Taiwan’s initiatives
The introduction of market mechanisms into universities means the transformation of higher education from a public good to a private commodity. In its efforts to decrease government control and integrate social demands with market forces, Taiwanese higher education since the 1990s has been significantly influenced by neo-liberalism thought and policy.
As a result of the introduction of free-market economy principles and neo-liberalism policies in 1990s, the proportion of financial support from the MOE has decreased 23% in the last decade, whereas the proportion of tuition income has increased 6% (Sun, 2006.12.12). Accordingly, an “administrative funding scheme”
was introduced into public universities to improve their accountability. No longer relying on government budgets alone, public (or so-called “national”) universities are required to designate partial funds for sharing their daily administrative costs.
Nevertheless, the MOE and other government budgeting offices still have the right to regulate various university practices. A trial program based on these principles within five universities was introduced by the central government in 1996. Now 55 out of 70 public universities participate in this new program, allowing more autonomy in
resource allocation (See Table 5).
Table 5 Source of Administrative Fund for Public Universities in Taiwan
1 3 1 5 1 7 1 8 1 9
5 6 5 6 5 4 5 2 5 0
3 1 2 9 2 9 3 0 3 1
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
year
percentage
Other(including other government offices)
From MOE
Tuition
In order to become more financially self-sufficient, leading universities undertook an unprecedented fund-raising campaign, gathering donations from their alumni, the general public, and business. However, many institutions have been less than successful in obtaining significant support from these sources. HEIs such as new public universities lack strong networks with their newly-graduated alumni.
Teachers’ Colleges (now re-classified as education universities) suffered from a shortage of strong alumni donations. Above all, the Taiwanese general public is not used to donating money to universities (public institutes especially) because the latter have been regarded as a public good, funded solely by the government. Therefore, a huge discrepancy in fundraising arose between the well-established HEIs (especially those with a comprehensive and science/engineering background) and the less prestigious/small-scale universities. Higher education quality skewed drastically according to different institutes (See Table 6).
Table 6 Percentage of Self-Fundraising in Public Univers ities in Taiwan
0.29 0.34 0.37
0.43 0.39 0.43 0.45 0.47 0.49
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 years
percentage
In another attempt to provide universities with more incentives for pursuing excellence and to offset declining quality due to rapid expansion and public budget cuts, the MOE promoted a “World Class Research University Project” in 2003. This proposal aimed to upgrade at least one of the HEIs in Taiwan to rank among the world’s top 100 universities based on international journals within the next ten years.
Consequently, a “Five-year, Fifty Billion Budget” plan (est. 1.6 billion USD) was launched among several selected prestigious public and private HEIs in early 2006 to improve fundamental development, integrate human resources from different departments, disciplines and universities, and establish research centers to pioneer specialized interests. In addition, universities now are required to establish an internal and external evaluation system using various indicators such as the Science Citation Index (SCI), Social Science Citation Index (SSCI), and the Engineering Index (EI) etc., in accordance with standards that meet international recognition for awards, achievements, and contributions within their field of expertise. A non-governmental organization (NGO), The Higher Education Evaluation and Accreditation Council of Taiwan , was established in December, 2005 to conduct external evaluations across universities on a regular basis (Chang, 2005.12.26).
Chinese initiatives
The Chinese government has launched similar projects in an attempt to enhance international competitiveness among universities. To achieve the goal of “100 leading universities, research centers, and disciplines across China in the 21st century”, the Chinese government started its “211 Project” in 1995. The project’s main emphasis is to develop a group of HEIs that will compete to enter the ranks of the top world-class universities (MOE of PRC, 2004). The project will choose 100 universities from
applications from across the country. In order to develop criteria and data to assist in selecting these 100 HEIs, the government started an evaluation process based on measurements of faculty quality and productivity, facilities, libraries, laboratories, research quality, university resources and many more criteria. Consequently, Chinese HEIs began a series of institutional mergers. After five years of this merger experience, many newly-established universities are developing the basis upon which to be highly competitive in acquiring national prestige. One example, previously mentioned, is Zhejiang University which now ranks among the top five universities as a result of a merger with local HEIs and funding by many of the aforementioned projects.
Subsequent to “Project 211”, another, labelled “Project 985”, was developed in an attempt to push Chinese higher education to a new level. The idea originated from a speech by the former General Secretary of China, Jiang Zemin who attended the 100th Anniversary of Beijing University in May 4, 1998, and proclaimed that “China must have a number of first-rate universities of international advanced level” (Hayhoe
& Pan, 2005). Consequently, the MOE of China has signed agreements with nine top HEIs in China such as Peking University, Tsinghua University and Shanghai Jiao Tong University, hoping to upgrade Chinese universities to the standards of Harvard University, London University, Tokyo University and the like. With full financial support from the central and local governments, these nine institutions are expected to blossom over the next few years. Top funding priority was given to Peking University and Tsinghua University, ranked as 14 and 28 respectively among the world’s top leading universities according to the Times’ Higher Education Supplement (World University Rankings, 2006). It is also expected that these leading universities will be able to serve as examples to improve Chinese higher education.
In another effort to upgrade their overall quality and reputation, many Chinese universities have established exchange programs with international universities intended to broaden the horizons of faculty and students. It is also considered an
“asset” to increase student enrolments in the university. Universities which go for international exchange programs are concentrated in areas like Peking, Shanghai, Tianjin, and other metropolitan and coastal cities in China that are more accessible to the outside world. It is estimated that approximately a half million students and scholars have gone to study abroad in the past 20 years, as more international academic exchange programs and joint research programs have been set up both domestically and abroad. As China continues its open-door policy, more internationally-oriented programs, such as international studies and foreign languages, have become very popular on university campuses. At the same time, more international exchanges and collaboration between Chinese students/scholars and
international counterparts are taking place.