Mick Clifford: Question marks over Chinese students’ claims of ‘racism’ at UCC
At a time when racism is on the increase in this country, a bizarre allegation has emerged from University College Cork.
A group of Chinese students, who failed a post-graduate exam in the university’s business school, are claiming their failure is attributable to racism and discrimination.
That, in itself, would be highly controversial at a time when third-level institutions rely heavily on income from foreign students.
What provides the bizarre turn is a body of evidence that suggests the racism card is being played to mask the real reason for a high failure rate in a particular subject.
The result is that a lecturer has been accused of racism and had their name blackened.
No allegation exists that this or any lecturer addressed or communicated with any student in any manner that might give rise to racism.
The only issue that arose was the use, in a classroom, of the former Chinese flag — currently the flag of Taiwan — rather than what is now the national flag of China.
According to sources, this was done in a historical context (China officially changed its flag in 1971).
“To call it racist in any way is ludicrous,” one source says. “And it is very damaging to that lecturer.”
Apart from the “racism” issue, there is also an allegation of discrimination in the exam in question. Emails making allegations against the lecturer — for which there is no evidence — were circulated in UCC.
An inquiry is now underway to examine how exactly the lecturer was treated by the university authorities in dealing with the matter.
The issue arose in one of the Masters classes in UCC’s business school. The class has more than 40 Chinese students, making up over a third of the class.
Income from foreign students is now a staple of university and college budgets in Ireland.
The failure of successive governments to properly address the whole area of third-level funding has left many institutions effectively fending for themselves in this manner.
Huge emphasis has been placed on attracting foreign students, who can pay up to €20,000 a year.
UCC, and particularly its business school, is no different from other Irish universities in assiduously courting this market.
In the only written exam on this masters course, conducted under full exam conditions, most of the Chinese students failed.
Other elements of the course were conducted on projects and group work.
The written exam results caused consternation among the Chinese students.
They returned to China mainly, it appears, because none of them got a placement in industry, a routine outcome for most students.
One of the big advantages for foreign students who come to Ireland is the offer of a two-year stay to work upon completing their studies.
From China, the students lodged a complaint about the high failure rate among their contingent.
Twenty-three students signed a letter sent to the university president and various senior “college managers”.
They claimed that, in other years, the resits didn’t include a written element, but there is dispute over the details of this claim.
The second ground of the complaint was that the college had decided that any student who didn’t attain the 40% pass mark in the written exam, but did achieve over 25%, could have a “second chance” through sitting oral exams.
The students claimed this was discriminatory to those who didn’t get 25% on the paper.
“Students who scored below 25 were not offered the opportunity to take an oral exam at all, as well as additional support,” the students wrote.
“What are the criteria for grading such a subjective group of people or even being treated differently based on the merit of their performance?”
They suggest that all those who don’t get the 40% pass mark should be treated equally, rather than giving an oral option to those who got at least 25%.
The third ground was ‘Difficulty of the Course Exam’.
“Most non-native English-speaking students did not pass the exam,” the students wrote. “We kindly request that the school assess the reasonableness of the exam’s difficulty level. Otherwise, the exam results were not published for the entire class.
“We need to ascertain the percentage of non-native English-speaking students who failed the exam.”
The understands that the “non-native” cohort is largely the Chinese students themselves.
The fourth ground of complaint was that the coursework “lacked academic rigour”. The only issue referenced was that of the flag, which was “incorrectly displayed” and was “disrespectful to China”.
Within UCC, there is sympathy for the students.
Culturally, the failure of an exam is regarded in some Asian countries as a source of shame. There is also the money involved.
Students pay up to €20,000 for various courses per year. There would also be travel and accommodation costs. For some Chinese families, this could involve a huge sacrifice.
The issue, however, appears to be that the students may not have been properly tested as to the standard of their English before being accepted for the course.
That reflects, sources say, the policy to bring in as many foreign students as possible for the financial benefit they bring to the college.
A spokesperson for UCC said the college could not comment on any complaints from staff or students due to the requirement of confidentiality.
The spokesperson also said that UCC upholds “robust academic standards”.
The college did not answer directly a question as to whether this proficiency in the English language was a factor in the whole issue that has arisen in relation to the high failure rate among Chinese students.
The spokesperson did say that international students are “only accepted at UCC if they have been awarded the required scores in international standardised tests of English language proficiency”.
Yet questions remain. If proficiency in English was not an issue, why did so many Chinese students fail?
That, in turn, gives rise to whether the college is robust enough in testing the proficiency in the English skills of foreign students at a time when it desperately requires the financial boon that comes from such students attending the college.
The lecturer who was accused of racism, and that lecturer’s colleagues, deserve full answers to these questions.
So also do the Chinese students who failed in such high numbers.
Other students, who may question whether the course is operating at maximum efficiency as a result of these matters, also deserve to be fully briefed on what exactly is going on.
