The 'degree' for foreign students at many Western universities is awarded from a specific 'department' that was created to accept foreign students that are not academically qualified to attend, say, the general MBA program in the graduate business school. The special 'degree' will be called a 'Masters Degree from the School of International Business' or some other neologism, a school that is populated exclusively by foreign students. Many Western universities send recruiters to China specifically to interview students for these special cash-generating 'graduate' programs. Once the students return to China with their 'graduate degree', few Chinese employers can distinguish between a Masters of Business Administration from the University of Leeds and a Masters in International Marketing from the same university. Western employers are seldom exposed to these bogus degrees because the Chinese students almost never receive visa approval to remain and work in the Western country; the universities' academic reputation remains domestically unsullied.

I believe there are two different issues being addressed. The 'ABC' (American Born Chinese) are attending U.S. universities in percentages significantly larger than their representation in the general population. The U.S., as a self-identified meritocracy, should have no problem with this situation, but U.S. citizens that are racist view this as a threat to their own child's opportunity. The performance of these Chinese students in these universities is excellent. As citizens they are entitled to student loans and many scholarship programs.

Rich PRC Chinese students are now attending overseas universities in greater numbers. Western universities are accepting them as a financial, not educational, opportunity for the university. I have seen many of my Chinese college students accepted to many universities in England, the U.S., Australia, and Canada. These students are unable to perform to the academic standards that Western universities require of domestic students. Their writing, listening and spoken English are inadequate to attend lectures and write academic papers, despite their ability to 'prep' themselves for high IELTS and BC scores. These incoming Chinese students are accepted to 'special' graduate programs or 'remedial' undergraduate courses designed by the university to 'nurture' these students while these 'special' students pay FULL tuition and board.

These students are sent back to China with 'degrees' that are NOT the equivalent of those given to the domestic university students. Many western universities now offer a one year 'graduate degree' in International Business specifically for foreign students. It is not a genuine graduate degree; it should be called a 'certificate' program. For a rich Chinese student, this time in a foreign university is an excellent socialization experience, visiting a foreign country for a year or two, but it is not a valuable educational experience. For a Chinese student whose parents must struggle to pay the tuition, it is a tragic waste of resources and a shameless business practice on the part of the university.

Interesting point you raise. If the schools went off test scores alone then the schools would be filled with mainly Asian (East and South Asian) students. However we (teachers) who have experience in the field here in Asia see that high test scores does not correlate with knowledge or being educated, just that they are really good at taking test. With that said, is the current application fair, equitable, or right? These are big questions and schools answer them as they see fit (sometimes in a safe way, like lets not get sued way). In part we would think that academia would want the best and the brightest, but even a highly diverse country like America if entrance rates were left unhindered/unmolested then it would be mostly white. Now some schools are progressive and seek the best but it does seem that the educational model is based more on the democratic one. Meaning for schools are looked at for three functions in regards to education: vocational, academic, democratic. We can see an evolution/change within education in America which was more vocational for the masses and academic for the upper class and now it is becoming more democratic for everyone (i.e., a right for everyone). There are still schools that specialize in vocational studies which, in one of my studies, I feel more schools are starting to lean towards this model and the older method of academic model which is subsequently being lost/diluted (this is another topic). Meaning academic schooling is for its own right, you take the higher (science) courses not because you will ever use them but because that's what it means to be educated.

So to your question I think they are trying to keep it 'democratic' in the sense an equal representation of society versus filled with everyone who is either really good at test scores or the majority. The original term democratic meant rule by majority but it is used differently in this case. If anyone is interested college libraries usually should have a wealth of information on education, its history, and role within society, and some periodic journals devoted to this subject, I know mine did.

It is sad in a way as the US has been a nation of immigrants and usually first and second generations push themselves really hard and tend to contribute a lot to America however now it is more about being equal. Though if people has been paying attention, if someone really wants to go, they can go as an international students, schools love them (i.e., cash cows)

"if all are equal none are free, if all are free none are equal"

P.S. sorry if I jumped around a lot.