INTERNATIONAL COMPETITION IN HIGHER EDUCATION: HOW DO CHINESE UNIVERSITIES COMPARE?

1. INTERNATIONAL COMPETITION IN HIGHER EDUCATION:HOW DO CHINESE UNIVERSITIES COMPARE? Kathryn Mohrman Arizona State University Peking University Education Forum December 21, 2010

2. 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

3. How are universities worldwide responding to increasing global competition? How do Chinese universities compare?

4. 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

5. USA • MIT, Berkeley, Michigan • EUROPE • Oxford (UK) • Paris 06 (Pierre and Marie Curie) • ETH (Switzerland)

6. 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

7. 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?

8. Basic demographics

9. 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

10. 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 • >15National Taiwan, Australian National, Berkeley, ETH, Sydney

11. How rich are these universities?

12. 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)

14. 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

16. Impact of 985 Project

17. How research intensive are they?

18. 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!

19. 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

21. 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

26. How are these universities regarded by their peers?

27. 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

28. 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

29. 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

30. Which universities are most likely to be successful in the future?

31. 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

32. 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

33. 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

34. 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

35. 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

36. 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

37. Future research

38. 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

39. Thank you Kathryn Mohrman Professor, School of Public Affairs Director, University Design Consortium Arizona State University kmohrman@asu.edu