Category Archives: China

What it costs to study where…

According to an infographic created by Forbes based on student fess (this excludes tuition)

The information is culled from a report by the bank HSBC. I cannot find anything more recent than September, 2014. The more interesting document I found has to do with parent ambitions, which was just released froma survey of over 5000 parents in 16 countries. Some key insights:

Structures that promote caring, Part II: The Residential College

Residential Colleges

Since the earliest days of Universities, students have lived in a system that has become known as the Residential College. Starting in Cambridge and Oxford, many other universities adopted the Residential Colleges as they sprung up. In modern times, the residential college has become synonamous with places like YaleRice, and University of California at Santa Cruz.  Collegiate way lists another 28 colleges in the USA that offer students the opportunity to live and learn in a residential college. Some Universities, like Duke and Vanderbilt offer a freshman residential experience that would be on par.

The Residential College is not just a dormitory, but something much more important and integral to the learning experience:

In its most generic sense, the term may be used to refer to an institution that houses most of its students on-campus as opposed to an institution with a large commuter or off-campus population. Many small, independent, liberal arts colleges conform to this definition of residential college. In a more restricted sense, the term residential college may be used interchangeably with terms such as living-learning center, theme house, and residential learning community. This usage, however, may obscure important differences between the classical model of residential college, conventional residence halls, and other types of contemporary residence education programs.

And more:

A 1998 meta-analysis by Gregory Blimling of studies published from 1966 through June 1997 shows, however, that residential colleges, as compared to conventional halls, increase students’ academic performance and retention and enhance the social climate of the living unit. Blimling’s study does not distinguish clearly between classic residential colleges and living-learning centers.

According to studies conducted in 1991 by George D. Kuh and associates and in 1993 by Jerry A. Stark, faculty participating in residential colleges or living/learning centers report improvement in their teaching skills and enhanced relationships with faculty from other disciplines. Frances Arndt reported in 1993 that faculty also held positive attitudes about opportunities offered by residential colleges for teaching a variety of special and experimental courses.

Also well worth the reading an artcile for StateUniversity.Com And this: 

Previous literature has consistently demonstrated a positive influence of residential living on the success of a student’s university experience (Stevens, 1996; LaNasa, Olson & Alleman, 2007). The impact of residential living on the university experience is believed to be multidimensional (Zhao & Kuh, 2004), it may also depend on how satisfied the student is with their arrangement. The most successful residential colleges are those living-learning colleges prominent in USA (LaNasa et. al, 2007). These colleges facilitate not only heightened living conditions but the environment assists to recruit and support student success and learning. Therefore such findings emphasise the need for residential communities to not only be a place to live, but to also foster academics and student success. There has been shown that on-campus living has a positive, often indirect effect on student growth and social development, this is associated with the on-campus environment increasing student involvement through maximised opportunities for social, cultural and extracurricular involvement (LaNasa et al, 2007).

Other research shows that

Students in residential learning communities had significantly higher levels of involvement, interaction, integration, and gains in learning and intellectual development than did students in traditional residence halls. 

The Collegiate Way, a web sit dedicated to Residential College, provides four questions that you should ask when exploring how a college’s living situation works:

o   “How many faculty live on campus?” The number of faculty living on campus is a good sign of an institution’s commitment to creating a comprehensive educational environment. And the question is not how many staff members or “student life professionals” live on campus, but how many faculty: professors, lecturers, deans, and so on, who not only participate in residential life but who also teach biology, or philosophy, or mathematics, or art, or some other academic discipline. Are there faculty offices in the dormitories? If so, that is also a good sign.

o   “Does the university have ‘theme halls’?” Theme halls are dormitories or dormitory corridors that group together students who have a common interest or background. Although at first glance this might seem like a good idea, theme halls are really not in students’ best educational interest. If all the art students live together, or all the science students, or all the athletes, how will any of them be able to learn and grow intellectually from exposure to the full range of talents and interests that other students have? If the university you are visiting has theme halls you might ask instead, “Why does the university segregate students in this way instead of integrating them so they can benefit from living in a diverse environment?”

o   “How many juniors and seniors live on campus?” How many graduate students? Are they segregated from the other students, or is everyone mixed together? If the campus dormitories are populated almost entirely by freshmen and sophomores, that is a bad sign. It means either that the conditions are so poor that older students don’t want to stay, or that the university is only concerned with rental occupancy and is not trying to create a rich and diverse educational environment.

o   “Do faculty eat in the campus dining halls?” If you visit a dining hall, look around and see if there are university faculty and staff eating there as well as students. Is the dining hall a noisy student ghetto with a widescreen television blaring away, or is it a relaxing, home-like place where people can talk and get to know each other?

o   “How are the dormitories used during the summer?” Many universities rent their dormitory space during the summer to make money, and in itself this is not objectionable. But who are the tenants? If the space is rented to academic societies, professional organizations, local charities, and the like, that is a good sign. If it is rented to summer sports camps, that may be a bad sign. Years of personal observation have taught me that summer sports camps are often badly supervised and commit extensive vandalism. Their presence may mean that campus buildings are so poorly maintained that more responsible groups don’t want to stay in them. Do you want your son or daughter’s campus home to be routinely vandalized over the summer?

Looking at the CollegiateWay’s listings, you can see that he makes a distinction between the Residential Colleges of Universities and the small liberal arts and science colleges that offer a very similar experience, albeit on a more intimate experience.

Each of these institutions—along with many others around the world—has established, is planning, or is expanding an internal system of residential colleges: permanent, cross-sectional, faculty-led societies that provide the advantages of a small college in the environment of a large university.

For what may be the most comprehensive listing of Residential Colleges in the world, visit Collegiate Way:

 

 

Alma Mata Index: Ranking universities by where their CEOs went to college

Time’s Higher Education continues to feed the monstor coming up with a ranking of Global universities based on where they went to universities. Simple enough premise: 

1) Take the 500 companies from the global 500 

2) Identify where their CEOs went to universities–all actual degress awarded. So say you went to University of Victoria for Undegraduate and University of Califronia, Berkeley for Graduate school, both universities get one point. 

3) Factor in the total revenue of the alumni CEOs’ companies-the more money, the higher the ranking. 

And voila you have a list. You can read the whole story here.

As one observer (Mark Freebairn, a partner at top City headhunters Odgers Berndtson) notes, “For prospective employers there is comfort in the fact that someone has been selected ahead of a lot of other applicants. It means they are obviously bright. Passing that selection process is an endorsement for employers.” Or is it just laziness?

Seriously, the sample size was less than 500 people. While many CEOs have two or three degress, this will only bump the number up slightly. Actually, for the top 100 universities, the tall of degress comes to 390 awarded. I expect there is a long tale of 100 more universities with one CEO. Certainly a typical CEO would have an undergaduate degree and a graduate school degree–probably MBA or Law. Indeed, the top 10 male CEOs have a total of 15 degrees collectively, or 1.5 on average. Female CEOs have to work harder (or perhaps are just smarter) judging by the number of degress earned-19, or 1.9 each. 84 universities had fewer than 6 degress awarded. Not exactly a resounding endorsement for such power houses as Columbia  or Yale(6), Oxford (5), USC (4), Umich (3) and Brown (2). 

Focusing only on the top 12, the sample size continues to be rediculously low coming in with a total of 159 degress awarded or just 13 each. While there might be some statsitical significance in relation to running a fortune 500 company, it pales in comparrision as to how many graduated from these same universities and are NOT running a fortune 500 company. Take Harvard, ranked number 1, with 31 degrees awarded. One can only asume that the degrees awarded spread out over multiple years and both undergraduate and graduate school. (A side note: Of the top 20 male and female CEOs, not one did their undergraudate at Harvard). Let’s just pretend that all CEOs graduated at the same time. 31 came from Harvard. In 2009, Harvard awarded a total of 7234 degrees (this includes undergraduate and graduate degrees like law and MBAs). 31 of 7234 went on to be CEOs. This would make a rather sad ratio of one in every 233 degrees, IF they all came from the same year. But they did not. They were spread out, one can fairly assume over a 20 year period. So let us guestimate that Harvard awards at least 7000 degrees every year for 20 years. So less than .03 percent of Harvard Degree earners went on to run a global 500 Comapny. Not exactly a reason to write home now is it?

To be fair, Harvard alum go onto to do MANY great things:

 

Fairburn acknowledges that ““While people still look at where a candidate went to university, and the quality of degree and what they studied, by the time someone is 45 with 20 years’ experience, it is less relevant. But it has an impact in the first three to five years. By then the advantage is established and it is difficult for laggards to catch up.”

Malcolm Gladwell took to task this sort of faulty thinking by distinguishing Treatment effect vs Selection Effect:

 

Social scientists distinguish between what are known as treatment effects and selection effects. The Marine Corps, for instance, is largely a treatment-effect institution. It doesn’t have an enormous admissions office grading applicants along four separate dimensions of toughness and intelligence. It’s confident that the experience of undergoing Marine Corps basic training will turn you into a formidable soldier. A modelling agency, by contrast, is a selection-effect institution. You don’t become beautiful by signing up with an agency. You get signed up by an agency because you’re beautiful.

At the heart of the American obsession with the Ivy League is the belief that schools like Harvard provide the social and intellectual equivalent of Marine Corps basic training—that being taught by all those brilliant professors and meeting all those other motivated students and getting a degree with that powerful name on it will confer advantages that no local state university can provide. Fuelling the treatment-effect idea are studies showing that if you take two students with the same S.A.T. scores and grades, one of whom goes to a school like Harvard and one of whom goes to a less selective college, the Ivy Leaguer will make far more money ten or twenty years down the road.

Times Higher Education is suggesting that where you goes. But the research does not fully bear this out. Alan Krueger and Stacy Dale (1999) found that “students who attended more selective colleges do not earn more than other students who were accepted and rejected by comparable schools but attended less selective colleges.” Indeed a decade later, they revealed that it did not matter if you got into an elite school–if you had the numbers:“Even applying to a school, even if you get rejected, says a lot about you,” Mr. Krueger told me. He points out that the average SAT score at the most selective college students apply to turns out to be a better predictor of their earnings than the average SAT score at the college they attended. (The study measured a college’s selectivity by the average SAT score of admitted students as well as by a selectivity score that the publisher Barron’s gives to colleges.)”

A final word rom Kruger

 

My advice to students: Don’t believe that the only school worth attending is one that would not admit you. That you go to college is more important than where you go. Find a school whose academic strengths match your interests and that devotes resources to instruction in those fields. Recognize that your own motivation, ambition and talents will determine your success more than the college name on your diploma.

My advice to elite colleges: Recognize that the most disadvantaged students benefit most from your instruction. Set financial aid and admission policies accordingly.

 

 

 

And the top universities, according to Times Higher Education?

 

1 Harvard University US–31 degrees, 25 CEOs

2 University of Tokyo JAP–14 degrees, 13 CEOs 

3  Stanford University US 13 degrees, 11 CEOs

4  École Polytechnique FRA 12 degrees, 12 CEOs

5 HEC Paris FRA 10 degrees, 9 CEOs

6 ENA, École Nationale d’Administration FRA 9 degrees, 9 CEOs

7 University of Pennsylvania US 9 degrees, 8 CEOs

8 Massachusetts Institute of Technology US 9 degrees, 7 CEOs

9 Keio University JAP 8 degrees, 8 CEOs

10 Seoul National University KOR 8 degrees, 8 CEOs 

11 Cornell University US 8 degrees, 6 CEOs

12 INSEAD FRA 7 degrees, 7 CEOs

13 Tsinghua University CHN 7 degrees, 7 CEOs

14 University of Chicago US 7 degrees, 6 CEOs 

15 Northwestern University US 7 degrees, 6 CEOs

 

 

 

Most expensive countries to study in for international students?

The following is what HSBC concluded international students will pay to attend university in various countries.

Country Annual fees (USD) Annual cost of living (USD) Annual total (USD)
Australia 25,375 13,140 38,516
United States 25,226 10,479 35,705
United Kingdom 19,291 11,034 30,325
United Arab Emirates 21,371 6,004 27,375
Canada 18,474 7,537 26,011
Canada 18,474 7,537 26,011
Singapore 14,885 9,363 24,248
Hong Kong 13,182 9,261 22,443
Japan 6,522 12,642 19,164
Russia 3,131 6,310 9,441
China 3,983 4,783 8,766
Taiwan 3,270 4,987 8,257
Spain 1,002 6,004 7,006
Germany 635 5,650 6,285

 

Australia, surpsingly comes in at the highest, which is incredibly deceptive. Firstly, an Australian (and UK) degree, will typically take you three years while Canadian and US degress take four years. Secondly, HSBC uses tuition soures based on what Forbes list, but it is unclear if they are using the “ten largest” or the Ivy League or what? Since the ten largest US institutions are not considered the elite of the US. Furthermore, many students receive discounts in the form of financial aid at the top US colleges, but those are tied to a family’s ability to pay.  Since the typical ivy league education (Princeton) is $56,750, this puts a US education well ahead of Australia. Moreover, if we extraoplate over 4 years, this hits a whopping $227,000 whereas Australia comes in 115,548, or almost half. UK comes in at about 91K. Canada rounds out just over $104 K. 

Why Canada get’s two entries just adds to the sloppy presentation. 

And why would they leave out some stellar international destinations like the Netherlands, Switzerland or New Zealand?

Australia the most expensive country?

The following is what HSBC concluded international students will pay to attend university in various countries.

Country Annual fees (USD) Annual cost of living (USD) Annual total (USD)
Australia 25,375 13,140 38,516
United States 25,226 10,479 35,705
United Kingdom 19,291 11,034 30,325
United Arab Emirates 21,371 6,004 27,375
Canada 18,474 7,537 26,011
Canada 18,474 7,537 26,011
Singapore 14,885 9,363 24,248
Hong Kong 13,182 9,261 22,443
Japan 6,522 12,642 19,164
Russia 3,131 6,310 9,441
China 3,983 4,783 8,766
Taiwan 3,270 4,987 8,257
Spain 1,002 6,004 7,006
Germany 635 5,650 6,285

 

Australia, surpsingly comes in at the highest, which is incredibly deceptive. Firstly, an Australian (and UK) degree, will typically take you three years while Canadian and US degress take four years. Secondly, HSBC uses tuition soures based on what Forbes list, but it is unclear if they are using the “ten largest” or the Ivy League or what? Since the ten largest US institutions are not considered the elite of the US. Furthermore, many students receive discounts in the form of financial aid at the top US colleges, but those are tied to a family’s ability to pay.  Since the typical ivy league education (Princeton) is $56,750, this puts a US education well ahead of Australia. Moreover, if we extraoplate over 4 years, this hits a whopping $227,000 whereas Australia comes in 115,548, or almost half. UK comes in at about 91K. Canada rounds out just over $104 K. 

Why Canada get’s two entries just adds to the sloppy presentation. 

And why would they leave out some stellar international destinations like the Netherlands, Switzerland or New Zealand?

Engagement Chinese style

A trio of stories raises profound issues about child rearing and learning in the Chinese heritage circles. First up: Taiwan: 

A study funded by the National Science Council suggested that the main reason why Taiwanese university students often remain quiet in class is because they are concerned about saving face and are conditioned to learning by simply listening to lecturers.

The study also discovered that only 28 percent of university students in Taiwan interact with their teachers, and only 36 percent participate in class discussions or raise questions in class.

In fairness, this is actually grade 7 class during nap time.

 

I suspect this study comes as no real surprise to anyone who has worked with a large group of Taiwanese students. While many are intensly curious, taking risks does not come naturally. Given the confucian heritage where teachers are reveared-and not to be questioned-we can imagine how this plays out in other countries like China, Hong Kong etc. Given that  ”83 percent of students are inclined toward rote learning content from textbooks and notes,” one wonders if MOOCs will take off there. 

If not on the Island, then perhaps the mainland where record levels of Pollution are keeping kids are indoors:

Parents are confining sons and daughters to their homes, even if it means keeping them away from friends. Schools are canceling outdoor activities and field trips. Parents with means are choosing schools based on air-filtration systems, and some international schools have built gigantic, futuristic-looking domes over sports fields to ensure healthy breathing.

Then again, kids are already used to growing up wearing facemasks for disease.

Meanwhile in Hong Kong we learn that parents are raising self indulgent, narcisitic children

Fung said she was worried because 16 per cent of children showed signs that they were aggressors or tended to bully, while similar studies in the US found about 10 per cent of children with such a tendency. This category of children had an APSD score of 6.23, similar to that of adolescent criminals in the US and Canada.

“Action must be taken. We don’t want murders,” she said, adding such children may try to achieve their goals without thinking of the consequences.

Then again when all you have to look up to is this:

on can understand how dizzying it is to raise children in Hong Kong. The author’s study, Dr Fong, warns “Parents are giving too many things to their kids, making them feel good about themselves. Such monster parents overprotect and make children narcissistic. This can be potentially dangerous.”

SO where should the future wealth seekers go if the US is not their destination? Wealth-X figured it out for you. 

PHOTO: The Chapel, Keble College, Oxford University, Oxford.
Getty Images
1.
University of Oxford

United Kingdom

372 ULTRA HIGH NET WORTH INDIVIDUALS

PHOTO: Aerial View of the Rajabai Clock Tower, Bombay Stock Exchange Building, Mumbai University and Mumbai City in Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Shriya Patil/The India Today Group/Getty Images
2.
University of Mumbai

India

361 ULTRA HIGH NET WORTH INDIVIDUALS

PHOTO: University of Cambridge, King's College, view from Great St. Mary's Church.
Getty Images
3.
University of Cambridge

United Kingdom

273 ULTRA HIGH NET WORTH INDIVIDUALS

PHOTO: The main entrance to the London School of Economics.
Umezo Kamata/Wikipedia
4.
London School of Economics and Political Science

United Kingdom

247 ULTRA HIGH NET WORTH INDIVIDUALS

PHOTO: The Great Hall of the University of Sydney.
Toby Hudson/Wikipedia
5.
University of Sydney

Australia

229 ULTRA HIGH NET WORTH INDIVIDUALS

PHOTO: The University of Dehli main building.
seek1/Wikipedia
6.
University of Delhi

India

211 ULTRA HIGH NET WORTH INDIVIDUALS

PHOTO: The Asia campus of Insead stands in Singapore, Dec. 6, 2010.
Munshi Ahmed/Bloomberg via Getty Images
7.
Insead

France

176 ULTRA HIGH NET WORTH INDIVIDUALS

PHOTO: The Australian School of Business building at the University of New South Wales.
unsw.flickr/flickr
8.
University of New South Wales

Australia

163 ULTRA HIGH NET WORTH INDIVIDUALS

PHOTO: Engineering building at the National University of Singapore.
Wikipedia
9.
National University of Singapore

Singapore

155 ULTRA HIGH NET WORTH INDIVIDUALS

PHOTO: The main administration building of Tsinghua University in Beijing, China.
pfctdayelise/Wikipedia
10.
Tsinghua University

China

136 ULTRA HIGH NET WORTH INDIVIDUALS

11.
Peking University

China

128 ULTRA HIGH NET WORTH INDIVIDUALS

12.
McGill University

Canada

127 ULTRA HIGH NET WORTH INDIVIDUALS

13.
Imperial College London

United Kingdom

123 ULTRA HIGH NET WORTH INDIVIDUALS

14.
University of Melbourne

Australia

123 ULTRA HIGH NET WORTH INDIVIDUALS

15.
University of Toronto

Canada

115 ULTRA HIGH NET WORTH INDIVIDUALS

16.
Monash University

Australia

110 ULTRA HIGH NET WORTH INDIVIDUALS

17.
Trinity College Dublin

Ireland

106 ULTRA HIGH NET WORTH INDIVIDUALS

18.
London Business School

United Kingdom

101 ULTRA HIGH NET WORTH INDIVIDUALS

19.
University of Technology, Sydney

Australia

99 ULTRA HIGH NET WORTH INDIVIDUALS

20.
University College London

United Kingdom

The Yale of Shanghai! or is that a ?

As Lisa Simpson remarked of Mcgill, the Harvard of Canada, “Anything that’s the “something” of the “something” isn’t really the “anything” of “anything”.”

SO is the newsheadlines caught my attention proclaiming that the Yale of China is open. Right here in Shanghai. Well Pudong technically. In an Educational park with 18 colleges. Xing Wei originally in 2001 as a trade school. It hit some financial difficulty. Now it is being transformed to a two year residential college taught in English focusing on the liberal arts experience. Of course, i am not actually aware of any liberal arts school in the US requiring “Intro. to Mao Thought & Theoretical System of China Socialism” as ac ore course, but what do I know? I am intrigued to learn more about “Mental Education and Foundation of Law” as I do believe students would benefit from mental education.

Unclear what the costs would be. Apparently they already have transfer agreements with San Jose State University! I do not believe Yale has such an agreement.

They plan to enroll 300 students this fall.
“We want students who have the courage to pursue their desires, to know what they really want; that’s different from the traditional definition of top students,” college founder and Harvard-educated investor Chen Weiming said. “Many students have the intelligence but most don’t have the courage; people who can think out of the box need to have a lot of courage.”

Learn more:

http://www.xingwei.edu.cn/en/index.html

World’s top 200 universities


1 California Institute of Technology United States
2 Harvard University United States
2 Stanford University United States
4 University of Oxford United Kingdom
5 Princeton University United States
6 University of Cambridge United Kingdom
7 Massachusetts Institute of Technology United States
8 Imperial College London United Kingdom
9 University of Chicago United States
10 University of California, Berkeley United States

See complete list of rankings here.

New York Times now showcasing Application porn

That got your attention didn’t it…which is the only objective of the New York Times publishing documents students from China sent to Grinnell as part of their efforts to gain admission. The story focuses on the dramatic increase in applications from China. Grinell, like many other US colleges in struggling to decipher which applicants will best fit in their small residential college. They may take 15 out of the 200 who have applied–half of whom have perfect scores on the SAT Math section.

Many students send bound booklets full of photographs and profiles in order to showcase their personalities and accomplishments to the universities. I have seen a few of these. They can be impressive. They can be insightful. And they are probably not read. Firstly, they are not asked for. Secondly admission officers are too busy. Besides, who actually produces these things? With agents in china reportedly writing student’s essays and even fabricating recommendations and transcripts…how could anyone trust these documents.

It is understandable that the New York Times should want to illustrate the story with photos…but many readers are wondering, did the Times explicitly obtain permission to use the student’s documents?

My personal favorite is slide 15 in which the student has assembled photos of himself in front of several super selective National Research Universities with the title “A fully prepared applicant-campus visits.” If you do look at the porn, you will see that these universities are nothing like Grinnell. This is sure to impress the admission director…impress them that you have no clue as to what you are doing.