Monthly Archives: March 2017

Government Reforms in Social Science and Humanities Research in Singapore

Posted on by

Hi folks!

Hope you had a great Spring break. I thought I should post my presentation slides on this blog, for the benefit of those who weren’t around during our session last week or might find it handy to have a soft copy of the slides!

The gist of my presentation is as follows:

  • On 07 November 2016, Singapore’s Deputy Prime Minister Mr. Tharman Shanmugaratnam announced that the Ministry of Education will spend SGD$350 million (equivalent to USD$250 million) on social science and humanities research for the next five years.
  • The government will also establish Singapore’s very first Social Science Research Council, while establishing partnerships with existing institutes in the US such as the SSRC in Brooklyn and Centre for Advanced Study in the Behavioural Sciences at Stanford.
  • My presentation examines the implications and limitations of these newly implemented government policies, focusing particularly on the potential winners and losers of these reforms, in HE institutions and the wider society.

Please feel free to share with me your thoughts or questions on this recent government reform! Will look to hear from you, specially on how we might be able to address critics’ skepticism towards the huge amount of funding that is channelled into this project by the Singapore government (while governments in other parts of the world such as the Trump administration is trying to cut back heavily on funding for the arts and cultural expression), fair democratic representation of members in the SSRC (because right now it is predominantly made up of senior academics and civil servants) and conflict between the winners and losers of this reform. Thank you!

– Tim

(Final) Government Reforms in Social Science and Humanities Research in Singapore- A Case Study-1lxygfs

How do international students experience university differently?

Posted on by

When we are discussing issues of internationalization in class we usually stop at the institutional level. Otherwise, we may discuss people in terms of student population movements between countries. This week, I tried to find something recently published that looked deeper than that. In the most recent Journal of International Students, researchers from Azusa Pacific University evaluated the way college experiences for international students diverge from their that of their domestic peers. They explain that their research fills an important hole in the literature which often ignores student satisfaction outcomes for international students. Using data from the 2010 University of California Undergraduate Experience Survey (UCUES), they came to some interesting conclusions.

The article shows that international students report lower levels of satisfaction with their college experience, with a particular weight placed on the quality of the classroom experience. Moreover, the researchers found that low levels of satisfaction correlated with lower levels of cognitive improvement. The researchers conclude that their findings should influence universities to craft more effective support systems for international students and ensure that international students’ satisfaction level equals that of their domestic peers. They suggest that knowingly selling an inferior product to an unwitting buyer is tantamount to exploitation on the part of the university.

Overall, I think the article makes a good moral argument about the risks of the profit model which is driving internationalization. That said, I don’t think the strength of their research design can quite back up the strength of their claim. For instance, the UCUES, from which the data for the study was pulled is a one-time survey of outgoing college seniors which relies extensively on retrospective self-reporting.  The study also suffers from a lack of longitudinal data. To be fair, the researchers do acknowledge these limitations in the concluding paragraphs.

Still, I think the article raises an important question about parity between students at research universities that may be uniquely relevant to SIPA given the size of its international student community.

Korean Horror movie reflecting brutal college entrance examination

Posted on by

Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9lyjyarCd8

Movie: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFqWC6F0Hps

 

Since last week we have been talked about Korean high school education and the studying abroad trend, I found this horror movie focusing on high school seniors preparing for the college entrance exams. It was published in 2006 by director Kim Eun-Kyung.

Story happens in a boarding high school created especially for students who have failed college entrance exams from previous year. It started with an advertisement by the principle introducing “the perfect school for study only” and close shots are around the campus. Dormitory, study room and dinning hall are newly renovated and look beautiful but lack of vitality. Everything in this high school is highly unified. Girls are dressed in uniforms with certain hairstyles and ruled by exactly same schedule of their daily activities. Girls get up early at the same time, brush their teeth in same room with same pace, do same morning exercises and eats the same breakfast during the same given period of time. Gilrs’ personal properties except textbooks and exercise booklets are collected on the first day they arrived school, because all are considered as disturbances, which could only harm their efforts for the test. We see girls lost their interests, their habits or even friendships during their preparation for test. They are taught that the only concerns should be the grade. It is not right to care about roommates or classmates because they are only competitors not companions in life.

Another storyline made me feel painful is the family of the girls. We see one girl, Kim Ri-Na, had strong desire to leave and was already mentally ill, however, her mother forced her to return and finally pushed her to the edge of her life. Family’s decision has been distorted by the stressful reality of education in Korean society.

“Do you wish to continue to be a loser?” Their mentor, a young cold-blood woman, repeated this sentence more than ten times in the movie. Originally from China, it is not difficult for me to imagine this story happening in the real world. Traditional admission culture and education system in Korea and China made college entrance examination a huge deal and had tremendous pressures and negative psychological effects on teenagers and their families. Failing the test equals to failing your first eighteen years of life. But truly, is it fair to define someone a “loser” based on test score? Is it valid to measure how well one learns in six years based on several pieces of test papers?

What do you think about the college admission requirement and process in Korea? Is a fatal examination enough to evaluate the education outcome? Does the examination well prepare students for higher education? Does it result more harm or more benefit? For broader picture, Do you prefer Korean way or American way of college admission? Why do you think this system has been effective in Korea and China for decades?

This movie is also known as “D-day” when it published in Korea and China. D-day usually refers to June 6,1994, which American army fought to win or die. It makes a lot of sense: A examination for win or die.

Job-Hunting Season Kicks Off in Japan

Posted on by

How can university students get a job in your country? Japan has a unique job hunting custom. Companies decide the job hunting schedule each year, affecting students significantly. In this year, companies started to hold seminars from March 1st and will be allowed to fully begin selection procedures, such as interviews and written exams, from June. http://www.nippon.com/en/behind/l10171/

You can learn more about the Japanese job hunting tradition from here: http://www.nippon.com/en/column/g00365/

I would appreciate it if you could share your countries’ cases about job hunting.

Relationship between HE enrollment & output in economy (high-tech intensity, GDP per capita & output per worker)

Posted on by

(Note: income level is given by GDP per capita. Economies’ position in the figure reflects their ranking by income and technology. Technology clusters are divided into three on the basis of the skill and hig-tech intensity of their products and exports.)

this proxy provides an assessment of an economy’s productivity and ability to move up the value chain within the service, manufacturing, non-manufacturing industry, and agricultural sectors.

Interestingly Japan has relatively high HE enrollment ratio(50+%) compared with other Asian countries. Korea has the highest level of enrollment ratio across the globe. However, Japan still has the highest level of GDP per capita and output per workers. There must be other factors leading to the outputs. However if we analyze from the perspective of higher education, I would say Japan has the highest capability of transferring knowledge/technology in HE into output.

Source: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EASTASIAPACIFICEXT/Resources/226300-1279680449418/7267211-1318449387306/EAP_higher_education_fullreport.pdf

Studying Abroad Trends in South Korea

Posted on by

Hello, all!

I was glad that everyone really responded to my presentation and questioned a lot today. 🙂

In summary,

Republic of Korea has the highest number of students studying abroad per capita in the world. (By Korean Ministry of Education, 223,908 in 2016, counting only higher education students. And SEVIS by Numbers, 74,817 coming to the US, counting all F&M Visa holders) Many of them mostly study abroad for Bachelor’s and Master’s degree.

The number of students going out is increasing by years gradually.

Major destinations are the US, China, and other Asian countries (Japan, Philippines).

According to SEVIS by Number, only 22% of Korean students study STEM field in the US.

According to Statistics Korea (the government office for statistics), 55% of a social survey respondent said yes to send their children to study abroad, 32% No, and 13% said I don’t know.

Among those 55% yes, the three top reasons why they want to send their children to study abroad is: 1) For nurturing international/cosmopolitan perspective, 2) For my children’s talents (in case of arts, and music), and 3) Because of unsatisfying education system.

And many of student studied abroad do not want to go back to Korea and this cause huge brain drain and education deficit. In response to this, Korean government spent a lot of money and policy for attracting foreign students and colleges and for establishing an education hub in several port cities, but so far nothing worked.

And I looked up the tuition system of Korea since I had no idea and want to add the tuition of several top ranked universities of Korea. The tuition was different by universities, each school within a university, major, how many credit you take per semester and what year you are in. The data is in 2016.

(using exchange rate 1 dollar = 1150 won)

Seoul National University (public) : average $5200 (per year, but it varied a lot from school to school. For example, the liberal arts school was $4400, but the medical school was $8600)

Korea University (private): average $7200 (per year, but this university also varied a lot. For example, the medical school was $10500, the engineering school was $8400, and the school of arts was $7800. But the liberal arts school was $6200. And also, the first year student needed to pay entrance fee of $900.)

Yonsei University (private): average $7800 (per year. It did not vary much among schools, just the medical school was about $10500. The first year student need to pay entrance fee of $860)

Please comment me below if you have any further questions. 🙂

Have a good day!

 

The actual powerpoint file is here:

Studying Abroad Trends in South Korea-2idklc5

Gender Parity Index and more

Posted on by
Hi class! This time our data team focuses on Gender Parity Index across countries.
Gender Parity Index (GPI) is a socioeconomic index usually designed to measure the relative access to education of males and females. It is calculated as the quotient of the number of females by the number of males enrolled in a given stage of education. (If the value is less than 1, then it means that the number of males enrolled is greater than that of females enrolled)
Here is the source from UNStats.
https://unstats.un.org/unsd/mdg/SeriesDetail.aspx?srid=614

And this is my summary!
U.S.A.: 1.37 (in 2013)
China: 1.15 (in 2013)
Peru : 1.09 (in 2010)
Pakistan: 0.98 (in 2013)
Mexico: 0.96 (in 2013)
India: 0.92 (in 2013)
Japan: 0.90 (in 2012)
Viet Nam: 0.90 (in 2013)
Korea: 0.75 (in 2014)
Singapore: – (no data found)
To be honest, I’m very surprised by the fact there is less differences across Asian countries than I thought and there is almost no correlation with gross enrollment ratio that I posted last time (http://edblogs.columbia.edu/inafu6653-001-2017-1/2017/02/08/international-comparison-gross-enrollment-ratio/). Another striking fact is Korea and Japan is lagging behind even within Asian countries.
And rather than just showing this alone, we also wanna share World Economic Forum’s Global Gender Gap Rankings in 2016. This index is composed mainly of four factors (economic participation and opportunity, educational attainment, health and survival, and political empowerment)
U.S.A.: 45th
Singapore: 55th
Viet Nam: 65th
Mexico: 66th
Peru : 80th
India: 87th
China: 99th
Japan: 111th
Korea: 116th
Pakistan: 143rd
Anything strikes you? Please share and discuss it!

The mentally-troubled student: How should universities get involved?

Posted on by

Hi everyone, as I introduced myself in our first class, my name is Dai and my goal is to become a psychologist working in Asia (I’m enrolled in the psychology program at the regular Columbia, across the street from SIPA). Thus, I’d like to use this post as an opportunity to discuss mental health, which I believe is essential for academic excellence but is not adequately reflected in social and educational policies.

In 2015, Newsweek reported a striking study by Japan’s Cabinet Office that examined child suicide. The study was striking because it found that the time of high suicide corresponded with the timing of the school year: more suicides were committed in early September when school starts and in mid-April when school resumes after spring break. The study is statistically persuasive, as their data were large: they looked at 18,000 records of child suicides from 1972–2013 (41 years). For those of us who are thinking that school stress can play a role, this thought partially supported by records of child suicide notes in 2006, which cited school stress as the cause of their decisions. Research done by Hokkaido University Professor Kenzo Denda, cited in the same Newsweek article, found that in Japan, 1 in 12 elementary school-aged children, and 1 in 4 junior high school students suffer from depression. Another study showed that suicide was the leading cause of death for Japanese children age 10-19 in 2014. Taken all of these findings into account, we can see that suicide and mental health present a concern for universities because the later part of the child spectrum (age 17-19) are university age, which means a considerable amount of university students may experience mental health problems and suicidal thoughts, some of whom since a very, very early age, as Professor Denda showed that depression was presented in elementary school.

While the above findings were specific to Japan, I think it is also reasonable to assume (we will have to assume because of the lack of quality data in Asia, something Professor Lefebure mentioned in class) that other Asian countries also face the same problem. In fact, here is a summary of mental health index in Asia Pacific in 2016 reported by The Economist (however, please note that this report is commissioned by a company called Janssen Asia Pacific, which is part of the healthcare giant Johnson & Johnson so there may be private interest in methodology and findings of the report):

The criteria for ranking were comprised of four categories:

 

  • Environment for people with mental illness to have a normal life
  • Access to medical services
  • Opportunities, specifically job-related for people with mental illness
  • Government policies including programs to reduce stigma against mental illness

 

We could see that the ranking relatively corresponds with the economic development status of a country – more developed countries ranked higher than less-resourced countries. However, this does not mean that resource-strapped countries, those countries at the bottom of the list cannot do anything about their population with mental health. The real question is, how can they maximize their result given their limited funding? Or simply put, how can they do more with less?

With respect to higher education, what role should universities play in supporting their at-risk students and the community at large? I think education plays a key role in solving many aspects of the mental health problem. For example, universities can reduce stress by changing their curricula and non-academic initiatives. Universities can solve the lack of expert resources by training future mental health professionals. University personnel is also in a position to influence policy and public opinion.

What are your thoughts?

 

 

 

Sources:

Newsweek: http://www.newsweek.com/why-do-so-many-japanese-schoolchildren-kill-themselves-391648

Janssen/The Economist Report: http://www.janssen.com/apac/news-center/health-policy-and-advocacy/mentalhealthandintegration

The Usefulness of Film Studies and Analysis in a Higher Education Institution

Posted on by

Hello, today, I am writing about a filmmaker, Beeban Kidron.

Beeban Kidron is a British filmmaker, best known for directing Bridget Jones: The Edge of Reason (2004). She has also produced documentaries, especially about troubling social issues, as seen in Hookers, Hustlers, Pimps and their Johns (1993) and Sex, Death and the Gods (2011), a film about “devadasi,” or Indian “sacred prostitutes”. Most important of all, Kidron founded FILMCLUB, a charity organisation that allows schools to screen films at no cost, and to discuss and review these films for educational purposes. FILMCLUB uses film as a pedagogical tool for students to explore ideas of community, society and culture. Kidron believes that film has the power to improve millennial students’ learning ability in diverse ways — viscerally, emotionally and intellectually.

In my opinion, the fundamental strength of Kidron’s project lies in her belief that film offers a chance for us to engage in a communal learning experience which we all need in this increasingly divided world. Film momentarily unites an audience through a shared process of watching and learning about other worlds and cultures. Even though films are produced in a variety of languages, it has a unique ability to elicit empathy in the viewer. These features are especially relevant for the younger generation, where movies enlarge their worldviews, heighten their understanding of who they are, and help them make sense of the world. Kidron said: “People have a right to have their lives witnessed. If we coexist with the systems that abuse people, then we have a duty to understand it.”

Kidron’s message made me think about the effectiveness of using film to promote a more international culture in higher education institutions. I think it will be very helpful for an international university like Columbia, which can do a lot more to create opportunities for minority representation and cultural interaction among students. Similar to Angelica’s blog post on “Chimamanda’s Danger of a Single Story”, I think it is important to expose students to a range of cultural narratives and stories. Film is perhaps the best way to promoting and publicising unity across cultural differences because it is financially low in cost (anyone with an iPhone can start filming) and is easily disseminated.

What do you think? As a SIPA student, I also want to question how much you feel belonged to Columbia? Do you feel that the school can do more to foster a communal or international identity among students?

 

Here is the link to her TED talk: