用户名:  密码:   
网站首页即时通讯活动公告最新消息科技前沿学人动向两岸三地人在海外历届活动关于我们联系我们申请加入
栏目导航 — 美国华裔教授专家网两岸三地台湾之声
关键字  范围   
 
成功大學2010年加州之行报告
成功大學2010年加州之行报告
作者:馮達旋 | 2010/3/29 11:57:14 | 浏览:1792 | 评论:2

A Historical Visit By Taiwan’s T3 System
to University of California Board of Regents Meeting

A Lesson on University System

Da Hsuan Feng 馮達旋
Senior Executive Vice President
National Cheng Kung University

成功大學2010年加州之行报告
A Group Photo at the meeting. The gentleman next to President Lai is President Mark Yudof of UC System. Next to him is Chancellor Fox of UCSD and next to her is Chancellor Kang of UC Merced

成功大學2010年加州之行报告
President Mark Yudof of UC System and President Lai of NCKU talked about the issues facing UC at the moment

On March 23-25, 2010, a higher education delegation from Taiwan, whose members are:

  • President Michael Lai(賴明詔)of National Cheng Kung University(NCKU,)
  • President Jei-Fu Shaw(蕭介夫)of National Chung Hsing University(NCHU,)
  • President Hung-Duen Yang(楊弘敦,)President of National Sun Yat-Sen University(NSYSU)
  • Senior Executive Vice President Da Hsuan Feng(馮達旋)of NCKU
  • Vice President Yung-Sheng Huang(黃永勝)of NCHU
  • Vice President Kin-Lu Wong(翁金輅)of NSYSU
  • Chairman of Chemical Engineering Ching-Chen Chen(陳進成)of NCKU

attended the University of California Board of Regents meeting. Themeeting venue was UC San Francisco Mission Bay campus. Every member of our delegation was profoundly honored by the invitation, especially when we were treated so “royally!”

Why this visit?

For the past several years, three universities in the middle and southern part of Taiwan, National Cheng Kung University(國立成功大學)National Chung Hsing University(國立中興大學)and National Sun Yat-Sen University(國立中山大學)were incubating and proactively developing the concept of forming a “system,” known as T3. One important efforts of this development the leaderships of these institutions undertook was to seek the experiences of some well known and well established “system” in the world. To this end, the University of California System was chosen as a target to study.

Why did we pick UC System?

Overall speaking, the concept of “University System” in the United States(in this report, I will concentrate only on research universities)began in the mid-19th century. Many systems are now well organized in a number of States. Some of the notable ones are

  • New York(SUNY System)
  • Pennsylvania(Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education)
  • Texas(University of Texas System, Texas A and M University System, University of North Texas System, University of Houston System, and so on)
  • Wisconsin(University of Wisconsin System)

and of course

  • California(University of California System, Cal State University System, and so on)

With more than a century of practice, it is no wonder that the concept of putting many “public” universities in a State together to form a “system” in the United States has become what the Chinese would refer to as 根深蒂固, or “deep roots and rigid stems,” with significant number of “kinks” shaken out.

While there is no official ranking of which system, there is a common understanding the University of California System is regarded as one of the best, if not the best.

For the T3 leadership, there are at least five reasons for our choice.

  • First, in the United States, there is a higher education “elite club” for research, or doctoral granting, universities known as American Association of Universities, or AAU. AAU was founded in 1900. Today, it is commonly regarded that only the best research universities in United States and Canada are inducted into the club. For example, for Texas, New York, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, each with no more than two AAU members:University of Texas at Austin(inducted in 1929,)Texas A and M University(2001,)Buffalo(1989,)Stony Brook(2001,)Penn State U(1958,)University of Pittsburgh(1974)and University of Wisconsin Madison(1900,)California has six(or 10% of the total number.)They are Berkeley(1900, one of the three public universities which is a founding member,)UCLA(1974,)UCSD(1982,)UCSB(1995,)UCDavis(1996,)and UCIrvine(1996.)
  • Second, a measurement of academic excellence is National Academy of Sciences(NAS)membership. For example, for Berkeley and UCSD, there are 136 and 85 members, respectively. Even for UCSB, which is a much smaller campus as compared to Berkeley and UCSD, it has 23 members. It is interesting to note that the numbers of Berkeley and UCSD are significantly higher than the total number of NAS members for the entire of State of Texas, which is 54! Interesting to note that there is now an active movement in Texas to change this scenario.
  • Third, the current structure of the University of California System is directly linked to the world renowned “California Higher Education Master Plan,” which was the brainchild of Clark Kerr, President of the University of California System fifty years ago(1960.)It is probably not an exaggeration to say that it is the farsighted vision of the Master Plan that gave rise to such an outstanding research university system.
  • Fourth, as the old saying goes, “when the going gets tough, the tough gets going!” This means that the best time to learn the functioning of a system is when it is in a stressed mode, and not necessarily when it is in a relaxed mode. To this end, the time to learn about UC System is now. As is now well known, the State of California is facing the most severe financial difficulty. In addition, quite by serendipity, in recent weeks, there were a number of unfortunate and ugly incidents on various UC campuses, thus placing even more stress on the System. For us, we consider this a great opportunity to observe how the UC System faces and deals with this era of great difficulty. It is time like this the true characters of the System will be revealed and an extremely worthy lesson which in our opinion no money can buy!
  • Fifth, without some luck, while we may have the desire to choose UC System as a target, UC System may not allow us to do so without some credible reasons. To this end, we were extremely fortunate that in NCKU’s Presidential Blue Ribbon Panel to learn about higher education autonomy, two of its world renowned members, Dr. Steve Kang and Ms. Leslie Tang Schilling are the Chancellor of UC Merced(the newest campus of the 10 UC campuses)and a member of UC Board of Regents, respectively. It was through the hard work of these two individuals that we were invited by President Mark Yudof of UC System to attend its Board of Regents Meeting on March 24 – 25, 2010.

It is worth noting that the group had another truly lucky moment at the meeting on the second day. Normally, at the Board of Regents meeting, with full program agendas, there would be little time for us to have in depth conversations with the Regents as well as the Chancellors. However, for nearly an hour and a half on the second day morning, the Regents had a “close session” in which all the Chancellors as well as the senior members of the System were not allowed to attend. While they were all loittering in the hall way, where we were as well, we leveraged this “down time” for them to engage in many very useful one-on-one conversations. What we learned again could not easily be obtained from the formal meeting!


A group photo with Chancellor Katehi of UC Davis and Chancellor Kang

成功大學2010年加州之行报告
A group photo with Chancellor Yang of UC Santa Barbara and Chancellor and Mrs. Kang


Our mission

We have two surgical reasons for coming to this Board meeting.

First, as was mentioned, NCKU which is in Tainan, NCHU which is in Taichung and NSYSU which is in Kaohsiung are in the process of organizing themselves to become a university system known as T3. To design the roadmap, from conception to reality(hence a “system”,)it is necessary for some serious homework. To this end, we need to gather information and observe first hand how the campuses within the UC System interact and compete with one another, how the ten campuses interact with the Board of Regents, and how the Board of Regents interact with the ten universities communities as well as the State Government in Sacramento. These would be extremely valuable lessons-learned of the system framework as our three universities strive to improve our educational qualities by becoming a system. With Asia developing at such a fast pace, higher education quality is becoming a more and more critical and imminent challenge for the entire region.

Second, all national universities in Taiwan, for which there are some 70, in principle and in practice “report” directly to the Ministry of Education. All the so-called “research universities,” for which NCKU, NCHU and NSYSU are classified as such, report to the Division of Higher Education within the Ministry. Such a raw relationship can easily create significant room for improvement. It is interesting that in our conversation with Chancellor Katehi, she mentioned that her home country, Greece, also faces the same challenge as Taiwan. This is why as representatives of the T3 universities, we are here to observe how the “intermediate level” between the “government,” in California’s case, the State Government in Sacramento, and the “universities,” in this case, the ten UC campuses, operates. This intermediate level is known as the Board of Regents. Through the discussions with many senior members of the System Office, and through discussions with a number of Board Members, we were given in depth and first hand knowledge of how the Board functions. We believe that no amount of reading relevant documents will give us such valuable knowledge.

Who did we meet in the two days

In the two days, we were honored to meet with the following 18 individuals.

  1. Dr. Mark Yudof, President of the University of California System.
  2. Chancellor Sung-Mo "Steve" Kang, University of California Merced
  3. Chancellor George R. Blumenthal, University of California Santa Cruz
  4. Chancellor Robert J. Birgeneau, University of California Berkeley
  5. Chancellor Timothy P. White, University of California Riverside
  6. Chancellor Linda P. B. Katehi, University of California Davis
  7. Chancellor Michael Drake, University of California Irvine
  8. Chancellor Marye Anne Fox, University of California San Diego
  9. Chancellor Henry T. Yang, University of California Santa Barbara
  10. Chancellor Susan Desmond-Hellmann, University of California San Francisco
  11. Dr. Lawrence Pitts, M.D., Interim Provost and Executive Vice President Academic Affairs, University of California System
  12. Bruce B. Darling, Executive Vice President, University of California System
  13. Marie N. Berggren, Chief Investment Officer, Vice President for Investments and Acting Treasurer, University of California System
  14. William De La Pena, M.D., Regent of the University of California
  15. Leslie Tang Schilling, Regent of the University of California
  16. Dr. Judy K. Sakaki, Vice President for Students Affairs, University of California System
  17. Charles F. Robinson, Vice President and General Counsel, University of California System
  18. Dr. Steven V. W. Beckwith, Vice President for Research and Graduate Studies, University of California System.

What did we learned?

We learned a great deal from one-to-one discussions with the Administrators and the Chancellors. The discussion with Dr. Pitts, the interim Provost and Executive VPAA was illuminating and information rich. As the second highest official in UC System, who obviously knows the System inside-out. The System is a very busy body, meeting six times a year, and each time is for two full days of agendas. In between the meetings, there could also be committee meetings. Since most Board members belong to no more than three committees, it is likely that each could average out to something like 7 to 8 meetings per year. Just as the United States Congress, no votes by the Regents can be casted by proxy or by “designated representatives!” This means that any one who is not totally devoted to the well being of UC probably would not want to be a part of this august body. Dr. Pitts gave us many details of the structure of the Board which we did not know. One of the most important information he told us is that the UC Board of Regents is legal stature wise the “fourth branch of the State Government,” with equal stature with the State Administration(led by the Governor,)the Legislation(the State House of Representatives,)and Judiciary(the State legal structure.)He also gave us many details as to how one could diminish the “political influence” of the Board. These are truly valuable lessons for us. I did asked several of the Chancellors what would be the scenario like if there were no Board of Regents and that the universities have to deal directly with the State Government, and all said that this would be a “formula for disaster!” One interesting note from one of the Chancellors is that he is not convinced that having ONE Board for all ten campuses is necessarily the best model for us to emulate. “If I could redesign it,” said this Chancellor, “I would have a Board for each campus.”

A very important point for all the Regents is that they serve on the pro-bono basis!

A very interesting thing we learned is that the two faculty representatives on the Board are NON-VOTING members. Apparently this was the choice of the Faculty Senate of the ten campuses, not the decision of the UC System. The rationale is that if the faculty members can vote, then they could be perceived as having conflict of interest. However, we were assured that there is no consensus from the Faculty Senate about this, and the NON-VOTING stature could be changed by the faculty. At the moment, it is NON-VOTING.

There is one member of the Board who is a student. We understand that the student is selected from a very complex and comprehensive system from the ten campuses. From listening to the student’s comments during the meeting, I would not have come to the conclusion that he is at most a factor of 2 to 2.5 in age from the other Regents. I found his comments very sophisticated, well thought out, and presented with clear articulation. From talking to Dr. Pitts, I understand that the UC System actually provides an office with staff members for this Regent during the year he/she serves as a member. I also learned from talking to another student that it is quite often the Student-Regent will suffer academically that year and may delay his/her graduation by a year. But imagine the benefit he/she gets by serving on the same par with so many movers and shakers of the State at such a young age!

The presentation by Mr. Darling and his team about the intricate relations between University of California and the three national laboratories, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory(LBNL,)Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory(LLNL,)and Los Alamos National Laboratory(LANL)was truly eye opening. LANL and LLNL are known to be weapons laboratory and LBNL is engaging in fundamental research. Darling’s presentation made us recognized the fundamental importance of these world class national laboratories impact on the University of California’s intellectual vitality on the one hand, and on the other, how the universities with students and outstanding faculty enhance the robustness of the laboratories. I do not believe that there is anything of this nature in Taiwan and that this could be a case study for T3 as a System.

I was especially impressed with my(unfortunately short)discussion with Charles Robinson about the legal team of UC. It is clear that a massive system such as UC(with nearly 200,000 students and 100,000 staff and faculty)with all possible human problems, conflicts and complications, there must be enormous number of legal challenges. So it is not surprising that UC would have to have, and does have, a powerful legal team. This to all of us, is the “price” one pays for existing in a democratic system with strong and complex legal structures. In Taiwan, while it is a democratic system, this aspect within the university structure is sorely in need of beefing up. With us making contact with Mr. Robinson, we hope down the road we can interact with him so we can learn more about the intricacies of his office.

We undoubtedly came at the right moment! With some of the highly undesirable and unfortunate events taken place at some of the UC campuses in the past few weeks, we saw first hand how the Board interacted with the public with dignity, elegance and without condescending.

We also saw how University of California, even faced with unprecedented difficult financial situations the State is experiencing, still is able to expand carefully to serve the public. The support of the Regents of the nurturing and expansion of a new campus in the underserved area of California, i.e. UC Merced, is a clear case of foresight and vision.

We saw how the UC system struggles with the issue of “excellence with diversity.” This is one issue where we saw disagreement between Regents. While this is currently not an issue of Asian universities, in time and in foreseeable future, because of the massive movement of humanity in the region and thus creating more complex societies, it could be. For this reason, we look forward to learning how the UC devise a system to meet the challenges of this issue.

Ultimately, we felt that what we sensed in the two days of meeting was that the “immortal” CALIFORNIA HIGHER EDUCATION MASTER PLAN developed exactly 50 years ago was still lurking in many of the discussions.(http://www.ucop.edu/acadinit/mastplan/mp.htm)This reaffirms the age old wisdom that if you begin with a great initial condition, whether it be a MASTER PLAN for higher education or a US Constitution for a nation, it makes outstanding development later on possible, even in tough times. This is an important lesson-learned for us.

Summary

It goes without saying that if one wants to learn a skill, finding the best to learn from is a must. Since “devils in the details,” we were able to have a glimpse of the complex structure of UC System. What is most important is that we have established personal links to these important individuals in the UC System and therefore down-the-road we could request for additional insights and information.

All of us, I am confident, left California a little wiser!

相关文章:『馮達旋
『港澳讯息』 20億美元新校區:澳門大學21世紀不可思議的轉變! 2013-03-09 [2027]
『学人动向』 馮達旋:Higher Education Board Governance Responsibilities 2012-02-13 [2253]
『台湾之声』 成功大學馮達旋:大學生應紮根在地文化 關心公共政策 2010-05-20 [1600]
『社区报道』 在第四屆「海峽兩岸中華文化發展論壇」致辭 2010-05-06 [1315]
『台湾之声』 生活讀書兩得意 大陸學生在成大沒有鄉愁 2010-04-01 [1580]
『台湾之声』 成功大學副校長馮達旋:成大與金門與閩南文化有密不可分的連結 2009-11-02 [1900]
更多相关文章
相关栏目:『台湾之声
林金源:《两岸经济合作架构协议(ECFA)》期满,下步怎么办? 2020-09-26 [153]
張亞中:台灣教科書的去中國史情形 2020-09-16 [162]
獨派連署取消馬禮遇 楊正中:凸顯鴕鳥心態 2020-08-28 [138]
馬英九吹奏反戰旋律 打痛了民進黨 2020-08-25 [288]
中評智庫:美一中政策的鬆動與影響 2020-08-23 [140]
今天,我们是否还要反思“丑陋的中国人”? | 作家柏杨诞辰100周年 2020-08-16 [124]
台湾社会力分析(一):省籍 2020-08-14 [147]
中評智庫:反分裂鬥爭中的法治思維 2020-08-03 [76]
台陆委会前副主委张显耀:中美紧张关系升高 台海危机前所未有 2020-08-03 [137]
心怀大是大非的许历农活过了李登辉! 2020-07-31 [185]
相关栏目更多文章
最新图文:
慕波:爬取7万条帖子  看看人们都是怎么吐槽相亲的 :黄钢教授:中华医学会核医学分会2019年学术年会总结 :警惕!你的个人信息在“裸奔” - “换脸”APP 后果很严重! :陈文玲: 必须推动中美关系回到正确轨道 :广州再生医学与健康广东省实验室2019年诚聘海内外英才 Colleen Flaherty 翻译 刘勤:MIT教授发文《美国经济评论》 :生命科学受益于明星科学家们的死亡 :北京和上海金融人的最新鄙视链 :日本政府《氢能利用进度表》
更多最新图文
更多《即时通讯》>>
Da hsuan说:留言于2010-04-12 11:08:30(第1条)
华裔巾帼创业楷模郑何淑圭女士加入布立顿•强斯生物医学光子学研究中心国际顾问委员会

美国奥罗拉影像科技有限公司总裁兼首席执行官郑何淑圭女士正式加入中心的国际顾问委员会。至此,中心顾问委员会已有27位成员。

出生于台南市的郑何淑圭女士于美国加州大学洛杉矶分校获得经济学硕士学位。毕业后进入洛杉矶盖蒂石油公司担任分析师,上世纪八十年代中期先后进入商业银行和投资银行,主要从事医药科技公司投资业务。凭借着敏锐专业的国际化商业头脑,她在医药公司行业渐有名气,九十年代更应邀成为白宫出口政策方面的顾问。

郑女士现任爱可瑞股份有限公司(纳斯达克代码:ARAY)和Trylon有限公司董事会成员。爱可瑞(Accuray)是放射外科领域的全球领导者。它的射波刀系统是全球唯一的机器人放射外科手术系统,能够精确治疗全身任何部位的肿瘤。郑女士还兼任肯尼思·施瓦茨中心(简称SKC)的董事。SKC是总部设于波士顿麻省总医院和塔芙茨医疗中心(简称TMC)的非营利性机构。而TMC是塔芙茨大学医学院的附属医院,是波士顿最好的学术型医疗中心,拥有450余名医生。

奥罗拉影像科技有限公司(以下简称“奥罗拉”)开发了专为乳房成像设计的、全世界唯一通过FDA认证的三维对称螺旋磁共振成像系统,开创了乳腺癌诊断和治疗的技术革新。郑女士自2003年7月起担任奥罗拉麻省北安多弗总部的首席执行官。为了全身心致力于公司发展,她从加州搬到麻省居住。在郑女士的领导下,奥罗拉在美国和全世界迅速扩张。公司的王牌产品对称螺旋乳房磁共振成像系统已成为乳房保健专家在处理乳腺癌和检测、诊断和治疗乳房疾病时的有效工具。

台湾成功大学资深执行副校长、研究中心国际顾问委员会副主席冯达旋教授十分赞赏郑女士卓越的领导才能和对商业及人类健康的贡献,曾于2007年力邀郑女士来汉参加了第一次顾问委员会会议。在讨论会上,郑女士作为商业界的代表,为促进中心未来又好又快地发展解囊相助。会后,郑女士还参加了研究中心主办的乳腺癌专题学术研讨会“中国和世界的公共健康威胁”,并作精彩报告。

2010年初,在以顾问委员会副主席冯达旋教授为首的部分委员的大力促成下,华裔创业楷模、巾帼不让须眉的郑何淑圭女士接受邀请,正式成为研究中心国际顾问委员会的一员。与此同时,在她的领导下,奥罗拉致力于国际乳腺癌关怀,与上海交通大学医学院——瑞金医院建立合作伙伴关系。奥罗拉乳房核磁成像系即将在医院的乳癌中心临床使用。这一举措将促成世界级前沿装备和专业医疗人员的强强联手,帮助中国内地的医院为日益增长的乳癌患者提供更好的诊治服务,帮助万千妇女减轻对乳癌的恐惧心理。

对于郑何淑圭女士的加盟,研究中心主任骆清铭教授评价道,“BC CBMP当前面临的一个迫在眉睫的问题就是如何将我们实验室自助研发的新技术用于临床以及产业化。郑女士有多年医疗器械行业的创业及经营经验,我相信有了她的指导,中心的成果转化会少走很多弯路。”
 
打印本文章
 
您的名字:
电子邮件:
留言内容:
注意: 留言内容不要超过4000字,否则会被截断。
未 审 核:  是
  
关于我们联系我们申请加入后台管理设为主页加入收藏
美国华裔教授专家网版权所有,谢绝拷贝。如欲选登或发表,请与美国华裔教授专家网联系。
Copyright © 2020 ScholarsUpdate.com. All Rights Reserved.