| TRUE | if the statement agrees with the information |
| FALSE | if the statement contradicts the information |
| NOT GIVEN | if there is no information on this |
Brain Drain
Of great concern to many Chinese educators and economists is the rapid outflow of "brains ” — the brain drain.
Education has always been perceived as the engine room of development and the last 5 decades has seen a concentrated effort by the Government to improve the average level of education. One of the major drawbacks has been the abysmal illiteracy rate which plagued “New China” from the beginning. However, recently, major advances have been made. For example, the proportion of illiterate and semi-illiterate people to the total population aged 15 years and older has dropped, from 15.9% in 1990 to 12.1% in 1997. However, the average Chinese individual will study for only 5.4 years. Despite this, in urban areas residents aged 15 years and older with middle and high school education make up 29.7% and 20.7% respectively, while those with a tertiary education account for 7.5% of the population. Competition to enter university is fierce and begins during the final years of elementary school. Naturally, only the very smartest enter the university system which currently does not contain enough places for all those who graduate from high school. After entry, in order to continue studying, the student will often need to compete for a place at a foreign institution or to be awarded a foreign corporate scholarship.
The average Chinese university student has a strong desire to further their studies overseas, especially in the US. This desire is based on the premise that not only will they receive a higher salary (in China) but that they will have opportunities to work and live overseas, earning even more money. This desire is being pandered to, not only by the innumerable scholarships offered by US universities, but also by the recent development of Educational Bank Loans offered by Chinese banks. Education is not free in China, and many parents see better value for their money in a foreign education. American institutions hold a prestigious position within the world of tertiary education in China, not necessarily because of their academic excellence, but because they offer scholarships and assistant teaching positions (which include school tuition and/or minimal living expenses). Many students would be just as happy to study in Australia, Canada or Europe, but fewer scholarships exist. It is the corporate structure of American tertiary education which offers Chinese students the most opportunities.
Not only are the universities directly recruiting, they are supported by many large multinational and US-based companies. Some Chinese educators are concerned by the proliferation of foreign-funded scholarships. Their concern is that the "cream" of Chinese talent will be co-opted by the foreign companies which sponsor the scholarships. It is not necessarily the overseas university scholarships which worry the professors, but those that have been established in Chinese universities by companies like Microsoft, Mercedes-Benz, IBM, and Motorola. One Chinese professor is uneasy about this development because "... domestic enterprises cannot offer close to the same number or size of scholarships”, and he is worried that foreign companies will attract China's top students, leaving none for domestic enterprises. Not surprisingly, many Chinese universities are unwilling to disclose details about the amounts and types of foreign scholarships being offered. Apparently Qinghua University offers the largest number of scholarships, over 100, ranging from RMB1.000 (USD120) to RMB5.000 (USD600). Of these, 80% to 90% arc offered by foreign companies. Likewise, the majority of scholarships at Beijing University are foreign corporate scholarships. The majority of these scholarships are in disciplines related to the sponsor's product or market.
Humanities, Languages and Fine Arts are already underfunded and many lack any scholarships at all. A professor at Beijing Normal University also cautioned that foreign corporate scholarships could have adverse effects for China's economic development. He gave the example of an automotive technology centre at an important Chinese university that accepted a grant from a Japanese company which retained the rights to any research published by recipients of the grant. From the student’s perspective, the corporate scholarship offers more than just education. Said one student, "... as time goes by I am paying more attention to this company ... generous salary and bright future that it offers are very attractive to me. The university really isn’t able to control whether or not its students work for foreign companies after they graduate”.
The other side of this coin is China’s recent attempts to recruit scientists from overseas. In order to tempt up to 300 scientists living abroad, the Government is spending RMB600m (USD72.55m) over the next 3 years. Recruits will be awarded a research grant worth around RMB2m (USD241.838) to work with the Chinese Academy of Sciences on research under the National Innovation Project. Earlier this year, China announced it would invest RMB5b (USD604.59m) on the National Innovation Project by the end of 2000. What is most interesting about this situation, both the National Innovation Project and the recruitment drive, is the unspoken belief among educators that this is particularly aimed at the Chinese nationals already living and working or studying overseas. Overseas Chinese are considered ethnic Chinese and granted permanent residence within China. Many of these overseas Chinese are individuals who were originally Chinese nationals, born in China but now owners of foreign passports. Currently, they are being actively courted by the Government, not only for their skills, but also for their revenue. Over the past 20 years, China has attracted nearly USD260b in utilized foreign investment, with over 70% of this investment coming from overseas Chinese.
There exists a general belief that most students who leave to study overseas tend not to return. However, few foreign embassies in China accumulate statistics on this area, and some state that there are no reliable statistics available. Statistics from various embassies in China do show that there continues to be a large number of Chinese nationals applying for and receiving visas to study overseas (see figures below). If even half of these individuals remain overseas, there will be a corresponding lack of talent and skill in China. The “brain drain” is a very real possibility.
AI explanationShows the answer. Tap to open.
Question Focus: General claim about seriousness of brain drain
Correct Answer: TRUE
Why this is correct: The passage clearly says the brain drain is of great concern and calls it a very real possibility. That shows the problem is serious, not minor or hypothetical.
Passage Reference: Of great concern to many Chinese educators and economists is the rapid outflow of "brains ' - the brain drain. If even half of these individuals remain overseas, there will be a corresponding lack of talent and skill in China. The 'brain drain' is a very real possibility.
Common Mistake: Some students think this is NOT GIVEN because there are no exact numbers. But the writer clearly expresses concern. This is a Synonym match trap.
Paraphrasing: Passage: 'of great concern' and 'a very real possibility' = Statement: 'becoming serious'
Tips: Look for the writer's attitude words like 'concern' or 'serious' when judging overall claims.
Key Vocabulary:
- outflow = leaving
- possibility = something that may happen
Question Focus: Who the number 5.4 years refers to
Correct Answer: FALSE
Passage Reference: However, the average Chinese individual will study for only 5.4 years. Despite this, in urban areas residents aged 15 years and older with middle and high school education make up 29.7% and 20.7% respectively
Why this is correct: The passage says the average Chinese individual, not the rural population. The statement adds a detail that is not true.
Common Mistake: Students often choose NOT GIVEN because 'rural' is not mentioned. But the statement is more specific than the passage, so it is wrong. This is a Context shift trap.
Paraphrasing: Passage: 'average Chinese individual' = Statement: 'rural population'
Tips: Be careful when a statement adds a specific group that the passage does not mention.
Key Vocabulary:
- average = typical
- individual = person
Question Focus: Percentage interpretation
Correct Answer: FALSE
Passage Reference: Despite this, in urban areas residents aged 15 years and older with middle and high school education make up 29.7% and 20.7% respectively, while those with a tertiary education account for 7.5% of the population.
Why this is correct: The passage says 20.7% have high school education, but it does not say they complete high school. Completion is an extra idea.
Common Mistake: Students see 20% and match it quickly. But 'complete high school' is not stated. This is a Partial truth trap.
Paraphrasing: Passage: 'with middle and high school education' = Statement: 'complete high school'
Tips: Check carefully for added verbs like 'complete' that change the meaning.
Key Vocabulary:
- respectively = in the same order
- tertiary = university level
Question Focus: Who can receive bank loans
Correct Answer: NOT GIVEN
Passage Reference: This desire is being pandered to, not only by the innumerable scholarships offered by US universities, but also by the recent development of Educational Bank Loans offered by Chinese banks.
Why this is correct: The passage mentions Educational Bank Loans, but it does not say who is eligible. It never discusses middle or high school students.
Common Mistake: Students often answer FALSE because they assume loans are only for university. That information is not stated. This is a Not Given trap.
Paraphrasing: Passage: 'Educational Bank Loans offered by Chinese banks' = Statement: 'not offered to middle or high school students'
Tips: If eligibility or limits are not clearly stated, the answer is usually NOT GIVEN.
Key Vocabulary:
- pandered to = encouraged
- recent development = new system
Question Focus: Reason for preference
Correct Answer: FALSE
Passage Reference: American institutions hold a prestigious position within the world of tertiary education in China, not necessarily because of their academic excellence, but because they offer scholarships and assistant teaching positions
Why this is correct: The passage clearly says American universities are preferred not because of academic excellence. That directly contradicts the statement.
Common Mistake: Students assume prestige means quality. But the writer explains a different reason. This is a Contradiction trap.
Paraphrasing: Passage: 'not necessarily because of their academic excellence' = Statement: 'better academic record'
Tips: Watch for phrases like 'not because of' which often signal FALSE answers.
Key Vocabulary:
- prestigious = respected
- academic excellence = high quality education
Question Focus: Location and purpose of scholarships
Correct Answer: FALSE
Passage Reference: It is not necessarily the overseas university scholarships which worry the professors, but those that have been established in Chinese universities by companies like Microsoft, Mercedes-Benz, IBM, and Motorola.
Why this is correct: IBM scholarships mentioned are in Chinese universities, not to support students studying in the USA.
Common Mistake: Students connect IBM with the US and assume overseas study. This is a Context shift trap.
Paraphrasing: Passage: 'established in Chinese universities' = Statement: 'studying in the USA'
Tips: Always check where the action happens - inside China or overseas.
Key Vocabulary:
- established = set up
- corporate = company related
Question Focus: Comparison between domestic and foreign enterprises
Correct Answer: TRUE
Passage Reference: One Chinese professor is uneasy about this development because "... domestic enterprises cannot offer close to the same number or size of scholarships', and he is worried that foreign companies will attract China's top students
Why this is correct: The professor clearly says domestic enterprises cannot compete in scholarship number or size.
Common Mistake: Some students miss the quoted opinion and think it is only an example. This is a Synonym match.
Paraphrasing: Passage: 'cannot offer close to the same number or size' = Statement: 'not able to compete'
Tips: Quoted opinions from experts are strong evidence in TFNG.
Key Vocabulary:
- uneasy = worried
- attract = draw in
Question Focus: Difference between disciplines
Correct Answer: TRUE
Passage Reference: Humanities, Languages and Fine Arts are already underfunded and many lack any scholarships at all. The majority of these scholarships are in disciplines related to the sponsor's product or market.
Why this is correct: Fine Arts lack scholarships, while sponsor-related disciplines like technology receive most scholarships.
Common Mistake: Students only read the Fine Arts sentence and forget to compare disciplines. This is a Wrong section trap.
Paraphrasing: Passage: 'underfunded and many lack any scholarships' = Statement: 'less likely to receive scholarships'
Tips: For comparison questions, always find evidence for both sides.
Key Vocabulary:
- underfunded = not enough money
- discipline = subject area
Question Focus: Who runs the project
Correct Answer: FALSE
Passage Reference: Recruits will be awarded a research grant worth around RMB2m (USD241.838) to work with the Chinese Academy of Sciences on research under the National Innovation Project.
Why this is correct: The Academy works under the project, but the passage does not say it runs the project.
Common Mistake: Students confuse participation with control. This is a Partial truth trap.
Paraphrasing: Passage: 'work with the Chinese Academy of Sciences' = Statement: 'run by the Chinese Academy of Sciences'
Tips: Words like 'under' do not mean 'in charge of'.
Key Vocabulary:
- recruit = hire
- grant = research money
Question Focus: Source of foreign investment
Correct Answer: TRUE
Passage Reference: Over the past 20 years, China has attracted nearly USD260b in utilized foreign investment, with over 70% of this investment coming from overseas Chinese.
Why this is correct: Over 70% means most, and overseas Chinese are described as ethnic Chinese with foreign passports.
Common Mistake: Some students miss the percentage meaning. This is a Synonym match.
Paraphrasing: Passage: 'over 70%' = Statement: 'most'
Tips: Translate percentages into simple words like 'most' or 'some'.
Key Vocabulary:
- overseas = living abroad
- utilized = actually used
Question Focus: Writer's conclusion
Correct Answer: FALSE
Passage Reference: If even half of these individuals remain overseas, there will be a corresponding lack of talent and skill in China. The 'brain drain' is a very real possibility.
Why this is correct: The writer clearly believes brain drain is serious and necessary to worry about.
Common Mistake: Students add their own logic instead of following the writer's conclusion. This is a Contradiction trap.
Paraphrasing: Passage: 'very real possibility' = Statement: 'not necessary to worry'
Tips: Final paragraphs often show the writer's true opinion.
Key Vocabulary:
- corresponding = related
- talent = skilled people
Question Focus: Visa comparison
Correct Answer: TRUE
Passage Reference: Statistics from various embassies in China do show that there continues to be a large number of Chinese nationals applying for and receiving visas to study overseas (see figures below).
Why this is correct: According to the figures mentioned below the passage, the UK approval rate is higher than New Zealand.
Common Mistake: Students look only at the text and ignore the figures. This is a Wrong section trap.
Paraphrasing: Passage: 'receiving visas' = Statement: 'better chance of being granted a visa'
Tips: Always check tables or figures linked to the passage.
Key Vocabulary:
- intend = plan
- grant = approve
Question Focus: Specific data detail
Correct Answer: TRUE
Passage Reference: Statistics from various embassies in China do show that there continues to be a large number of Chinese nationals applying for and receiving visas to study overseas (see figures below).
Why this is correct: The exact number comes from the figures below the passage, not the main text.
Common Mistake: Students answer NOT GIVEN because they do not check the figures. This is a Wrong section trap.
Paraphrasing: Passage: 'statistics from various embassies' = Statement: '1,242 visa applications'
Tips: For number questions, always look at charts or tables.
Key Vocabulary:
- application = request
- embassy = official office
Question Focus: Comparison of visa difficulty
Correct Answer: FALSE
Passage Reference: Statistics from various embassies in China do show that there continues to be a large number of Chinese nationals applying for and receiving visas to study overseas (see figures below).
Why this is correct: The figures show other countries have lower approval rates than the US.
Common Mistake: Students rely on personal belief about US visas. This is a Causation trap.
Paraphrasing: Passage: 'receiving visas' = Statement: 'difficult to apply'
Tips: Never use outside knowledge. Only trust the data given.
Key Vocabulary:
- approval rate = success rate
- listed = shown
General Tips:
- TFNG questions follow passage order - use the previous answer's location to find the next.
- FALSE means the passage clearly says the opposite, not just that information is missing.
- NOT GIVEN is common when a statement adds extra detail like place, time, or group.
- Watch carefully for phrases like 'not because of' or 'not necessarily'.
- Always check figures or tables connected to the passage.
The rest of this explanation is for members. Sign in free to read why the other options are wrong, key words and tips.
Sign in to read the full explanation