Soulware E-Book

Way Kuo

• Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
• Kategorie: Bildung
• Sprache: Englisch

Seitenzahl: 534

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2019

Beschreibung

This book is a critical account of the history, evolution and challenges of higher education in mainland China, Taiwan and Hong Kong, with important reflections on other systems, notably those in the US, UK, Korea and Japan. In addition to hardware and software, it introduces the concept of "Soulware" in global higher education and analyses its importance for internationalization and the pursuit of excellence. In an age where robots and artificial intelligence are impacting our jobs and our daily lives, its critical analysis and insightful reflections provide considerable value for a range of global stakeholders interested in higher education reform to nurture talent and promote innovation to prepare students for an unpredictable future. "Professor Kuo's perspective provides considerable value for a range of global stakeholders both in the east and the west. As American universities awake to the realization that the demand for higher education is an increasingly global phenomena, his contribution could not be more timely." Mike Crow, PhD President, Arizona State University "Way Kuo advances a powerful historical argument for the means to achieve excellence in Asian universities. His recipe is bold leadership, combining excellence in teaching and research, and embracing the lessons of western university successes and failures. A superb combination of history and forward thinking." Michael Kotlikoff, VMD, PhD Provost, Cornell University "Way's book is not just about the past or the present. Rather, it offers useful insights into the future. In an age where robots and artificial intelligence are impacting our jobs and our daily lives, he introduces the concept of "soulware" and analyzes its importance for higher education." G. P. "Bud" Peterson, PhD President, Georgia Institute of Technology "Differing from their Western counterparts, Chinese universities will demonstrate their own cultural characteristics. In this regard, Professor Kuo's book offers us many valuable insights." Yong Qiu, PhD President, Tsinghua University, Beijing "Wisdom is the ultimate goal of higher education. It is the illumination of that wisdom among audiences, English-speaking or Chinese-speaking, to which Way Kuo's book hopes to kindle a spark." Frank H. Shu, PhD President, 2002-06, National Tsing Hua University, Hsinchu, and University Professor Emeritus, University of California, Berkeley and San Diego

Leseprobe

Contents

Cover

Preface

Foreword by G. P. “Bud” Peterson

Foreword by Yong Qiu

Foreword by Frank H. Shu

Trump vs Roosevelt: A Historical Overview

Introduction

PART I: The Internationalization of Higher Education

Chapter 1: Internationalization without Soulware

International Branch Campuses around the World

Essence of Internationalization

Hardware and Software

Soulware

Anonymous Letters and Surreptitious Whispers

Localization

Chapter 2: Higher Education in Post-1980 England, Wales, and Northern Ireland

A Tale of Two Territories

From Elite to Mass Higher Education

Achievements and Failures of University Reforms

Increase in Tuition Fees

Financing

Chapter 3: On Universities across the Strait

Higher Education in Hong Kong

Education Reforms in Taiwan

Second Rise of Mainland Universities

Common Characteristics for Higher Education across the Strait

Low Tuition Policy in Universities across the Strait

Comparing Students Studying Abroad

Exchanges of the Cross-Strait Students

Undergraduate Degrees Granted by Universities across the Strait

Learning from Global Experience

Declining Birth Rate

Chapter 4: Simplicity Is the Ultimate Sophistication

A Good System Should Make It Easy for One to Do the Right Thing and Hard to Do the Wrong Thing

Avoid Using the Right Solution for the Wrong Problem

Models: Not to Be Trusted Completely, but Useful as a Reference

Strive for the Best

Chapter 5: Blind Spots and Loss of Scholarship

Selection of University Leaders

Being Humble in the Quest for Talent

Be Sincere When Knocking on Doors

Publish Peer-Reviewed Papers

Subcontractors of Academic Papers

Content and Form

Chapter 6: Languages Carry Doctrine

Mutuality in Communication

Communication Requires Cultural Understanding

Communication Should Be Genuine and with Substance

Wherein Lies the True Beauty of Tang Poetry?

Popular Courses at Harvard

Light Up Our Campus with Humor

From Jokes about Teaching to Importance of Content

Chapter 7: English, English Alone – Distorted View of Communication

English, English Alone

English, Chinese, and Korean

Writing Contests

English on University Campuses across the Strait

South Korea and Japan

Asian Higher Education Market

Remarks

PART II: Integration of Teaching with Research

Chapter 8: Integration of Teaching and Research – The Essence of University

Perfecting Skills Coupled with Research

Investigation for New Knowledge

Disputes over Teaching Versus Research Universities

Research and Teaching, Not A Zero-Sum Game

Whoever Questions, Learns

Teaching without Research Is like Driving after Drinking

Chapter 9: Practicing the Integration of Teaching and Research

Four Types of Universities

What Else for A University besides Teaching?

Students Are the Reason for Universities to Exist

Remove Restrictions and Establish Clear Positioning

Income and Social Status

Higher Education Is Costly

Examinations?

Concluding with Another Story

Chapter 10: Strategies for Nurturing Generalists or Specialists

The Meaning of A Doctoral Degree

Transdisciplinary Knowledge and Understanding

Depth and Breadth of Knowledge

Profound Professional Knowledge over Extensive General Knowledge

Cooking

Chapter 11: Academic Degrees: No Guarantee for Success

Math and the Tuhao (Newly Rich Hillbillies)

Education Is Not Necessarily Associated with University

Degrees Are Not Equal to Knowledge

Knowledge Does Not Equal Effectiveness

Success Does Not Have to Come from Degrees

Experience May Not Stand the Test of Time

Take Nothing for Granted

A Few Thoughts

A Farmer’s Advice

Chapter 12: Pitfalls of Whole-Person Education

General Education

Whole-Person Education: A Historical Perspective

A Professor’s Lament

Our Blind Spot

Universities for the Pursuit of Profound Knowledge

Students and I

Follow Basic Norms

A Few Thoughts from the Taipei Marathon

Chapter 13: No Team Spirit Is like Being Poor with Nothing but Money

Team Work

Professionalism

Pseudo-Ethics

Spiritual Vagabonds

PART III: Quality and Evaluation

Chapter 14: Quality and University Rankings

Things Are Not What They Used to Be

Quality, Quality Management, and Accountability

Accreditation and Evaluation

Take Heed of Rankings

Teaching and Research Evaluation

What Does University Ranking Represent?

Controversies Regarding Rankings

Reflection and Insights of Ranking

Chapter 15: Rankings in the Humanities and Liberal Arts

Subject Ranking More Important

Liberal Arts

Stories of My Colleagues

American Strengths in Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences

Substance Matters in Academic Innovation

Evaluation Applies to All Professions

Chapter 16: Course Design and Choice of Majors

Benchmarks and Criteria

Evaluation of University Curricula

Fragmentation of Disciplines

Learning and Selection of Majors

Associate Degrees and Community Colleges

PART IV: The Right Mindset for University Governance

Chapter 17: Enhancement of Soulware in Higher Education

First-Rate Higher Education

University Autonomy

Free Competition

Market Mechanism

Social Factors for Disparities in Higher Education

Respect Innovative Ideas

Plans to Deal with Declining Birth Rate

Chapter 18: Academic Freedom and Power Politics Do Not Mix

Academic Freedom in the US

Misuse of Academic Freedom – A Few Examples

Academic Ethics

Violations of Academic Ethics – A Few More Examples

University Autonomy

Blindness of the Mind

The Presidential Selection of National Taiwan University

Separation of State and Education

Chapter 19: Accomplished Hermits behind Unprepossessing Gates

Innovation in Japan

Sentiments Regarding University Names

Campuses and Gates

PART V: Creativity and Innovation

Chapter 20: Curiosity Engenders Discovery and Innovation

Asking Questions

Thinking Hard Ahead

New Science and Technology, New Challenges

Innovation

Chapter 21: What Is Missing in Society?

No Interest in Technologists and Scientists in Hong Kong

Pride and Regrets

Soul-Searching Needed

Eliminating Political Meddling in Industrial Development

Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon

Chapter 22: Promoting Innovation and Technology: Whose Responsibility?

Intellectual Property Rights

South Korea

Singapore

Taiwan

Hong Kong

Era of Knowledge Economy

Chapter 23: No Risk by Government, No Innovation at University

Lack of Faith in Building Local Education

Challenges to University Innovation

Salary Comparisons of Fresh University Graduates

Overstretched Accountability

Student Tuition and Faculty Salary

Beyond Technological Innovation

Chapter 24: Innovation in Education and Beyond

MOOCs (Massive Open Online Courses)

Online and Offline

Lack of Creativity, Lack of Innovation

Lack of Innovation, Lack of Entrepreneurship

Multifaceted Analysis and Cooperation

Need Long-Term, Comprehensive Education Policy

Distance from US, Hong Kong, and Taiwan to Mainland China

Chapter 25: Avoid Nano-Management

American Experience

Policy and Market Orientation

Do Not Let Prejudices Bias Our Professional Evaluation

Acknowledgements

Appendices

Appendix 1: Judging the Reputation of a University from its President’s Speech

Appendix 2: True Value of University Degrees*

Epilogue

A Fresh Breeze

Youyou Tu

Justification for Existence

Author’s Bio

Index

End User License Agreement

Guide

Cover

Table of Contents

Begin Reading

List of Illustrations

Chapter 3

Figure 3.1

University enrollment rate in the US and the selected areas and countries in Asia.

Chapter 23

Figure 23.1

Percentage of starting salary for fresh university graduates to GDP per capita.

Figure 23.2

Relationship between percentage of student tuition to GDP per capita and percentage...

Part V

Figure V.1

R&D investment in selected countries and areas in Asia and the US.

List of Tables

Chapter 14

Table 14.1

Number of universities ranked in top 100 in US, UK, and major Asian...

Chapter 21

Table 21.1

Academic background of CEOs in the US, mainland China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan...

Pages

ii

iii

iv

vii

ix

x

xi

xii

xiii

xv

xvi

xvii

xviii

xix

xx

xxi

xxii

xxiii

xxiv

xxv

xxvi

xxvii

xxviii

xxix

xxx

xxxi

xxxii

xxxiii

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

101

102

103

104

105

106

107

108

109

110

111

112

113

114

115

116

117

118

119

120

121

122

123

124

125

126

127

128

129

130

131

132

133

134

135

136

137

138

139

140

141

142

143

144

145

146

147

148

149

150

151

152

153

154

155

156

157

158

159

160

161

162

163

164

165

166

167

168

169

170

171

172

173

174

175

176

177

178

179

180

181

182

183

184

185

186

187

188

189

190

191

192

193

194

195

196

197

198

199

200

201

202

203

204

205

206

207

208

209

210

211

212

213

214

215

216

217

218

219

220

221

222

223

224

225

226

227

228

229

230

231

232

233

234

235

236

237

238

239

240

241

242

243

244

245

246

247

248

249

250

251

252

253

254

255

256

257

258

259

260

261

262

263

264

265

266

267

268

269

270

271

272

273

274

275

276

277

278

279

280

281

282

283

284

285

286

287

288

289

290

291

292

293

294

295

296

297

298

Scrivener Publishing100 Cummings Center, Suite 541JBeverly, MA 01915-6106

Publishers at ScrivenerMartin Scrivener ([e-mail])Phillip Carmical ([e-mail])

Soulware: The American Way in China’s Higher Education

Way Kuo

This edition first published 2019 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, USA and Scrivener Publishing LLC, 100 Cummings Center, Suite 541J, Beverly, MA 01915, USA© 2019 Scrivener Publishing LLCFor more information about Scrivener publications please visit www.scrivenerpublishing.com.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, except as permitted by law. Advice on how to obtain permission to reuse material from this title is available at http://www.wiley.com/go/permissions.

Wiley Global Headquarters111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, USA

For details of our global editorial offices, customer services, and more information about Wiley products visit us at www.wiley.com.

Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of WarrantyWhile the publisher and authors have used their best efforts in preparing this work, they make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this work and specifically disclaim all warranties, including without limitation any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. No warranty may be created or extended by sales representatives, written sales materials, or promotional statements for this work. The fact that an organization, website, or product is referred to in this work as a citation and/or potential source of further information does not mean that the publisher and authors endorse the information or services the organization, website, or product may provide or recommendations it may make. This work is sold with the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering professional services. The advice and strategies contained herein may not be suitable for your situation. You should consult with a specialist where appropriate. Neither the publisher nor authors shall be liable for any loss of profit or any other commercial damages, including but not limited to special, incidental, consequential, or other damages. Further, readers should be aware that websites listed in this work may have changed or disappeared between when this work was written and when it is read.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Names: Kuo, Way, 1951- author.Title: Soulware : the American way in China / Way Kuo.Description: Hoboken, New Jersey : Wiley-Scrivener, 2019. | Includes index.|Identifiers: LCCN 2019008594 (print) | LCCN 2019010225 (ebook) | ISBN9781119509905 (ePDF) | ISBN 9781119509912 (ePub) | ISBN 9781119509899(hardback)Subjects: LCSH: Education, Higher–China. | Education, Higher–United States.| Education and globalization. | BISAC: EDUCATION / Higher.Classification: LCC LA1133 (ebook) | LCC LA1133 .K85 2019 (print) | DDC378.51–dc23LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2019008594

Keep Distance from Empty Talk

Money comes and goes like endless traffic in and out of a tunnel;

It is nothing compared to knowledge that enriches thinking.

A degree gives only a temporary pride of owning a certificate,

Not worth holding on to and relying upon.

Give full play to one’s potential throughout one’s life,

For the promotion of the sustained development of society.

Effectiveness must be reviewed and assessed;

If we really care for education, keep distance from empty talk.

Preface

A previous book was published in Taipei in 2015 under the Chinese title . In 2017, a slightly modified version was published in Hong Kong, and a simplified Chinese version in Beijing by under the title . The publication of the Japanese edition under the title was in Tokyo in 2018.

This English version is a significantly modified copy of the Taipei version. In all the versions I endeavor to be as factual as I possibly can, when I make my arguments. In several instances my arguments are critical of what I perceive in higher education to be less than desirable, if not a failure.

Before moving on to higher education, it is necessary to define the terms I will be using. Borrowing from the verbiage of computer science, I shall be referencing the hardware and the software of higher education. By hardware, I mean the infrastructure, or the physical facilities of a university. I have in mind here buildings, libraries, internet, laboratories, etc., which provide an environment conducive to good teaching and research. By software, I mean human resources, strategic plans, research abilities of faculty, and also the sound educational background and preparedness of its students.

Whereas both the hardware and the software are important for success in higher education, there is a third even more important element that is essential for achieving the greatness of a university. This is related to internationalization, a commonly discussed topic among university administrators and governmental officials. Internationalization demands the presence of a certain mindset which goes beyond the hardware and the software of a university. This mindset also enables better communication and co-ordination towards achieving greatness. This mindset is what I label the soulware of higher education.

So what exactly is the soulware of a university? At the operational level, I see soulware, a term I have coined, as the crucial bringing together (or fusion) of technical virtuosity, and humanistic cum spiritual engagements. Soulware entails a commitment to enable our heart and soul to embrace due processes, and to follow international norms in all our educational endeavors. At a more abstract level, I see soulware as a vision for making the best use of the hardware and the software at our disposal, to spearhead innovation, and the combination of teaching and research, for the betterment of society. Conceptually, I envision hardware, software, and soulware working and communicating in concert as the three pillars of wisdom which drive a great university, with soulware being an internal cosmic force.

The soulware concept introduced and elaborated in this book encompasses the fundamental ingredients of anti-discrimination, fair competition, equal treatment, and accountability applied to all stake holders, including universities, government, and society at large. In an ideal university environment, it provides students significant opportunities for enlightenment.

Higher Education in the US and across the Taiwan Strait

For the most part, the higher education system in the US has been the most advanced over the past century, and therefore it deserves to be studied and benchmarked. Much of this book is about higher education systems across the Taiwan Strait that broadly include the Republic of China in Taiwan, Hong Kong as a Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China, and mainland China. When compared with the US, the observations and analyzes made in the book regarding higher education across the Taiwan Strait are equally applicable to universities elsewhere inside and outside the US.

It is ironic that quite a few people in Taiwan and in Hong Kong would dissociate themselves politically, and even economically, from mainland China. Some think of themselves as not being Chinese; however, they turn out to be more Chinese and retain more traits of traditional Chinese culture than they may have realized, or are willing to admit. Culturally speaking, they may be more Chinese than those on the mainland. This is because they did not suffer from the eradication of culture and tradition that caused tremendous damage in mainland China during the Cultural Revolution from 1966 till 1976, when educational institutions from primary schools to universities were closed and intellectuals were targeted for ideological critique and even physical abuse.

More objectively, however, there are many similarities among universities across the Strait because spawned by, after all, from the same cultural roots. For example, on a somewhat negative side, people in Taiwan, Hong Kong, and mainland China — not only students, but also perhaps their parents — almost make a fetish of academic degrees, believing that the more the better; they often have an obsequious admiration for Westerners and things Western. They may be well-disciplined, but often lack the spirit of innovation and creativity. On the more positive side, they are mostly diligent, energetic, hard-working, peace-loving, interested in learning, and highly respectful of those with knowledge.

I do not subscribe to a universal way to educate people, given the fact that employment must be the aim for everyone. Therefore, general education, which is promoted in many universities, must be modulated for university students from different disciplines. In some cases, a general education may be unwarranted for professional education at the university level.

On the other hand, the main purpose of education is for students to learn how to serve society, rather than just to benefit from what society offers. One common criticism of Chinese students, particularly those in Hong Kong and mainland China, is that many lack humanistic literacy. Such students may give the impression of being robots with mechanical memories and lots of skills, but with insufficient education in the arts and humanities. Although the Six Arts of ancient China, namely, ritual, music, archery, charioteering, calligraphy and mathematics, may seem anachronistic, the philosophical ideals mentioned within each can still be important for students today in their formative years. It would be too late for them to inculcate humanistic literacy studies later at college when most of them have already formed their pattern of behavior.

Evolution of the Spirit of Soulware

When I am in Hong Kong or travel to the mainland, people often write down my first name as “Wei” and my last name as “Guo”. Although Wei Guo sounds just like Way Kuo in Chinese pronunciation, the names are not the same.

Our English teacher asked each of us to come up with an English name when I was in my senior year at Taipei Municipal Chiankuo High School in 1967. I wasn’t interested in having a usual English name like Henry, John or Paul. Such names sounded to me remote. Besides, the name that my father gave me was easy to write and memorize. It originated from the first chapter of Zhong Yong (The Doctrine of the Mean), one of The Four Books in the classical Chinese canon. That chapter is “What Heaven has conferred is called The Nature”:

“What Heaven has conferred is called The Nature; an accordance within this nature is the path of duty; the regulation of the path is called instruction. The path may not be left for a moment. If it could be left, it would not be a path. On this account, the superior man (or “junzi”) does not wait until he is seen to be cautious, nor until he is heard to be apprehensive. The most secretive may eventually be visible one day; and the minutest may become manifest someday. Therefore, the superior man is watchful over himself even when alone. The mind may be said to be in a state of equilibrium when it is not disturbed by pleasure, anger, sorrow or joy. It may be considered in a state of harmony even when it is disturbed by such feelings as long as they are expressed properly, and conform to rituals and moral principles. This equilibrium is the common natural essence of all the things in this world; whereas this harmony is the universal path to be pursued. In a perfect state of equilibrium and harmony, heaven and earth will fall into the right place, and all things will be nourished and flourish.” (Adapted from James Legge’s translation of The Four Books)

The dictionary informs us that the Chinese character for “place” is pronounced “Wei”. The closest English name was Wayne. But there is nothing natural, moral or philosophical in that name. Nor does it agree with The Doctrine of the Mean. Still perplexed, I walked out of school and it was then that I spotted a poster across the street that announced: The Way, the Truth and the Life.

It then clicked: “The most secretive may eventually be visible one day; and the minutest may be manifest someday.” The Chinese should be Way in English. So “Way” became my English name. This book was written in the same spirit of trying to make the secretive visible and the minutest manifest to enlighten The Way.

In Asian societies across the Taiwan Strait, universities may be incorrectly viewed as a major political powerhouse, more so than universities in the US. The western democratic system offers people ways to secure power for the betterment of society, but unfortunately benefits for the people coming after the democratic practice have been overlooked by many across the Strait when they use universities and their students as a platform for promoting political propaganda.

As a result, they are almost always copycats in dealing with academic issues and major movements, staying busy in responding to those issues experienced by local communities, or foreign practices, when ideally universities should be leaders for the betterment of human society. Among others, using the internet in classroom is an example; establishing big data research is another. Both were common practices in industries before universities started to pay attention to them.

A major reason why many universities lag behind is largely due to a poor mindset. Staying away from empty talk, the right mindset for internationalization in obeying both academic autonomy and academic ethics should be alike not only in appearance but in spirit. That is what I endeavor to argue in this book.

Publication of the Book

Soulware: The American Way in China’s Higher Education aims to provide an analysis for promoting healthy soulware in the higher education sector in Hong Kong, Taiwan, and mainland China.

One quote from the 2011 congregation talk and another speech of the 2017 congregation, both delivered at City University of Hong Kong, are listed as appendices. They outline the spirit of soulware which encourages students to gain knowledge instead of simply earning degrees.

Way Kuo

City University of Hong Kong Hong Kong Institute for Advanced Study

March 2019

Foreword by G. P. “Bud” Peterson

If anyone can offer a global perspective on trends, challenges and opportunities in higher education, it is Way Kuo. His experience spans the globe. Before accepting the presidency of City University of Hong Kong in 2008, he served in senior academic leadership roles at the University of Tennessee, Texas A&M University and Iowa State University. He earned degrees in Taiwan and the U.S. and has been honored professionally in several countries.

Way and I met when we were both graduate students in engineering at Kansas State University in the mid 1970s. He was pursuing a PhD and I was working on my MS. We shared an office for a semester until I had to return to full-time work while continuing my graduate studies on a part-time basis. Interestingly enough, our paths crossed again when we were both in engineering leadership positions at Texas A&M University: I as Head of the Department of Mechanical Engineering and he as Head of the Industrial Engineering Department. During part of his tenure at Texas A&M, Way held the endowed Wisenbaker Chair of Engineering in Innovation. This is important to note when considering the chapters that follow because throughout Way’s career, he has been known for thinking innovatively, particularly about problem-driven research. He has also become a student of, and given careful thought to, approaches used in higher education and their relevance to societal needs.

In his latest book, Way introduces the concept of “soulware” and links it to the internationalization of higher education. He begins with a description of several perceived conflicts, teaching and research, quality and evaluation, and creativity and innovation. He introduces these concepts from the perspective of the history and culture of higher education, sharing from his personal experience how universities around the world map out their own individual trajectories in response to globalization. He then explores the advantages of simplicity, and the importance of integrity and communication. He boldly explores many of the issues and challenges those of us in higher education face, and gives careful thought to how they are addressed.

Technological changes, the introduction of interactive teaching methods, research breakthroughs and globalization have all served to connect higher education across international borders in ways that were previously unimaginable. Way’s book is not just about the past or the present. Rather, it offers useful insights into the future. In an age where robots and artificial intelligence are impacting our jobs and our daily lives, he introduces the concept of “soulware” and analyzes its importance for higher education. Robust soulware prepares students for an unpredictable future with a deeper appreciation of human values. Developing soulware inculcates in students a sense of efficacy and aspiration by engaging with real-world problems and a capacity for empathy through experiential learning and international exchange. Healthy soulware facilitates collaboration, humanizes technology and enhances the human-machine interface. It opens up new possibilities and extends boundaries.

This book is a valuable reference point for educators, policy makers and readers who have an interest in global higher education. Through his thoughtful analysis and structured presentation the reader can take full advantage of that interconnectivity and address the many challenges we as educators face, as we all work toward excellence in higher education.

G. P. “Bud” Peterson

President, 2009–, Georgia Institute of Technology

August 2018

Foreword by Yong Qiu

I was very pleased to learn about Professor Kuo’s new book and his reflections on higher education. As an experienced university leader and practitioner, Professor Kuo has coined a new term, “soulware”, for higher education, defined as “a commitment to concentrating our heart and soul to embrace due process and follow international standards and procedures in all our educational endeavors”. He raises this concept as a credo from his rich education and work experience by comparing higher education systems in North America and China and across the Taiwan Strait, including Hong Kong, Taiwan, and the mainland.

Throughout the long history of modern universities, the purpose and role that they play have been defined and debated by great minds such as Wilhelm von Humboldt and John H. Newman. Bertrand Russell’s definition is remarkable: “… universities exist for two purposes: on the one hand, to train men and women for certain professions; on the other hand, to pursue learning and research without regard to immediate utility” (On Education, Especially in Early Childhood, 1926). In addition to professional training and knowledge learning, a university’s aims include contributing to society, preserving and developing culture, and promoting cooperation within the globalization context. Bertrand Russell also once said that, “Traditional Chinese education was, in some respects, very similar to that of Athens in its best days. Athenian boys were made to learn Homer by heart from beginning to end, Chinese boys were made to learn the Confucian classics with similar thoroughness” (What Shall We Educate for? 1936).

When we compare modern Chinese universities and Western universities, many similarities can be found. Funding, buildings and equipment are certainly essential, yet a university is far more than that. It is the intellectual community and spiritual home for faculty and students where they gather for knowledge, inspiration, understanding and appreciation. Chinese higher education has experienced rapid growth over the past decades, and it is now widely agreed that hardware is the most significant achievement so far, while more effort is needed for improving software. The term soulware itself prompts us to consider the holistic development of higher education.

I am honored to offer some words as a foreword to Professor Kuo’s book. We share some higher education background. He received his B.A. from National Tsing Hua University, Hsinchu, in 1972, and I received my B.A. in 1988 and Ph.D. in 1994 from Tsinghua University. We both serve as university administrators, he as president of City University of Hong Kong and I as president of Tsinghua University. As presidents, we share similar considerations not only about the current climate for universities, but also for the future.

We have witnessed the exciting recent progress of Chinese higher education institutions. Tsinghua University will celebrate its 110th anniversary in 2021. Compared to Western universities, Chinese institutions are rather young. But in step with rapid economic development and significant government funding, Chinese universities have demonstrated greater dynamism. However, the development of higher education is never a short march. It’s a marathon for excellence in quality.

The 21st century is characterized by innovation and openness. We will witness the millennial anniversary of the modern university in 70 years’ time. Universities have contributed greatly to the development of humankind, and will continue to play an important role, particularly in terms of educating future generations for sustainable development.

Will Chinese universities evolve in a unique way? Many higher education observers have raised such a question. I believe future Chinese universities will become increasingly open and innovative and will learn from Western universities through international cooperation that will be very helpful not only for Chinese universities but also for global higher education.

As we know, ideas within a university are often generated by culture. I believe Chinese universities will remain true to their natural identity and be nurtured by local culture. Differing from their Western counterparts, Chinese universities will demonstrate their own cultural characteristics. In this regard, Professor Kuo’s book offers us many valuable insights.

Qiu Yong

President, 2015–, Tsinghua University, Beijing

December 2018

Foreword by Frank H. Shu

Soulware: The American Way in China’s Higher Education is a masterful analysis of the relative strengths and weaknesses of the American (USA, Japan) and the Chinese (mainland China, Hong Kong, Taiwan) approaches to higher education. Its author, Professor Way Kuo, is well qualified to comment on this important problem. He received his college education in Taiwan, went to the United States for graduate study and was on the Technical Staff of Bell Labs. As a researcher, teacher, and administrator in reliability engineering, he had a distinguished career at Iowa State University, Texas A&M University, the University of Tennessee, and Oak Ridge National Laboratory before he assumed his present position as President of City University of Hong Kong.

Way Kuo’s recipe for success at the upper echelons of the educational enterprise has a foundation built on the synergistic blending of teaching and research. The physical assets and operational management of the higher education infrastructure are the hardware and software of an enterprise that has profound impact in the race to a future based on innovation. Way Kuo gives a sharp and critical analysis of how well mainland China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan are faring in the international arena, and relative to each other, in the hardware and software aspects of this competition. Adequate financing to build and maintain the hardware/software infrastructure is, of course, a prerequisite. However, what differentiates Kuo’s insights from more pedestrian analyzes is the identification of “soulware” (or mindset) of the academic culture as the missing ingredient why the Chinese approach has been less successful than the American approach.

According to Kuo, “soulware” encompasses different opposing philosophies:

Internationalization versus localization;

Autonomy in university operations versus supervision by political bodies;

Governance by a clearly-defined administration, which is held accountable for adverse results versus large committees whose powers extend beyond an advisory role into the decision-making sphere, but that cannot be held responsible for the consequences of their decisions;

Institutions of learning versus institutions of political activists;

Seeking knowledge versus seeking power or profits;

Standards for professional ethics versus common mercantile practices;

Simplicity of rules of behavior versus complicated regulations that arise from lack of trust and jealousy of higher-achieving colleagues;

Qualitative/quantitative assessments of performance by peer review and expert systems versus rewards according to personal relationships;

Teamwork toward common goals versus fragmented fiefdoms focused on self-interest;

Reward for creativity versus lip service to innovation while capitalizing on other’s pioneering efforts;

Benchmarks based on meaningful prizes and rankings versus accreditation by degrees and lofty titles or self-proclamations; and

Understanding of academic freedom and its attendant responsibilities versus exploiting the immunity granted to the sanctuary of academe.

By statistical analyzes and amusing anecdotes, Kuo goes through topic by topic in devastating detail to demonstrate the ways in which the practices of mainland China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan lag behind the best in the world, with America often featured as an example.

Because Kuo emphasizes that “research” is inseparable from the “teaching” mission of higher education, it is interesting and informative that he breaks out “research universities” into four separate categories (with examples):

Liberal-arts centric (e.g., Princeton)

Science and technology-centric (e.g., MIT)

Comprehensive universities (e.g., UC Berkeley)

Elite concentrations of specialists (e.g., Caltech or Rockerfeller University)

He makes the point that America does not have a federal Department of Education that dictates what role each university should play in the education of society. Rather, America succeeded in higher education because, in essence, it allowed private universities (governed by boards of trustees) and public universities (governed by the States) to discover what it was good at doing. Because America is a big country and has many institutions of higher learning, systems of governance arose, by trial and error, “where it was easy to do what is right, and difficult to do what is wrong”.

Crucial to developing and maintaining superior operating systems of higher education is society’s placing a value on expertise. Unfortunately, as Way Kuo humorously recounts, in Greater China, everyone regards themselves as experts on higher education: taxi drivers, parents of students, politicians of every persuasion, successful and unsuccessful businesspeople, environmental activists, … the list is endless. In reality, only enlightened professors are experts at what universities do and should not do.

With the great power granted by university autonomy (self-governance) comes great responsibility. From the perspective of quality assurance, Kuo argues that professors deserve the academic freedom they so cherish only if they accept assessment and accountability. He even goes so far as to say that disciplines that cannot withstand evaluation by experts are not true academic fields. They do not belong in the modern research university. The statement is bold common sense, validated by several now-existing rankings of the top research universities that broadly agree on which institutions rank, say, in the top 100.

Given how important higher education is to the economic health of the citizens of any country, and therefore to their physical and mental well-being, one can ask to whom is Way Kuo’s present book addressed? In Greater China, policy makers, university administrators, professors, students, and the literate public would most likely read the Chinese edition. Who is the audience for this English translation, which has undergone considerable updating since the original Chinese publication in 2015? Is the English-speaking public in America or elsewhere interested in why mainland China, Hong Kong, or Taiwan lag behind the international leaders in higher education?

My personal answer is: yes, there should be a large international audience for this book even if the reader’s native language is not English. Huge problems have emerged in the twenty-first century whose solutions require global cooperation and a common agreement of what are achievable goals. Foremost among the difficulties are perhaps the challenges of climate change and the collapse of the environment driven by an ever-expanding consumerism fueled by advances in marketing techniques. Saving the future of human civilization may require large transformations of our energy and economic systems. How can such changes be effected without drastic reforms of the systems of higher education in large parts of the world?

The same sentiments may attach to the question why the democracies of the twenty-first century are plagued by ever increasing trends toward becoming autocracies that are hostile to the nobler aspirations of higher education. Some experts have blamed the underlying sickness to the ever growing difference in the incomes of the rich and the poor, with an attendant increase in the relative power of the rich to effect laws and practices that reinforce even greater income disparity. If promoted without careful thought, the rise of artificial intelligence and smart robots can enhance the anxiety of the working poor that the rich and powerful elites are their enemy.

Other experts emphasize the role of the “clash of civilizations” that can occur when there are major shifts in the military and economic prowess of the dominant nations of the world. Whether we have a peaceful or a warlike resolution of these clashes may depend on the wisdom of the educated leadership of the nations of the world.

Thus, rather than disdain or fear the aspirations for higher education in Greater China, many of the empathetic in the English-speaking world may view those aspirations as opening an access to valuable human resources for finding sustainable solutions to these difficult problems. Indeed, as Kuo argues persuasively, the cure for bad financial investments, for income inequality, and for environmental pollution and climate change, is not a retreat from innovation in the sciences, engineering, and humanities, but a wiser use of the ingenuity of the human mind and compassion of the human spirit. Wisdom is the ultimate goal of higher education. It is the illumination of that wisdom among audiences, English-speaking or Chinese-speaking, to which Way Kuo’s book hopes to kindle a spark. I wish him the best of luck.

Frank H. Shu

President, 2002–06, National Tsing Hua University, Hsinchu University Professor Emeritus, University of California, Berkeley and San Diego

December 2018

Trump vs Roosevelt: A Historical Overview

According to a story in Politico and a milder report on CNN, US President Donald Trump characterized Chinese students in the US as spies during a private dinner with corporate executives in New Jersey on August 7, 2018.

Apart from the impact on international unity and historical perspectives, such careless words, if they were in fact uttered, endanger both Chinese students and US society at large, which is unfortunate and undesirable.

Whether or not influenced by Trump, mainland China is no longer on the list of countries for the 2018/19 admission cycle during which an optional interview program is offered by Stanford University, subsequent to MIT, which means applicants from the mainland interested in applying to these two universities will not have an interview opportunity.

Recent developments in the US–China trade war plus the investigation of researchers affiliated with the Thousand Talents plan, a scheme aimed at attracting Chinese scientists and entrepreneurs back to mainland China mostly for part-time appointments, could slow down academic advancement and technological modernization in China, and ultimately could hurt China–US scientific cooperation. This is based on news published in Nature on October 24, 2018, in an article titled “China hides identities of top scientific recruits amidst growing US scrutiny”.

On a side issue, Taiwan’s Yushan Talents scheme, which is like mainland China’s Thousand Talents scheme, could be in jeopardy because it is being questioned by the US.

Upon hearing all these news, people might wonder how in the first place Chinese students came to study in America, and what they have brought to these societies over the years.

Illinois, 1906

In 1906, Edmund J. James, the fifth president of the University of Illinois, proposed that the US should establish scholarships that would enable Chinese students to study in America. “The nation which succeeds in educating the young Chinese of the present generation will be the nation which for a given expenditure of effort will reap the largest possible returns in moral, intellectual and commercial influence,” James wrote to US President Theodore Roosevelt at the time. (Mary Timmins, Enter the Dragon, Illinois Alumni, December 15, 2011)

Instead of mimicking those 19th century imperialists, who reaped huge financial gains from old China, Roosevelt’s administration accepted the idea to establish the “Boxer Indemnity Scholarship Program”. Roosevelt believed such a program could maximize American profits by bridging China with American culture and traditions. In 1908, the US Congress passed a bill to endorse Roosevelt’s vision, which led to the establishment in 1911 of a preparatory school in Beijing for young Chinese pursuing studies at American universities. The school was named Tsinghua College .

The Boxer Indemnity Scholarship Program was a milestone for Chinese students wishing to study at US institutions of higher learning, and it set the scene for “The American Way in China’s Higher Education”. The impact of the Tsinghua program and other extended ones on China and the US has been much greater than either James or Roosevelt could have imagined. There are now more than 350,000 Chinese students studying at US universities, and many were granted doctorates by American universities in 2016.

In addition to bringing back to China the American way in education and technology development, Chinese students add value to American campuses and societies through the diversity of their perspectives, which American high-tech industries, national laboratories know full well. Chinese students also bring honor and pride to America. One such example is that eight Chinese-American Nobel laureates in physics and chemistry studied and did their research in the States. Numerous Chinese-Americans have contributed economically, technologically, and scientifically over the past few decades, promoting those American values cherished in China and elsewhere in the world.

The Chinese culture has enriched, and will continue to enrich, life in America, helping to make the US a more internationalized country. Disparaging an entire population or any ethnic group is wrong-headed and un-American. Such comments made by Trump are not worthy of the high office of national leaders.

James’ remarks about educating young Chinese in America have held true for more than 100 years until Trump recently complicated the matter. An overall view of the situation for the US and China shows that the world benefits when it is united; it suffers when divided. For that reason, Roosevelt’s vision to bridge China with American culture and traditions should be enhanced instead of diminished. We should also bridge the US with Chinese culture and traditions to make this a better world.

Introduction

It is well acknowledged that Chinese culture pays special attention to education. But, how has education been viewed and how modern is the current practice of education in Chinese societies?

In ancient times, “Chinese” was more of a cultural concept than a racially or ethnically defined notion, but at the same time, there was the differentiation of hua, meaning civilized Chinese, and yi, meaning barbarians outside China and of a different race. Such a differentiation between hua and yi has been embedded in the mind of the Chinese for a long time, even when China was economically and politically weak. In recent years, cases of racial discrimination have sometimes emerged on campuses in Taiwan and Hong Kong, but since they were not serious enough to be considered violations of the law, little attention was paid to them. Racial discrimination is strictly prohibited in the US, and if similar cases should have happened in American universities, they would have been dealt with as serious matters, and the party responsible would bear dire consequences.

In this part of the world, however, it is not rare to see people poking fun at foreigners, mocking foreign customs, or joking about foreign names or faces. Once even a university president in Hong Kong laughed at someone’s foreign sounding name. Because it was not viewed to be a big issue, no one thought to seek an apology for it. This not only shows bad taste and a lack of sensitivity in an important matter among the Chinese but also a lack of respect for other people and their identities.

First Encounter with Hong Kong

My first encounter with Hong Kong was an eye-opening experience. I had studied and worked in North American higher education institutions and the science and technology sector for 34 years. Apart from some short-term visits to some universities in Hong Kong, I knew very little about the city when I took over the presidency at City University of Hong Kong (CityU) on May 14, 2008; and Hong Kong knew nothing about me.

Somehow, I believe it was destiny that brought me to Hong Kong, in a zigzag kind of way. Prior to 2008, I had frequently visited universities and research institutions in Taiwan, my birth place, maintaining a particularly keen interest in education reforms. I was also aware of university reforms on the mainland, and the rigid education system over there. I had visited South Korea and Japan many times, had supervised a number of South Korean doctoral students, and had enjoyed discussing higher education, science, technology, and innovation with South Korean academics.

Perhaps, having spent so much time in other parts of East Asia, it was natural that I should find myself eventually working in Hong Kong. This book has evolved from my observations and reflections over the years on higher education across the Strait. The book is divided into five parts: the internationalization of higher education (Chapters 1–7), integration of teaching and research (Chapters 8–13), quality and evaluation (Chapters 14–16), the right mindset for leadership and governance (Chapters 17–19), and creativity and innovation (Chapters 20–25).

Internationalization of Higher Education

As an ethnically non-mainstream resident in the US, I was in various academic leadership positions for many years. I was familiar with the common practice in academia of going by the rules, be it in teaching and research, or administration and management, or discussions and debates. Therefore, I was taken aback when, soon after arrival in Hong Kong, I witnessed how the entire CityU campus was thrown into chaos over the decision made by a former vice-president not to renew several instructors’ contracts upon expiry.

It was incredible that a routine, legal, and reasonable decision could trigger heated reaction and interference by outsiders who tried to disrupt the normal functioning of a university. Where did the anger come from? And where did it go? Regrettably, this was the work of just a few who refused to play by the rules or who tried to make some personal gains by politicizing the issue.

Another uncommon example was about a student’s thesis. Shortly before my arrival at CityU, a PhD student from the mainland failed his final examination and was asked by his study committee to fix his PhD thesis. But the student insisted he was correct and claimed that he was more qualified than the committee members. He asked CityU to overrule the committee’s decision. After my refusal to alter an academic decision, he started to make all kinds of noises including bringing in-street politics and suing the university for delaying his graduation. He requested the court to order CityU to pay for the losses associated with the delay after he had already entered and passed a second examination. Such an absurd violation of the academic practice of the candidate’s PhD degree committee was unthinkable.

The lack of a soul can be seen in this student, perhaps as a result of a lack of humanistic literacy. Why did this student repudiate the academic judgment of his committee? What would be the use for forcing his way through an academic degree? Would he behave this way if he were on the mainland, the US, or Taiwan?

Hong Kong is an Asian metropolis where English is a major language of communication. It claims to be one the most internationalized cities in the world. There are many good things to be said about this great city, but even a cosmopolitan hub like Hong Kong is plagued by the increasingly unhealthy entanglement of outside politics interfering in higher education, and by an absurd commercialized notion that the getting an A is that all students should fight for. Given the shared cultural roots, if Hong Kong fails to achieve the goal of an advanced level of higher education, how can the modernization of education in Taiwan or mainland China fare any better?

What is internationalization anyway? Could it be that people in higher education across the Taiwan Strait (the Strait), which is defined broadly to include the Republic of China in Taiwan, Hong Kong as a Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China, and mainland China of the People’s Republic of China, are barking up the wrong tree by promoting issues not central to higher education?

Integration of Teaching and Research

The second phenomenon I noticed after I first arrived in Hong Kong was treating teaching and research as two distinct and unrelated activities. Lecturers were only involved with teaching duties while research professors mainly performed research duties. Not only that, during my visits to Taiwan, I learned that the so-called research universities prioritized research activities while the so-called teaching universities undertook no research at all.

What puzzled me was why anyone interested in learning would want to choose to study in so-called research universities that do not care much about teaching and why teaching-oriented universities would be involved in granting PhD degrees? What kind of research universities are they if they do not teach, and what kind of teaching universities are they if they do not conduct research at all, and yet grant doctoral degrees?

Later when I revisited mainland universities that I was familiar with, I realized that university teachers on either side of the Taiwan Strait who had not done any research tended to classify universities that emphasized teaching as teaching universities. As a result, professors involved in research were classified as professors of research universities.

The underlying assumption is that those who do research do not know how to teach and therefore have no teaching duty, while teaching staff concentrate on their teaching and do not engage in research and, as a result, do not know how to discover or create new knowledge through research. But how valid is this assumption that those who are not engaged in research do indeed know how to teach, and that those who are engaged in doing research do not really know how to teach?

How can anyone be healthy by only consuming nutritious food but not doing any exercise, or by doing exercise but not consuming nutritious food?

The limited innovation and segregation of teaching and research also exist in North American institutions of higher education; however the situation is seemingly worse among universities across the Strait. The ability to foster innovation with a good balance between teaching and research is what really separates modern universities from the rest.

Quality and Evaluation

At one time even in the US, university faculty and staff were wary of evaluations of their teaching and research, regarding them as a violation of academic freedom.

But how can anyone make progress in the absence of feedback from evaluation? How can one groom oneself without checking in front of the mirror? Besides, academic freedom refers to the freedom to engage in academic studies. How can someone demand academic freedom when what he/she does is unrelated to academic pursuits? Why is it that people who are not directly involved in academic activities keep talking about academic freedom when in fact people who are directly engaged in academic pursuits do not necessarily lack freedom?

It is obvious that quality assurance should be given a priority within a clearly defined assessment framework. No stone should be left unturned in the pursuit of excellence and efficiency. Nowadays, recognition of the importance of the design, evaluation, and enhancement of quality has been extended from manufacturing to the service, medical, government, education and legal sectors. The concept of quality assurance in universities has developed too rapidly, moving beyond the evaluation of investment in hardware and software, to include the evaluation of investment in education. Higher education should be examined in terms of its impact on society at large.

The lack of a sound and healthy development turns out to be one of the key reasons as to why higher education across the Strait lags behind other global leaders.

The Right Mindset for Leadership and Governance

To hold universities accountable, we could use quality assurance as a way to evaluate student learning, graduate employability, faculty productivity, alumni contributions to society, and social responsibility, in terms of both economic and non-economic impacts. However, these are only some of the necessary prerequisites that universities must have, if they are to excel.

If we are to see universities functioning properly under a healthy education system, they need to be led and governed by the right mindset instead of just a mechanical control. The operation of a university is also a business, the intellectual business of learning, and not a for-profit business, nor a platform for political fighting. That is why we need to respect the autonomy of a university.

Academic freedom is exercised by faculty for academic subjects that should not be used as an excuse for dealing with non-academic issues, and certainly should not be used for political purposes. This should be held as being universally true regardless of where universities are located.

If we do not adopt the right mindset or relinquish the empty talk that exists in abundance and to different degrees in political circles and elsewhere in society across the Strait, and which is inherited from traditional Chinese rhetoric, higher education systems are likely to serve as a platform for producing numerous superstars at second-class universities.

Creativity and Innovation

Creativity may be spontaneous, but innovation has to be built on quality. Creativity becomes innovation only when original ideas spontaneously conceived are implemented systematically. Innovation is tomorrow’s quality yardstick, which is why quality improvement and enhancement are considered as innovation. After all, the purpose of innovation that spurs entrepreneurship is to improve the quality of life.

Like internationalization, innovation is often a goal that universities aspire to, yet it is also a most puzzling concept and difficult to achieve.

Higher education depends on government investment in resources and policy guidance, but operations should be left to academic professionals, free from bureaucratic micro-management and meddling by government agencies. Society should respect higher learning as a profession. University is likely the best platform to create and innovate, and therefore, professors should be committed to the pursuit of innovation, knowledge creation, and knowledge transfer as a measure to provide quality education for students and for academic advancement. They must observe professional ethics and be willing to accept peer evaluation.

Higher Education in the US

Universities around the world need to learn from more advanced civilizations, understand the diversity of student talents, define strategic positions for universities, and make good use of resources that can revitalize their own cultures and create a brand name for themselves.

In this book, the US higher education system is used as a benchmark against universities across the Strait, and possibly other places. The US leadership in higher education is unrivalled to the point that even some older European universities seek to emulate its success. However, US higher education is by no means trouble-free; it undergoes continuous improvement. In addition to those elite US private institutions that the Chinese public know well, state-funded institutions have been an extraordinarily admirable embodiment of US democracy. They constitute an unprecedented experiment in human history to broaden US citizens’ access to higher education. But while all universities in the US use vigorous quality assurance standards for granting degrees, state-funded universities are witnessing a number of challenges. Higher education in general is under assault because of a decrease in funding and rising student tuitions.

Additionally, decline in college enrollments in recent years due to the flattening pool of high school graduates has been compounded by a drop in applications from overseas. Competition continues to ramp up in the UK, Australia, and New Zealand, and from institutions in mainland China. During 2017/18 year, the number of new foreign students studying in the US dropped more than 6%. A growing number of four-year colleges has been aggressively recruiting students from abroad to offset their eroding admissions numbers. Under the free market competition, some small private colleges in the US might go bankrupt.

University autonomy, which is almost always exercised in the US, can be defined as showing respect for professional management in higher education and redressing deficiencies by leaving the education and research agenda to faculty instead of outsiders. Strategically promoting healthy competition revitalizes higher education and only by doing so can higher education maximize its contribution to society.