View the ‘shocking’ university ranking with composure

 

Photo: VCG

The newly released "Leiden Rankings" from the Netherlands has recently drawn widespread attention. Eight of the world's top ten universities on the list are from China, with Zhejiang University ranking first, while Harvard University of the US - long a fixture at the top - fell to third place. The results sparked intense discussion. The New York Times published an in-depth analysis under the headline Chinese Universities Surge in Global Rankings as US Schools Slip, while France's Le Monde reported on January 20 that the ranking had triggered widespread shock, noting that the rise of Chinese universities has made the West less certain of itself. How should one view this "shocking" ranking? Our answer is simple: with composure.

First, the ranking does reflect, to a considerable extent, China's advances in education and science and technology. The Centre for Science and Technology Studies at Leiden University in the Netherlands, which publishes the ranking, is highly respected in the global field of scientometrics. The ranking focuses primarily on research output in high-impact international academic journals. Chinese scholars have ranked first globally for years in both the volume of SCI-indexed papers and citation counts. Judged by these criteria, it is hardly accidental that Chinese universities occupy eight of the top ten positions. In 2025, China's research and development (R&D) spending intensity reached 2.8 percent, surpassing the average of economies in the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) for the first time. The rise of many Chinese universities in the rankings is therefore a natural outcome of China's long-standing commitment to the strategy of invigorating China through science and education, coupled with sustained increases in research investment.

Most of the Chinese universities ranked in the top ten are research-oriented institutions with strengths in science and engineering, such as Tsinghua University, Zhejiang University, and Shanghai Jiao Tong University. What the ranking effectively "captures" is the growing competitiveness of China in fields such as electronic communication, materials science, physics, and chemistry. From Huawei's 5G technologies to the Tianhe supercomputers, and to the quantum satellite "Micius," Chinese university research teams have played a direct, critical, and in-depth role behind these achievements. The continuous flow of innovation generated by Chinese universities has been a powerful driver of China's transition from a major manufacturing country to a major science and technology power.

However, it is important to remain clear-eyed about the limitations of this ranking, which has a distinct focus - or preference. It places greater emphasis on universities' performance in academic research publications, reflecting only part of the picture rather than the whole. Judged by more comprehensive indicators, the more widely recognized global university rankings remain the QS World University Rankings, the Times Higher Education World University Rankings, and ShanghaiRanking's Academic Ranking of World Universities. In these rankings, universities from the US and the UK continue to dominate the top tiers. In terms of research originality, global talent attraction, and employer reputation, established Western universities still enjoy advantages. These gaps also serve as a reminder that the overall strength of Chinese universities - particularly their capacity to translate integrated technologies into real-world applications and their models for cultivating innovative talent - still has room for further improvement. 

Even so, in early 2000, the same Leiden Ranking still had seven US universities among the top 10, while Zhejiang University only made it into the top 25. Today, although Harvard produces even more research than it did back then, it has slipped to the third place. Given the progress made by Chinese universities over the past two decades, it is hardly difficult to understand why Western media might feel "shocked." This ranking has overturned many long-held perceptions. In fact, Chinese universities did not seize the spotlight "overnight." In recent years, from advances in basic research and breakthroughs in frontier technologies to leaps in strategic industries, China's scientific and technological rise has long been visible to the world. As universities serve as a "reservoir" for scientific and technological development, it is only natural that higher education institutions have made corresponding gains.

As for some Western media outlets linking the Leiden Ranking to narratives of "shifting power" or even a "new world order," this is an overreaction. Behind such "shock" lies Western anxiety over the erosion of technological hegemony. In reality, the progress of Chinese universities does not imply the failure of the West; rather, it represents a "collective increment" in humanity's overall creation of knowledge. From Harvard's liberal education to Stanford's entrepreneurial incubation, drawing on advanced educational philosophies from developed countries has itself been part of the progress of Chinese universities. At a time when global knowledge cooperation is becoming ever more closely intertwined, only by breaking free from zero-sum thinking can humanity's scientific enterprise advance together.

In a sense, the Leiden Ranking is like a mirror, reflecting both our achievements and our shortcomings. Every year, many Chinese students cross oceans to pursue their studies, with venerable Western institutions such as Harvard and Oxford remaining their "dream schools." We also hope that in the future, more international students will come to regard Chinese universities as their own "dream schools" and choose to study in China. That would be a far more persuasive kind of "ranking." 

-  Global Times editorial

Moon race on a deadline

A Long March-2F rocket, carrying the Shenzhou-19 spacecraft and a crew of three astronauts, lifts off from the Jiuquan Satellite Launch Centre in the Gobi Desert, northwest China. — TNS

“If you really want to beat the Chinese, give Nasa the funding and stabi­lity it needs. You’re not going to win if every week there’s a new direction, a new budget, a new administrator.” -by  G. Scott,Hubbard

EARLY in his first term, US President Donald Trump held a modest ceremony directing Nasa to return humans to the moon for the first time in half a century – a lofty goal with no clear road map.Veterans of the space community were torn between excitement and concern.Was Trump offering a windfall to aerospace contractors or charting a genuine strategic vision to reclaim American ­leadership in space?The idea wasn’t new.

President George W. Bush had proposed a similar plan in 2004, only for Barack Obama to abandon it six years later.

For decades, Nasa wrestled with the question of whether to return to the moon or leap straight to Mars – each path promi­sing scientific glory but demanding vast, steady funding from a fickle Congress.

Eight years on, that debate is over.

Trump’s revived lunar policy has igni­ted a new space race – this time with China – and the countdown is already on.

Both nations are targeting manned lunar landings by 2029, a symbolic year marking the end of Trump’s presidency and the 80th anniversary of the People’s Republic of China.

But unlike the Cold War’s first space race, this contest is not about planting flags. It’s about who gets to stay.

Washington’s Artemis programme aims to establish a permanent base to test life beyond Earth.

Beijing has similar ambitions – and ­ both are zeroing in on the same spot: the moon’s South Pole, where peaks of eternal sunlight border deep, shadowed craters believed to contain frozen water.

Whichever nation establishes a foothold first could claim the region – and the resources – for itself.

“The bottom line is, yes, it’s doable,” said G. Scott Hubbard, a veteran of human space exploration and Nasa’s first “Mars czar”.

“But it’ll take intense effort and proper funding. It’s not inconceivable – but it’s a stretch.”

Nasa officials fear that funding cuts and private-sector delays could hand China an early lead.

The Trump administration has proposed slashing the agency’s research budget by nearly half, fuelling uncertainty within Nasa at a critical moment.

“There’s too much uncertainty,” said one official. “Inside headquarters, everyone’s walking on eggshells.”

In the 1960s, the US government poured 4.4% of GDP into Nasa to win the space race.

Today, the share is less than 0.5%.

White House officials insist Trump is committed to making “American leadership in space great again”.

Acting Nasa administrator and Trans­portation Secretary Sean Duffy said: “Being first and beating China matters because it sets the rules of the road. Those who lead in space lead on Earth.”

Beijing, meanwhile, is steadily ticking off milestones. It recently launched its Lanyue lander – built to carry two taiko­nauts (China’s term for astronauts) – validating its take-off and landing systems, according to state media.

Two tests of its new Long March 10 super-heavy rocket were declared “complete successes” by the China Manned Space Agency.

“They’re progressing on every key piece they’ll need,” said Dean Cheng, a China expert at the US Institute of Peace. “They’ve built a new rocket, a lunar lander and they’re moving faster than anyone expected.”

China has accelerated its timeline from 2035 to 2029 and plans to start building a joint lunar research base with Russia by 2030, most likely at the South Pole.

“There’s room for two powers – but not without coordination,” warned Thomas Gonzalez Roberts, a space policy scholar at Georgia Tech. “Competition for the same landing sites could turn risky.”

China’s goal, experts say, is to arrive first and establish broad control – securing access routes, communications, dig sites and even a nuclear reactor to power its base.

Nasa’s own plans depend on Elon Musk’s Starship rocket – a giant, reusable launcher built by SpaceX and central to Trump’s Artemis vision.

But repeated test failures have put the schedule in jeopardy.

“Starship has yet to reach orbit,” Hubbard said. “And once it does, it’ll need to prove it can transfer cryogenic fuel in space – something never done before. Doing all that within two years is a real stretch.”

Delays have already pushed Artemis III, the first planned lunar landing, towards the end of Trump’s term.

Artemis II – a manned orbit around the moon – is expected early next year after design flaws in Lockheed Martin’s Orion capsule were fixed.

Trump’s aides fear Beijing could deploy a nuclear reactor on the moon by 2029, allowing it to declare a “keep-out zone” and block American operations nearby.

Duffy has ordered Nasa to prepare a competing US reactor mission by the same year.

Yet, uncertainty persists.

Trump has not nominated a permanent Nasa administrator and the White House declined to identify who is overseeing the lunar effort.

Even Trump’s broader space agenda is shaky.

His administration has proposed ­cancelling funding for Nasa’s Mars Sample Return mission, a cornerstone of planetary science, despite evidence that the Red Planet once supported life.

Setbacks are part of the space game, but China’s pace has turned them into a liabi­lity.

If Beijing lands first, it would not just be a symbolic victory – it could reshape power dynamics on Earth.

“I’ve been on the inside,” Hubbard said. “You waste enormous time fighting budget battles.

“If you really want to beat the Chinese, give Nasa the funding and stabi­lity it needs. You’re not going to win if every week there’s a new direction, a new budget, a new administrator.”

Then he paused. “And China may still win,” he said. “That would be another claim that they’re the dominant power in the world.” — Los Angeles Times/TNS

Relates posts:

Do not misread China, Victor Gao on How the US Misunderstands China

 

How China’s J-16 drives away foreign stealth jets, deterring them from approaching China’s coastal waters again

 

Li Chao Photo: CCTV news

"My canopy was only about 10 to 15 meters away from his…" In a documentary titled Invincible about the V-Day military parade, aired Thursday on China Central Television, a pilot from the special mission aircraft formation shared his experience of driving away two foreign stealth fighter jets while flying a domestically developed J-16 fighter jet, according to CCTV news.

Li Chao, a pilot with the PLA Air Force under the Western Theater Command, encountered two foreign fighter jets during a coastal training mission in 2024. "They headed straight toward our two aircraft. Their intention was very clear—it was a provocation.With our backs to the territorial sea line, we had to intercept them."

During the first encounter, Li locked onto the foreign fighter jet. Its wingman immediately broke away at high speed, while the other foreign fighter jet exited the combat zone and locked onto Li's jet. Seizing the opportunity, Li pulled up his aircraft and executed a barrel roll, flying inverted directly above the foreign jet.

"At that moment, my canopy was just 10 to 15 meters away from his. After completing this maneuver, I simultaneously locked onto both foreign fighter jets. In the end, both aircraft withdrew," Li said. 

That was the only encounter. Since then, this type of foreign fighter jet has not been spotted again near China's coastal waters, according to CCTV.

Chinese media revealed on Monday how China’s J-20 stealth ...

Facebook · Global Times

410+ reactions · 3 months ago

0:41

After multiple rounds of intensive attack and defense, the foreign military aircraft were finally expelled. (Video: CCTV Military Channel) ...

‘Make AI an ally’

 

AS universities grapple with regulating the use of artificial intelligence (AI) among students, a niche service sector has already emerged.

Third parties are now advertising services on e-commerce platforms to help students bypass AI detectors in their submissions.

These services, marketed as “humanising” AI-generated assignments, involve making machine-produced material sound more like it was written by an actual person. This is done by refining text, replacing overly formal phrasing with more conversational language, or weaving in personal stories and anecdotes.

Stressing the need for varsities to safeguard academic integrity, educators cautioned that this is essential to ensure that students genuinely develop the competencies and skills their qualifications claim to represent.

This, they argued, requires rethinking student assessment models, including moving away from one-off major exams, integrating continuous assessment of the learning process, and introducing formal declarations of AI use - similar to acknowledging collaboration with peers.

“When learning activities are designed to consider not just the final outcome, but also the process, the responses, and how students engage with the material, those elements can serve as meaningful forms of learning assessment,” University of the Philippines Open University (UPOU) development communication Prof Melinda dela Peña Bandalaria told StarEdu.

A former UPOU chancellor, Prof Melinda also served as president of the Asian Association of Open Universities, championing massive open online courses and open educational resources across the region.

“It is no longer just about teaching because knowledge today comes from many different sources.

“Our role is to determine the right level and type of assessment, so we can truly certify that an individual has gained the necessary competencies and skills,” she said.

Rooted in culture

Prof JungEducation Research Institute visiting research fellow Prof Insung Jung at Seoul National University, South Korea, said students’ reliance on “humanised” AI services is closely tied to societal pressures.

“It is a universal issue, especially in societies that place a strong emphasis on achievements and admission into top universities. This pressure tends to be even stronger in Asian cultures,” she said.

The pressure, said Prof Jung - who has over three decades of experience in open, distance and digital education - is compounded by the fact that some institutions discourage AI use, pushing students to conceal it.

“Students often aim to produce quality work quickly, but then conceal their use of AI. This is partly because some education institutions discourage AI use.

“As a result, students resort to using ‘humanised’ AI responses to avoid detection,” she explained.

In contrast, she noted that Japan’s education and employment practices create a different dynamic.

“In Japan, grades matter less because companies don’t hire based on transcripts. The minimum grade requirement is only 1.0 out of 4.5.

“Whereas in Korea, if you don’t have, for example, 3.0 out of 4.5, you don’t even get to apply for jobs at companies,” said Prof Jung, who spent 19 years teaching in Tokyo, Japan.

Agreeing, University of South Africa Emeritus Prof Paul Prinsloo noted that societal norms often influence how students perceive integrity.

“Another factor is when corruption is deeply embedded in a national culture and people routinely get away with it - without naming any specific countries or regions.

“In such environments, students may grow up believing it is acceptable to pay off authorities or buy their way through life.

“This creates a distorted sense of right and wrong, as dishonesty feels justified - everyone is doing it, or they believe they will not be caught,” Prof Prinsloo, whose expertise is in open and distance e-learning, AI in education and the ethics of student data use, explained.

Focus on learning

The real issue, Prof Prinsloo highlighted, also lies in universities’ emphasis on outcomes rather than the learning journey.

“We did not prepare graduates properly. We focused too much on giving them the right answer instead of teaching them how to think and to find the answer,” he admitted, adding that the focus is now slowly shifting to the learning process.

A way forward is to integrate continuous assessment into the learning process, Prof Olaf Zawacki-Richter of University of Oldenburg, Germany, suggested.

Outsourcing assignments through student help services is relatively uncommon In Germany due to the country’s academic system, said the varsity’s Faculty of Education and Social Sciences dean.

“Students are not graded frequently as they only receive one graded project per module.

“Learning is project-based and collaborative, so lecturers can observe the students’ process step by step.

“This makes it transparent whether the students actually did the work themselves,” he said.

Even before the rise of AI, some institutions had been experimenting with alternative ways of engaging students in assessment.

Citing an example, Prof Prinsloo said some varsities require learners to evaluate their own work based on a clearly spelt-out guideline.

“Students grade their own assignments according to criteria, and then we compared their self-assessment with ours,” he explained.

Although not foolproof, the approach encouraged accountability by prompting students to reflect honestly on their performance and take ownership of their learning.

“It becomes part of their responsibility to own up and say ‘this is how well I think I did’,” he added.

Be transparent

Prof XiaoIt is human nature to look for shortcuts, making it crucial for universities to establish mechanisms that ensure responsible use of AI, said Emeritus Prof Junhong Xiao from Open University of Shantou, China.

“Whether we like it or not, AI will be used in education.

“We, as educators, ensure that students learn to use AI responsibly,” he said.

Rather than punishing students for turning to AI, Prof Prinsloo advocated embracing it as part of the learning process.

“I want to know how they use AI. What was their process? Did they check the answer? How did they validate the answers? We should be interested in the process,” he said, emphasising that students should be encouraged to use such tools responsibly.

He also underscored the importance of transparency in learning and collaboration, cautioning that punishment of AI use could drive students to discover new ways to cheat.

“One university even has a declaration that students fill in to say, ‘I worked with a colleague or AI in this assignment.’

“We almost always punish them for working together with other students or with technology when we should be open and encourage them,” he opined.

Likewise, Prof Melinda shared that her university has already introduced an AI policy at the institutional level.

Under the policy, students are required to declare and document how they engaged with AI, such as the questions they asked, the responses they received, and how they evaluated those responses.

“We ask ‘How did you use AI in your submission’, for instance?

“They have to track the actions they have taken and document it,” Prof Melinda explained.

She, however, acknowledged the challenges of enforcement, as declarations may not always be complete or fully honest.

“Of course, it’s not a guarantee that they will declare everything, especially if they submitted something that’s completely AI-generated. We still have to reflect and guard against that,” she added.

Note: Prof Melinda, Prof Jung, Prof Xiao, Prof Prinsloo and Prof Zawacki-Richter were speakers at the Open University Malaysia “Visionary Leadership: Charting the Futures of Digital Education” public lecture on Aug 6.

Thumbs up: Mustapha (ninth from left) with Prof Ahmad Izanee (seventh from right) with the speakers and guests at the public lectures series. - AZMAN GHANI/The Star

AI in academia

THE Higher Education Ministry is committed to preparing students for a future shaped by AI and digital transformation, says its Deputy Minister Datuk Mustapha Sakmud.

“We are improving how AI is taught and used across our universities.

“We are also building campus environments that support flexible learning, including better Internet access, modern learning spaces, and stronger support for academic staff,” he said at the Open University Malaysia (OUM) “Visionary Leadership: Charting the Futures of Digital Education” public lecture on Aug 6.

Held at a hotel in Kuala Lumpur, the free public lecture series was organised in conjunction with the varsity’s 25th anniversary.

Also present were higher education director-general Prof Dr Azlinda Azman, and OUM president and vice-chancellor Prof Dr Ahmad Izanee Awang.

Subsequently, in a parliamentary reply on Aug 26, Mustapha said the ministry has outlined several measures to address the use of AI in academic writing, namely:

Developing guidelines for AI use in higher education.

Monitoring and regulating practices at the institutional level.

Revising assessment and evaluation methods.

Strengthening teaching and learning approaches that support higher-order thinking skills.

Providing training and professional development.

Upholding a firm commitment to academic integrity.

Ensuring all new and existing courses will include AI-related elements starting from 2025.

Mainstreaming the integration of AI into curricula through an “embedded AI” approach across study programmes, according to the needs of each discipline, such as engineering, technology, social sciences, and service-related fields.

Related posts:

AI and job transformation in Malaysia: What's next?

Related news:

GT Voice: Can China become global testing ground for 'making AI work'?

The transition from “making AI talk” to “making AI work” is the next frontier of AI commercialization. Could China, with its advantages in AI application, technology and policy support, be a global testing ground for such a transition?

Focus 

Tackling AI-driven crime

Nation 

On the ethical AI map with first syariah-aligned LLM

Nation 

Jakim collaborating with Zetrix AI to create

 world's first...

Source link https://www.thestar.com.my/news/education/2025/09/14/make-ai-an-ally