Some comments regarding the College Dream Act have digressed to include the practice of even having foreign students in our various public colleges, as if those students are not paying for their seats and providing cultural exchanges which are so valuable to America’s rather myopic students. Putting aside the fact that foreign students often have to pay more, we should reconsider how and why foreign students should be encouraged to attend our institutions. We should not only seek to encourage, but should fund many of them.
One needs only to examine the world’s population to recognize that there is literally nothing that the United States, other countries, or non-profit organizations can do in the way of foreign aid to truly overcome the problems that exist due to massive poverty! Sure, we can make our “national selves" feel good by sending billions of dollars to these populations, but it is simply a drop in a bucket, and it is a drop that we will not be able to spare in the distant future. Then, who do we eliminate from the lifeboats?
The world population living without food, water, adequate sanitary conditions and hope, as measured in billions, far outstrips the resources that could effectively be placed at their continual disposal by the US and all of the other countries. This is especially true when we recognize that much of the aid goes elsewhere, i.e. administrative costs, waste, and of course, my favorite, graft, rather than to the individuals who need the aid.
The only way these lives will be improved is through effective development. Development requires resources, knowledge, and leadership from within. While natural resources often exist, it is the knowledge necessary to effectively use and develop those resources that is missing.
Using as a model, college tuition programs that require education majors or med students to become teachers or doctors for given periods, in certain states, the US should redirect significant funding from Foreign Aid programs to make subsidized college education available to students from depressed countries with the proviso that these students return to their home countries to live and work. These subsidized programs could be connected with other organizations, including non-profits, from around the world which would contribute some funding and also help guide the student selection and completion process.
How this might be structured is a subject that would require significant thought. At a minimum, participating colleges could have a common “sub-curriculum” which would provide an underlying basis of studies to address the above problems while enabling the students to pursue studies in the specialties. Today’s technologies and social networks could be a major part of all of this, enabling students to focus and share their experiences based upon both their subject areas and countries. Additionally, technology could possibly enable sharing of college programs. For the selected students, participation in these and other aspects of the program would not be optional; for the objective is clearly to create a knowledge force which is ready and willing to return home to make things better for their country-men.
2195
Posts
I agree in theory but wonder how many foreign nationals actually go home once their educations are complete? This is particularly true with graduate students in the science and technology fields, as there are not enough American graduates to fill US employment needs. Very sad, but American students appear unwilling to defer the instant gratification of post-baccalaureate employment to attend graduate school, so the professorships and research positions are disproportionately going to foreign nationals.
ReplyDeleteI understand Anonymous' concern which is why the proviso is a must. Hopefully, the involvement of a supporting, i.e. overseeing "co-funder" in the form of a local non-profit organization would help deal with the problem.
ReplyDeleteThe other issue raised about American students being unwilling (unable) to do graduate work in science and technology is another issue entirely. As young students they see "gratification" in so many other professions via TV, etc. that by the time they get to college, they do not have, and it is likely too late to develop, the "scientific" mindset necessary to move into these fields.
You make some excellent points. We are blessed with so many wonderful things in this country. We frequently share them, but often not as effectively as we should. The idea of subsidizing foreign students is a good one, but difficult to sell politically. But, it might be made easier by enlisting charities, nations and the United Nations to help provide funds.
ReplyDeleteThe idea that our universities can be viewed as training places for leaders to the benefit poor nations is really a fresh way of looking at what has been happening, albeit ineffectively. By laying that on the table as an intentional objective, we can accomplish so much more.
I've long held the view that America unintentionally does many good things for nations of lesser wealth. Consider the fact that we pay dearly for medical products, that in turn stimulates research that benefits the world. Consider the effect we've had on developing nations by being the world's consumer. China is a major beneficiary of our wealth in this way. It cost us in terms of lost jobs and unfavorable trade balances, but others have benefitted. One by one as nations emerge from undeveloped to developing to developed, we create future markets for our goods and services.