Transcript xxx - ASU School of Public Affairs

INTERNATIONAL COMPETITION
IN HIGHER EDUCATION:
HOW DO CHINESE UNIVERSITIES
COMPARE?
Kathryn Mohrman
Arizona State University
Peking University Education Forum
December 21, 2010
Background
• University president, dean and professor
• Visiting prof at Chinese University of Hong
Kong and Sichuan University
• University Design Consortium—focused on
reform and innovation in higher education
worldwide http://universitydesign.asu.edu
• Research on public policies regarding world
class universities
How are universities worldwide
responding to increasing
global competition? How do
Chinese universities compare?
Case study universities
• CHINA
– Peking, Tsinghua, Sichuan, Tianjin, Beijing
Normal
• ASIA
– Tokyo, Kyoto, Tohoku
– Australian National, U of Sydney
– U of Hong Kong, Chinese U of Hong Kong
– National Taiwan U, National U of Singapore,
Korea U
• USA
– MIT, Berkeley, Michigan
• EUROPE
– Oxford (UK)
– Paris 06 (Pierre and Marie Curie)
– ETH (Switzerland)
Methodology
• Individual university as the unit of analysis
• Gathering information not usually analyzed
• Comparing 2003 and 2007 (looking at the
impact of 985 Project’s second round of
funding)
• Quantitative/data analysis
Research questions
•
•
•
•
How rich are these universities?
How research intensive are they?
How are they regarded by their peers?
Which universities have the strongest
base for the competitive market?
• Which ones are most likely to be
successful in the future?
• What are possibilities for future research?
Basic demographics
Enrollments in 2007
• Largest —SCU at almost 60,000 students
in 2007
• Next —University of Michigan, 39,000
• Smallest —MIT with 10,000
• Most of the rest between 15,000 and
30,000
Student-faculty ratio (2007)
• <10 Hong Kong U, Korea, Michigan,
Paris06, Tohoku, Tsinghua
• 10-15 Beijing Normal, MIT, Peking, Tokyo,
Kyoto, Tianjin, Chinese U Hong Kong,
Oxford, Sichuan, National U Singapore
• >15 National Taiwan, Australian National,
Berkeley, ETH, Sydney
How rich are these
universities?
Comparisons are difficult
• Differences in size
– Don’t look at the total amount, look at the
budget per student or per professor
• Differences in currencies
– Convert all to U.S. dollars
• Differences in buying power
– Convert using a market basket of similar
goods and services (Purchasing Power
Parity—World Bank)
University expenditures per student
and per professor plus researcher,
in U.S. dollars using PPP, 2007
800,000
700,000
600,000
500,000
400,000
300,000
200,000
100,000
PKU THU SCU TJU BNU
TOK KYO THK ANU SYD
expend per student
CUHKHKU NTU NUS KOR
expend per P&R
OXF ETH P06
MIT UCB UM
Table 1. University budgets
• Comparing Tokyo and Sichuan
– Per student: Tokyo has 7.1 times the expenditure
– Per professor plus researcher: 6.2 times
• Overall (per professor plus researcher)
– <$200,000: Sichuan, Paris06, Tianjin, ETH, Korea
– $200-300,000: Beijing Normal, National Taiwan, Oxford,
Peking, Tsinghua, Hong Kong U, Sydney
– $300-400,000: Tohoku, Australian National, Chinese U
Hong Kong, Kyoto, National U Singapore
– $400-500,000: Tokyo, MIT
– >$500,000: Berkeley, Michigan
% change in university expenditures
2003 to 2007
90.0%
80.0%
70.0%
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
UM
UCB
MIT
ETH
OXF
KOR
NUS
NTU
SYD
ANU
THK
KYO
TOK
BNU
TJU
SCU
CUHK
-10.0%
THU
PKU
0.0%
Impact of 985 Project
985 Phase 2 Ave annual
2004-2008
grant (PPP)
Ave grant as
% of budget
SCU
400,000,000
28,985,507
5.9%
TJU
421,000,000
30,507,246
9.6%
BNU
600,000,000
43,478,261
12.5%
PKU
2,408,000,000
174,492,754
16.0%
THU
3,591,000,000
260,217,391
20.2%
How research intensive are
they?
Table 2. Research funding
– Michigan/Beijing Normal 24 times the
expenditure in 2003, 16 times in 2007
– MIT/Tsinghua 2.3 times in 2003, 1.5 times in
2007
– Tokyo/Peking 2.3 times in 2003, 2.0 times in
2007
In other words, Chinese universities are
catching up fast!
Growth in research expenditures
• Percentage change between 2003 and 2007
– 122% Sichuan
– 70-100% Peking, Tsinghua
– 50-70% Tianjin, Oxford, Tokyo, Tohoku, Beijing
Normal
– 24-50% MIT, Kyoto, Australian National, ETH,
Chinese U Hong Kong
– 10-25% Korea
– <10% Michigan, Berkeley, Singapore
Research expenditures per professor
plus researcher, in U.S. dollars
using PPP, 2007
200,000
180,000
160,000
140,000
120,000
100,000
80,000
60,000
40,000
20,000
UCB
MIT
TOK
UM
NUS
OXF
KYO
THU
THK
ANU
PKU
HKU CUHK TJU
KOR
ETH
BNU
SCU
SYD
P06
Times Higher Education
rankings
• Data organized into five categories:
– Teaching, research, citations, industry
income, internationalization
• Ranking in research area measures:
– Reputation among peers
– Research income per staff member using
PPP
– Published articles per staff member
– Research income from outside sources
Times Higher Education rating on
research, 2010
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
UCB
OXF
TOK
MIT
UM
ETH
KYO
NUS
HKU
THU
THK
ANU
SYD
PKU
NTU
P06
Indexed publications per professor
plus researcher, 2007
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
UM
UCB
MIT
P06
ETH
OXF
KOR
NUS
NTU
HKU
CUHK
SYD
ANU
THK
KYO
TOK
BNU
TJU
SCU
THU
PKU
0
% change in publications per
professor plus researcher
2003 to 2007
180%
160%
140%
120%
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
SCU
TJU
KOR PKU BNU
ETH
NTU
THU
SYD
UM
MIT
OXF NUS
P06
UCB CUHK ANU HKU
THK
KYO TOK
Research expenditures per indexed
article, in U.S. dollars using PPP, 2007
180,000
160,000
140,000
120,000
100,000
80,000
60,000
40,000
20,000
UM
UCB
MIT
P06
ETH
OXF
KOR
NUS
HKU
CUHK
SYD
ANU
THK
KYO
TOK
BNU
TJU
SCU
THU
PKU
-
How are these universities
regarded by their peers?
Table 3. Shanghai Jiaotong
rankings
•
•
•
•
•
Top 10: Berkeley, MIT, Oxford
Top 25: Tokyo, Michigan, ETH, Kyoto
Top 50: Paris06
Top 100: Australian National, Sydney, Tohoku
Top 200: National Taiwan, Singapore, Chinese
U Hong Kong, Peking, Tsinghua
• Top 300: Korea, Hong Kong U
• Top 400: Sichuan
• Top 500: Tianjin
Table 4. Times Higher
Education rankings
• Top 10: MIT, Oxford, Berkeley
• Top 25: ETH, Michigan, Hong Kong U
• Top 50: Tokyo, Singapore, Peking,
Australian National
• Top 100: Kyoto, Tsinghua, Sydney
• Top 150: National Taiwan, Tohoku, P06
• Not included: Beijing Normal, Chinese U
Hong Kong, Sichuan, Tianjin
Rankings
– SJTU looks only at research, not at teaching
– Times Higher Education puts 2/3 of the weight
on research, citations, and industry income
– Times Higher Education rates teaching, but
much of the category is graduate education
– The competition is increasing worldwide
– No Chinese university has highly cited
researchers in SJTU
Which universities are most
likely to be successful in the
future?
Which have the strongest base
for competition?
• American universities are the richest but
growing slowly
• Chinese universities are growing rapidly in
total funding, money for research, and
reputation
• Tsinghua and Peking have more money
per prof plus researcher than Oxford
Commitment to research
• Research % is highest at Oxford, Berkeley,
and Tsinghua
• Biggest increases at Singapore, Korea, and
Chinese institutions
• Productivity (measured by articles per prof
plus researcher) highest at Tokyo, Berkeley,
Kyoto, Paris06
But what else is important?
• Philip Altbach—a world class university
needs
– Hardware: library, laboratories, equipment
– Software: free inquiry, academic honesty
– Autonomy: limited government interference
Table 5. Paris 06
• Paris06
– Lowest in total university expenditures per
professor plus researcher
– Low in % expenditure for research
– Yet higher in productivity than Michigan,
Oxford or MIT
• Next generation of scholars and citizens
– Commitment to teaching and learning
– Nurturing of graduate students
• Chinese University of Hong Kong
– Blend of East and West
– Follows an American style undergraduate
program, organized by colleges and requiring
general education
– Low commitment to research (about ¼ of
Oxford’s) although increasing as % of total
– Modest scholarly productivity
Are Chinese universities
globally competitive?
• In some regards, yes, especially
compared with European universities
• In some regards, no, especially in terms of
reputation among peers
• But ten years from now, a similar study will
look very different—Chinese universities
will be much more highly regarded
Future research
• With more information about how funds
are used, more insight into policy
decisions
– Especially allocations for research and teaching
• With more universities in the study, more
analytical tools are possible
– Therefore, how to collect more institutional data,
especially from China
• With multiple years, more opportunities to
analyze trends
Thank you
Kathryn Mohrman
Professor, School of Public Affairs
Director, University Design Consortium
Arizona State University
[email protected]