Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 77
4
Understanding the Statistics:
Problems and Issues
As mentioned in the Preface, ever since the exchanges started
in 1978, the figure for the total number of Chinese students and
scholars in the United States has eluded officials on both sides of
the Pacific. Because, on the face of it, this basic figure should
not be so difficult to determine, its absence inevitably draws first
surprise, then disbelief. Surely either the United States with its
advanced computers or China with her presumed controls over people
should have the answer. It is just this incredulity that prompts the
inclusion in the body of this report, rather than in an appendix,
a detailed discussion of the problems and issues associated with
statistics on Chinese students in the United States. Many readers
will undoubtedly want to understand some of the methodological
and institutional problems that have been responsible for this void;
others, who are not interested in the bows and whys of the data, can
skip directly to the statistical tables and the analysis in the sections
that follow.
.
CHINESE STATISTICS ON SENDING STUDENTS ABROAD
Although China's notoriously poor statistics (in all fields) have
improved dramatically in the 1980s, there are still many deficiencies
to overcome. Among them are a shortage of personnel trained in
statistics and a traditional casualness with regard to numbers- a
77
OCR for page 78
78
CHINESE STUDENTS IN AMERICA
cha-bu-duo attitude which, despite the purported accuracy of the
1982 national census, has been especially evident when it comes to
"people numbers." 1
The problems associated with keeping track of the movement
of students and scholars in and out of China are magnified by the
number of institutions, scattered throughout the country, involved
in the process. Not only are student exit permits issued by various
ministries, bureaus, universities, and institutes, but even passports
are obtained in scattered administrative jurisdictions, with officially
sponsored scholars getting them from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs
and privately sponsored students getting their passports from the
Public Security Bureaus. As is so often the case in China, a partic-
ular locality or administrative entity may have reasonably accurate
figures, but the system breaks down in the process of transmission
and aggregation, which, for the most part, is still done manually.
Beijing has not published either an integrated series of year-by-year
figures for students and scholars sent abroad or a breakdown by
country of study. Most of the highly rounded figures reported by the
Chinese refer to cumulative totals between 1978 and a given year,
occasionally indicate distributions by country of study, sporadically
show figures on returnees, and never include a total of students in
any country in any particular year (see Table 4-1~. How accurate are
the available figures?
In 1986 (apparently for the first time) China published a set of
figures under the heading Number of students sent abroad." Al-
though no expl~ation was provided, the figures are obviously too
low to include either scholars or privately supported students, and
since they were released by the State Education Commission, the
numbers must refer only to the officially sponsored students. From
this assumption we can then derive the distribution of government-
sponsored students between the United States and other countries
(see Table 2.
Although combining Chinese and U.S. statistics in one calcula-
tion is somewhat risky, since the Chinese rarely publish any break-
down of students and scholars by country of study, even an approx-
imate distribution between the United States and the other Surplus
countries is of special interest. Although the results seem to con-
tradict Chinese reports that two-thirds of all students and scholars
iSee, for example, Leo A. Orleans, "China's Statistics: The Impossible
Dream." The Amertea" Statutician, May 1974, pp. 47-52.
OCR for page 79
UNDERSTANDING THE STATISTICS
TABLE 4-1 PRO Students and Scholars Abroad (all countries)
Number
Total
Between Jan. 1979 and TotalOfficialPrivate Returned
Nov. 1979a b (2,230)2,230n.a. -
End of 1979c (2,700)2,700n.a. -
End of 1980 5,192n.a.n.a. -
Mid-1982d e (12,000)12,000n.a. __
End of 1983 25,50018,5007,000 (7,000)
June 1984f 33,00026,0007,000 14,000
Mid-1985g h 36,80029,0007,800 15,000
End of 1985 38,00030,0008,000 16,500
Mid-1987 50,00040,00010,000 20,000
NOTE: Although figures for a number of years are missing, the totals
that are reported appear in many sources. In most cases the starting
date of January 1979 is clearly indicated; when the source indicates
the end month, it is shown in the table; the more general time periods
in the table were surmised from the date of the earliest publication
in which the figure appeared. The totals in parentheses do not
include the privately sponsored students.
SOURCES:
bBeiiin~ Review (BR), p. 5, No. 47, 1979.
Xinhua, Dec. 22, 1979; Foreign Broadcast Information Service
(FBIS), Jan. 7, 1980, p. L6
CXinhua, Nov. 7, 1980; FBIS, Nov. 7, 1980, p. L32. This total
includes 3,963 visiting scholars, 562 postgraduate students, and 667
undergraduates.
dXinhua, Aug. 22, 1982; FBIS, Aug. 23, 1982, p. K15.
fBR, No. 3, Jan. 16, 1984, p. 11.
Xinhua, Nov. 29, 1984; Joint Publications Research Service
(JPRS)-CST-85, Jan. 3, 1985, p. 5.
gBanvuetan (Semi-MonthlY Talks), Aug. 25, 1985; JPRS-CST-85-037,
Act. 29, 1985, p. 4.
. Xinhua, July 8, 1986; FBIS, July 9, 1986, p. K12.
Xinhua, June 10, 1987; FBIS, June 15, 1987, p. K7.
79
come to the United States, the discrepancy can be explained by the
fact that the figures in Table 4-2 apply only to officially sponsored
students. If scholars and privately supported students were included,
the proportion in the United States would undoubtedly come closer
to two-thirds of the total numbers sent abroad. As for figures in
Table 12, in the early postnormaTization years, the majority of Chi-
nese students were indeed sent to Europe and Japan, but in just
three years the balance shifted, so that by 1983 most were coming to
the United States. Since this country is the overwhelming choice of
OCR for page 80
80
CHINESE STUDENTS IN AMERICA
TABLE 4-2 Estimated Percentage of Officially Sponsored Students
Sent to the United States
Number of Number of Number of
Students J-1 Visas Students Sent Percentage of
Sent Issued by to Other Students d
Abroada the U.S. b Countries Sent to U.S.
1980 2,124336 1,758 17
1981 2,922680 2,242 23
1982 2,326950 1,376 41
1983 2,6331,572 1,061 60
1984 3,0731,783 1,290 58
1985 4,8882,507 2,381 51
1986 6,3803,069 3,311 48
l
SOURCES:
aAchievement of Education in China. 1980-1985, State Education
Commission, Beijing, 1986, p. 50. The 1986 figure was reported
in PRO Yearbook 1987, p. 465.
bFrom Table 5-8.
CSubtracting column 2 from column 1.
dPercentage in column 2 of column 1.
Chinese students, the downturn in the proportion (not in absolute
numbers) coming to the United States in the last three years may
also seem somewhat surprising. One reason for this is that it is much
easier to obtain a visa for Canada and some of the European coun-
tries, where stricter immigration policies and stringent enforcement
also make their return much more certain than if they came to the
United States.
Until recently, Chinese diplomatic officials in the United States
readily admitted that they did not have an accurate count of the
numbers of scholars and students in this country, and such a number
rarely appeared in Chinese sources.2 ~ 1986, however, with the help
of a newly acquired computer, the Chinese Embassy in Washington
began inputting data on all students and scholars with J-1 visas
in the United States, their locations, their majors, and probably
2 When released, the number was likely to be picked up by numerous
publications. For example, the 1984 release stating that as of April 1984, 8,900
officially sponsored and 4,000 privately sponsored students had come to the
United States and 3,600 had already returned to China appeared in many
sources (see, for example, CD, April 28, 1984~.
OCR for page 81
UNDERSTANDING THE STATISTICS
81
other pertinent information. This has obviously greatly improved the
statistical base available to the Chinese officials, but they continue to
lack one important set of figures. Although the information on those
entering the United States is said to be reasonably accurate, the
Embassy is not always informed when individuals return to China.
What this means, of course, is that although China's capability of
estimating the number of persons in the United States under official
Chinese auspices is rapidly improving, it still must be viewed as an
approximation. And, of course, Chinese figures on the number of
returnees must be even more problematic. Moreover, since there is
no attempt to keep track of the privately funded students, a formula
for determining the total number of Chinese scholars and students in
the United States remains unattainable.
In any case, according to statistics obtained from the Chinese
Embassy, in November 1986 there were 4,987 scholars (46 percent),
5,716 graduate students (53 percent), and 116 undergraduate stu-
dents (1 percent) in the United States, for a total of 10,819 scholars
and students with J-1 visas. This total, as noted below, is several
thousand lower than that derived from the U.S. Information Agency
(USIA) data. While it is true that a discrepancy between U.S. and
Chinese figures is inevitable, in this case, most of the difference can
be explained by the fact that Chinese statistics exclude all visiting
scholars who spend less than six months in the United States, a
distinction which this country does not make but which has some
merit.
Despite China's problems with statistics, after considering the
difficulties on the U.S. side, it may not be too risky to suggest that
in years to come, we may be looking to Chinese officials for the most
accurate data on scholars and students in the United States.
Tangentially, it is interesting to consider the significant growth
of foreign students in Chinese universities. According to the State
Education Commission, their number has grown from 1,270 in 1979
to more than 6,000 In 1987 and is expected to reach almost 10,000
by the end of 1990. Just over half of all foreign students in China are
said to come from 77 countries in the third worId.3
3 CD, Dec. IS, 1987, P ~
OCR for page 82
82
CHINESE STUDENTS IN AMERICA
U.S. EMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE
DATA ON CHINESE STUDENTS
As already mentioned, many people may find it especially diffi-
cult to understand how a country that is as statistically and techno-
logically sophisticated as the United States can also only guess about
the number of Chinese in U.S. institutions of higher education. It is
important to understand why. Two U.S. agencies control the entry
of foreign students and scholars and theoretically should be able to
provide statistics on their numbers: the Immigration and Natural-
ization Service (INS) and the Visa Office of the U.S. Department of
State.
The problem with U.S. immigration statistics produced by the
INS was carefully analyzed in a National Academy of Sciences 1985
report. Aptly subtitled "A Story of Neglect, it referred to immi-
gration as "the Cinderella of the federal statistical system." 4 Indeed,
despite recent efforts to improve the management of immigration
statistics by introducing more advanced computer technology, the
INS is still unable to produce much of the data sought by gov-
ernment policymal~ers, as well as demographers and other scholars
specializing in the study of migration and immigration. Data on
the 20 nonimmigrant categories entering the country are said to be
especially difficult to collect and, according to one anonymous INS
spokesman, the figures on Chinese students are virtually useless. Let
us consider some of the specific reasons.
Anyone who consults the statistical yearbooks, published annu-
ally by the INS, is immediately taken aback by the figures in the table
entitled "Nonimmigrants Admitted by Country of Citizenship." The
1985 INS yearbook reports a total of 202,447 nonimmigrants admit-
ted to the United States from China. This is obviously an impossible
figure, but there is fortunately a footnote (which, incidentally, did
not appear in previous years). The footnote reveals that the figures
under the "China" entry include both the People's Republic of China
and Taiwan! It also provides a breakdown between the two entities,
but not by analyzing INS data. It relies on Formation provided
by the Visa Office of the U.S. Department of State: PA total of ap-
prox~mately 143,000 visas were issued to these two countries in fiscal
year 1985: 93,000 to Taiwan and 50,000 to the Peoples' Republic
4Daniel B. Levine et al., eds., Immigration Statistics (Washington, D.C.:
National Academy Press, 19853.
OCR for page 83
UNDERSTANDING THE STATISTICS
83
of China. There is no clarification of the discrepancy between the
202,447 in the table and the 143,000 in the footnote, no distribu-
tion of the totals by specific categories of nonimmigrants, and no
explanation for the need to rely on Department of State figures.5
Unquestionably, the INS has legitimate problems that are not
easily overcome. At the time of entry, every nonimrnigrant fills out
Form I-94 in which the reason for entering the United States must
be shown. In theory, therefore, the INS should have in its data base
the number of PRC students (F-1 visas) and PRC "exchange visi-
tors" (visiting scholars with J-1 visas, in our terminology) entering
the country each year, and its Statistical Analysis Branch did, in
fact, provide some figures. However, to anyone familiar with the flow
of Chinese students and scholars to the United States it would be
immediately evident that these figures were grossly inflated, espe-
cially for the F-i category. Although some part of the excess could
be the double-counting of multiple entries, in the case of students
and scholars from China multiple trips between the two countries
are relatively infrequent. In response to a request for a better expla-
nation for the much lower figures reported by the Visa Office, the
INS came up with a rather distressing response. It is not uncommon
for visitors from Taiwan many of whom may need assistance with
an English language form to enter simply "China as their country
of citizenship and country of residence. (Incidentally, the Form I-94
encourages such an abridgment by allowing only 15 block letters for
these entries not quite enough to print "Republic of China. By
way of verification, the number of F-1 visas issued to students from
Taiwan is much lower than it should be. The discrepancy is not
nearly as great for the J-1 visas (albeit in the same direction) not
only because official visitors would be much more careful in identi-
fying their country of citizenship and residence but also because the
number of J-1 visas issued to residents of Taiwan is much smaller.
To complete the INS story, it should be noted that even if the
forms were filled out properly, the INS would not be able to provide
the number of Chinese students In the country in any one year.
Such an estimate would require not only statistics on the number
of arrivals, but also on the number who returned to China. But
with departure controls much more lax, it is virtually impossible
for INS to estimate the number of annual departures or the number
51985 Statistical Yearbook of the Imrrugration and Naturalization Service (Wash-
ington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, 1986), pp. 113 and 120.
OCR for page 84
84
CHINESE STUDENTS IN AMERICA
who have overstayed their visas. For a clearer understanding of the
problem we must return to the two-part I-94 form. The top part, the
"arrival record," ~ relinquished to INS on entry; the bottom part,
the Departure record, is retained by the individual until departure,
when it must be Reunited with the arrival record. However, this
does not always happen. All too often the departure forms are not
returned-curiously the responsibility of the carrier or not turned
in to the appropriate INS office; and even when they are properly
collected and turned in to INS, the prescribed process of matching
the departure and arrival sections of the I-94 forms is of low priority.
As a result, students of all nationalities tend to overstay their visas,
and so long as they do not break any laws, no one is likely to search
them out. What this means, of course, is that even if specifically
tasked, the INS could not readily produce internally reliable data
from which a figure for the number of Chinese currently in the
United States could be derived. And, of course, the grapevine works;
it does not take long for arriving foreign students to Recover the
impotence of American immigration laws.
To end on a more positive note, the INS has become keenly aware
of the special and varied problems associated with the heavy flow of
Chinese students and scholars to this country, and the corrective
measures now being taken should eventually unprove statistics on
visitors from China.
STATISTICS PROM VISA APPLICATIONS AND
USIA DATA TAPES
Now let us consider the data from visa applications and the
USIA's IAP-66 forms the two sources of the statistics used in this
study.
Visa applications submitted to the U.S. Embassy and the four
Consulates in China constitute the most accurate and useful statistics
on Chinese students and scholars in the United States. To review the
process, a Chinese scholar or student wishing to come to the United
States must first get approval from the work unit. The written ap-
proval is used to obtain a Chmese passport, which must be presented
at the U.S. Embassy or Consulates when application is made for a
nonimmigrant visa. The F-1 visas are generally issued to students
who develop their own program of study and get financial assistance
for travel and tuition from relatives or friends. Most of the J-1 visas
OCR for page 85
UNDERSTANDING THE STATISTICS
85
are issued to scholars (many of international standing), selected and
supported by the Chinese government or one of its subordinate en-
tities, and are therefore considered to be "officially sponsored," even
when not funded by Beijing. All visa applications contain consider-
able detail about the intended program of study in the United States,
as well as personal characteristics of the applicants. One reason for
so much detail ~ to prove to the consular officer that the applicant
has sufficient ties to China (professional and/or family) to assure
his or her return and therefore increase hm or her eligibility for a
· · -
non~mm~grant visa.
There is no reason to doubt the accuracy of the number of
visas issued by the U.S. Embassy and Consulates in China and,
while some of the responses on the applications may be subject to
~adjustments" that a prospective student might deem necessary or
desirable, the completed forms are rich in information not otherwise
obtainable. The problem ~ that while we have accurate totals of
the number of visas issued, the Department of State does not keep
track of the returnees (an INS task), making it impossible to estimate
the actual number of Chinese students and scholars in the United
States. Moreover, neither the Department of State's Visa Office in
Washington, nor any other government office has the responsibility
or the wherewithal to analyze the information available in the visa
applications. In other words, this rich source of information went
untapped prior to CSCPRC's first effort to process and analyze
these data.6
The second source of statistical data for J-1 scholars and students
is the lAP-66 form issued by the USTA. Using information obtainer]
from the student's application form, universities or other institutions
in the United States fill out Form lAP-66 to document the applicant's
qualifications under one of the programs designated by the USIA.
They also show the amount and source of financial support and are
submitted with the student's passport to the U.S. visa offices at
the embassy or consulates. Form LAP-66 ~ also filled out by any
exchange visitor requesting an extension of the ongoing program,
wishing to transfer to a different program, or requesting a permit to
allow a visit by a member of his or her immediate faintly.
6David M. Lampton et al., A Relationship Restored licade in U.S.-China
Educational E~changc~ 1978-1981 (Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press,
1986~).
OCR for page 86
~6
CHINESE STUDENTS IN AMERICA
As shown in the next chapter, the statistics on those entering
new programs and those extending their stay is of considerable value
in estunating the net number of students and scholars in this country.
Since F-1 students are privately sponsored, they do not have to fill
out Form lAP-66, although they must present an affidavit of financial
support to assure the authorities that they will not become public
charges or be forced to work.
Representative terms from entire chapter:
sponsored students
