5 ms·
> First, the foreign students cross-subsidize the locals' education. There are large fixed costs to running a university and these students pay way above their
by rdtsc 9y ago
> First, the foreign students cross-subsidize the locals' education. There are large fixed costs to running a university and these students pay way above their marginal costs. So now the universities have fewer resources; hence cutting the newspaper funding etc.
Well any out-of-state student would do that not just international ones. There is a deeper problem there in that these universities perhaps simply can't afford to have 10 foreign languages or gyms or sports clubs. Using international students to keep those going seems a bit of a round-about way. Since many of those are state schools, maybe seeing why the states have cut funding to the schools is more useful.
> Second, the foreign students increase the schools' reputations and can collaborate with the faculty.
Not really. Undergraduate students are minimally involved in research. (You did read the article to sew that it talks primarily about undergraduate students, right?).
> In my own PhD program, the productivity of the Americans was much lower than the foreigners. That productivity led to discoveries that benefit everyone.
As I mentioned, the article doesn't talk much about PhDs and is mostly focused on international students. In my own undergraduate program, international students were about average or worse than American ones. The few that I knew were struggling with English and others were "struggling" with academic honesty. I won't mention which country they are from but I think people here might figure it out. Many were in school because their wealthy parents had money to send them more than say being chosen for their academic performance.
> Third, immigration: some of the foreign students would have wound up staying.
Some would have and some do. But it's not a program geared for permanent residence. There was an option to do a short internship / co-op with that visa after graduation but that was about it.
> Educated people who work hard and are ambitious enough to go overseas and stay are good for the country.
As I said, from what I have seen in this case it is mostly students who come from wealthy families. Do we need more students from wealthy international families in US? I don't know, maybe. I would rather it be based on merit, so perhaps refocus that effort towards graduate students in certain fields or who manage to do exceptionally well in their studies.
In general it seems to me you have conflated and mixed undergraduate and graduate international student groups. For the purpose of discussion there are quite distinct in how admission, tuition, research funding and self-selection works. It seems your arguments apply more to graduate students even though the article is mostly about undergraduates. You made good points in general, but for clarity, you might want to update your comment mentioning the difference.
- Fej 9y ago> There is a deeper problem there in that these universities perhaps simply can't afford to have 10 foreign languages or gyms or sports clubs. I always found it weird that universities evolved to become sports franchises; it's at the very least orthogonal to being an institution of higher learning if not opposed to it, given that sports programs siphon money away that could be used in intellectual pursuits. I'm a bit proud that my university does not have a (gridiron) football team; we did once but it was disbanded in the 1910s because the sport was becoming more violent.
- pm90 9y ago> Well any out-of-state student would do that not just international ones. There is a deeper problem there in that these universities perhaps simply can't afford to have 10 foreign languages or gyms or sports clubs. Using international students to keep those going seems a bit of a round-about way. Since many of those are state schools, maybe seeing why the states have cut funding to the schools is more useful. Tell me why out of state students will pay significantly higher tuition when they can get a cheaper education in their State College? And are you saying that the State University wouldn't prefer Americans in their undergraduate programs? (please don't lob some racism/conspiracy theory: University administrators are Americans, and probably prefer Americans over others) It seems like international students are the only ones willing to pay higher out of state. > Not really. Undergraduate students are minimally involved in research. (You did read the article to sew that it talks primarily about undergraduate students, right?). The kernel of interest in research is laid during undergraduate study. US universities are in general better at promoting research during undergrad. Most undergrad programs focus more on learning than conducting research, simply because many don't even have graduate research programs of caliber. But many US universities do. > Some would have and some do. But it's not a program geared for permanent residence. There was an option to do a short internship / co-op with that visa after graduation but that was about it. Its not directly. But the hope is that the brightest and hard working will stay. > As I said, from what I have seen in this case it is mostly students who come from wealthy families. Do we need more students from wealthy international families in US? I don't know, maybe. I would rather it be based on merit, so perhaps refocus that effort towards graduate students in certain fields or who manage to do exceptionally well in their studies. You say this as if these wealthy students have no merit. Its not easy to get into US universities, especially as an international student. You have to have merit and wealth. I don't see why Universities shouldn't prefer students with both merit and wealth?