Are the educational standards of schools like Harvard, MIT, and Stanford overrated?

I was a visiting scholar at Harvard Kennedy School in 2017. I have some friends at MIT and have given several lectures at Harvard and MIT. Let me share my views.

I think the educational standards of the schools you mentioned are not overly praised. They can be said to be of a real high level.

Just take the lectures at Harvard Kennedy School as an example. There are countless lectures every day, and the speakers who come are basically of international level. Some lectures also provide food in order to attract people.

Some visiting scholars said that they spent a week attending various lectures and even had to eat. Several visiting scholars from Chinese universities lamented to me that no wonder Harvard’s tuition fees are tens of thousands of dollars, and they can earn back just by attending lectures.

I have also been a visiting scholar at the University of Hong Kong. I have no intention of stepping down from the University of Hong Kong. The University of Hong Kong is ranked very high in Asia. To be honest, just looking at the level of the school’s lectures, it is not at all comparable to Harvard University. On one level. Friends from HKU, please forgive me for saying this.

There are many Chinese visiting scholars at Harvard University, often for gold plating, promotion, etc. Getting a degree is really not that easy.

In our year, I felt that the number of visiting scholars was 10 times the number of Chinese students studying for degrees. In other words, if you want to study for a degree at Harvard, you really can’t just squeeze in. It's not easy to get in.

Among those who are studying for a degree, far more are studying for a doctorate than for an undergraduate degree. Harvard undergraduates are the elite among the elite.

At a Chinese Students and Scholars Association, I met several Chinese students who were undergraduates at Harvard. At such a young age, they were really considerate in dealing with each other. I was very impressed. Harvard spent one year in China. Only a few undergraduates are recruited, and some years there are none.

In terms of academics, I’m not engaged in academics, so it’s hard to say anything.

I can say that the international background and vision of Harvard students are by no means ordinary. Kennedy School students come from different countries around the world, and some African students may become prime ministers in a few years back home. Ha ha!

In terms of diversity, students’ creativity, self-confidence, etc., I think students from Harvard, MIT and other schools are really at the top level in the world.

Take a photo with Professor Qiu, a great mathematician, when participating in the event

Speaker at the 2019 Harvard China Education Forum

Strictly speaking, the gap between China and the United States is, in fact, It’s the gap in higher education. The United States’ strong scientific and technological strength lies in its high-quality higher education. Therefore, encouraging more international students to study in top universities in the United States has more benefits than disadvantages. Those who slander international students have a pit mentality. Some people We are always worried about brain drain and international students not coming back. Don’t be afraid. First, most of them will come back. Even if they stay in the United States, there are quite a few people who have contributed to the development of our country. In any case, closing down is not advisable. Yes, so our country supports studying abroad.

This is the world’s top university. It cannot be destroyed by just a few words from netizens. It’s too naive and too stupid. Once the United States encircles the economy, we can’t even handle the chip now. Young people We have time to learn more, and don’t just talk about it.

The level of education is aimed at different education targets. Therefore, this level of education is aimed at "gifted students"!

Teach students in accordance with their aptitude!

Indeed, it is said that it must be Harvard and Oxford. Just like Americans, the reform must be based on international standards. Deep down, I am still not confident. Western education is indeed ahead of the curve, but it cannot do anything. This epidemic has revealed the problem of over-respecting freedom, individuality, and laxity. Citizens lack collective consciousness and social responsibility.

Primary and secondary education should emphasize China first, we are the best in culture, and we are the best in economy. Only by persisting for more than ten years can we get over the bend.

Due to work reasons, I am surrounded by many people from American Ivy League schools, British G5, and Chinese C9 (I am a C9 player).

At the same time, I will also interact with people from different walks of life.

There are reasons why world-famous schools are world-famous schools. But what is good and what is bad?

It’s like a person, how can he be considered great or praised? This is the issue of evaluation standards.

Evaluation criteria

For example, when we evaluate a person, is Zhuge Liang considered great?

From a strategic perspective, this is a tough angle. However, if it comes to martial arts, he is a rookie.

The same goes for evaluating college students.

Why is the proportion of graduates from Chinese science and technology universities going abroad so high? Is it because of the school's school spirit?

NO! ! !

Because this school is very powerful, but it is located in Hefei. Where will you go after graduation?

Since I am leaving Hefei, I will look globally. So...

Then, students who graduated from the University of Science and Technology of China may not be suitable in the eyes of many local employers, but they are very comfortable in another place.

The same goes for Harvard. Letting Harvard graduates dig excavators is definitely not as good as Lanxiang people.

But how many U.S. presidents has Harvard produced?

This is the standard of measurement. What talent do you want?

Harvard is a good school. Lanxiang is also a good school. They just cultivate different talents from each other.

The world cannot be without Harvard, nor can it be without Lan Xiang.

Harvard people

I know relatively few people from Harvard and relatively many from Columbia. But the people who come back from Ivy League all have their own personalities and personalities. *** nature, you will feel that these people's conversation and other aspects have a broad vision, novel angles, and sufficient depth.

If you don’t use excavators and use them as a reserve for managers, then the future potential is OK.

Similarly, for British G5 people, you will find that they have a strong brand of gentleman or lady, and at the same time they are quick-thinking.

The Chinese C9 people are not good at it either. It is actually not easy for people who can pass C9. These people all have their own merits (why do you feel like you are bragging?)

Everyone has their own characteristics. A good university is soul-giving. Used in the right place, it will be valuable. But if used in the wrong place, it will not only be a waste of talent, but may also be inferior to college students. (I once encountered a listed company that insisted on recruiting girls who graduated from Harvard to be the front desk. What’s the point?)

I don’t think it’s overrated at all. The big names I’ve come into contact with are from these schools. , indeed very powerful. I also often watch the open courses of these schools. The same courses are indeed taught very well. The most important thing is that the whole process will give you a process of thinking and self-understanding. To give a simple example, with the same function, the difference between the program I wrote and the program written by MIT students is not too big. It may be that my programming ability is relatively poor, but I really have to admire it. [Face-covering][Face-covering][Face-covering]

Having attended open classes, I am more flexible in thinking, knowledgeable and innovative, and very original and individual. A problem will be solved unexpectedly and in various ways. Chinese teachers are relatively scripted.

I feel that in China, an environment that places too much emphasis on school education, the so-called well-known universities are basically over-rated in terms of educational standards, especially when one uses the top talents emerging from this school to When evaluating the educational level of this school, it is even more overrated.

Because every well-known university, whether domestic or international, has produced hundreds of thousands or even millions of graduates at all levels. In the end, only a few hundred, or at most, thousands of people will become so-called talents. Others For 99% of people, the difference is between higher and lower wages.

So for a real talent, the most important thing is not the "educational level" that the school can bring to everyone, but your own personal advantages that distinguish you from those on the same platform as you. However, many people regard the top talents trained by these schools as a result of the school's educational level, so they tend to over-praise the educational level. In fact, what happens to the ordinary people trained by this school and those mediocre people can best reflect the level of a university.

Of course, many people are accustomed to praise and criticize all well-known universities. They will not "over-praise" all well-known universities, but they will give universities at the top of the chain of contempt in their hearts according to their own. Highly overrated.

For example, those who like to praise British and American universities will say that domestic universities are worthless and can be labeled as misleading people; those who praise established European universities will look down on British and American universities. Utilitarianism; and some of Japan's top universities that have been boasted per capita.

Especially those well-known universities, which have great initiative in talent selection and have selected all the best talents, how bad can the future of these people be?

Moreover, old schools like Harvard University have a very strong tradition of alumni recommendation in history. Generation after generation, they are the children of Harvard alumni, as well as the children of those rich and powerful people. The gathering place, in other words, is a school for the second generation of officials and rich people. Even if there are a few prodigal second generation ancestors, it is not difficult to come up with several leading figures in the political and business circles. As long as there are a few, it will not be difficult. That's enough to brag about.

Of course, this is not to deny the teaching level of these schools. They must have two skills, especially the emerging science and technology universities such as MIT, Stanford, Berkeley, Caltech, and CMU. I have my own teaching "secret", because engineering and science are subjects that require hard work, and it doesn't depend on one's background (not that, it doesn't mean it doesn't matter, and whether 'IQ' counts as one's background, I think Partially calculated), coupled with the rapid technological progress in the past century, they caught up with this dividend, so they took off.

For example, Berkeley students are famous for their good basics. This is definitely related to the school’s education system, but what you need to know is that grasping the basics may seem simple, but in fact it is very difficult to implement. Disaster.

Thinking about other relatively poor schools, it is actually possible. From a policy perspective, it is also possible to increase the curriculum of basic science subjects, pay close attention to assessments, and increase the difficulty of examinations. But can students bear it? If this group of students is a group of people who have been confused since middle school, a group of students with 90% skipping classes, and a group of people with average or lower IQs, you will definitely let them "first" if you teach like this. "Rise", or will 80% of students fail to graduate first, directly preventing the school from opening?

The so-called teaching in accordance with aptitude, high teaching level and high-quality students themselves complement each other and achieve each other.

Of course, this does not deny that students should pursue good universities and pursue a better platform. It is absolutely the right choice. Especially when you are not a "talent", getting involved in a good platform is a very correct method.

An ordinary person goes to a good university through hard work. There is a metaphor that I think is very good, "Sand is mixed with gold, and of course it is sold as gold." Ordinary people in a good university, Although if you are not a talent, you will never be a talent, but once you are on the platform, you will not let your sales be too bad.

But further, to become a truly outstanding person, you need to think more about what is different from others, what are your own advantages, it can be a better background, it can be your Good looks can mean your extraordinary IQ, extraordinary hard work, extraordinary self-discipline, and more purposeful planning than others. To take it a step further, don’t be too limited by platform.

These schools have the highest reputation in the world. They recruit the best students from all over the world, employ the best teachers in the world, and have the most advanced experimental equipment and laboratories in universities around the world. , coupled with a good learning atmosphere, coupled with the students' admiration mentality and harder study, how the teacher teaches is not very important!