE" [sic]. Not naming names, but the top journals in this field definitely have a [white, male] hegemony of a select few American and British universities talking to each other at academic conferences and calling it "international." If you are not part of their limited conversation and schooled in its abstruse nuances, well, tough luck.

I guess things have to change if we are ever going to attract a broader audience since what Benjamin Cohen calls "mid-level theorizing"--economics envy masquerading as IPE--has lost its relevance. This may shock the white malestream, but it seems not everyone is as fascinated with the concerns and perspectives of a precious few privileged folks who often do not speak any language other than English. The evidence is clear: IPE is in decline by this measure. I would attribute this to its failure to live up to its claims of being "interdisciplinary" and "international." IMHO, we need homegrown Asian theory emerging especially out of East, South and Southeast Asia. Genuine African perspectives would be welcome, too. Certainly, more scholarship out of the white malestream won't save us since the current state of Anglophone hegemony doesn't seem to be expanding the discipline. IPE, you have been warned: change your ways by really globalizing or fall into even greater obscurity.

After OLPC: Ten Commandments of ICT for Education

♠ Posted by Emmanuel in , at 4/24/2014 06:00:00 AM
Is tech the global education solution? I have an continuing interest in the information and communication technologies for education (ICT4E) field having worked on education reform and written an article on the ill-fated One Laptop per Child (OLPC) project for UC Berkeley's California Management Review. For the record, it was not an article I found pleasant to write about--these folks were well-intentioned, after all--but we need to explore why they failed. Isn't the appeal of the Internet obvious to all? Doesn't the Internet automatically promote development? Especially with OLPC, failure to read the political-economic environment of education procurement meant that its reception has been muted as the article explains.

There has been much research done in this field ever since not only by international organizations like the World Bank, regional development banks, UN agencies such as UNESCO, etc. Fortunately for us, ICT4E stalwart Tim Unwin (his fine blog comes highly recommended) lists the ten commandments of ICT4E in a new article for the Commonwealth publication Global: The International Briefing commemorating the Internet's 25th anniversary (WWW inventor Tim Berners-Lee is a Brit, right?) With the benefit of hindsight, you kind of wish the OLPC folks considered these earlier on:
  1.  It is the learning that matters and not the technology: Many e-learning and m-learning initiatives place the emphasis on the technology – be it laptops or mobile phones. Effective initiatives begin with identifying the learning objectives and then pinpointing the technologies that are best suited to delivering them.
  2. Teachers must be closely involved in the implementation of ICT for education initiatives: Teachers need to be given effective pre- and in-service training in advance of the introduction of ICT in schools. This is absolutely crucial and goes far beyond the mere learning of Office packages of software.
  3. Sustainability issues must be considered at the very beginning: Computers, laptops, tablets and mobile phones are expensive. While it can be affordable to purchase these as a one-off investment, careful thought must be given to the budget costs of maintaining this equipment and of how to provide it for the next generation of pupils. Computers do not last forever and a substantial budget stream must constantly be made available.
  4. The supporting infrastructure must be in place: All too often, insufficient attention is paid to ensuring that there is sufficient reliable electricity and internet connectivity to enable the equipment to be used, and for teachers and students to gain access to the internet.
  5. Appropriate content must be available to help deliver the curriculum and learning needs: Far too often, ICT initiatives merely provide access to internationally available content delivered in foreign languages. It is important that local content developers are involved in shaping learning content and that as much attention is focused on using ICT to provide new ways of communicating, and not just delivering information.
  6. Ensure equality of access to all learners: ICT devices enhance inequality between those who have access to them and those who do not. It is essential, therefore, that attention is paid to ensuring that all learners are indeed able to access the benefits. Usually, ICT for education initiatives starts with those who are already privileged through their wealth or by living in urban environments with the necessary infrastructure. Enlightened initiatives actually begin with delivering learning solutions to the most marginalised people and those living in rural areas. It is also salient to remember that people with greater disabilities have far more to gain from learning ICT skills than do those with fewer disabilities.
  7. Monitoring and evaluation must be undertaken from the very beginning: Evaluation ensures that learning objectives are indeed being achieved and that any initiative can be tweaked accordingly to improve its efficacy.
  8. Appropriate maintenance contracts for equipment and networks need to be established: Training local people in the maintenance of learning technologies is essential to ensure that the equipment is used effectively. This can also provide a real boost to local economies.
  9. Use equipment and networks in schools for as long as possible each day: ICT equipment and networks in schools should be used by local communities in out-of-school hours. This maximises the use of expensive equipment and can also provide a valuable source of income generation that can help defray the costs of its usage.
  10. Think creatively in your own context: There are no best practices, only a range of good practices from which to choose. Learners and teachers should develop solutions that best fit their learning needs and then get on with implementing them!
Technological revolutionaries have by now been disabused of the idea that ICT is the magic bullet to promoting education in developing countries. Alas, things are never so simple: the form (electronics) is secondary to function (education). Remember that.

Indeed, I am becoming more "computer-agnostic" in thinking that the presence of computers is incidental and not instrumental to learning.

OECD 2012 Education Rankings: US, Leftists Get Dumberer

♠ Posted by Emmanuel in at 12/04/2013 11:34:00 AM
I am annoyed with the leftist Economic Policy Institute's spin on the results for the OECD's standardized tests known as PISA. The EPI is complaining that the results portray an unfair picture of American academic performance, and that US policymakers paint an unnecessarily dire picture of US education. Another year, another batch of crappy (should I spell that "KrapPi" to make it more intelligible to certain North American audiences?) results. Ho-hum. Among other EPI complaints we have the following:
  • There is a test score gap between socioeconomically advantaged and disadvantaged students in every country. Although the size of the gap varies somewhat from country to country, countries’ gaps are more similar to each other than they are different.
  • Countries’ average scores are affected by the relative numbers of advantaged and disadvantaged students in their schools. The United States has relatively more disadvantaged students than the usual comparison countries. If average scores were adjusted so that each country had a similar social class composition, U.S. scores would appear to be higher than conventionally reported and the gap with top-scoring countries, while still present, would be smaller. Adjusting for differences in countries’ social class composition can also change their relative rankings.
While I appreciate the retro-Marxist class warfare stylings, the EPI argument boils down to this: "social class," i.e., household income (I aspire to the petty bourgeoisie, in case you're interested) is the largest determinant of PISA test performance. If we accept this premise, then the picture they paint is even direr than that portrayed by American policymakers. Why? Because Stateside incomes are going nowhere fast--and so there's no point in trying to improve test scores when they are tied to stagnant-to-declining incomes. Next, try this observation:
  • Some countries to which the United States is frequently unfavorably compared currently have higher test scores, but their test scores have been falling over time, while scores in the United States have not been similarly falling. It is not apparent to what extent U.S. policymakers should attempt to learn from the experience of countries with high scores, or from the experience of countries with rising scores.
Actually, US scores have been falling over time--see an older post--while those of others have only on a case-to-case basis. For them you have this explanation: Given that any number of developed countries are just as stagnant-to-declining in income growth terms as the United States, you would expect similar performance in terms of academic achievement. The EPI told us this, right?

IMHO both parties get it wrong. American policymakers should target raising incomes if they really are concerned about raising test scores. There are endogeneity biases possible here, but the wealth of nations is seldom discussed in education reform for obvious reasons despite good reasons to believe they are linked. It's not politically correct, is it? Meanwhile, the leftists do not manage to brush off this issue with Alfred E. Neuman ease but actually exacerbate it by tying it to American's economic fortunes in engaging with well-worn class warfare discourse. US incomes are going down the toilet (or floating around a porcelain bathroom fixture), and so are US test scores.

Bottom line: Results from Shanghai, Singapore, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Korea and Macau are definitely not representative since they are neither OECD members nor are they sampled nationwide but only in major cities. That said, their economies are not stagnant-to-declining, so there's really no surprise they're faring better. Do we really need more evidence of the shifting balance of knowledge?

There is no conspiracy here to keep Americans poor and stupid. As you get poorer, you get stupider; well no @#$%, Sherlock. Ask this guy...

Is the IMF Beating Colleges at Online Learning?

♠ Posted by Emmanuel in , at 6/24/2013 03:43:00 PM
There is a big debate raging in academia about the relevance of university education as we know it today: First, it is becoming increasingly expensive as salaries remain stagnant or even decline as in the US and other Western nations. Second, do what universities offer have relevant course content, or are they becoming increasingly isolated in ivory towers without much practical application? Third, doesn't a higher education degree become obsolete far more quickly nowadays with the rate of advancement in all fields of human endeavour?

More and more educators believe that today's university paradigm is outmoded--and I am one of those who are asking this same question. That is, what value-added does having a college degree really offer? One of the solutions proposed, of course, is delivering course content online via what they call Massive Online Open Courses (MOOC) that can potentially deal with the issues raised above. First, delivering courses digitally allows universities to deliver courses--save for face-to-face interaction, of course--more cheaply and to a geographically broader audience. Second, material can be more readily tailored online to reflect the latest real-world trends and developments in various subject areas instead of sticking to the inbred world of folks who've been stuck in academia for years and years--like me! Third, updating of content is easier when you're not stuck with using sporadically updated textbooks and other dated course materials.

A potentially surprising vote of confidence in this idea is coming from, of all sources, the IMF. It faces the challenge of providing knowledge to many stakeholders in far-flung nations who wish to train officials better in matters of public financial management. Delivering technical assistance (i.e., advice) after all is one its main lines of business--see the table above taken from this 2011 IMF survey. What's more, it is in fact not hard up given steady incoming funding at this time because of various financial crises in different parts of the globe, but it is nonetheless moving with the times in trying to shift more courses online. Say what you will about the IMF--its critics are legion and include me--but it definitely has a 'brand' when it comes to public financial management. Unlike many middling universities, the IMF also does not lack takers for its educational services regardless of your opinion of its content:
The International Monetary Fund will make its training sessions on financial policy and debt sustainability available online this year to government officials worldwide, allowing it to reach a bigger audience at lower cost, it said on Wednesday. IMF financial workshops are meant to help governments address economic dilemmas and are currently held in eight training centers worldwide, meaning officials must travel and remain onsite for weeks, said Sharmini Coorey, director of the IMF's Institute for Capacity Development. That model is expensive for the IMF and its donor countries - and the classes fill quickly, Coorey said. In 2012, the IMF trained 7,800 officials in 270 workshops held in places like Singapore, Brazil, Kuwait and the African island of Mauritius.

"We have a lot of demand for our training and we don't have the scale to meet that demand," Coorey said. The online courses will be hosted by edX, a nonprofit consortium founded by Harvard University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. So far, the platform has primarily been used to host massive open online courses, or MOOCs, from elite universities.
The learning arm of the IMF, by the way, is known as the IMF Institute for Capacity Development. Get this: the IMF is even looking to expand its 'student base' insofar as others may wish to learn more about public financial management including civil society actors, consultancies, and so forth. Its marketing is sharp, too, with course offerings being made in different languages in the near future:
The classes will be in English, but may carry subtitles in other languages. They will open first to government officials within the next few months. Coorey plans to open them to the broader public in 2014. "We hope it will enhance public awareness and elevate the debate about economic issues," she said. The financial arrangements have not been made public, but edX President Anant Agarwal said the IMF courses would bring in revenue for the consortium. If it's a success, Agarwal said he would seek similar deals with other institutions, as well as corporations and nonprofits.
Who'd think that the IMF of all institutions would be an innovator in delivering online education modules? You may not agree with IMF policies and prescriptions (I usually don't). You may not even believe that it performs its functions well as the world's lender of last resort (ditto). However, when it comes to keeping in tune with the times in delivering timely and cost-effective solutions in education, it is making noticeable strides. It's hard  to imagine, but yes, the IMF seems to understand the logic driving MOOCs more than any number of universities still wedded to increasingly outmoded learning models.

I can't believe I'm saying this, but perhaps it's time that we let the IMF show us the way in higher education.

In the meantime, repeat after me, class: Savings...good! Debt...bad!

UPDATE: Details for the distance learning modules, AKA MOOCs, are already listed online.