connect. create. question.

I find this article from the New York Times slightly disturbing.

If you haven’t read it, please do — it is long, enlightening, and profiles one family in particular from Beijing who was able to send their daughter to university in Ohio. But if you don’t have time to read it, here are the basics:

1. Student overseas wants to go to American, Australian, Canadian, or UK university.
2. American, Australian, Canadian, and UK universities want students from overseas because
   • they pay way more tuition, and
   • it diversifies their school culture, and
   • they pay way more tuition, and… wait, I already said that.
3. So, Student pays X amount of USD to Agent to find him an appropriate university in the western world, and
4. American, Australian, Canadian, and UK universities pay Y amount of USD to same Agent to find them Z number of international students because
   • they pay way more tuition, and
   • it diversifies their school culture, and
   • did I mention that they pay way more tuition?
5. Agent finds appropriate fit, Student applies to University recommended by Agent, and is admitted.
6. Student happy (found tertiary educational direction), University happy ($$$ + cultural diversity = better learning?).
7. Agent happiest, because X + Y = BINGO.

The article states,

. . . [M]any agents collect hefty fees from both sides — the students they advise, and the universities they contract with — leaving some to question whose interest is being served . . .

To be fair, the next sentence implies that some people are working towards changing this perception:

Even some advocates of recruiting agents see a need for an ethics code.

And further,

“We should be doing this, but we should be doing it right,” said Mitch Leventhal, vice provost of international affairs at the University of Cincinnati, which has contracts with agents. “And I don’t think it’s right for students to have to pay a lot if the agent is also getting paid by the university. I don’t think it’s ethical.”

Umm, but you’re still doing it, aren’t you? Did the University of Cincinnati cut their contracts with the agents because Mr. Leventhal said it was unethical to pay them? (Note that the sentence above does not say if the University of Cincinnati pays the agents they have contracts with.)

At least one university representative thinks it is unethical and does not pay agents they have contracts with:

Throughout Asia and to a lesser extent other parts of the world, thousands of agents offer help to students seeking admission to an English-speaking university, charging them fees that may be a few hundred dollars, or far more. “Some agents charge as much as $30,000,” said John Robert Cryan of the University of Toledo, which works with agents, but pays no commissions. “There’s a lot of gouging going on.”

[emphasis mine]

Apparently, Mr. Leventhal (of the U of C, above) is an advocate of ethics in this field, but get this:

Mr. Leventhal is also advocating a code of ethics, modeled on Australian practice, under which American universities would pay agents a 10 percent commission, if the agents agreed to charge students only a nominal fee.

This is ethical? Am I missing something? Maybe an Aussie can explain it to me, as apparently this is Australian practice. To my mind, none of this is ethical. For students AND universities to pay for placement at “the right” university? Where does that leave the international (or local, for that matter) student who wants and rightly deserves a place in a university? Well, apparently, unless he has between $500 and $5000 US to spend — that leaves him nowhere.

On the last page of the article, Philip G. Altbach, director of the Center for International Higher Education at Boston College, is quoted as saying:

“In a globalized world, where some people need a lot of guidance to get here, there may be a legitimate place for responsible middlemen,” he said, then added, “although I really hate it.”

And I agree — perhaps there is a need for a middleman. But, but, but… here are my buts:

• Universities should NOT be paying them — what if instead they were simply “regular” university employees, out and about recruiting for their university as normal?
• Students should not have to pay them very much (like, less than $50), or even better nothing at all

Basically, I think that universities perhaps need to beef up their own recruitment practices, and aim to recruit international students the old-fashioned way — by making their university look like the best place to go, rather than by paying a middleman thousands of dollars.

Does anyone else think this is unethical? Or am I being too old-fashioned and curmudgeonly?

Whatever happened to open and honest application procedures? Whatever happened to applications requiring that the person with the best fit (based on grades, SAT scores, and whatever else the university deems necessary) gets in on his/ her own merit, rather than simply because he/she is from China and has thousands of dollars to spend?

Should people be making money from international students’ desire to go to university in the Western world?

---

Photo credit: Here. There. And Nowhere. by drp

Tags: International Education, New York Times, philosophy, university

 [Edit: if anyone can help me properly use footnotes, I'd be much obliged! Thanks!]

Ok, so we’re on what, Day 10? And I am still thinking about Day 7.

Here’s the thing: I’ve been falling behind because I am, on some level, not finding the Comment Challenge to be such a challenge.

Let me explain. The purpose of the Comment Challenge is to:

. . . [become] better blog citizens . . . by actively participating in conversations and [share] your learning, especially with those new to blogging . . .

And I get that, I really do. That is, in fact, why I signed up for the challenge. Indeed, I even was initially intimidated by the challenge:

And I even understand the purpose of the Daily Activities, which is to

challenge our thinking, writing and . . . aid in the process of becoming better commenters.

But here is my problem: I think I am already a good commenter, without the Daily Activities.
Task 1 was a good starting place, and definitely uncovered some areas for me that I need to focus on in my commenting. Basically, after the Self-Audit I felt more mindful of how I make my presence understood as I go about life in the online world, interacting with people who have never met me. I realized that at times, my tone is unclear and perhaps not accurate, and so I have been more cognizant of what I say and how I say it.

Tasks for Days 2 through 6 were things that were not unusual for me — i.e., I do these things anyway, fairly regularly. So I didn’t really, officially, do them as part of the Comment Challenge.¹ And then I got to Day 7 (even though today is Day 10) and thought, Hmm… what am I really learning here?

Answers:

• I often make comments on others‘ blogs that are perhaps even more insightful than what I post here on my own blog. Therefore, I think I am better at responding to others’ ideas than coming up with my own. Question: What does that say about me? Am I not that innovative? Or am I just too social?
• I don’t need prompted tasks to make sure I am expanding my PLN, communicating with the people in it, and respectfully disagreeing with people. Perhaps others do, but I don’t.
• I comment enough, but definitely since the challenge began, I have been commenting more — which I guess was the point, so … ta-da! Mission (thus far) accomplished.

And one more question for anyone reading this: Is there a word which means “not having discovered something new and epiphanous² when one was expecting to?”

---

¹(Even coComment was already installed on my Firefox browser at home, though I had not enabled it in a while. The only new thing I needed to do was enable it on my tablet at school.)
²Ok, I made that word up.

Tags: comment08

So, I’ve been reading a few things about blogging. And I’ve been reading a few things about writing. And I’ve been reading a few things about both blogging and writing, and I’m starting to think I’m missing something. Or need clarification, at the very least.

I’m going to keep this philosophical, much like my assessment post a while back.

First, a question:

If (text-based)¹ blogging is a kind of writing, then aren’t all bloggers writers?

And now, the statements:

1. I (foolishly, perhaps) believe that all my students can become good writers² of some kind.
2. I therefore believe that all my students should try their hand at blogging, just as I believe all my students should try writing poetry, maybe a short story, a personal narrative, an e-mail, and oodles of other writing types.
3. I do not believe a great writing teacher needs to be a great writer; he / she simply needs to “know the ropes” and be great teacher, period.
4. I therefore believe a great blogging teacher does not need to be a “master blogger”, but that he / she just needs to know how it works, and be a great teacher, period.

And finally, more questions:

• Those of you out there who use blogs with your students, how do you use them?
• Do you assess them? If so, how?
• And if you don’t use blogs with your students, why not?

The background

I am changing (quite drastically) the way I use blogs with my students for the remainder of this school year, and next. And so, I’m looking for ideas and anecdotal feedback… errr.. feed-forward… from those who have walked this path before me.

¹Of course, the visual-types of blogs aren’t really writing, but a different kind of communication

²I define the term “good writer” as one who creates “good writing.” And for the definition of “good writing,” I turn to one of my most influential mentors in both teaching and writing, Carl Leggo, who once stated, “Good writing gets the job done. It works.” I should also note that I have different definitions of “great writing” and other comparative terms.

---

Photo credits: You can almost see the grass grow by aussiegall; How to Grow a Blog by teachandlearn (licensed under CC 2.0 Generic)

Tags: Assessment, blogging, grading, philosophy, web 2.0, Writing

Ok, I am a bit late to the party (hard to keep up, man! I’ve got a busy life!), but seeing as I am participating in the 31-Day-Comment Challenge, I figured I should follow Langwitches’s instructions for a Self-Audit.

For this activity, do the following:

Answer the following questions:

1. How often do you comment on other blogs during a typical week?
   Hmm. Probably on average, twice a week.
2. Do you track your blog comments? How? What do you do with your tracking?
   I track comments made on blogs that I comment on, usually via the e-mail subscription or an RSS feed. As for what I do with them, well, I basically don’t “do” anything with them. I just read, follow, and follow-up if necessary. I try to always respond to comments left on my own blog. However, I also realize that at some point a conversation has to end, and not everything needs a reply.
3. Do you tend to comment at the same blogs or do you try to comment on at least one new blog per week?
   I pretty much comment on the same blogs. So, I think it’s time to branch out a bit. There is so much out there!

Now review Gina Trapani’s Guide to Blog Comments and ask yourself how well you’re doing in each of the different areas. Are there any specific areas where you think you need to do some work? What do you want to do to address these issues?

1. Stay on topic. I am pretty good at this, though often I make references to other issues that are related.
2. Contribute new information to the discussion. This is often what holds me back from commenting. I often feel like I simply agree with what has already been said, so I say nothing. Or I say, “I agree with so-and-so” which I realize is not useful. I guess I need to think more carefully about what I am adding that is new.
3. Don’t comment for the sake of commenting. Yeah, I’m okay with this. Mostly just because I don’t have the time!
4. Know when to comment and when to e-mail. I think I am pretty good with this area, too. I understand the boundaries, especially with those whom I know very well.
5. Remember that nobody likes a know-it-all.  OOoh, I think I have been guilty of this at times. Perhaps I need to tone things down a bit. I will admit that there are times when I need to address things more diplomatically. Often I should re-draft comments before hitting “submit”!
6. Make the tone of your message clear.  I think this is related to my problem in #5 above.
7. Own your comment. I am very consistent with this, but I will admit that I have left the WRONG URL on a couple of comments. oops!
8. Be succinct.  Again, the re-drafting thing. Hmmm… I do this in my e-mails… why do I think I don’t need to in my comments? Point taken!
9. Cite your sources with links or inline quoting. Yes, I try to do this as often as possible. But it’s hard sometimes — again, a time issue.
10. Be courteous.  I think this goes without saying. Just because it’s the blogosphere and written in words does not mean that there are not people behind those words.
11. Do not feed or tease the trolls.  I have no tolerance for this online, really.

Tags: comment08

“For every nine people who denounce innovation, only one will encourage it. . . . For every nine people who do things the way they have always been done, only one will ever wonder if there is a better way. For every nine people who stand in line in front of a locked building, only one will ever come around and check the back door.

“Our progress as a species rests squarely on the shoulders of that tenth person. The nine are satisfied with things they are told are valuable. Person 10 determines for himself what has value.” -Za Rinpoche and Ashley Nebelsieck, in The Backdoor to Enlightenment (Three Leaves)

The pessimistic side of me wants to say that in schools, the proportion is probably one out of every twenty, or perhaps even higher. But that’s just me being whiny.

What this book excerpt reminds me of:

• Ian Jukes’s Committed Sardine metaphor
• about 203,094,820 faculty meetings I’ve been to where one person speaks out about doing something differently, and gets verbally crucified
• the feeling I have after I finish a really good yoga session, when I have the most clarity about what I determine as valuable for myself

Questions I have:

• Is it in a person’s nature to be that 10th person? Or can one learn to question and be curious?
• How long before that 10th person becomes tired of always being “the only one” who’s encouraging innovation, asking if there’s a better way, and going around to the back door? How many times before s/he gives up?
• What would happen if the proportions shifted? What if, in a group of 10, there were 4 people who were always asking the questions and finding new ways of doing things? What would that look like?
• Should leaders in our schools be the 10th person?

Photo credit: Mozzer502

Tags: books, change, innovation, musings, philosophy, questions, value