WHEN REFLECTING on the phenomenon of globalization, many images come to mind, such as McDonalds' golden arches or the Starbucks logo.What does not come to mind is the United States' higher education system. Recently, many universities in the United States have clamored to establish branches of their schools in foreign countries, especially in the Middle East and China. The University of Michigan has a business school in India, Georgetown and Virginia Commonwealth University have schools in Qatar and New York University plans to open a school in Singapore, among many others.
They claim that students admitted in these branches are held to the same standards as students in the United States branch, and that the educational programs are equivalent. In a Feb. 10 New York Times article regarding such satellite programs, university officials cited such goals as competing globally, earning international recognition, spreading knowledge and reducing cultural friction. Meanwhile, a proportion of all profit made in such ventures is sent back to the home university. However, the goal of profit-making should never be allowed to overshadow the overall aims of higher education.
If universities were to send existing faculty to teach in their satellites, our country would be losing resources as well as experts in their fields. The home universities cannot afford to lose great numbers of talented professors to extended commitments overseas. If they instead choose to hire local faculty, I question whether the education would be the same. This is not to say that international scholars are not equally qualified for the job, but having an American perspective is vital to getting an American experience. American professors are not necessarily qualitatively better, but their presence is a key part of the unique character of a university.
I value the presence and perspective of international students at the University; having the brightest international students in the United States can only benefit us as a nation. When these students choose to attend universities in the States, they make friends and form attachments to our country and our culture. This phenomenon can truly combat anti-Americanism abroad, and we would be disadvantaged to discourage such experiences.
Getting an international or American education is already a possibility when we welcome international students to attend our universities. We also host study abroad programs and faculty exchanges, other great ways to foster cultural acceptance. Marina Markot, associate director for Study Abroad at the University noted, "The ultimate goal of study abroad is to prepare the future generation ... to be able to communicate with people across cultures, build bridges across differences, while respecting different approaches and opinions, and understand our common humanity." If students believe they can get the same education in their own country, they may be discouraged from traveling thousands of miles from home to study in the United States. This reduces the chances that all parties involved will benefit from the increased cultural awareness that results from such international travel and studies.
Proponents claim that this would spread American-style education as if they are doing the world a tremendous favor. Considering that only the most privileged students from these wealthy? nations would likely be able to afford the tuition at these for-profit universities, it hardly seems like a grand altruistic gesture. Perhaps the time and energy being put into these programs would be better spent making higher education affordable to our own students, or even funding educational programs in the most impoverished nations. The New York Times article previously cited asserts that these satellite programs will "provide a new pool of tuition-paying students, just as the number of college-age Americans is about to decline."Although there will be fewer college-age Americans due to the declining birth rate, there are certainly more qualified and able students in our country than ever who want to attend college. As a college education becomes more essential in the workplace, more young adults are making the decision to attend college. Meanwhile, tuition costs are skyrocketing and admissions are becoming more demanding, keeping many of our own citizens from getting college degrees.
These satellite universities are nothing more than a business venture as universities rush to make money off of these booming economies, particularly in China and the Middle East. In fact, Catherine Armitage, from The Australian, wrote in detail about the many satellite university ventures that have failed because of a lack of profit and fear of damaged reputations. Although certainly there is much to gain from such an enterprise, the inherent problems are too great to make these satellites worthwhile. Our education system is not the proper place for imperialist expansion and capitalist enterprise.
Arin Smith is a Cavalier Daily Viewpoint writer.
Read More
WILLIAMS: Donald Trump will be a threat to student loan forgiveness
By Ryan Williams | 23 hours agoTo be sure, this is not a problem of the University’s making. Nevertheless, understanding the uncertainty of financial accessibility in education, the University must step up to the plate.
PATEL: Personal development courses support students beyond the gradebook
By Heer Patel | 6 days agoThe University must rethink its approach to education beyond traditional major-specific requirements and mandate personal development courses.
EDITORIAL: Commercialization threatens U.Va.’s educational mission
By Editorial Board | 6 days agoAfter all, measuring the University’s worth in terms of accrued capital, operational efficiency and numerical rankings molds this space into just another cookie-cutter institution.
