I think fixing the dings in your car is a form of cheating.
Nah, its a form of subsidizing bad drivers.
Post #111 is off in so many levels. Mind boggling. That explains why some people on the fast lane text at the same time. They see nothing wrong with it.
@californiaa If you are in California as your username implies, I believe courts would decide that a teacher charging a student who is also currently in their class for tutoring on the side is illegal. I expect such a ruling would be based on the so-called “pay-to-play” law in California that says schools cannot charge for learning or related program participation. So, no required fees for sports, band, textbooks, field trips, etc. A lot of people don’t make a big deal about fees, because the law is not well-known and has complicated exceptions. However, I think you’d have a pretty good case in California against the district. It’s not even difficult to file for if you have spent money on some fees that should have been “voluntary”; you are supposed to be able to use the “Uniform Complaint Procedure” provided by each district to file for a refund.
My S’s GF, a lovely girl in all ways, is a Chinese national and a PhD candidate in a specialized area of engineering at Columbia (with a BS in chemical engineering from a Chinese U). She has a fellowship from a large, international corporation. One of her parents is a physician, and the other is a professor. She is fluent in English.
The only way in which she even faintly resembles students described on this thread is that she does seem to like brand names. 
She does not have a car of any description.
I don’t know whether she will end up staying in the US. But I do know that if she does we would benefit from her presence.
Frankly, I cringe at the thought of her reading this thread, although I would think it likely that she is acquainted with the sort of person described here.
" I don’t understand an outrage about a Chinese kid that used iPhone at an SAT exam, when everybody knows that Ivys can be influenced by a big donor or a big political figure."
Umm, “Two wrongs don’t make a right.” I do understand the outrage, so maybe this illustrates the cultural difference we’re talking about.
It seems to me that in California, OOS students subsidize our in-state students pretty much to the same extent that international students do. I’m fine with having international students here, but I’d like more verification that what they claim in their applications is accurate.
^ I believe that at the grad student level, there is more verification of what students did as undergraduates, even for internationals.
Don’t know about the first, @jym626 --but as to the second, the rich ones hire others to write their papers for them. Shame on any editor who agrees to do that.
“…only about 2.3% of Chinese students studying in the US were asked to leave for this reason. Without comparable numbers for American students, it’s difficult to draw any meaningful conclusions with respect to the prevalence of those things. Given the graduation rates at less selective American institutions, it seems likely that far more than 2.3% of native born students failed out.”
But maybe one group is failing out more because they are cheating less? I am not saying that is a fact, I just do not know.
“a bit over 20% Want to make any sweeping generalizations based on that incident?”
Well, the class was “Sports, Ethics & Religion.” I am not sure what the sweeping generalization would be. Possibly that athletes are more likely to cheat, or that people who are religious are more likely to cheat? I am not sure what you are trying to suggest.
I do have the impression that our society has become increasingly one where “doing the right thing” is not rewarded. If it is legal, or you get away with it, it is okay. Unfortunately, that seems to be the example our leaders set for the next generation. i
Here is what studies have shown: not that someone with a particular background is more likely to cheat. Rather, people of all backgrounds will cheat when the stakes are (or perceived to be) high enough.
That includes people who have never felt the “need” to cheat ever before, people who have shown honesty/integrity previously with regard to their behavior as a matter of course, people who were raised in an atheistic environment, people who were raised in a religious environment. It’s all about the perceived consequences of poor (or disappointing) performance.
The University of California system spent $32 million on financial aid for non-resident students last year. The examples in this article http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article21478290.html are out of state students rather than international, but there is nothing to indicate that international students would not be eligible also. The taxpayers of California additionally subsidize non-residents due to the taxes they pay which go to support the running of the university system.
All this aid is of course additional to the financial aid subsidies available under the Dream Act for undocumented aliens.
So, many chinese are cheating to gain illegal entrance into the us by first cheating to gain entrance into US colleges/universities and then disappear. Lovely. The school should hold their passports upon arrival. However, the student would then probably lie during the holiday break and claim they need their passport to return home, and then disappear into the general population. I am not convinced that they are all finding their way into high paying jobs with full healthcare benefits and adding to our economy.
It’s simplistic to think that just because international students pay more, they are no longer being subsidized. We taxpayers subsidize all our public colleges through many different ways. In addition to direct funding, these entities occupy hundreds if not thousands of acres without paying property taxes, that is one major form of public subsidy. Next, the endowment income of all non-profit private or public universities are also non-taxable, and they also receive hundreds of millions in research funding each year from the federal government, which comes directly from our federal tax dollars, yet another form of subsidy. The additional tuition dollar is not enough to offset all of the subsidies per student.
In addition, foreign students also take up spots in the freshman class, in CS, Engineering and Business programs that should be given to in-state students as top priority. This is a zero sum game as these spots are finite in each department, more applicants does not equal more spots opening up. It just means in-state students are outplaced.
All public universities should limit their foreign enrollment. If they can’t balance the budget, they need to cut cost. In just about every university there is so much waste, especially in administrative cost. Read Richard Vedder’s “Going broke by degree”. Instead the administrators take the easy way out and increase foreign enrollment so they don’t have to cut cost, giving away spots that should go to our in-state students, often knowing full well many of the transcripts, LORs etc. submitted by the foreign students could be fake or result of massive cheating. Don’t ask don’t tell. Just take the money and look the other way.
Let these foreign students go to the private universities. Public universities should be for US taxpayers only.
I don’t really see the problem, unless it’s that we’re undercharging internationals. There’s high demand overseas for US university spots. Why do we charge 50K/year for a spot we could get 200K/year for?
Any way you look at it, foreign students are going to be subsidized by the US taxpayer, to the same degree that US citizens are subsidized by the US taxpayer. They will drive on our roads, go to our parks and beaches, send their kids (if they have any) to our public schools, etc. They will pay sales taxes if they buy anything, but not income taxes, unless they can get a job while attending college.
We could have federal and state charges for foreign students studying in the US. There’s no reason we HAVE to be subsidizing them.
“Public universities should be for US taxpayers only.”
Do you really want a university where NO ONE has exposure to the points of view of, or contact with, someone who has grown up outside of our country? A place like Michigan State or Ohio State where you don’t have contact with an international person? That would be a very limited education IMO.
Sounds like a Midwest issue. On the coasts there are plenty of recent immigrants to provide much needed diversity. :-*
Asian immigrants want to assimilate, not be the spokesmen for their parents’ homeland.
" A place like Michigan State or Ohio State where you don’t have contact with an international person? That would be a very limited education IMO."
??? Odd choices to call out. Those schools certainly have internationals. Your example would have been better if you’d picked no - name, obscure colleges.
Even Ball State has 1,000 international graduates in each year’s class. It would just seem ludicrous to me to ban them simply because it is a public university. Most international students take back to their country a great experience in the US and a greater appreciation of what our country is about. How would banning internationals from any public university make that university a better place? I’ll never forget a Japanese classmate at my midwestern university who made a bunch of us a 10-course meal after we completed a semester-long group project together. He did outstanding work AND he gave each of us an experience quite unlike any other that we had in school.