I believe in global education, BUT…

May 112008
 

I find this article from the New York Times slightly disturbing.

If you haven’t read it, please do — it is long, enlightening, and profiles one family in particular from Beijing who was able to send their daughter to university in Ohio. But if you don’t have time to read it, here are the basics:

  1. Student overseas wants to go to American, Australian, Canadian, or UK university.
  2. American, Australian, Canadian, and UK universities want students from overseas because
    • they pay way more tuition, and
    • it diversifies their school culture, and
    • they pay way more tuition, and… wait, I already said that.
  3. So, Student pays X amount of USD to Agent to find him an appropriate university in the western world, and
  4. American, Australian, Canadian, and UK universities pay Y amount of USD to same Agent to find them Z number of international students because
    • they pay way more tuition, and
    • it diversifies their school culture, and
    • did I mention that they pay way more tuition?
  5. Agent finds appropriate fit, Student applies to University recommended by Agent, and is admitted.
  6. Student happy (found tertiary educational direction), University happy ($$$ + cultural diversity = better learning?).
  7. Agent happiest, because X + Y = BINGO.

The article states,

. . . [M]any agents collect hefty fees from both sides — the students they advise, and the universities they contract with — leaving some to question whose interest is being served . . .

To be fair, the next sentence implies that some people are working towards changing this perception:

Even some advocates of recruiting agents see a need for an ethics code.

And further,

“We should be doing this, but we should be doing it right,” said Mitch Leventhal, vice provost of international affairs at the University of Cincinnati, which has contracts with agents. “And I don’t think it’s right for students to have to pay a lot if the agent is also getting paid by the university. I don’t think it’s ethical.”

Umm, but you’re still doing it, aren’t you? Did the University of Cincinnati cut their contracts with the agents because Mr. Leventhal said it was unethical to pay them? (Note that the sentence above does not say if the University of Cincinnati pays the agents they have contracts with.)

At least one university representative thinks it is unethical and does not pay agents they have contracts with:

Throughout Asia and to a lesser extent other parts of the world, thousands of agents offer help to students seeking admission to an English-speaking university, charging them fees that may be a few hundred dollars, or far more. “Some agents charge as much as $30,000,” said John Robert Cryan of the University of Toledo, which works with agents, but pays no commissions. “There’s a lot of gouging going on.”

[emphasis mine]

Apparently, Mr. Leventhal (of the U of C, above) is an advocate of ethics in this field, but get this:

Mr. Leventhal is also advocating a code of ethics, modeled on Australian practice, under which American universities would pay agents a 10 percent commission, if the agents agreed to charge students only a nominal fee.

This is ethical? Am I missing something? Maybe an Aussie can explain it to me, as apparently this is Australian practice. To my mind, none of this is ethical. For students AND universities to pay for placement at “the right” university? Where does that leave the international (or local, for that matter) student who wants and rightly deserves a place in a university? Well, apparently, unless he has between $500 and $5000 US to spend — that leaves him nowhere.

On the last page of the article, Philip G. Altbach, director of the Center for International Higher Education at Boston College, is quoted as saying:

“In a globalized world, where some people need a lot of guidance to get here, there may be a legitimate place for responsible middlemen,” he said, then added, “although I really hate it.”

And I agree — perhaps there is a need for a middleman. But, but, but… here are my buts:

  • Universities should NOT be paying them — what if instead they were simply “regular” university employees, out and about recruiting for their university as normal?
  • Students should not have to pay them very much (like, less than $50), or even better nothing at all

Basically, I think that universities perhaps need to beef up their own recruitment practices, and aim to recruit international students the old-fashioned way — by making their university look like the best place to go, rather than by paying a middleman thousands of dollars.

Does anyone else think this is unethical? Or am I being too old-fashioned and curmudgeonly?

Whatever happened to open and honest application procedures? Whatever happened to applications requiring that the person with the best fit (based on grades, SAT scores, and whatever else the university deems necessary) gets in on his/ her own merit, rather than simply because he/she is from China and has thousands of dollars to spend?

Should people be making money from international students’ desire to go to university in the Western world?

Photo credit: Here. There. And Nowhere. by drp

Like this? You might also enjoy these:

 11 May, 2008  Posted by at 11:00 pm Education Philosophy, International Education Tagged with: , , ,  15 Responses »

I Am Epiphany-less

May 102008
 

[Edit: if anyone can help me properly use footnotes, I’d be much obliged! Thanks!]

Ok, so we’re on what, Day 10? And I am still thinking about Day 7.

Here’s the thing: I’ve been falling behind because I am, on some level, not finding the Comment Challenge to be such a challenge.

Let me explain. The purpose of the Comment Challenge is to:

. . . [become] better blog citizens . . . by actively participating in conversations and [share] your learning, especially with those new to blogging . . .

And I get that, I really do. That is, in fact, why I signed up for the challenge. Indeed, I even was initially intimidated by the challenge:

tweetscan.png

And I even understand the purpose of the Daily Activities, which is to

challenge our thinking, writing and . . . aid in the process of becoming better commenters.

But here is my problem: I think I am already a good commenter, without the Daily Activities.
Task 1 was a good starting place, and definitely uncovered some areas for me that I need to focus on in my commenting. Basically, after the Self-Audit I felt more mindful of how I make my presence understood as I go about life in the online world, interacting with people who have never met me. I realized that at times, my tone is unclear and perhaps not accurate, and so I have been more cognizant of what I say and how I say it.

Tasks for Days 2 through 6 were things that were not unusual for me — i.e., I do these things anyway, fairly regularly. So I didn’t really, officially, do them as part of the Comment Challenge.1 And then I got to Day 7 (even though today is Day 10) and thought, Hmm… what am I really learning here?

Answers:

  • I often make comments on others‘ blogs that are perhaps even more insightful than what I post here on my own blog. Therefore, I think I am better at responding to others’ ideas than coming up with my own. Question: What does that say about me? Am I not that innovative? Or am I just too social?
  • I don’t need prompted tasks to make sure I am expanding my PLN, communicating with the people in it, and respectfully disagreeing with people. Perhaps others do, but I don’t.
  • I comment enough, but definitely since the challenge began, I have been commenting more — which I guess was the point, so … ta-da! Mission (thus far) accomplished.

And one more question for anyone reading this: Is there a word which means “not having discovered something new and epiphanous2 when one was expecting to?”

1(Even coComment was already installed on my Firefox browser at home, though I had not enabled it in a while. The only new thing I needed to do was enable it on my tablet at school.)
2Ok, I made that word up.

Like this? You might also enjoy these:

 10 May, 2008  Posted by at 5:00 pm On the Personal Side, Writing Tagged with:  15 Responses »

I can see it growing: Blogging and Writing

May 072008
 

So, I’ve been reading a few things about blogging. And I’ve been reading a few things about writing. And I’ve been reading a few things about both blogging and writing, and I’m starting to think I’m missing something. Or need clarification, at the very least.

I’m going to keep this philosophical, much like my assessment post a while back.

First, a question:

If (text-based)1 blogging is a kind of writing, then aren’t all bloggers writers?

And now, the statements:

  1. I (foolishly, perhaps) believe that all my students can become good writers2 of some kind.
  2. I therefore believe that all my students should try their hand at blogging, just as I believe all my students should try writing poetry, maybe a short story, a personal narrative, an e-mail, and oodles of other writing types.
  3. I do not believe a great writing teacher needs to be a great writer; he / she simply needs to “know the ropes” and be great teacher, period.
  4. I therefore believe a great blogging teacher does not need to be a “master blogger”, but that he / she just needs to know how it works, and be a great teacher, period.

And finally, more questions:

  • Those of you out there who use blogs with your students, how do you use them?
  • Do you assess them? If so, how?
  • And if you don’t use blogs with your students, why not?

The background

I am changing (quite drastically) the way I use blogs with my students for the remainder of this school year, and next. And so, I’m looking for ideas and anecdotal feedback… errr.. feed-forward… from those who have walked this path before me. 🙂

1Of course, the visual-types of blogs aren’t really writing, but a different kind of communication

2I define the term “good writer” as one who creates “good writing.” And for the definition of “good writing,” I turn to one of my most influential mentors in both teaching and writing, Carl Leggo, who once stated, “Good writing gets the job done. It works.” I should also note that I have different definitions of “great writing” and other comparative terms.

Photo credits: You can almost see the grass grow by aussiegall; How to Grow a Blog by teachandlearn (licensed under CC 2.0 Generic)

Like this? You might also enjoy these:

 7 May, 2008  Posted by at 10:44 pm Assessment, Education Philosophy, Writing Tagged with: , , , , ,  7 Responses »
 Older Entries  Newer Entries