Daniel Goldin, educatuon editor of Pro Publica, has written a new book about spying by foreign exchange students.
This practice has been rumored for years but no one has pinned down evidence.
Emily Richmond of the Education Writers Association wrote about his new book:
In his recent book, “Spy Schools,” veteran higher education journalist and two-time Pulitzer Prize winner Daniel Golden builds a compelling case that the globalization of American universities has made them fertile territory for espionage. Using case studies and sometimes stunning revelations, he shows how foreign operatives are exploiting access to get a better understanding of U.S. policies and practices, and, in some cases, to steal valuable scientific research. On the flipside, American intelligence agencies are cultivating foreign students in the U.S. in hopes of grooming them to become informants when they return to their home countries. How did Golden uncover some of these practices, and what’s been the fallout from his reporting for the schools and programs he featured? What makes American colleges and universities particularly vulnerable to espionage? And what can campuses do to better protect their intellectual property? Plus, Golden—the education editor for ProPublica—shares story ideas for reporters covering international students at local postsecondary institutions.
Goldin wrote a book about how very rich people buy seats for their children in elite universities, and one of his examples was Jared Kushner, whose fathers gave Harvard $2 Million plus the year before Jared plied. He was accepted over several others from his high school who were better qualified.
He is the author of The Price of Admission: How America’s Ruling Class Buys Its Way into Elite Colleges—and Who Gets Left Outside the Gates.

I knew his name sounded familiar. I did read “The Price of Admission” a couple of years ago. It contains some juicy, and damning, disclosures about Jared Kushner (spoiler alert: he wasn’t bright enough to gain entry to Harvard without his father’s money) and his really strange family.
LikeLike
STRANGE family is an understatement, mrakstexterminal. Thank you.
Many, like Kushner, just PURCHASED their degrees. Rump did.
LikeLiked by 1 person
If life is fair—and who says that it is?—one of those students he jumped over got a good law degree at a great public university and is now preparing to prosecute the entire (k)clan. If only…
LikeLiked by 1 person
Excellent, GregB: like enthusiastically.
LikeLike
Oh good grief. Are we supposed to be looking for spies everywhere? I was in the Peace Corps and we were sometimes accused of being secret members of the CIA.
When i was in school, I had to study and work. Of course, music education students most likely didn’t make good spies back in the olden days when I went to college.
I’m surprised Jared hasn’t brought peace to the Middle East yet. He has great intelligence, just like Trump.
LikeLike
More xenophobic fear-mongering. “Exploiting access to get a better understanding of U.S. policies and practices” sounds like, well, international study to me. And science should be shared anyway.
LikeLike
Absitively. And shhhhh! Don’t tell anyone. The National Institute of Health, which consists of 27 institutes and centers at cover every disease and disability under the sun and is the crown jewel of taxpayer-funded spending, funds research and researchers in other countries! And why? Because, now get this, diseases know nothing about geography and political boundaries.
LikeLike
…that cover every disease…
LikeLike
Nonsense.
Making a complex issue out to be one of xenophobic fearmongering just demonstrates ignorance.
LikeLike
Labeling is never a good argument for anything
I provided arguments below that indicate some of the issues involved.
What are your counterarguments showing that it is all just xenophobic fearmongering?
LikeLike
I think if you are going to dismiss what Goldin says as xenophobic fearmongering, you need to directly address the specific case studies to show why they are just xenophobic fearmongering.
Are you prepared to do this?
LikeLike
I’m willing to read Goldin’s book and challenge you to do the same to debate your claim. Are you prepared to do this? I’m wondering if he also points out the success stories and those of have contributed greatly not only to this nation, but to humanity. I would bet the house that a comprehensive book making this argument would have both.
LikeLike
I was not the one who claimed it was all just xenophobic fearmongering.
It’s not simply a matter of sharing scientific data.
There is this thing called intellectual property.
Many universities do research that leads to patentable inventions which the universities license to companies.
But there is a lag between when a discovery is made and when a patent is awarded which can be up to several years.
It normally takes over two years to get a patent even after the application is filed.
Several years lead time is enough for a foreign company to get a jump on the discoverers if they are fed the information from a student working in the research lab here in the US.
Intellectual property theft is a real — not imaginary concern.
Anyone who would dismiss this concern as merely xenophobic fearmongering is clearly not familiar with the issue AT all.
LikeLike
And if a foreign company can show a working device or process before a US university gets the patent, the university may not even be awarded the patent. It is even possible that the foreign party could be the the one that gets the patent if they manage to beat the US university to the punch on disclosing the invention.
It’s really hard to deny the potential for theft of intellectual property in this case –unless, that is, one happens to believe there is no such thing as intellectual property.
LikeLike
Besides, many countries like China do not even respect US patents, so in that case it is whoever gets the device or process to market first who wins.
LikeLike
So you’re not “prepared to do this”, I take it.
Just curious, should agencies like the National Cancer Institute fund research projects in other nations?
LikeLike
So you like tariffs it would seem. Effectively a tariff is a tax designed to pick winners and losers interfering with the function of a free market. Now I am not in principle offended by the government interfering in markets because I am a lefty who believes in the common good. When we institute a tariff we are saying that the consumer will pay a tax on goods in order to protect a particular industry or its employees. The industry wins and the consumer loses. I am fine with that depending who the winners are.
Patents, in essence, are a tax no different than a tariff. They protect the rights of the intellectual property holder to charge more for his product by restricting access to the market by other producers. Producers who seek to use the designs that he apparently came up with first. The logic is that we are funding the research that creates the product. We all support education and research. We certainly would not want a whole bunch of research fellows languishing in programs at American Universities with their Doctorates in Bio, Chem, and the other sciences. Getting by teaching as adjuncts at poverty level wages.
But how long should we pay; in order to fund that research? And how much are we to allow those inventors to charge for their discovery. To say the least some of the richest people in the world got there because of these protective tariffs; among them Gates Jobs and Zuckerberg.
Whereas a tariff is 10, 20, 50 percent protective tax, patents can be unlimited whatever the market will bear.
So let us take the easy one because creative artists usually starve in spite of their intellectual property rights. Somewhere out there tonight there is a patient receiving a life-saving drug perhaps a cancer treatment that is costing him or more likely the Government 100s of thousands of dollars for a course of treatment. A treatment that if not for the patent would cost perhaps only a few hundred dollars.
The ironic part roughly 45% of drug research is funded by NIH with public dollars. I think the dollar amount is about 32 billion dollars +-.
If we doubled that drug research funding and relegated the Pharmaceutical industry to being manufacturers of generic drugs; we would save the American people roughly 370 billion a year. Now I did not make up that number see Stiglitz and Baker. A few months back I came up with another interesting tidbit. Every new drug that was brought to market in the last decade was derived from a critical compound discovered in a Government funded program. Most of that NIH money going to basic research rather than testing. Government-funded not being the same as Government owned.
But how concerned are American Corporations about the theft of intellectual property rights? We constantly hear how the Chinese force them to turn over their discoveries and production details (property rights) in exchange for access to Chinese labor or markets. Apparently, the titans of American industry have decided that access to 500 million soon to be middle-class Chinese consumers was more important than their property rights.
Technology evolves, seldom are inventions created in a vacuum. The light bulb had I believe 17 people working on it at the same time. Gates did not invent DOS and Jobs did not invent the touchscreen nor the Cell phone both of which came out of defense programs. Simply as Baker says there are other ways to fund research other than a system developed in the 18th century. Other ways that may even be more productive to research; by giving other researchers access to more data.
LikeLike
Excellent post, Joel.
In most modern cases, the original scientific or technical idea and early development was done at public expense based in part upon the available public information, the ‘the shoulders of giants’ available to anyone who wants a boost. It is the ‘patent system’ that is stealing intellectual property
I have occasional gout attacks. A few years ago, I went to my pharmacy to get my colchicine prescription refilled. Colchicine has been used for hundreds of years for gout. Pharmacists used to grind up the dried roots in their shops and make the tincture themselves. Then, drug companies began to manufacture it sand provided a more standardized product. The price went up to cover the cost of manufacture (and, of course, some profit for the idle rentier class). Just recently, an ‘exclusive patent’ was given to some drug company for the only available colchicine product, “Colchris’ and the price of a pill increased almost tenfold for no apparent reason. A folk medicine has been converted into ‘intellectual property’ with no market competition, whatsoever.
LikeLike
It is pointless to debate issues with people who are uninformed about them.
LikeLike
Because I support patents I support tariffs??
Next thing I know the argument will be that because I support patents I support Trump.
Transitivity, you know. Perfectly logical.
LikeLike
I thought I made it clear that a Tariff is a tax passed on to the consumers to protect an industry. It is the Government interfering in the operation of free markets to pick a winner. Fundamentally in this country, the debate goes back to the founders and the conflict between nascent Northern industry and Southern exporters
A Patent is a tax passed on to consumers to supposedly finance invention. The difference being the holders of these patents define the amount of that tax, not the Government. You are getting rather snippy poet. Instead, try demonstrating that a patent is not a protective tax similar to a tariff.
There are no free markets everyday decisions are made that pick winners and losers. They are made by access to the decision makers. In the case of a patent protection and the Pharmaceutical industry is the perfect example the access to the decision makers (political influence or cash) outways the access of the people to their elected official’s many folds. At what point has the research on a drug been paid for? And why have these patents been extended?
Let me know when big Pharma spends more on research than they do on advertising and lobbying.
At 370 billion a year in excess patent tax !!!!! (Tariff) we could increase research funding 5 fold on drugs or simply pass that on to the American people in savings. We could apply those savings toward Universal health insurance or infrastructure or education. Yes, the mechanism to do all this implies raising taxes. But as far as the consumer is concerned it is a wash. A tariff (targeted tax) to pay for a patent or using those savings to invest in the American people.
So perhaps you might try explaining the difference between a tariff and a patent. Or how a patent is not a tax on consumers.
Click to access baker-jayadev-stiglitz-innovation-ip-development-2017-07.pdf
LikeLike
Vice News carried the story of Liu Ruompeng who was a graduate student in North Carolina. He studied metamaterials under Professor David Smith. When he returned to China, he replicated Smith’s research and became a billionaire. He is probably the most famous example of the theft of US intellectual property by the Chinese. https://www.businessinsider.com/chinese-billionaire-is-accused-of-stealing-research-from-a-duke-lab-2018-7
LikeLike
Not just intellectual theft.
Potential theft related to research affecting national security.
Many graduate programs in science in the US (eg, in physics) are involved in work on military projects.
I hate to sound like Trump, but on this issue, I would just have to point out the obvious: many foreigners in programs like physics are directly sponsored by their home countries (eg, China) and it is hardly a stretch to think that their country is expecting (demanding?) something in return.
Even when they are not stealing secrets, foreign nations are displacing Americans from spots in graduate schools.
While the argument is often given that they are more qualified students and should therefore get priority, there are several significant problems with that argument. Admission is based on test scores, grades and recommendations, all of which can be gamed by foreign students and foreign governments.
it is an established fact that many standardized tests are notoriously insecure and grades and recommendations coming from a university in some place like China are of dubious reliability.
LikeLike
oh.mi.god.
LikeLike
Not to mention the fact that test scores are a very dubious basis for predicting success in grad (or even undergrad) school.
The physics GRE, for example, is a complete joke.
The idea that you can tell anything about a person’s ability to do graduate work in physics based on a short multiple choice test that effectively emphasizes speed at solving freshman level physics problems is just dumb and says a lot about the physics graduate schools that use it to admit students.
LikeLike
Good points all, SomeDAM. And thanks.
LikeLike
By the way, I suspect that one of the primary reasons why universities overlook the obvious gaming issue is that they get FULL tuition from foreign nationals in many cases.
It’s hard for a US citizen not getting a full ride from the US government to compete against someone being sponsored by a foreign government who does not need tuition help or even a teaching fellowship.
Universities have become a money making venture and this certainly impacts admissions decisions.
Also the reason that sons, daughters etc of the rich have an advantage even here at home.
It’s pretty messed up and quite frankly, it has gotten significantly worse in recent years, not better.
LikeLike
Many years ago I worked at the International House ESL Program at Penn. I mostly worked with the wives of graduate students that came from all over the world. Most of the students were either sponsored by their country or by corporations directly. I met students from Iran (pre-revolution), Japan, Turkey, Korea, Lebanon and many from the typical EU. Many top universities attract students from all over the world, but we should be wary of the Chinese and Russians that are known for intellectual espionage.
LikeLike
There is a long history of intellectual property theft.
Samuel Slater, called the father of the American industrial revolution by some, memorized the design of the revolutionary water frame for spinning cotton thread while an apprentice in England. England had made it illegal to export the design, but they could do nothing about the knowledge that was in his head, and soon after coming the the United States Samuel Slater partnered with Moses Brown to set up the first water powered roller spinning mill in America.
LikeLike
Quite apart from the gaming and foreign sponsored government sponsorship issue, there is another issue involved.
American universities (even the private ones) get billions of dollars in grants every year from the US government. For example, Harvard alone gets over $600 million in US federal grants each year.
It is no exaggeration to say that we the American taxpayers are underwriting American colleges and universities. We the taxpayers have made them what they are and without us many of them would shrivel up and die.
So it does not seem unreasonable (to me, at least) to expect that American citizens should actually be FAVOREd in admissions decisions.
That is particularly true in the case of departments receiving government grants directly, which is the case in the sciences, engineering and mathematics.
Even if the foreign students are not receiving tuition assistance or other direct aid, their education is effectively being underwritten by US, the taxpayers.
This is not an issue of racism or fear of foreigners. It is an emergency entirey practical issue.
Why should we the American taxpayers be underwriting the education of foreign students when their own governments (China, India, UK, etc) have the resources to educate them?
It’s actually crazy.
LikeLike
SDP: I think yours is the classic slippery slope argument and it concerns me. There are protections in place to guard research with national security research in U.S. academia.
Foreign students in the U.S. and American students abroad can only be a good thing. It is grassroots public diplomacy in action and more exchanges can only be a good thing. Teaching foreign languages, beginning in Kindergarten and through college can only be a good thing.
I also take issue with your “American taxpayer subsidizing” argument. Can that not also be said about any American student studying abroad? I have literally never heard this argument and find it bordering on jingoism. A few years ago I had a chance meeting with a number of American students studying in Copenhagen. I’m sure their taxpayers are footing a bigger bill for “outsiders.”
There is a history stretching back to the late nineteenth century of Americans going abroad to study in places of particular expertise. American medicine back then was often a shady business and poorly taught, if at all. You couldn’t be considered a serious doctor unless you studied in Heidelberg, Paris, or Tübingen. The same was true of physics in the 1910s-1930s. Comparative research, regardless of the field, can only be enhanced by diverse experiences with diverse people.
I also have no problem with a student coming over here, learning something, and going home to make money and reputation. Many of those foreign students end up staying here and becoming valuable additions to our nation. Our medical system could not survive without foreign students.
Is it perfect? No. Are there potential intelligence threats? Sure. That’s why we have huge national security and law enforcement. But to cherry pick something you don’t like to condemn an entire issue does not sit well with me. I know that the interactions I have had in my life in other countries has made me both more thankful about many things in this country and incredibly concerned about others. It has also taught me that we are part of a diverse world, not just citizens of a particular country.
LikeLike
Dear SomeDAM…
I WAS a Physics graduate student. During that time, I worked for two summers in a ‘defense plant’, a place that made parts for atomic bombs, although I was involved in research on other things (molecular transport).
Let me assure you that the reason my physics department was full of foreign graduate students was because there were almost no American college graduates who had prepared themselves for that level of work in physics. First, undergraduate physics was ‘too hard’ for most, and secondly those who had such an undergraduate degree learned that they could make more money as engineers working for ‘the man’. The physics department was filled with foreigners (in part) because they were the only competent students available. They didn’t ‘take spots’ from equally qualified Americans.
Later, I worked in the Biochemistry Dept. of a medical school (thanks to my molecular transport credentials) The same was true there. The place was swarming with foreign post-docs and a few graduate students because American ‘Biology majors’ had no clue and American ‘Chemistry majors’ had either sold their souls to industry in order to protect their ‘intellectual property’ or had not absorbed the temperament necessary for doing cutting edge research requiring tight experimental design and analytic competence.
As for ‘intellectual property’, Science suffocates in secrecy. Secrecy is anathema to intellectual discourse and, thus, the intellectual atmosphere, the ‘cross-fertilization’ needed for rapid advances in ‘understanding’ (a better way for us to predict and describe how the external world impinges upon us).
The largest benefits ‘foreign governments’ got from having their students educated in American graduate schools was a well-educated student, not a ‘national secret (whatever that is). Sadly, students from those countries valued an American education more than most of those raised in our own country, a country where people are taught that money is king and intellectual activity is a servant one can always hire.
LikeLike
“The physics department was filled with foreigners (in part) because they were the only competent students available. They didn’t ‘take spots’ from equally qualified Americans.”
“The place was swarming with foreign post-docs and a few graduate students because American ‘Biology majors’ had no clue…”
I’ve heard comments like these elsewhere before, but on a site dedicated to quality public education, I am surprised that this comment goes unchallenged!
Aren’t we doing a great job educating scientists? According to Daedalus, our universities are excellent, so this must mean….???
LikeLike
Daedalus, thanks for making my case better than I ever could.
“Science suffocates in secrecy. Secrecy is anathema to intellectual discourse…” Beautiful. I will steal that.
Don’t know your musical tastes, but here’s a song I love with your name as title.
LikeLike
I know facts can be pesky. Business, MBAs, Law are American preferences. Please compare the lines on business with any of the math or sciences.
https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d17/tables/dt17_322.10.asp?current=yes
LikeLike
Part of the reason that you might find fewer native born/educated students in natural science graduate programs is that there are much more attractive options available to native born/educated students gifted in the natural sciences.
A student hoping to become a biology professor might graduate college at 21, finish graduate school at 27, finish their first 3 year post-doc at 30, second at 33, get a tenure track position and receive tenure at 40. At each step there is a significant probability of failure to move on to the next level
That same student could graduate college at 21, finish medical school at 25, finish their residency at 28 and become a primary care physician. Each step here there is a significant probability of failure as well, but there are many fewer steps and success comes more than a decade earlier.
LikeLike
I am reminded of one of the many lies that Kavanaugh told in his confirmation hearing.
He claimed he had no connections at Yale and that he got into Yale purely on his own merits when in fact, his grandfather was a Yale graduate and it is no secret that legacy makes a big difference in admissions at Yale (and many other Ivy league schools)
It’s kind of funny that so many of these types are the quickest to brag about merit, when they have had the world handed to them on a silver platter and are continually bailed out by their parents and other connections when they fail and/or get into legal trouble
https://www.newsweek.com/kavanaugh-said-he-had-no-connections-yale-he-was-legacy-student-1145286
LikeLike
This gaming of the system by foreign governments doubtless occurs, but I would like to point out that a great many foreign nationals who do graduate studies here end up staying and making extraordinarily important contributions to our country. According to Forbes, “since 2000, 40 percent of the Nobel Prizes won by Americans in the areas of chemistry, medicine and physics — 31 of 78 awards — were earned by immigrants.”
LikeLike
According to the Population Reference Bureau, “In 1994, there were 6.2 U.S.-born workers for every foreign-born worker in science and engineering occupations. By 2006, the ratio was 3.1 to 1.”
LikeLike
That’s all fine and dandy, but i would just point out that many immigrants are actually American citizens at the time when they attend US universities and ask who is to say that the American students that they displaced would not have done great things?
As I indicated above. I think it is misguided to make this into an antiimmigrant issue because it is not and doing so takes the focus off the real issue: the system is broken and needs to be fixed.
LikeLike
Correction,
In the case when the grad students are not citizens, ask who is to say that the American students they displaced…
LikeLike
Many of the foreigners who are making contributions would be immigrating to the US regardless of whether they were educated here.
I don’t buy the argument. Sorry.
LikeLike
Many “foreigners” also come over here with no intention of staying but end up being recruited by various professions because there are not enough Americans to fill the roles. And if I were young again, I would study abroad with the intention of living in a civilized nation.
LikeLike
I worked as an engineer in an R&D group with engineers and scientists who had been educated in their home country.
In many cases, these people are actively recruited by US companies and Universities.
LikeLike
We agree, apparently.
LikeLike
The immigrant contribution argument is not even the primary one being made by the graduate schools who admit foreign students.
In programs like physics, for example, the claim is made that qualified american candidates can not be found and that people from China and I dia are better qualified.
But the latter claim gets back to the grades, test scores and recommendations all of which can be gamed.
Also,bits not even surprising that someone who comes from China would outperform Americans on tests because that is how they are educated, but when one focuses on that, one actually ignores what is arguably the most important element, one that American society actually engenders: imagination and creativity.
My experience is that Chinese students and others educated under regimented systems are good at solving simple problems they have seen before but I would take a creative problem solver any day of the week.
My fear is that a lot of the latter are actually being displaced by the former under the current system.
LikeLike
Unfortunately I think our current AP class/exam-obsessed high school system is doing a great job in killing creativity in our own students….
LikeLike
David, as much disagreement as there is on this post (hey, we’re allowed to have disagreements and remain allies!), I think we can all agree on this sentiment. If only all of you knew how much I plagiarize from you. Here’s another one for my files.
LikeLike
Yes, yes, yes, Bob, I wrote my comment above before reading this.
LikeLike
We need these people. I am extremely grateful that our universities continue to attract high-level talent from abroad.
LikeLike
Maybe “intellectual property” by its nature must always remain easy to steal. ???
Sent from my iPhone
>
LikeLike
Totally agree, ‘deb’…
‘intellectual property’ is almost an oxymoron, and it is a concept designed to hinder any future intellectual advance in order for the ‘owners’ of that ‘property’ (not necessarily those who created the idea) can dominate our society far into the future to the detriment of the children of everyone else.
LikeLike
Can you say Bill Gates?
LikeLike
This is sort of off topic but one that should be considered. it is becoming a fearful thing to be a teacher.
……
Right-Wing Groups Are Recruiting Students to Target Teachers
Brian Howey
When the threatening letters started to arrive, Albert Ponce stopped letting his daughter touch the mail.
Ponce, a political science professor at Diablo Valley College in the San Francisco Bay Area, and his wife didn’t know how to explain to their 9-year-old that her father was receiving death threats. “Only Mom and Dad can touch the mail” became a new house rule.
Each night after putting his daughter to bed, Ponce would peek through the windows of his home in Martinez, California, to check for strange cars or people outside, “precautionary measures,” he said, after an internet troll army had targeted him.
It started just before Christmas last year. Ponce logged in to his college email account expecting the usual: work messages, a few season’s greetings from family and colleagues, maybe some spam. Instead, he found an inbox full of vitriol…
“All it takes these days is one kid with a smartphone who turns on their recording app,” Sterling Beard, director of journalism training at Campus Reform, told The Chronicle in 2015.
https://www.truthdig.com/articles/right-wing-groups-are-recruiting-students-to-target-teachers/
LikeLike