Thanks to Harrison's reminder, I picked up the news on Science horribly titled as Max Planck Accused of Hobbling Universities. Is Max Planck going to be sentenced?
It is an interesting piece of news, but far from good enough in argument, in
my opinion. The author made a mistake at the very first step as she/he quoted the international university rankings to prove the problem of Germany's education. It is nonsense for European universities, as it is an invention of US style. However, I don't intend to deny the trouble the Germany's universities face and has been argued for a long time. In fact, The "problem" that is talking about is a consequence of globalization rather than a problem of Germany, or any other country. And it is never an independent trouble of the education and research system.
The institution of Germany, or more generally, Europe, is largely different with that of US in many an aspect, among which the distinction in welfare system, including education, may be most significant. For example, in the recent documentary film 'Sicko', Moore compared the health insurance system of US and France. Generally speaking, along the dimension of equality and freedom, US often shows propensity to
individualist, while the European continent prefers egalitarian to some extent. I believe the institutions evolved via different paths historically, and fit well in their own niches for some time, until the parts of the world merge together.
By the same token, the education systems start with different points. For US, it is biased to meritocracy, that is, the universities open for the rich and the clever. While for Europe, the colleges serve the public, and everybody, either rich or poor, clever or stupid, as long as she is willing to, has the opportunity for higher education. The result is that the former wins in efficiency, of course. And once the borders are open, the clever flow to US, since they can benefit more than average there. Will the transformation of Max Planck reverse the trends? I believe not.
The situation is like two Nash equilibrium strategies, each of which is stable itself. But if placed in the same playground, one invades another. However, it is too early to conclude that one is better than another. Suppose in the prisoner's dilemma the defector dominate the cooperator but leads to a worst outcome. That is it.
To sum up, I'd like to quote the former core, that this article is "too simple, sometimes naive".
PS: If we further include China's education in this debate, where should we place it? I'd prefer to identify it as much more extreme than US in utilitarian. The poor have no way to receive good education, and the universities are in a hurry to copy certifications rather than to culture youth and do science. As a result, we are obviously among the most efficient, but as to quality, I'm not sure. Will more fundings boost China's universities? I have to be pessimistic.
Anyway, it is somewhat ironic for me now to consider two offers from Max Planck and Stanford as once a very "bad" bachelor student in Tsinghua.
1/29/2008
Does Max Planck Hobble Universities?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
So you mean the poverty of German universities is not a result of MP's deriving too much, but that total resource has been reduced for globalization and american's invasion?
Inspiring comment, inspiring Nash :)
btw, shift of the balance seems to cease as long as the talents' concentration difference would arrive a threshold. But how long?
Not really. There is no so called "poverty of German universities" or "resource reduced for globalization and american's invasion". It's just a competition between US and Europe, and US is leading the game at present. As a result, it seems that only the Yankee's way is right. But it is always ignorant to deny diversity of culture.
But isn't what happened a process of brain drain, by means of "the clever flow to US"?
As to China, Jeffrey Mervis's report in the same issue suggested "Those with temporary visas are increasingly likely to remain in the United States 5 years after earning their S&E Ph.D.s, according to Michael Finn of Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education. The already high rates for Chinese- and Indian-born students have risen during the past 2 decades."
/Jeffrey Mervis, “SCIENCE STATISTICS: Got Data Questions? NSF's Indicators Has (Most of) the Answers,” Science 319, no. 5862 (25, 2008).
Exactly, it is the consequence I referred to. And Max Planck has little, if anything, to do with the problem. For example, what could we expect by integrating CAS and universities?
Ha, interesting. I think the only consequence is that more poor Chinese student will not be able to get higher degrees at home. Maybe more will go abroad, if only possible. Maybe I can just understand you right here.
Btw, "poverty of German universities" as I said never means I think they are really poor, at least not so poor compared to counterparts in our own country. How are your applications?
"For example, what could we expect by integrating CAS and universities?"
Looking at the proposal of two Chongqing-based committeemen, it seems that you are really a prophet...
Post a Comment