Upload
others
View
15
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
GHAUTH JASMON
Entrepreneur
CRITICAL FACTORS IN DEVELOPING A SUCCESSFUL
EDUCATION HUB: The Malaysian Case
WHAT IS AN EDUCATION HUB?
A designated region intended to attract foreign investment, retain local students, build a regional reputation by providing access to high-quality education and training for both international and domestic student, and create a knowledge-based economy. An education hub can include different combinations of domestic/international institutions, branch campuses, and foreign partnerships, within the designated region.
Educational Hubs (Updated September 26, 2013) Education Hub: A designated region intended to attract foreign investment, retain local students, build a regional reputation by providing access to high-quality education and training for both international and domestic student, and create a knowledge-based economy. An education hub can include different combinations of domestic/international institutions, branch campuses, and foreign partnerships, within the designated region. The following is a list of entities that have described themselves as current or developing education hubs. For each entry we provide a basic description based upon news reports, information from the organization, and, when possible, our own visits. Inclusion below does not mean that the entity currently operates as a hub, but merely that there is evidence that it is intended to be a hub. United Arab Emirates Abu Dhabi Dubai Dubai Knowledge Village / Dubai International Academic City Dubai International Financial City Dubai Health Care City Dubai Silicon Oasis Bahrain Kuala Lumpur Education City Iskandar (Malaysia) Singapore’s Global Schoolhouse Incheon Free Economic Zone (South Korea) Education City (Qatar) Republic of Panama - City of Knowledge Jeju Global Education City
MALAYSIAN HIGHER LEARNING INSTITUTIONS 20 Public Universi-es 70 Private Universi-es 34 Private University Colleges 410 Private Colleges 14 High Ins-tu-ons COE 33 Polytechnics 91 Community Colleges Public Univ Academics(33,199 Acad with 37% PhD)(560,000 students) Private Univ, UC & Colleges(24,476 Acad with 13% PhD)(485,000 students) Polytechnics(7,256 Acad with 0.6% PhD)(90,000 students) Community Colleges(2,826 Acad with 0.1% PhD)(22,000 students) Total Student Enrolment: 1.2 million Interna-onal student: 85,000
SUSTAINABLE EDUCATION HUB • Existence of Autonomous Top Class Universi-es • Academic System that Holds Ethics, Professionalism and Quality as its Core Value
• Conducive Environment that Welcomes Interna-onal Top Academics and Quality Students
• Large Funds To Support Research & Academic Ac-vi-es • Opportuni-es for Employment & Internship • Suppor-ve Infrastructure for Global Networking & Collabora-on • Ac-ve Innova-on & Commercializa-on • Vibrant Industry & Community • Excellent Academic & Entrepreneurial Leadership
• Academic Excellence • Leadership • Serious Financial Sustainability Issues
• The National Higher Education Study Loan Disaster • Loan cut of up to 30% • Private Inst Fees has risen by more than 30% • OPEX of Public Inst is 5 times the OPEX of Private Inst
FUNDAMENTAL ISSUES FOR SUSTAINABILITY
STANFORD UNIVERSITY: A Role Model
• It takes more than just great laboratories and facilities to build a great research center. Stanford also has some of the finest minds in the world working for it. The school’s faculty currently include 22 Nobel Laureates, 51 members of the American Philosophical Society, three Presidential Medal of Freedom recipients, 158 National Academy of Science members, five Pulitzer Prize winners, and 27 MacArthur Fellows.
• With a $20 billion endowment Stanford has access to numerous world-class research resources.
Stanford University’s Economic Impact via Innovation and Entrepreneurship
• A 2011 survey by Sequoia Capital, estimates that 39,900 active companies can trace their roots to Stanford. If these companies collectively formed an independent nation, its estimated economy would be the world’s 10th largest. Those companies have created an estimated 5.4 million jobs and generate annual world revenues of $2.7 trillion.
• 29 % reported being entrepreneurs who founded an organization (for profit or nonprofit)
• 32 % described themselves as an investor, early employee or a board member in a startup at some point in their careers.
• 25 % of faculty (some are also alumni) reported founding or incorporating a firm. • 55 % chose to study at Stanford because of its entrepreneurial environment.
• Stanford graduates created some 30,000 nonprofit organizations such as The Special Olympics, and Kiva, a microfinance organization.
• The nonprofits include: Acumen Fund, global venture fund aimed at alleviating poverty, MentorNet, to help university science-based students achieve their career goals by matching them with mentors over the Web.
• The majority are small grassroots organizations that collectively have had impact in education, global healthcare, the arts, economic development, human rights and many other areas.
• At the same time, many have pursued social innovation – the idea of doing well by doing good. Two of the best-known of these enterprises are Sally Ride Science, a science education company founded by astronaut Sally Ride, and Embrace, providers of an affordable infant warmer for the developing world that was created by four students.
STANFORD’S NONPROFITS AND SOCIAL INNOVATION
The fundamental strategic choices or priorities of Stanford are: • Attract the very best and most promising students globally • Attract the very best faculty globally • Educating the whole student • Strongly link education and research • Cutting edge, frontier research • Encouraging interdisciplinary research while maintaining strong
disciplines • Maintain healthy and mutually beneficial interchanges with other
universities, the government, corporate sectors, and society at large. • Healthy Endowment
STANFORD PRIORITIES
GREAT BRAIN RACE Ben Wildavsky - Princeton University • Today, many nations are involved in the GREAT BRAIN RACE:
Term to describe the increasing competition among nations for new knowledge and innovation.
• Governments increasingly adopt comprehensive competitiveness strategies designed to improve their economic position in the global economy.
• As governments around the world have accepted that the key to economic competitiveness is an educated, innovative and enterprising labour force, so has been ushered in a growing desire to establish "world-class" universities, expand the number of graduates, import overseas providers and drive up quality.
The economic prosperity of a nation in the 21st century would be created, not inherited – “A nation’s competitive advantage in the global marketplace is based upon its industries’ ability to innovate and upgrade.” [“The Competitive Advantage of Nations”, Michael Porter, Harvard Business School]
This new paradigm of economic development positioned colleges and universities as primary engines of economic growth. -‐ Paul Romer, New York University.
INNOVATION AS THE ENGINE OF ECONOMIC GROWTH
• Rankings have received increasing a1en2on worldwide because of the way in which they can tell a complex story of higher educa2on performance in a simple yet effec2ve manner.
• USERS: students, parents, policymakers, employers, founda2ons and benefactors, poten2al collaborators, partners, alumni, other HEIs etc. At governmental and ins2tu2onal level, there is a strong belief that performance in global rankings can bring tangible benefits to a country or university.
• USE: To “short-‐list” university choice; business and industry use it to influence investment decisions and employee recruitment; HEIs use rankings to help iden2fy poten2al partners, assess membership of interna2onal networks and organiza2ons, and for benchmarking.
• Thus rankings can provide an important branding and adver2sing value. Doing well in rankings can help maintain and build na2onal and ins2tu2onal reputa2on—essen2al elements in a compe22ve marketplace.
IMPORTANCE OF UNIVERSITY RANKING
Striving for World Class Excellence, Ellen Hazelkorn, Dublin Inst of Technology
WORLD CLASS UNIVERSITIES
• Although some of the world's top-ranked institutions such as Harvard, Cambridge and Oxford are hundreds of years old, a series of case studies of successful world-class research universities, prepared by the World Bank, shows that a faster and more effective approach to achieving world-class status is to establish a new institution. The just-released World Bank study, titled The Road to Academic Excellence: The making of world class research universities, found that new universities can grow into top quality research institutions within two or three decades when academic talent, financial resources and governance - particularly autonomy and academic freedom - are present from the start
Altbach & Salmi, World Bank Report The Road to Academic Excellence: The making of world class research universi;es
• Top-performing research universities share 3 common characteristics: (1) concentration of talented academics and students (2) significant budgets (3) strategic vision and leadership.
• Global talent search is the MOST POWERFUL ACCELERATING FACTOR towards world-class status for leading research universities whether they are in a poor or rich country, small or big. It is all about TALENT.
• World-class universities thrive in environments that foster competitiveness, unrestrained scientific inquiry, academic freedom, critical thinking, innovation and creativity. In addition, institutions that have complete autonomy are more flexible because they are not bound by cumbersome bureaucracies and can quickly respond to the demands of a rapidly changing global market.
Altbach & Salmi, World Bank Report The Road to Academic Excellence: The making of world class research universi;es
BUILDING WORLD CLASS UNIVERSITIES
UNIVERSITIES RISING AT TOP SPEED
You dont need 200 or 300 years to become a World Class University. These TOP Performers did it in 2 to 3 decades: • Hong Kong University of Science and Technology • Shanghai Jiaotong University • Pohang University of Science and Technology • Na-onal University of Singapore • Nanyang Technological University • Indian Ins-tute of Technology • Monterrey Ins-tute of Technology, Mexico • Universi-es des Chile.
“Malaysia is on track to becoming a regional educa-on hub judging from the posi-ve feedback in various countries which already have their students here.”
Na-on – The STAR Published: Saturday June 21, 2014 MYT 12:00:00 AM
Malaysia as educa-on hub looks posi-ve
MINISTER’S STATEMENT • “Malaysian universi2es are world class because they are a popular des2na2on for interna2onal students and Universi2 Malaya has a decent spot on the QS university rankings.”[Idris Jusoh]
• While rankings are useful indicators, they are not the only exhaus2ve and defini2ve indicator. We always have to be mindful as there are many ranking bodies, each vying to be conclusive and authorita2ve.
• I have also said in the past that rankings are not the “be all and end all” as they are not always able to capture the more subtle values of higher educa2on, such as priori2zing access over outcomes, teaching over research and publica2ons, building infrastructure or the capacity of young lecturers and so forth.
• The above said, rankings nonetheless give us a yards-ck and benchmark as to where our strengths lie and how we can improve, and we find it useful for this purpose. The key is to strike a balance between se\ng our ins2tu2onal objec2ves and conforming to ranking criteria.
• -‐ See more at: hip://www.themalaysianinsider.com/sideviews/ar-cle/what-‐it-‐means-‐to-‐be-‐world-‐class-‐idris-‐jusoh#sthash.yzbCN1WP.dpuf
OPPOSITION STATEMENT – [Ramakhrishnan]
• It’s a brutal fact that foreign students are not in Malaysia because of its education standards. “It is the third world countries’ students who come here to study. Australian students in Malaysia are few and far between. The reverse instead is true. “Many had rightly expressed their reservation and disagreement over his claims,” said Ramakrishnan. “It is the foreign affiliations and twinning arrangements that bring foreign students to Malaysia.”
OPPOSITION STATEMENT [Tony Pua] • Firstly, said Pua, assuming that the QS World Ranking Table is a reliable measure of quality, there is absolutely nothing “world class” about UM being ranked 151st in the world.
• “None of the other 19 local public universi2es, 36 private universi2es and 30 university colleges ranked within the top 250 in the world,” said Pua. “Even if Malaysia chooses to define the 151st ranking as being ‘world class’, one swallow certainly does not make a summer.”
• Secondly, he said, while all ranking methodologies are imperfect, why did Idris Jusoh choose to cite only the QS rankings out of several reputable global university rankings tables out there?
• “In fact, of the handful of rankings tables, QS is perhaps the most cri2cized for its lack of rigour and consistency in its methodology.”
• “Let me emphasize here again that no ranking system is perfect,” said Pua. “Such tables do however provide indica-ve rela-ve quality rankings between global universi-es.”
• The ques2on to ask is therefore, why is the Ministry of Educa2on selec2vely interested in the QS Rankings, and why did it fail to cite any of the other studies?
The 3 Paramount Characteristics: (1) Concentration of talented academics and students (2) Significant budget (3) Strategic vision and leadership. World-Class University Environment: (1) Competitiveness (2) Unrestrained Scientific Inquiry (3) Academic Freedom (4) Critical Thinking (5) Innovation & Creativity. (6) Full Autonomy
CHECK LIST FOR MALAYSIAN UNIVERSITIES TRANSFORMATION – THE WORLD BANK
ISSUES IN PUBLIC UNIVERSITIES
POSITIVE • Government Guaranteed & Protected • Huge Funding & Low Tuition Fees • More Facilities • Extensive Networking • Always Given Preference Compared to Private NEGATIVE • Bureaucratic, Slow • Directionless Board • General Prejudices • Government-Controlled • Policies That May Not Support Academic Excellence • Political Intervention • Dead Woods • Vision and Motivation • Weak Leadership
ISSUES IN PRIVATE UNIVERSITIES
POSITIVE: • Autonomous and Self-Determination NEGATIVE: • Mostly Financially Motivated • Financial Sustainability • Lack of Understanding of Academic Excellence • Poor Vision & Roadmap • No Proper Action Plan • Quality of Academic Staff & Students? • Low Research Level & Quality? • Quality of Teaching? • Facilities
PUBLIC UNIVERSITY TRANSFORMATION
• Selection of Top Management & Board Members to be made by an Independent Committee, NOT by the Minister.
• Visionary and Capable Leadership with Business & Entrepreneurial Experience
• University Board to be More Effective & Not Just A Sleeping Board [Read “Why is Harvard No. 1”]
• VC, DVC, Board Members Must Have Performance Targets. • Improve Financial Capability. • Top Performing Universities Should Receive Higher Funding. • University to Create Its own Autonomous Scheme of Service • Greater Staff and Student Mobility.
PRIVATE UNIVERSITY TRANSFORMATION
• Private Universities Should Transform to “Not for Profit” In Order to Get Public Funding
• University Management Must Realign Their Vision, Mission and Practices to participate in Global Ranking
• Ministry Must be Serious In Taking Action Against Fraudulent and Dishonest Practices. [“Weeding Out Process”]
• Government Funding Should be Open to High Performing Private Institutions
• Greater Staff and Student Mobility. • Create a New Act that Combines the University and University Colleges
Act and Private Higher Educational Institution Act Into One New Act.
QS TIMES HE SHANGHAI JIAOTUNG
Australia 8 3 2 China 6 3 4 Hong Kong 5 3 2 Japan 9 4 4 Korea 6 4 1 Malaysia 1 0 0 Singapore 2 2 2 Taiwan 2 1 1 New Zealand
2 1 0
TOP 200 UNIVERSITIES -‐ EAST ASIA & AUSTRALASIA
ATTEMPTS AT ACHIEVING FINANCIAL SUSTAINABILITY:
The University of Malaya
• Interna-onal University of Malaya-‐Wales • In-‐Campus Commercial Development • Health Metropolis • Malaysian Innova-on Hub • Planta-on