Saturday, 24 August 2013
Wednesday, 21 August 2013
យុវសិស្សនាំគ្នាចាប់យកមុខវិជ្ជាសិក្សាពេញនិយមតែមើលរំលងពីទីផ្សារដ៏តូចចង្អៀត
Wednesday, 21 August 2013
ជ័យ ភារុន និង ហង់ សុគន្ធា
នៅស្រុកខ្មែរ មុខវិជ្ជាចិត្តវិទ្យា មានទីផ្សារការងារទូលំទូលាយ
ដែលសិស្សមានឱកាសការងារទាំងផ្នែករដ្ឋ និងឯកជន
ព្រមទាំងអង្គការនានា។ ពេលដែលសិស្សកំពុងធ្វើសារណា
មានអង្គការមកមើលផ្ទាល់ ហើយយកសិស្សទៅធ្វើការតែម្តង»
នេះជាប្រសាសន៍របស់លោកសាស្ដ្រាចារ្យ សោម ច័ន្ទ សុវណ្ណតារា
ដែលជាអនុប្រធានដេប៉ាតឺម៉ង់ចិត្តវិទ្យានៅសាកលវិទ្យាល័យ ភូមិន្ទ
ភ្នំពេញ។
ប្រាកដណាស់ ក្រោយពេលដែលសិស្សានុសិស្សបញ្ចប់ការសិក្សាទុតិយភូមិ
ពួកគេភាគច្រើននាំគ្នាសម្រុកទៅសិក្សាផ្នែកគណនេយ្យ
គ្រប់គ្រងពាណិជ្ជកម្ម ឬហិរញ្ញវត្ថុជាដើម។
បើយោងតាមស្ថិតិ
និស្សិតកំពុងសិក្សាថ្នាក់បរិញ្ញាបត្រតាមមុខជំនាញ
នាយកដ្ឋានឧត្តមសិក្សានៃក្រសួង អប់រំ យុវជន និង កីឡា បានឲ្យដឹងថា
មុខជំនាញដែលនិស្សិតអាហារូបករណ៍ និងបង់ថ្លៃឆ្នាំសិក្សា ២០១០-២០១១
មានច្រើនជាងគេបង្អស់ គឺបរិញ្ញាបត្រភាសា អង់គ្លេស ដែលមានសិស្សសរុប
២២,២៣៥ នាក់ ហើយចំណាត់ថ្នាក់លេខ ២ គឺគណនេយ្យដែលមានសិស្សរហូតដល់
២០,២៨៩ នាក់ និងលេខរៀងទីបី ផ្នែក គ្រប់គ្រងដែលមានសិស្សចំនួន ១៩,២៥៨
នាក់ ក្នុងចំណោមសិស្ស ១៨៥,៩១៨ នាក់។
បើតាមការប្រៀបធៀបតាមចំណាត់ថ្នាក់នៃសកម្មភាពសេដ្ឋកិច្ចនៃ
ព័ត៌មានជ្រើសរើសបុគ្គលិក និងអ្នកស្វែងរកការងារធ្វើសរុបក្នុងឆ្នាំ
២០១០ ដល់ខែ វិច្ឆិកាឆ្នាំ ២០១១
របស់ព្រឹត្តិបត្រការងារនៃទីភ្នាក់ងារជាតិមុខរបរ និងការងារ
បានឲ្យដឹងថា អ្នកស្វែងរកការងារផ្នែកគណនេយ្យ សវនកម្ម
និងពន្ធអាករមានដល់ទៅ ១៣,៥ ភាគរយ ខណៈដែលតម្រូវការទីផ្សារមានត្រឹម
៥,៨ ភាគរយ។
ក្រៅពីភាសា អង់គ្លេសដែលជាភាសាគ្រឹះសម្រាប់ចាប់យកឱកាសការងារ
តើហេតុអ្វីបានយុវសិស្សមិនបង្វែរទិសដៅរបស់ខ្លួនពីគណនេយ្យ
គ្រប់គ្រង និងហិរញ្ញវត្ថុមកជ្រើសយកមុខវិជ្ជា រូបវិទ្យា ជីវវិទ្យា
ប្រវត្ដិវិទ្យា ភូមិវិទ្យា សង្គមវិទ្យា ចិត្តវិទ្យា វិចិត្រសិល្បៈ
និងផ្នែករដ្ឋបាលសាធារណៈដែលចំនួនអ្នកសិក្សាផ្នែកនេះមិនលើសពី ១
ពាន់នៅក្នុងមួយឆ្នាំសម្រាប់ឆ្នាំសិក្សា ២០១០-២០១១?
ចំពោះការជ្រើសរើសមុខវិជ្ជាសិក្សាដ៏ជោរជន់នេះ កញ្ញា គីម ស៊ីនេត
ទើបបញ្ចប់ថ្នាក់បរិញ្ញាបត្រផ្នែកគណនេយ្យបានសារភាពថា
កញ្ញាពិតជាសោកស្តាយនូវជម្រើសថ្នាក់បរិញ្ញាបត្រណាស់
ដោយមិនបានសិក្សានូវអ្វីដែលជាចំណង់ចំណូលចិត្ដរបស់ខ្លួន។
ចំណែកឯ កញ្ញា ភឿក ចាន់រិទ្ធ
ជាសិស្សទើបបញ្ចប់ការសិក្សាអនុបណ្ឌិតវិទ្យាសាស្ដ្រ ផ្នែកគីមីវិទ្យា
តាមរយៈអាហារូបករណ៍ពីប្រទេស ថៃ
ដែលកញ្ញាមានគម្រោងចង់ក្លាយជាអ្នកស្រាវជ្រាវវិទ្យាសាស្រ្តមួយរូប
ទាក់ទងទៅនឹងមុខជំនាញរបស់ខ្លួន
និងជាគ្រូបង្រៀនថ្នាក់មហាវិទ្យាល័យ។
បន្ទាប់ពីបញ្ចប់ការសិក្សាថ្នាក់ ទី១២ ក្នុងឆ្នាំ ២០០៣
កញ្ញាបានសិក្សាផ្នែក គីមីវិទ្យា នៅសាកលវិទ្យាល័យ ភូមិន្ទ ភ្នំពេញ
ដែលពេលនោះកញ្ញាគិតថា
ខ្លួននឹងធ្វើជាគ្រូបង្រៀនគីមីវិទ្យាមួយរូប។
ប៉ុន្ដែលុះដល់ឆ្នាំទី៣ ទើបកញ្ញាជ្រើសរើសយកមុខជំនាញ គីមីជីវៈ
ដែលវាមិនមែនសុទ្ធតែក្លាយជាគ្រូបង្រៀននោះទេ។
ដោយការខិតខំប្រឹងប្រែងទើបកញ្ញាជាប់អាហារូបករណ៍ក្នុងឆ្នាំ ២០០៩។
កញ្ញា ពន្យល់ថា៖ «ក្រោយពីបញ្ចប់មុខជំនាញ គីមីជីវៈ
យើងអាចធ្វើការក្នុងមន្ទីរពិសោធ ដូចជាមន្ទីរពេទ្យ
វិទ្យាស្ថានស្រាវជ្រាវវិទ្យាសាស្រ្ត
ឬយើងអាចក្លាយជាគ្រូមហាវិទ្យាល័យ។
ពួកយើងអាចធ្វើការនៅទីពិសោធឧស្សាហកម្មផ្សេងៗ»។
លោក សោម ច័ន្ទ សុវណ្ណតារា
បានពន្យល់អំពីជម្រើសការងាររបស់និស្សិតបញ្ចប់ការសិក្សាបរិញ្ញាបត្រ
ឬអនុបណ្ឌិត ដូចជា
ជាអ្នកប្រឹក្សាចិត្តសាស្រ្តធ្វើការងារតាមអង្គការ មន្ទីរពេទ្យ
និងស្ថាប័ននានាក្នុងមុខនាទីជាគ្រូបង្រៀន
ឬក៏អ្នកស្រាវជ្រាវផ្នែកទីផ្សារជាដើម។
មុខវិជ្ជា ប្រព័ន្ធផ្សព្វផ្សាយនិងសារគមនាគមន៍ តូរ្យតន្រ្តី
សង្គមកិច្ចវិទ្យា បរិស្ថាន បុរាណវិទ្យា និង នាដសាស្រ្ត
ដែលមុខវិជ្ជានីមួយៗមានសិស្សមិនដល់ ១៥០ នាក់ក្នុងឆ្នាំសិក្សា
២០១០-២០១១។
ពាក់ព័ន្ធនឹងការជ្រើសរើសមុខវិជ្ជានេះដែរ កញ្ញា អោម រតនា
និស្សិតឆ្នាំទី១ ផ្នែកហិរញ្ញវត្ថុ បានសារភាពថា៖
«នៅពេលត្រូវជ្រើសរើសមុខវិជ្ជាទៅតាមសៀវភៅក្រហម
ខ្ញុំឃើញមុខវិជ្ជាសារគមនាគមន៍ផងដែរ ប៉ុន្តែខ្ញុំមិនស្គាល់
ទើបខ្ញុំរើសមុខជំនាញហិរញ្ញវត្ថុនេះទៅ»។
ការពិតណាស់
ការទទួលបានព័ត៌មានគ្រប់គ្រាន់សម្រាប់ការសម្រេចចិត្តជ្រើសរើសមុខ
ជំនាញដ៏សមស្របសម្រាប់ខ្លួនពិតជាសំខាន់
ពីព្រោះការរើសនូវជំនាញខុសអាចធ្វើឲ្យយើងខាតបង់ពេលវេលា
និងប៉ះពាល់ដល់អនាគតទៀតផង។
ដោយឡែកយុវតី គុំ រស្មីមណី ជាសិស្សទើបប្រឡងមធ្យមទុតិយភូមិឆ្នាំ
២០១៣
ជ្រើសរើសផ្នែកបរិស្ថានបន្ទាប់ពីកញ្ញាបានស៊ើបសួរព័ត៌មានពី
មុខវិជ្ជាមួយនេះ
ហើយឪពុករបស់កញ្ញាបានទូរស័ព្ទទៅសាក់សួរព័ត៌មានពីសាកលវិទ្យាល័យ
ភូមិន្ទ ភ្នំពេញ ដោយផ្ទាល់។
កញ្ញាបាននិយាយថា៖ «ខ្ញុំចូលចិត្តមុខវិជ្ជាបរិស្ថាន
ទំនាក់ទំនងបរទេស និងគណនេយ្យ
ប៉ុន្តែក្រោយពីទូរស័ព្ទសាកសួរព័ត៌មានពីសាលាមក ទើបដឹងថា
ផ្នែកបរិស្ថាននេះមានតែសិស្សអាហារូបករណ៍ ៣០
នាក់ប៉ុណ្ណោះក្នុងមួយឆ្នាំ
ហើយនៅថ្ងៃអនាគតផ្នែកមួយនេះនឹងមានទីផ្សារការងារទូលំទូលាយ»។
ដើម្បីបកស្រាយឲ្យអស់មន្ទិលសង្ស័យ លោក កៀង រតនា
សាកលវិទ្យាធិការរងនៃសាកលវិទ្យាល័យ
បញ្ញាសាស្ដ្រកម្ពុជាបានប្រាប់ថា៖
«ចំពោះសិស្សដែលរៀនមុខវិជ្ជាមិនចាប់អារម្មណ៍យើងឲ្យគាត់សិក្សាចប់
ចេញទៅរកបានការងារស្រួល និងចំណូលខ្ពស់
ហើយកាន់តែមានតម្រូវទីផ្សារខ្ពស់ដែលអាចទាក់ទាញយកអ្នកសិក្សា
មុខវិជ្ជាពេញនិយមនានា»។
ជាចុងក្រោយលោកគ្រូផ្ដល់យោបល់ដល់សិស្សទាំងអស់ថា៖
«កុំឲ្យគិតតែរៀនតាមគ្នា គួរតែពិគ្រោះជាមួយអ្នកជំនាញ ឬសាលា
ពីព្រោះការធ្វើតាមគ្នាគឺជាកត្តាដែលធ្វើឲ្យការចូលរៀនអស់ ៤
ឆ្នាំខាតបង់គ្មានប្រយោជន៍។
សិស្សត្រូវដឹងពីសមត្ថភាពខ្លួនថាខ្លួនពូកែខាងផ្នែកអ្វីឲ្យ
ច្បាស់ ពីព្រោះមានតែយើងខ្លួនឯងទេដែលអាចដឹងច្បាស់
និងចេះបង្កើតបណ្ដាញស្គាល់គេឲ្យបានច្រើន»។
គួរបញ្ជាក់ថា ក្នុងឆ្នាំសិក្សា ២០១២-២០១៣ នេះ
មានបេក្ខជនប្រឡងសញ្ញាបត្រមធ្យមសិក្សាទុតិយភូមិសរុបមានចំនួន
១០៧,៨៣៥ នាក់ នេះបើយោងតាមសេចក្ដីប្រកាសព័ត៌មានពីក្រសួង អប់រំ យុវជន
និងកីឡាអំពីការប្រឡងសញ្ញាបត្រមធ្យមសិក្សាទុតិយភូមិចំណេះទូទៅ
និងបំពេញវិជ្ជា៕
Hun Sen Mute After Initial Election Remarks
By Colin Meyn and Phorn Bopha - August 21, 2013
Over the past three weeks, a standoff between the long-ruling CPP and
newly strengthened opposition CNRP has made for an increasingly tense
political environment.
But almost entirely missing from the equation has been Prime Minister
Hun Sen, whose last public appearance was 18 days ago when he addressed
villagers in Kandal province and warned the opposition that a failure
to take their seats in Parliament would result in them being given to
the CPP.
As opposed to his usual schedule of delivering nationally televised
speeches almost every day—weighing in on everything from pressing
political issues to personal trivialities—the prime minister has
remained completely out of the public eye since August 2.
The prime minister’s silence comes amid a steady security buildup in
Phnom Penh after the CNRP promised mass demonstrations if the CPP did
not cede power and commit to conducting an independent enquiry of
alleged election irregularities.
It also comes after the CPP suffered its worst showing in the
National Assembly since 1998, just one year after Mr. Hun Sen ousted
then-Prime Minister Norodom Ranariddh from power in factional fighting
that took place on the streets of Phnom Penh.
Still, officials on Tuesday said Mr. Hun Sen’s silence was warranted
because he wanted to give space to both political parties to form a
government and plan ahead for the next five years of CPP rule.
As the head of government during a time of partisan wrangling and
potential social instability, it is important for Mr. Hun Sen to remain
out of party politics, said Council of Ministers spokesman Phay Siphan.
“He [Mr. Hun Sen] always keeps to himself during heightened tension.
He lets the other mechanisms take care of their own responsibilities and
address their own mandate,” Mr. Siphan said.
“The prime minister remains independent and lets the two parties work together,” he added.
Since meeting on August 9 to discuss the formation of a joint
committee to investigate irregularities in Cambodia’s election, the CPP
and CNRP’s cooperation has stalled. Mr. Siphan said that if talks
continue to be fruitless, Mr. Hun Sen may step back into the partisan
fray for talks with Mr. Rainsy.
“[I]f the [joint CPP-CNRP] committees cannot solve something, then it
is time for Sam Rainsy and him [Mr. Hun Sen] to meet together,” Mr.
Siphan said.
Cheam Yeap, a senior CPP lawmaker and de facto spokesman for the
party, said that Mr. Hun Sen has remained largely silent since the July
28 national election because he has been busy preparing for his next
five years managing the country as prime minister.
“He is busy organizing the implementation of the party’s political
platform to ensure that it meets the expectations set out in our
platform during the election campaign,” Mr. Yeap said, adding that the
party is also trying to figure out why its popularity has fallen
sharply.
“We are busy evaluating why we lost support,” he said.
Political analysts said Tuesday that dealing with internal problems
within a party that has seen a steep drop in its popularity, along with
practicing caution in how the party deals with a significantly
strengthened opposition, likely explain the prime minister’s silence.
“The prime minister always lets others talk and express all the
issues and then he analyzes that information and finds a strategy to
fight back,” said independent political analyst Kem Ley, adding that
there were two directions Mr. Hun Sen could take in his response to the
CNRP’s calls for reform.
“[Mr. Hun Sen] has a great opportunity to be smart in a good way, by
[improving] rule of law and democracy strengthening, or a bad way, by
cracking down on other parties to win,” he said.
Another political analyst, Lao Mong Hay, said that soul-searching in
the wake of such a drop in popularity could have more to do with why Mr.
Hun Sen has had little to say in public in recent weeks.
“We’ve seen that the top leaders of the CPP have not issued any
public statements, apart from Deputy Prime Minister Sar Kheng. This
reflects that there might be difficulty in determining the roles within
the party and this needs to be resolved,” he said.
“The party members are old too, and they need to change. The CPP
needs to rejuvenate in order to get back its popularity. But change is
not easy,” said Mr. Mong Hay, adding that it was still the ruling
party’s responsibility to explain public actions such as the
mobilization of troops and movement of tanks.
“During these times, there should be someone high up equal to a
minister in the government who appears in front of the public and
explains the people what this is and why it is happening,” he said.
© 2013, The Cambodia Daily. All rights reserved. No
part of this article may be reproduced in print, electronically,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without written permission.
Sunday, 18 August 2013
GLOBAL: Academics in South Korea top business funding index
Karen MacGregor13 August 2013 Issue No:283
Academics in South Korea attract the largest amounts of funding per
capita in the world from big business, according to a new index – on
average US$97,900 per researcher. Next come academics in Singapore, The
Netherlands, South Africa and Belgium.
Ireland (US$8,300 per academic) and Portugal (US$8,600) are at the bottom of the list of 30 countries surveyed for the World Academic Summit Innovation Index, which calculates what big companies invest annually in academics to conduct research and innovation work on their behalf.
The index, compiled by Times Higher Education ahead of its inaugural World Academic Summit to be held in October, was produced from Thomson Reuters data used by the THE World University Rankings. It examines one of the 13 indicators in isolation: ‘Industry Income – Innovation: Research income from industry/academic staff’.
The average value per researcher was calculated, and institutions that did not report research income from industry were removed from the calculation. The index converted all cash values into US dollars for comparative purposes, and used purchasing power parity to take into account the cost of living in each country in the study.
The idea, according to a press release, is to provide “an interesting global snapshot of how successfully the world’s top universities compete for research funding from industry”.
It found that global companies invest on average US$97,900 in each Korean academic. In Singapore, academics receive on average US$84,500 per academic, with The Netherlands in third (US$72,800), South Africa in fourth (US$64,400) and Belgium fifth (US$63,700).
In the Top 20 they are followed by Taiwan, China, Sweden, Denmark and India in 10th place, Russia, Turkey, Canada, the US, Australia, Japan, Finland, New Zealand and France, with Hong Kong (US$20,000) coming in at number 20.
One surprise, the press statement said, is that major companies invest just US$13,300 in British academics, “putting the UK fourth from the bottom”.
“The other surprise result is that, like the UK and Ireland, traditional educational powerhouse the US lies in the middle of the table, in 14th position, with industry contributing nearly four times less to its academic researchers (US$25,800 per person) than in the case of Korea.
“This apparent lack of appetite for Western investment by big business is in contrast to the fact that some of the world’s most significant developments historically come from British and American institutions.”
In recent years, the statement continued, “the world’s increasing enthusiasm for technological advancement and computer science has seen big business shift its attention eastward to Asia; a region known for its strong manufacturing sector and traditional academic focus on these subject areas”.
It cited examples of the Korea Institute of Science and Technology’s collaboration with Samsung to develop the world’s first humanoid robot, and scientists at Nanyang Technological University in Singapore recently displaying the latest ‘invisibility cloak’ by making a cat and a goldfish vanish.
“Whilst the West dominates in terms of quantity, with 15 European countries present alongside the US and Canada, Asia sees five of its nine featured countries in the top 10: Korea in first, Singapore in second, Taiwan in sixth, China in seventh and India in 10th.”
The release said the findings were good news for some countries whose universities did not appear in the THE World University Rankings.
“At number 10, India is ranked fifth most commercially valuable country in Asia, with big business pouring in an average $36,900 per researcher. Yet the three Indian institutions featured in THE’s annual World University Rankings all fall below 226th position.”
Russia, at number 11 in the index, had only two institutions in the THE rankings and both were outside the Top 200. Russian academics are paid US$36,400 by big business.
The Times Higher Education World Academic Summit will be held from 2-4 October at Nanyang Technological University in Singapore.
A spokesperson for the summit said: “Working with business and industry to move their discoveries and ideas from the ivory towers into the real world – and to make a real social and economic impact – has become one of the most important functions of a modern university.
“For some, an ability to attract funding from big business could even be a case of sink or swim in this age of austerity.”
Ireland (US$8,300 per academic) and Portugal (US$8,600) are at the bottom of the list of 30 countries surveyed for the World Academic Summit Innovation Index, which calculates what big companies invest annually in academics to conduct research and innovation work on their behalf.
The index, compiled by Times Higher Education ahead of its inaugural World Academic Summit to be held in October, was produced from Thomson Reuters data used by the THE World University Rankings. It examines one of the 13 indicators in isolation: ‘Industry Income – Innovation: Research income from industry/academic staff’.
The average value per researcher was calculated, and institutions that did not report research income from industry were removed from the calculation. The index converted all cash values into US dollars for comparative purposes, and used purchasing power parity to take into account the cost of living in each country in the study.
The idea, according to a press release, is to provide “an interesting global snapshot of how successfully the world’s top universities compete for research funding from industry”.
It found that global companies invest on average US$97,900 in each Korean academic. In Singapore, academics receive on average US$84,500 per academic, with The Netherlands in third (US$72,800), South Africa in fourth (US$64,400) and Belgium fifth (US$63,700).
In the Top 20 they are followed by Taiwan, China, Sweden, Denmark and India in 10th place, Russia, Turkey, Canada, the US, Australia, Japan, Finland, New Zealand and France, with Hong Kong (US$20,000) coming in at number 20.
One surprise, the press statement said, is that major companies invest just US$13,300 in British academics, “putting the UK fourth from the bottom”.
“The other surprise result is that, like the UK and Ireland, traditional educational powerhouse the US lies in the middle of the table, in 14th position, with industry contributing nearly four times less to its academic researchers (US$25,800 per person) than in the case of Korea.
“This apparent lack of appetite for Western investment by big business is in contrast to the fact that some of the world’s most significant developments historically come from British and American institutions.”
In recent years, the statement continued, “the world’s increasing enthusiasm for technological advancement and computer science has seen big business shift its attention eastward to Asia; a region known for its strong manufacturing sector and traditional academic focus on these subject areas”.
It cited examples of the Korea Institute of Science and Technology’s collaboration with Samsung to develop the world’s first humanoid robot, and scientists at Nanyang Technological University in Singapore recently displaying the latest ‘invisibility cloak’ by making a cat and a goldfish vanish.
“Whilst the West dominates in terms of quantity, with 15 European countries present alongside the US and Canada, Asia sees five of its nine featured countries in the top 10: Korea in first, Singapore in second, Taiwan in sixth, China in seventh and India in 10th.”
The release said the findings were good news for some countries whose universities did not appear in the THE World University Rankings.
“At number 10, India is ranked fifth most commercially valuable country in Asia, with big business pouring in an average $36,900 per researcher. Yet the three Indian institutions featured in THE’s annual World University Rankings all fall below 226th position.”
Russia, at number 11 in the index, had only two institutions in the THE rankings and both were outside the Top 200. Russian academics are paid US$36,400 by big business.
The Times Higher Education World Academic Summit will be held from 2-4 October at Nanyang Technological University in Singapore.
A spokesperson for the summit said: “Working with business and industry to move their discoveries and ideas from the ivory towers into the real world – and to make a real social and economic impact – has become one of the most important functions of a modern university.
“For some, an ability to attract funding from big business could even be a case of sink or swim in this age of austerity.”
UNITED STATES: The MOOC ‘revolution’ may not be as disruptive as some imagined
Steve Kolowich, The Chronicle of Higher Education17 August 2013 Issue No:283
In California, the MOOC revolution came to a halt unceremoniously.
Senator Darrell Steinberg, the leader of the state senate, quietly
decided to put his online education bill on the back burner last month.
The bill, introduced with fanfare in March, originally aimed to push
public universities to award academic credit to students who succeeded
in some massive open online courses offered by outside providers.
But now that the universities have promised to expand their own online courses, the senator sees no immediate need to let outside providers through the door, says his spokesperson Rhys Williams.
[This is an article from The Chronicle of Higher Education, America’s leading higher education publication. It is presented here under an agreement with University World News.]
The fate of the California bill, SB 520, is the latest indication that MOOCs might not be the revolutionary force that many had imagined. They're not bound for extinction, nor are the companies that rose to prominence on the strength of the MOOC hype doomed.
But political, regulatory, administrative and faculty barriers to the kind of unfettered online education that MOOC promoters originally envisioned have proved quite high, and it's starting to look as if what they have to offer to universities may be technology tools and services that are more helpful than revolutionary.
Steinberg's decision to shelve the bill was voluntary, but by the time he made it, SB 520 had already been defanged – a series of revisions had returned control over college credits to university faculties.
In Florida the legislature considered a bill with similar aims – circumventing the higher education bureaucracy and giving non-university players, including MOOC providers, a chance to have certain courses count for credit. That measure became law, but not before it, too, had been blunted by negotiation and compromise.
Meanwhile, several projects aimed at helping MOOC students navigate existing pathways to college credit have attracted little or no interest.
Colorado State University-Global Campus has seen no takers since offering last autumn to award credit to students who performed well in a computer science MOOC offered through Udacity. Likewise, the Council for Adult and Experiential Learning, which helps students translate non-traditional learning into college credit through its LearningCounts programme, has not seen any students attempt to redeem MOOC certificates for credit.
Those stalled efforts to push MOOCs through the institutional membrane that surrounds higher education credentialling have cast doubt on whether large-scale free courses will end up disrupting anything.
“As you go in the belly of the beast, you will run into this brick wall every single time,” says Michael B Horn, a co-founder of the Clayton Christensen Institute for Disruptive Innovation.
Providers continue to grow
As the efforts to legislate MOOCs into mainstream higher education petered out, Coursera, edX and Udacity – the triumvirate of major MOOC providers – have continued to grow, offering new courses while attracting additional collaborators and investment money.
Coursera, which recently raised US$43 million, plans to double in size by the end of the calendar year, according to Andrew Ng, one of the company's founders.
The company has collected close to US$1 million in revenue from its "Signature Track" programme, which offers users the chance to take a proctored examination and earn a ‘verified’ certificate of achievement for their work in MOOCs.
All three providers have indicated that they are not satisfied to operate at the fringes of the higher education system. They want to be a part of online education in the main. But given the institutional monopoly on credit-granting privileges, that means catering to colleges rather than attempting to undermine them.
"Credits are the coin of the academic realm," says Russell Poulin, deputy director for research and analysis at the Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education's Cooperative for Educational Technologies. "And if that's where the coins are, these companies are going to drive there."
To that end, the products and services those providers could supply colleges in the future have little to do with MOOCs. Rather, they resemble products and services that technology vendors like Blackboard and Pearson have been selling to colleges for years – "many of which are not disruptive at all”, says Horn.
82 students who mattered
Ronald F Rogers, chair of the psychology department at San Jose State University, co-taught an introductory statistics course on the Udacity platform this past spring.
Nearly 20,000 people from around the globe signed up for the MOOC version of the course. By June about 3,000 of them had completed the course and earned a certificate from Udacity, according to the professor.
But Rogers was more interested in the 82 students who were taking the online course for credit through San Jose State.
For those students, the course was not a MOOC. It was a conventional online course, just taught on the Udacity platform. Their written assignments were graded by hand by a live human being, and they could contact the professor for help.
In turn, Rogers could log in to the platform, see whether individual students seemed to be stuck – and if so, where – and reach out to them.
"My life has been turned into a stream of emails," he says, adding that his experience as an instructor has been a positive one.
This is how Udacity now expects to make inroads into higher education: not with MOOCs but with technology and support services aimed at propping up credit-bearing online courses at traditional universities.
Rather than relying on 100,000-student MOOCs in which only the fittest survive, the company wants to "leverage the best of MOOC technology" – namely, the Udacity platform – with "services that are known to the industry", such as instructional support, says Sebastian Thrun, Udacity's founder.
"A medium where only self-motivated, web-savvy people sign up, and the success rate is 10%, doesn't strike me quite yet as a solution to the problems of higher education," says Thrun.
"Are we going a step backwards? Perhaps," he says. "But, then again, we really want to solve the problem."
The closest Udacity has come to bringing MOOC-like economies of scale to the credit world is a proposed partnership with the Georgia Institute of Technology on a masters degree in computer science.
Over the next three years, the programme aims to enrol 10,000 students, each of whom will have the opportunity to earn a degree for less than US$7,000 – a fraction of the cost of a traditional masters programme.
To save on faculty costs, Udacity would hire ‘course assistants’ to help Georgia Tech instructors with "academic and non-academic tasks", according to a contract between the company and the Georgia Tech Research Corporation.
But that plan, too, could encounter institutional challenges.
Benjamin Flowers, chair of the university's graduate curriculum committee, says he and his colleagues have "at no point been given, to review, any written proposal for any new graduate degree programme".
Officials seem to have circumvented the committee by casting the Udacity partnership as a ‘modification’ of an existing computer-science masters programme, says Flowers. He says his committee is not done with the Udacity proposal, and may raise the issue in the university's faculty senate when the body reconvenes this autumn.
Conventional course provider
Coursera, like Udacity, has no intention of discontinuing its MOOCs. But the company has also begun positioning itself as a provider of more-conventional online courses.
In its latest round of partnerships, the company invited 10 public universities to use its online teaching platform for non-MOOC online courses for a fee – a $3,000 charge for ‘development’ plus an additional per-student fee. The contracts also lay out a framework for universities to license course content from one another, with a percentage going to Coursera.
The terms apply to what the contracts call ‘guided’ or ‘adopted’ courses, which are taught for credit to registered students – those who are enrolled at the university and pay tuition.
MOOCs, by contrast, are classified in the contract as ‘open access’ courses that are broadcast to ‘end users’, who may or may not be students.
While casual observers tend to conflate MOOCs and the providers that offer them, Coursera has moved into new territory. Says Horn: "They're really just trying to compete to be the education platform of the future" – not just for MOOCs, but also for credit-bearing online programmes.
That puts the MOOC providers in the ring with some heavyweight content providers and education technology companies that have been duking it out for years, says Phil Hill, a co-founder of MindWires, an education-technology consulting firm.
"They're essentially going to be competing, directly or indirectly, with Blackboard and Desire2Learn and Instructure," says Hill, referring to well-established companies that sell technology- and online-support services to colleges.
The MOOC providers may soon also find themselves competing with publishers, says Hill. Textbook giants like Pearson and McGraw-Hill in recent years have expanded their product lines to include automated coaching and grading software, as well as pre-assembled course modules.
Those products resemble the goods that Coursera and Udacity might sell to colleges for use in their credit-bearing courses, says Hill. The MOOC providers are, as he puts it, "skating to where the puck is going to be".
Will they be able to win control of that puck once it arrives? Nobody knows. Right now, Coursera and Udacity are riding high on hype and pedigree. Neither company is planning to hawk its wares at Educause, the annual higher education-technology conference, alongside almost every other company that sells technology to colleges. Both say they have more suitors than they can handle already.
In the long term, the fate of Coursera and Udacity's ambitions may depend on how well their platforms and content work in a non-MOOC context.
The early returns, though hardly definitive, do not reflect the makings of a revolution.
This spring, only half of the San Jose State students taking Rogers' statistics course on the Udacity platform earned a passing grade – a lower pass rate than the face-to-face version of the course, according to a preliminary analysis by the university.
Other courses in the spring pilot produced similarly underwhelming outcomes. The university has since decided to pause its experiment with Udacity.
The students who earned San Jose State credit in the small format Udacity courses will, of course, get to count those credits toward their degrees. But the students who earned a Udacity certificate for passing the MOOC version?
"You can't take that and get a cup of coffee with it," says Rogers
But now that the universities have promised to expand their own online courses, the senator sees no immediate need to let outside providers through the door, says his spokesperson Rhys Williams.
[This is an article from The Chronicle of Higher Education, America’s leading higher education publication. It is presented here under an agreement with University World News.]
The fate of the California bill, SB 520, is the latest indication that MOOCs might not be the revolutionary force that many had imagined. They're not bound for extinction, nor are the companies that rose to prominence on the strength of the MOOC hype doomed.
But political, regulatory, administrative and faculty barriers to the kind of unfettered online education that MOOC promoters originally envisioned have proved quite high, and it's starting to look as if what they have to offer to universities may be technology tools and services that are more helpful than revolutionary.
Steinberg's decision to shelve the bill was voluntary, but by the time he made it, SB 520 had already been defanged – a series of revisions had returned control over college credits to university faculties.
In Florida the legislature considered a bill with similar aims – circumventing the higher education bureaucracy and giving non-university players, including MOOC providers, a chance to have certain courses count for credit. That measure became law, but not before it, too, had been blunted by negotiation and compromise.
Meanwhile, several projects aimed at helping MOOC students navigate existing pathways to college credit have attracted little or no interest.
Colorado State University-Global Campus has seen no takers since offering last autumn to award credit to students who performed well in a computer science MOOC offered through Udacity. Likewise, the Council for Adult and Experiential Learning, which helps students translate non-traditional learning into college credit through its LearningCounts programme, has not seen any students attempt to redeem MOOC certificates for credit.
Those stalled efforts to push MOOCs through the institutional membrane that surrounds higher education credentialling have cast doubt on whether large-scale free courses will end up disrupting anything.
“As you go in the belly of the beast, you will run into this brick wall every single time,” says Michael B Horn, a co-founder of the Clayton Christensen Institute for Disruptive Innovation.
Providers continue to grow
As the efforts to legislate MOOCs into mainstream higher education petered out, Coursera, edX and Udacity – the triumvirate of major MOOC providers – have continued to grow, offering new courses while attracting additional collaborators and investment money.
Coursera, which recently raised US$43 million, plans to double in size by the end of the calendar year, according to Andrew Ng, one of the company's founders.
The company has collected close to US$1 million in revenue from its "Signature Track" programme, which offers users the chance to take a proctored examination and earn a ‘verified’ certificate of achievement for their work in MOOCs.
All three providers have indicated that they are not satisfied to operate at the fringes of the higher education system. They want to be a part of online education in the main. But given the institutional monopoly on credit-granting privileges, that means catering to colleges rather than attempting to undermine them.
"Credits are the coin of the academic realm," says Russell Poulin, deputy director for research and analysis at the Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education's Cooperative for Educational Technologies. "And if that's where the coins are, these companies are going to drive there."
To that end, the products and services those providers could supply colleges in the future have little to do with MOOCs. Rather, they resemble products and services that technology vendors like Blackboard and Pearson have been selling to colleges for years – "many of which are not disruptive at all”, says Horn.
82 students who mattered
Ronald F Rogers, chair of the psychology department at San Jose State University, co-taught an introductory statistics course on the Udacity platform this past spring.
Nearly 20,000 people from around the globe signed up for the MOOC version of the course. By June about 3,000 of them had completed the course and earned a certificate from Udacity, according to the professor.
But Rogers was more interested in the 82 students who were taking the online course for credit through San Jose State.
For those students, the course was not a MOOC. It was a conventional online course, just taught on the Udacity platform. Their written assignments were graded by hand by a live human being, and they could contact the professor for help.
In turn, Rogers could log in to the platform, see whether individual students seemed to be stuck – and if so, where – and reach out to them.
"My life has been turned into a stream of emails," he says, adding that his experience as an instructor has been a positive one.
This is how Udacity now expects to make inroads into higher education: not with MOOCs but with technology and support services aimed at propping up credit-bearing online courses at traditional universities.
Rather than relying on 100,000-student MOOCs in which only the fittest survive, the company wants to "leverage the best of MOOC technology" – namely, the Udacity platform – with "services that are known to the industry", such as instructional support, says Sebastian Thrun, Udacity's founder.
"A medium where only self-motivated, web-savvy people sign up, and the success rate is 10%, doesn't strike me quite yet as a solution to the problems of higher education," says Thrun.
"Are we going a step backwards? Perhaps," he says. "But, then again, we really want to solve the problem."
The closest Udacity has come to bringing MOOC-like economies of scale to the credit world is a proposed partnership with the Georgia Institute of Technology on a masters degree in computer science.
Over the next three years, the programme aims to enrol 10,000 students, each of whom will have the opportunity to earn a degree for less than US$7,000 – a fraction of the cost of a traditional masters programme.
To save on faculty costs, Udacity would hire ‘course assistants’ to help Georgia Tech instructors with "academic and non-academic tasks", according to a contract between the company and the Georgia Tech Research Corporation.
But that plan, too, could encounter institutional challenges.
Benjamin Flowers, chair of the university's graduate curriculum committee, says he and his colleagues have "at no point been given, to review, any written proposal for any new graduate degree programme".
Officials seem to have circumvented the committee by casting the Udacity partnership as a ‘modification’ of an existing computer-science masters programme, says Flowers. He says his committee is not done with the Udacity proposal, and may raise the issue in the university's faculty senate when the body reconvenes this autumn.
Conventional course provider
Coursera, like Udacity, has no intention of discontinuing its MOOCs. But the company has also begun positioning itself as a provider of more-conventional online courses.
In its latest round of partnerships, the company invited 10 public universities to use its online teaching platform for non-MOOC online courses for a fee – a $3,000 charge for ‘development’ plus an additional per-student fee. The contracts also lay out a framework for universities to license course content from one another, with a percentage going to Coursera.
The terms apply to what the contracts call ‘guided’ or ‘adopted’ courses, which are taught for credit to registered students – those who are enrolled at the university and pay tuition.
MOOCs, by contrast, are classified in the contract as ‘open access’ courses that are broadcast to ‘end users’, who may or may not be students.
While casual observers tend to conflate MOOCs and the providers that offer them, Coursera has moved into new territory. Says Horn: "They're really just trying to compete to be the education platform of the future" – not just for MOOCs, but also for credit-bearing online programmes.
That puts the MOOC providers in the ring with some heavyweight content providers and education technology companies that have been duking it out for years, says Phil Hill, a co-founder of MindWires, an education-technology consulting firm.
"They're essentially going to be competing, directly or indirectly, with Blackboard and Desire2Learn and Instructure," says Hill, referring to well-established companies that sell technology- and online-support services to colleges.
The MOOC providers may soon also find themselves competing with publishers, says Hill. Textbook giants like Pearson and McGraw-Hill in recent years have expanded their product lines to include automated coaching and grading software, as well as pre-assembled course modules.
Those products resemble the goods that Coursera and Udacity might sell to colleges for use in their credit-bearing courses, says Hill. The MOOC providers are, as he puts it, "skating to where the puck is going to be".
Will they be able to win control of that puck once it arrives? Nobody knows. Right now, Coursera and Udacity are riding high on hype and pedigree. Neither company is planning to hawk its wares at Educause, the annual higher education-technology conference, alongside almost every other company that sells technology to colleges. Both say they have more suitors than they can handle already.
In the long term, the fate of Coursera and Udacity's ambitions may depend on how well their platforms and content work in a non-MOOC context.
The early returns, though hardly definitive, do not reflect the makings of a revolution.
This spring, only half of the San Jose State students taking Rogers' statistics course on the Udacity platform earned a passing grade – a lower pass rate than the face-to-face version of the course, according to a preliminary analysis by the university.
Other courses in the spring pilot produced similarly underwhelming outcomes. The university has since decided to pause its experiment with Udacity.
The students who earned San Jose State credit in the small format Udacity courses will, of course, get to count those credits toward their degrees. But the students who earned a Udacity certificate for passing the MOOC version?
"You can't take that and get a cup of coffee with it," says Rogers
GLOBAL: UNESCO’s sustained engagement in higher education
26 July 2013 Issue No:283
UNESCO has responded to an article in University World News
by Philip G Altbach, titled “Long-term thinking needed in higher
education”. The UN agency argues that its work in higher education is
advancing on many fronts, it is helping ministries and institutions to
build effective systems, and it continues to use its convening power "to
promote sustainable change for quality higher education".
UNESCO response
UNESCO is the only United Nations agency with a mandate in higher education. In this capacity, it sets and monitors the implementation of standards and conventions, produces policy research and advice, and strengthens capacity in higher education.
Despite financial constraints, this work is advancing on many fronts.
UNESCO is providing leadership on quality assurance-related matters, guiding policy through research, improving international statistics and national capacities to collect and use statistics, and strengthening the governance of higher education systems and institutions.
What follows are a few examples of UNESCO’s recent accomplishments and ongoing work in these areas.
Providing leadership on quality assurance
Launched in 2007, the Global Initiative for Quality Assurance and Capacity, or GIQAC – implemented by UNESCO with the financial support of the World Bank – supported several regional quality assurance networks.
Following suit, an African initiative to support higher education quality assurance institutions and mechanisms is now being put in place by UNESCO’s Regional Bureau for Education in Africa.
These initiatives build on UNESCO's work through the UNESCO-OECD Guidelines for Quality Provision in Cross-border Higher Education.
Guiding policy through research
In the policy domain, UNESCO explores issues that are critical to higher education, such as university rankings. UNESCO’s July 2013 publication, Rankings and Accountability in Higher Education: Uses and misuses, follows on from the forum convened by the organisation in May 2011 on the same subject, bringing together the world’s major rankers. It provides international perspectives on what has emerged as a major debate.
Another illustration of UNESCO’s engagement in policy discussion in higher education is the research recently conducted by UNESCO’s International Institute for Educational Planning, or IIEP, on the impact of national governance reforms on the effectiveness of higher education institutions in Asia and Africa.
The expansion of postgraduate education in Asian countries is another subject being examined by UNESCO. The organisation’s Institute for Statistics, or UIS, and IIEP are working with a network of experts, the United Nations University and Elsevier to produce an analytical report on this topic. The report is expected to capture emerging developments and offer policy alternatives for higher education.
To be released in early 2014, the report investigates the tension between expanding access to undergraduate education and upgrading postgraduate education, as well as the implications for resource allocation, equity and quality.
Improving international statistics and national capacities to collect and use statistics
Effective policies are built on solid evidence. For this reason, UNESCO is striving to improve data collection and dissemination in higher education. UNESCO, through its UIS, is the only organisation that produces cross-nationally comparable data on higher education for more than 200 countries and territories.
UIS seeks to improve data quality through the development of new standards and methodologies, such as the recently revised International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED 2011), which was specifically designed to improve the cross-national comparability of higher education data.
The annual UIS and UNESCO-OECD-Eurostat education surveys are also making significant contributions by including substantial sections on higher education, including a unique data set on tertiary student mobility presented in a well-regarded data visualisation tool on the UIS website.
Beyond data collection, dissemination and improvement, UIS is building capacities for policy-making on the basis of an improved use of statistics. This effort supports UNESCO’s commitment to strengthening the capacity of countries to plan and manage their education systems.
Strengthening the governance of higher education systems and institutions
In addition to offering training on quality assurance, IIEP develops higher education planning and management capacity in institutional management, in establishing monitoring and evaluation systems, and in developing indicators for monitoring higher education.
On issues pertaining to academic fraud and codes of ethics for universities, IIEP has positioned itself as a global leader.
Lastly, UNESCO has a unique mandate in the international recognition of studies, diplomas and degrees – an area that plays an important role in the promotion and regulation of student mobility.
UNESCO remains strongly engaged in monitoring and revising the five regional conventions in this area and one inter-regional convention. Altogether, these provide a unique legal framework for the governance of higher education provision at the international level.
More recently, following a debate at the International Conference of States in Tokyo, Japan, in November 2011, UNESCO initiated a feasibility study on a global convention on the recognition of higher education qualifications. The outcomes of this study will be discussed at the UNESCO general conference, in November 2013, in order to decide on the way forward.
These examples illustrate how UNESCO is collaborating with organisations and professional networks worldwide to help ministries and higher education institutions build higher education systems that can effectively meet national development challenges.
UNESCO’s commitment to long-term thinking in higher education is evident in the many facets of its work. UNESCO has used, and will continue to use, its convening power effectively to promote sustainable change for quality higher education.
UNESCO, 19 July 2013
UNESCO is the only United Nations agency with a mandate in higher education. In this capacity, it sets and monitors the implementation of standards and conventions, produces policy research and advice, and strengthens capacity in higher education.
Despite financial constraints, this work is advancing on many fronts.
UNESCO is providing leadership on quality assurance-related matters, guiding policy through research, improving international statistics and national capacities to collect and use statistics, and strengthening the governance of higher education systems and institutions.
What follows are a few examples of UNESCO’s recent accomplishments and ongoing work in these areas.
Providing leadership on quality assurance
Launched in 2007, the Global Initiative for Quality Assurance and Capacity, or GIQAC – implemented by UNESCO with the financial support of the World Bank – supported several regional quality assurance networks.
Following suit, an African initiative to support higher education quality assurance institutions and mechanisms is now being put in place by UNESCO’s Regional Bureau for Education in Africa.
These initiatives build on UNESCO's work through the UNESCO-OECD Guidelines for Quality Provision in Cross-border Higher Education.
Guiding policy through research
In the policy domain, UNESCO explores issues that are critical to higher education, such as university rankings. UNESCO’s July 2013 publication, Rankings and Accountability in Higher Education: Uses and misuses, follows on from the forum convened by the organisation in May 2011 on the same subject, bringing together the world’s major rankers. It provides international perspectives on what has emerged as a major debate.
Another illustration of UNESCO’s engagement in policy discussion in higher education is the research recently conducted by UNESCO’s International Institute for Educational Planning, or IIEP, on the impact of national governance reforms on the effectiveness of higher education institutions in Asia and Africa.
The expansion of postgraduate education in Asian countries is another subject being examined by UNESCO. The organisation’s Institute for Statistics, or UIS, and IIEP are working with a network of experts, the United Nations University and Elsevier to produce an analytical report on this topic. The report is expected to capture emerging developments and offer policy alternatives for higher education.
To be released in early 2014, the report investigates the tension between expanding access to undergraduate education and upgrading postgraduate education, as well as the implications for resource allocation, equity and quality.
Improving international statistics and national capacities to collect and use statistics
Effective policies are built on solid evidence. For this reason, UNESCO is striving to improve data collection and dissemination in higher education. UNESCO, through its UIS, is the only organisation that produces cross-nationally comparable data on higher education for more than 200 countries and territories.
UIS seeks to improve data quality through the development of new standards and methodologies, such as the recently revised International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED 2011), which was specifically designed to improve the cross-national comparability of higher education data.
The annual UIS and UNESCO-OECD-Eurostat education surveys are also making significant contributions by including substantial sections on higher education, including a unique data set on tertiary student mobility presented in a well-regarded data visualisation tool on the UIS website.
Beyond data collection, dissemination and improvement, UIS is building capacities for policy-making on the basis of an improved use of statistics. This effort supports UNESCO’s commitment to strengthening the capacity of countries to plan and manage their education systems.
Strengthening the governance of higher education systems and institutions
In addition to offering training on quality assurance, IIEP develops higher education planning and management capacity in institutional management, in establishing monitoring and evaluation systems, and in developing indicators for monitoring higher education.
On issues pertaining to academic fraud and codes of ethics for universities, IIEP has positioned itself as a global leader.
Lastly, UNESCO has a unique mandate in the international recognition of studies, diplomas and degrees – an area that plays an important role in the promotion and regulation of student mobility.
UNESCO remains strongly engaged in monitoring and revising the five regional conventions in this area and one inter-regional convention. Altogether, these provide a unique legal framework for the governance of higher education provision at the international level.
More recently, following a debate at the International Conference of States in Tokyo, Japan, in November 2011, UNESCO initiated a feasibility study on a global convention on the recognition of higher education qualifications. The outcomes of this study will be discussed at the UNESCO general conference, in November 2013, in order to decide on the way forward.
These examples illustrate how UNESCO is collaborating with organisations and professional networks worldwide to help ministries and higher education institutions build higher education systems that can effectively meet national development challenges.
UNESCO’s commitment to long-term thinking in higher education is evident in the many facets of its work. UNESCO has used, and will continue to use, its convening power effectively to promote sustainable change for quality higher education.
UNESCO, 19 July 2013
VIETNAM: Students offered free tuition to study Marxism
The Associated Press17 August 2013 Issue No:283
HANOI, Vietnam — Market forces are working against college degrees in the ideology of Marx, Lenin and Ho Chi Minh in Vietnam, where the Communist government has resorted to offering free tuition to attract students.
Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung recently signed a decree giving free
tuition to students who agreed to take four-year courses on
Marxism-Leninism and the works of Ho Chi Minh, the country’s
revolutionary hero, at state-run universities.
Students have been shunning such degrees because potential employers are
not interested in those programs, said Pham Tan Ha, director of
admission and training at Ho Chi Minh City University of Social Sciences
and Humanities. Degrees in subjects like communications, tourism,
international relations and English are more popular because students
believe “they will have better chances of employment and better pay when
they graduate,” he said.
Under the decree, the state will also pay tuition costs for students who
study certain medical specialties, like how to treat tuberculosis and
leprosy. Ordinarily, they would have to pay about $200 a year for
tuition.
All Vietnamese students must take at least three classes in
Marxism-Leninism and Ho Chi Minh studies, but few go beyond that minimum
requirement. Although Vietnam is run by Communists, the country
embraced market-based policies in the 1980s. More than 60 percent of the
country’s 90 million people are under 30. Competition for well-paying
employment is intense among the roughly 500,000 graduates who enter the
job market each year.
“Studying Marxism and Leninism is rather dry and many students don’t
like it,” said Tran The Anh, 23, a fifth-year student. “The number of
students studying these courses is very modest because many of them
believe that it is difficult to find a job after graduation.”
Phan Thi Trang, a pharmaceutical student, conceded that the subjects
might be interesting if she studied them more. But “they are just not
applicable to my daily life,” she said.
MYANMAR: Reconstructing higher education in Myanmar
Jamil Salmi26 July 2013 Issue No:283
The last time the world took notice of higher education in Myanmar, it
was in the aftermath of the brutally repressed student uprising of
August 1988, which resulted in thousands of deaths and arrests and
stronger sanctions from the international community.
The political transition that started in 2011 has triggered the resumption of international collaboration in the higher education sector and the launch of a comprehensive education sector review led by the government of Myanmar with strong support from development partners.
The purpose of this analytical exercise is to pave the way for increased external assistance based on an objective diagnosis of the current situation and needs, to help the government and other stakeholders formulate a strategy for the future development of higher education.
The first higher education policy dialogue workshop in Myanmar since the beginning of the political transition took place in Naypyitaw on 29 June 2013, with a focus on “Empowering Higher Education: A vision for Myanmar’s universities”.
It was convened by the British Council with strong participation and support from AusAID, the Asian Development Bank and UNESCO. I was invited as an advisor to AusAID.
The two-day meeting brought together representatives of the various ministries overseeing the operation of higher education institutions, rectors and academics, student leaders, and members of parliament, including the Nobel peace prize laureate Aung San Suu Kyi.
The workshop offered a unique platform for policy dialogue around the main issues facing higher education in Myanmar, allowing many stakeholders who had not had a voice for several decades – especially students from all over the country – to participate actively in the deliberations.
The official opening statement by Deputy Union Minister of Education Myo Myint outlined changes the government had already made to improve education as well as plans to revitalise higher education and intensify international partnerships.
Suu Kyi’s four guiding principles
It was of great significance and symbolic value that this was followed by a speech delivered by Aung San Suu Kyi in her role as chair of the parliamentary committee for revitalisation of Yangon University.
In her inspirational speech about the role of education in constructing a democratic Myanmar, the Nobel laureate spoke about the priorities for restoring universities, articulating four dimensions of empowerment as the organising principles that should guide higher education development in the current reconstruction phase.
The first one is empowerment through autonomy, which would allow universities to manage their academic activities in an effective manner, as opposed to the present situation of strict government control.
The second is inclusiveness, a basic requirement to ensure equal opportunities for all groups in Myanmar society in terms of access and success in higher education. This emphasis on equity is all the more important as large segments of the population have been excluded from higher education since the 1988 crackdown.
The third principle is empowerment for change, referring to the ability of each university to transform itself into an innovative institution.
And the last one is empowerment for the future, through reforms of the curriculum and pedagogical practices with the purpose of better preparing the young women and men of Myanmar who will be responsible for creating a more democratic society and building a more productive economy.
Review and priorities for action
After the presentation of the preliminary results of the sector review – indicating major performance gaps in terms of coverage and equity, quality and relevance, financing and governance – I urged the workshop participants to consider five key points as Myanmar moves forward to reconstruct its higher education system with possible support from several donor agencies: opportunities, challenges, vision, consensus-building and coordination.
First of all, the political transition represents a unique opportunity to ‘get it right’ – to construct a sound and balanced higher education system for the long term.
Many, if not most, countries in the world are hampered in their efforts to improve higher education by the weight of tradition and the reluctance of stakeholders to embrace change.
The current situation offers a unique opportunity to undertake courageous reforms that are often not possible in other countries because of vested interests and entrenched positions that block meaningful change.
Second, the national authorities and university leaders face a perplexing dilemma as they work on reconstructing the higher education system. On the one hand, they are faced with a myriad of immediate tasks to get the system to operate properly again. On the other hand, they should devote, as a matter of priority, sufficient time to thinking seriously about the future of higher education in preparation for the long-term transformation that is needed.
Balancing the resolution of urgent problems and the careful preparation of future developments is a major challenge that must be addressed effectively.
Third, preparing for the future requires elaborating a vision and formulating a strategic plan to guide the harmonious development of Myanmar’s higher education system.
This would involve setting clear targets in terms of quantitative expansion and the reduction of social and ethnic disparities and defining the desirable institutional configuration of the system; that is, the types of institutions – universities and non-university institutions – that are needed to satisfy demand for higher education, as well as the specific mission of each category of institution.
The plan would include identifying the conditions necessary for the proper functioning of all institutions from the viewpoint of supporting quality assurance mechanisms, appropriate governance and sustainable funding.
Fourth, the development of a vision and strategic plan should not be a technocratic exercise rigidly controlled from the top. It will only become meaningful if prepared in a participatory mode as a consensus-building process, bringing together the diverse constituents of the higher education community and allowing for a high degree of tolerance for controversies and disagreements around the content of the needed reforms and the proposed changes.
Achieving consensus on higher education policies requires a transparency of approach and creating confidence among all stakeholders.
Last but not least is the need for effective donor coordination. Countries in transition like Myanmar, emerging from a long period of international isolation, often become the donors’ latest darling. Offers for university partnerships abound all of a sudden; many projects are being prepared concurrently.
But these concrete manifestations of good intentions are not always coordinated, and carry the risk of pulling the higher education system in several directions. The onus is on the government and parliament of Myanmar to make sure that donor support is consistently and coherently anchored in the country’s vision, plan and priorities.
As Myanmar moves forward to reconstruct its higher education system, all stakeholders should bear in mind the notion expressed by the president of the University of Maryland, at the beginning of the financial crisis in the United States, that “a crisis is an opportunity not to be wasted”.
I would paraphrase his observation by stating that, in the case of Myanmar, the political transition is too good an opportunity to be missed, as the country commits itself to establishing the basis for a strong higher education system.
* Jamil Salmi is a global tertiary education expert, former World Bank tertiary education coordinator, and the author of numerous books and articles. He has advised more than 70 governments in all regions of the world on tertiary education reform, and guided strategic planning at universities in Colombia, Kenya, Madagascar, Mexico and Peru. To visit his website, click here.
The political transition that started in 2011 has triggered the resumption of international collaboration in the higher education sector and the launch of a comprehensive education sector review led by the government of Myanmar with strong support from development partners.
The purpose of this analytical exercise is to pave the way for increased external assistance based on an objective diagnosis of the current situation and needs, to help the government and other stakeholders formulate a strategy for the future development of higher education.
The first higher education policy dialogue workshop in Myanmar since the beginning of the political transition took place in Naypyitaw on 29 June 2013, with a focus on “Empowering Higher Education: A vision for Myanmar’s universities”.
It was convened by the British Council with strong participation and support from AusAID, the Asian Development Bank and UNESCO. I was invited as an advisor to AusAID.
The two-day meeting brought together representatives of the various ministries overseeing the operation of higher education institutions, rectors and academics, student leaders, and members of parliament, including the Nobel peace prize laureate Aung San Suu Kyi.
The workshop offered a unique platform for policy dialogue around the main issues facing higher education in Myanmar, allowing many stakeholders who had not had a voice for several decades – especially students from all over the country – to participate actively in the deliberations.
The official opening statement by Deputy Union Minister of Education Myo Myint outlined changes the government had already made to improve education as well as plans to revitalise higher education and intensify international partnerships.
Suu Kyi’s four guiding principles
It was of great significance and symbolic value that this was followed by a speech delivered by Aung San Suu Kyi in her role as chair of the parliamentary committee for revitalisation of Yangon University.
In her inspirational speech about the role of education in constructing a democratic Myanmar, the Nobel laureate spoke about the priorities for restoring universities, articulating four dimensions of empowerment as the organising principles that should guide higher education development in the current reconstruction phase.
The first one is empowerment through autonomy, which would allow universities to manage their academic activities in an effective manner, as opposed to the present situation of strict government control.
The second is inclusiveness, a basic requirement to ensure equal opportunities for all groups in Myanmar society in terms of access and success in higher education. This emphasis on equity is all the more important as large segments of the population have been excluded from higher education since the 1988 crackdown.
The third principle is empowerment for change, referring to the ability of each university to transform itself into an innovative institution.
And the last one is empowerment for the future, through reforms of the curriculum and pedagogical practices with the purpose of better preparing the young women and men of Myanmar who will be responsible for creating a more democratic society and building a more productive economy.
Review and priorities for action
After the presentation of the preliminary results of the sector review – indicating major performance gaps in terms of coverage and equity, quality and relevance, financing and governance – I urged the workshop participants to consider five key points as Myanmar moves forward to reconstruct its higher education system with possible support from several donor agencies: opportunities, challenges, vision, consensus-building and coordination.
First of all, the political transition represents a unique opportunity to ‘get it right’ – to construct a sound and balanced higher education system for the long term.
Many, if not most, countries in the world are hampered in their efforts to improve higher education by the weight of tradition and the reluctance of stakeholders to embrace change.
The current situation offers a unique opportunity to undertake courageous reforms that are often not possible in other countries because of vested interests and entrenched positions that block meaningful change.
Second, the national authorities and university leaders face a perplexing dilemma as they work on reconstructing the higher education system. On the one hand, they are faced with a myriad of immediate tasks to get the system to operate properly again. On the other hand, they should devote, as a matter of priority, sufficient time to thinking seriously about the future of higher education in preparation for the long-term transformation that is needed.
Balancing the resolution of urgent problems and the careful preparation of future developments is a major challenge that must be addressed effectively.
Third, preparing for the future requires elaborating a vision and formulating a strategic plan to guide the harmonious development of Myanmar’s higher education system.
This would involve setting clear targets in terms of quantitative expansion and the reduction of social and ethnic disparities and defining the desirable institutional configuration of the system; that is, the types of institutions – universities and non-university institutions – that are needed to satisfy demand for higher education, as well as the specific mission of each category of institution.
The plan would include identifying the conditions necessary for the proper functioning of all institutions from the viewpoint of supporting quality assurance mechanisms, appropriate governance and sustainable funding.
Fourth, the development of a vision and strategic plan should not be a technocratic exercise rigidly controlled from the top. It will only become meaningful if prepared in a participatory mode as a consensus-building process, bringing together the diverse constituents of the higher education community and allowing for a high degree of tolerance for controversies and disagreements around the content of the needed reforms and the proposed changes.
Achieving consensus on higher education policies requires a transparency of approach and creating confidence among all stakeholders.
Last but not least is the need for effective donor coordination. Countries in transition like Myanmar, emerging from a long period of international isolation, often become the donors’ latest darling. Offers for university partnerships abound all of a sudden; many projects are being prepared concurrently.
But these concrete manifestations of good intentions are not always coordinated, and carry the risk of pulling the higher education system in several directions. The onus is on the government and parliament of Myanmar to make sure that donor support is consistently and coherently anchored in the country’s vision, plan and priorities.
As Myanmar moves forward to reconstruct its higher education system, all stakeholders should bear in mind the notion expressed by the president of the University of Maryland, at the beginning of the financial crisis in the United States, that “a crisis is an opportunity not to be wasted”.
I would paraphrase his observation by stating that, in the case of Myanmar, the political transition is too good an opportunity to be missed, as the country commits itself to establishing the basis for a strong higher education system.
* Jamil Salmi is a global tertiary education expert, former World Bank tertiary education coordinator, and the author of numerous books and articles. He has advised more than 70 governments in all regions of the world on tertiary education reform, and guided strategic planning at universities in Colombia, Kenya, Madagascar, Mexico and Peru. To visit his website, click here.
MALAYSIA: Controversy over compulsory Islamic studies on foreign campuses
Yojana Sharma and Emilia Tan17 August 2013 Issue No:283
An Islamic studies and Asian civilisation course, compulsory for
students in Malaysia’s public universities, will also be mandatory for
all private university students – including those at foreign branch
campuses – from 1 September.
Amid controversy over the course content, Muhyiddin Yassin, Malaysia’s deputy prime minister and education minister, said the move was intended to “streamline the requirements” of private and public universities.
Vincenzo Raimo, director of the international office at the University of Nottingham in the UK, which has a branch campus in Malaysia, said the subject was being made compulsory across the board, including at foreign branch campuses.
TITAS, as the religion and civilisation course is known by its Malaysian acronym, has sparked considerable debate within the country, particularly among non-Malay communities.
Critics have called on the government to make the subject non-compulsory for non-Muslims; Malaysia has significant Hindu, Chinese Buddhist and Christian minorities, many of them attending private universities because of restricted places at public institutions.
Just over 60% of Malaysians consider themselves to be Muslim, according to official census figures.
Consultations on TITAS have been held with private universities and foreign branch campuses over the past year. Malaysia hosts eight foreign branch campuses and has just over 50 private universities and more than 400 private colleges.
In a written parliamentary reply on 11 July, Yassin said foreign students in private institutions would also be required to take Malaysian studies and Malay language courses. At Nottingham University’s campus in Malaysia, three hours a week will be allocated to the compulsory subjects.
Previously some students who had already studied TITAS could be exempt. “There are no exemptions under the new regulations,” Christine Ennew, provost of the University of Nottingham Malaysia campus, told University World News.
“Like other institutions in Malaysia, we have been delivering teaching in areas related to TITAS for some considerable time and already have significant capacity in this area, but we will need to scale up provision, and this will have significant cost implications.”
The subjects already taught at Nottingham’s branch campus include Malaysian studies, moral or Islamic studies and Bahasa Malaysia, the national language.
“We delivered these subjects to students as a supplement to the standard curriculum,” Ennew said, adding that the purpose of the courses was to provide students with some grounding in the national language, an understanding of the country’s history, and awareness of religious and moral debates.
But some academics have said that the use of many Malay terms in the course could make it particularly difficult for students who do not speak the language.
Controversy
Since July the issue has become highly emotive, with some critics accusing the government of ‘creeping Islamisation’ and pandering to Islamist groups that support the government.
Although the government’s stated aim is to promote national harmony, they are concerned that the focus will be on Islam and that students risk being taught by religious fanatics with little exposure to other religions.
Islamic groups in turn accused the critics of being ‘Islamophobic’.
The Ministry of Education insists the claims that the course contains Islamic elements and is unsuitable for non-Muslim students are inaccurate. TITAS also tackles “Malay, Chinese, Indian civilisations as well as civilisations of the future", the ministry said in a statement.
The subject is already being taught on a compulsory basis in the Malaysian provinces of Sabah and Sarawak on the Island of Borneo, where non-Muslims attained excellent results according to the ministry’s higher education department Director General Morshidi Sirat, quoted by the official Bernama news agency.
“It is about comparative Asian civilisations as well as the good and common values,” he said.
Member of parliament Ko Chung Sen, of the multiracial opposition Democratic Action Party, urged the government to withdraw the compulsory TITAS requirement. He cited the country’s constitution, which states: “No person shall be required to receive instructions in or of a religion other than his own.”
“How would this improve one’s studies to be a doctor, lawyer or engineer? Why would this be necessary here in Malaysia?” he asked in a press statement last month.
Others have argued that since TITAS is taught in Malaysia’s primary and secondary schools, there is little need for it to be mandatory for university students.
Compulsory vs elective
Gan Ping Sieu, vice president of the Malaysian Chinese Association, which is part of the ruling Barisan coalition, said the course should be made elective instead of compulsory, “as is the practice of top-ranked universities in the world.
“To make study of a single religion-civilisation compulsory for non-followers of that religion-civilisation is a step backward from national harmony. The ministry should instead introduce the general studies of all major religions-civilisations in secondary schools to promote better understanding and goodwill amongst our younger generation.”
Mahaganapathy Dass, higher education bureau chair of the Malay Indian Congress youth organisation, said that if the intention was to provide students with some exposure regarding civilisations, the current focus on one civilisation should be reduced and more emphasis given to others. A new syllabus should be drawn up after discussion with academics, experts and teachers, he said.
Making TITAS compulsory “shows that there is a fear that it won’t be popular in the first place. Bureaucrats are scared that if a course is initiated and its undertaking is voluntary, classrooms would be empty save for a dedicated few,” said Aerie Rahman, a Malaysian student at the School of Oriental and African Studies, London University, who took TITAS classes while an undergraduate law student at Malaysia’s Universiti Teknologi MARA.
When he studied the subject four years ago at the public university, “there was some Islamic bent”, Rahman told University World News.
Even if the syllabus has been changed since then for private universities, Rahman said, “I don’t think it is appropriate for foreign or non-Muslim students, or even Muslim students. Students at university are not looking for what TITAS is offering. It is not useful to students, who need skills to secure a job on graduation.”
TITAS has been compulsory in public universities since 2006, although marks are not included in the cumulative grade point average that leads to a degree award.
Education ministry officials have said private institutions can decide how to assess and grade students.
“There is a specified curriculum which indicates the broad areas to be covered. We are in discussion with the ministry about a range of flexible delivery options and we are particularly interested to explore integration with other elements of our curriculum,” Nottingham’s Ennew said.
She added that the subject was “potentially of value to a ‘global citizen’ because it will help them understand modern geo-politics and its implications for their future working career. The skills elements included in the new diet of compulsory subjects is also one that is relevant to student employability.”
Academics who spoke on condition that they were not named said it was unlikely the government would withdraw the course – but there was still some scope for adjusting the content.
Amid controversy over the course content, Muhyiddin Yassin, Malaysia’s deputy prime minister and education minister, said the move was intended to “streamline the requirements” of private and public universities.
Vincenzo Raimo, director of the international office at the University of Nottingham in the UK, which has a branch campus in Malaysia, said the subject was being made compulsory across the board, including at foreign branch campuses.
TITAS, as the religion and civilisation course is known by its Malaysian acronym, has sparked considerable debate within the country, particularly among non-Malay communities.
Critics have called on the government to make the subject non-compulsory for non-Muslims; Malaysia has significant Hindu, Chinese Buddhist and Christian minorities, many of them attending private universities because of restricted places at public institutions.
Just over 60% of Malaysians consider themselves to be Muslim, according to official census figures.
Consultations on TITAS have been held with private universities and foreign branch campuses over the past year. Malaysia hosts eight foreign branch campuses and has just over 50 private universities and more than 400 private colleges.
In a written parliamentary reply on 11 July, Yassin said foreign students in private institutions would also be required to take Malaysian studies and Malay language courses. At Nottingham University’s campus in Malaysia, three hours a week will be allocated to the compulsory subjects.
Previously some students who had already studied TITAS could be exempt. “There are no exemptions under the new regulations,” Christine Ennew, provost of the University of Nottingham Malaysia campus, told University World News.
“Like other institutions in Malaysia, we have been delivering teaching in areas related to TITAS for some considerable time and already have significant capacity in this area, but we will need to scale up provision, and this will have significant cost implications.”
The subjects already taught at Nottingham’s branch campus include Malaysian studies, moral or Islamic studies and Bahasa Malaysia, the national language.
“We delivered these subjects to students as a supplement to the standard curriculum,” Ennew said, adding that the purpose of the courses was to provide students with some grounding in the national language, an understanding of the country’s history, and awareness of religious and moral debates.
But some academics have said that the use of many Malay terms in the course could make it particularly difficult for students who do not speak the language.
Controversy
Since July the issue has become highly emotive, with some critics accusing the government of ‘creeping Islamisation’ and pandering to Islamist groups that support the government.
Although the government’s stated aim is to promote national harmony, they are concerned that the focus will be on Islam and that students risk being taught by religious fanatics with little exposure to other religions.
Islamic groups in turn accused the critics of being ‘Islamophobic’.
The Ministry of Education insists the claims that the course contains Islamic elements and is unsuitable for non-Muslim students are inaccurate. TITAS also tackles “Malay, Chinese, Indian civilisations as well as civilisations of the future", the ministry said in a statement.
The subject is already being taught on a compulsory basis in the Malaysian provinces of Sabah and Sarawak on the Island of Borneo, where non-Muslims attained excellent results according to the ministry’s higher education department Director General Morshidi Sirat, quoted by the official Bernama news agency.
“It is about comparative Asian civilisations as well as the good and common values,” he said.
Member of parliament Ko Chung Sen, of the multiracial opposition Democratic Action Party, urged the government to withdraw the compulsory TITAS requirement. He cited the country’s constitution, which states: “No person shall be required to receive instructions in or of a religion other than his own.”
“How would this improve one’s studies to be a doctor, lawyer or engineer? Why would this be necessary here in Malaysia?” he asked in a press statement last month.
Others have argued that since TITAS is taught in Malaysia’s primary and secondary schools, there is little need for it to be mandatory for university students.
Compulsory vs elective
Gan Ping Sieu, vice president of the Malaysian Chinese Association, which is part of the ruling Barisan coalition, said the course should be made elective instead of compulsory, “as is the practice of top-ranked universities in the world.
“To make study of a single religion-civilisation compulsory for non-followers of that religion-civilisation is a step backward from national harmony. The ministry should instead introduce the general studies of all major religions-civilisations in secondary schools to promote better understanding and goodwill amongst our younger generation.”
Mahaganapathy Dass, higher education bureau chair of the Malay Indian Congress youth organisation, said that if the intention was to provide students with some exposure regarding civilisations, the current focus on one civilisation should be reduced and more emphasis given to others. A new syllabus should be drawn up after discussion with academics, experts and teachers, he said.
Making TITAS compulsory “shows that there is a fear that it won’t be popular in the first place. Bureaucrats are scared that if a course is initiated and its undertaking is voluntary, classrooms would be empty save for a dedicated few,” said Aerie Rahman, a Malaysian student at the School of Oriental and African Studies, London University, who took TITAS classes while an undergraduate law student at Malaysia’s Universiti Teknologi MARA.
When he studied the subject four years ago at the public university, “there was some Islamic bent”, Rahman told University World News.
Even if the syllabus has been changed since then for private universities, Rahman said, “I don’t think it is appropriate for foreign or non-Muslim students, or even Muslim students. Students at university are not looking for what TITAS is offering. It is not useful to students, who need skills to secure a job on graduation.”
TITAS has been compulsory in public universities since 2006, although marks are not included in the cumulative grade point average that leads to a degree award.
Education ministry officials have said private institutions can decide how to assess and grade students.
“There is a specified curriculum which indicates the broad areas to be covered. We are in discussion with the ministry about a range of flexible delivery options and we are particularly interested to explore integration with other elements of our curriculum,” Nottingham’s Ennew said.
She added that the subject was “potentially of value to a ‘global citizen’ because it will help them understand modern geo-politics and its implications for their future working career. The skills elements included in the new diet of compulsory subjects is also one that is relevant to student employability.”
Academics who spoke on condition that they were not named said it was unlikely the government would withdraw the course – but there was still some scope for adjusting the content.
EUROPE: Spain dominates Erasmus student exchange flows
Jan Petter Myklebust17 August 2013 Issue No:283
Of the 252,827 students exchanged under the Erasmus programme during
2011-12, around 75,000 – 30% – moved between 100 sending or receiving
universities. Spain dominated the list, with 31 institutions in the top
100 for both sending and receiving students.
The University of Granada was the top sending and top receiving university, sending 2,101 of its students abroad under Erasmus and receiving 2,052 Erasmus students.
Among the top 100 receiving institutions, only four were in the United Kingdom and only one – the University of Nottingham – was in the top 100 for sending universities.
Altogether 3,328 higher education institutions in 33 countries – the EU27 plus Iceland, Lichtenstein, Norway, Switzerland and Turkey – participated in 2011-12, while 4,452 higher education institutions were eligible, holding an Erasmus University Charter.
By the current academic year, three million students had participated in the Erasmus programme since it was launched in 1987, with a 9% increase in participating students compared with the previous year.
Spain is the main participating country, sending out 39,545 students and receiving 39,300 during 2011-12. The other major countries were Germany, France, Italy and Poland as major sending countries, and France, Germany, the UK and Italy as major receivers.
Out of the top 10 receiving universities, six were Spanish: Granada, Sevilla, Complutense Madrid, Valencia, Polytechnic University of Valencia and Slamanca. Each sent more than 1,100 students. Other major receiving universities were: Bologna (1,693), Aarhus (1,532), Chales University in Prague (1,137) and La Sapienza in Rome (1,107).
Out of the 10 major sending universities, five were Spanish: Granada, Complutense Madrid, Sevilla, Valencia and Polytechnic University of Valencia. Each sent more than 1,450 students.
Other major sending universities were: Bologna (1,713), Warszawa (1,349), La Sapienza (1,213), Padova (1,195) and Ljubljana (1,188).
* Click here for information on Erasmus.
The University of Granada was the top sending and top receiving university, sending 2,101 of its students abroad under Erasmus and receiving 2,052 Erasmus students.
Among the top 100 receiving institutions, only four were in the United Kingdom and only one – the University of Nottingham – was in the top 100 for sending universities.
Altogether 3,328 higher education institutions in 33 countries – the EU27 plus Iceland, Lichtenstein, Norway, Switzerland and Turkey – participated in 2011-12, while 4,452 higher education institutions were eligible, holding an Erasmus University Charter.
By the current academic year, three million students had participated in the Erasmus programme since it was launched in 1987, with a 9% increase in participating students compared with the previous year.
Spain is the main participating country, sending out 39,545 students and receiving 39,300 during 2011-12. The other major countries were Germany, France, Italy and Poland as major sending countries, and France, Germany, the UK and Italy as major receivers.
Out of the top 10 receiving universities, six were Spanish: Granada, Sevilla, Complutense Madrid, Valencia, Polytechnic University of Valencia and Slamanca. Each sent more than 1,100 students. Other major receiving universities were: Bologna (1,693), Aarhus (1,532), Chales University in Prague (1,137) and La Sapienza in Rome (1,107).
Out of the 10 major sending universities, five were Spanish: Granada, Complutense Madrid, Sevilla, Valencia and Polytechnic University of Valencia. Each sent more than 1,450 students.
Other major sending universities were: Bologna (1,713), Warszawa (1,349), La Sapienza (1,213), Padova (1,195) and Ljubljana (1,188).
* Click here for information on Erasmus.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
The 2024 Workshops for Foreign Confucius Institute Directors on June 13-21, 2024 at Sichuan Province, China
My sincere thanks and gratitude go to my respectful Rector, H.E. Sok Khorn , and the Chinese Confucius Institute Director, Prof. Yi Yongzhon...
-
Wachira Kigotho 09 May 2014 Issue No:319 Unequal access to university education is likely to persist in most countries globally ...
-
លោកនិពន្ធនាយកជាទីគោរពរាប់អាន! តាម ការពិនិត្យសង្កេតរបស់ខ្ញុំ មានប្រព័ន្ធផ្សព្វផ្សាយជាតិ និងអន្តរជាតិជាច្រើន បានច... -
ការពិនិត្យមើលផលអាក្រក់កើតចេញពីវប្បធម៌ប៉ែងជើង ឬក្ដិចត្រួយគ្នា ដោយ កែវពេជ្រ មេត្តា 2011-11-03 ទម្លាប់នៃការប...
-
Chambers and Partners - Home 1 Bun & Associates THE FIRM Sources single out this firm as a market leader, highlighting its inc...
-
Combat Journalism: CQR Is reporting on global conflict worth the risk? By Frank Greve Introduction Chr...
-
ព្រះករុណាព្រះបាទសម្តេចព្រះនរោត្តម សីហនុ « ព្រះបរមរតនកោដ្ឋ » បានស្ថាបនាសាកលវិទ្យាល័យភូមិន្ទបាត់ដំបងតាមរយៈ ព្រះរាជក្រឹត្យលេខ ៣៤/៦៨.ប.រ ចុះថ្... -
By Sam Rany 1. There is a jump in higher education in Cambodia, what do you see from this development? Actually, I o...
-
https://www.box.com/files/0/f/0/1/f_2876428255#/files/0/f/0/1/f_2876428255 International Journal of Higher Education ISSN 1927-... -
Academic Adjustment Issues in a Malaysian Research University: The Case of Cambodian, Laotian, Burmese, and Vietnamese Postgraduat...
-
https://www.box.com/profile#/profile/183918435/page/1/1/2876421805 International Journal of Learning & Development ISSN 216...
