The internationalization of higher education: Are we on the right track?

By Jane Knight

in Academic Matters. The Journal of Higher Education, October/November 2008.


Globally-respected internationalization scholar Jane Knight explores recent trends in the internationalization of higher education and raises searching questions about the unintended consequences.

by Jane Knight

Headlines from recent higher education newspapers paint a colourful picture of some new developments in internationalization—“Ten universities in the United Kingdom, Ireland, New Zealand, and Australia begin sharing education content on iTunes U.” “China could be vulnerable to ‘education dumping’ by overseas universities seeking to exploit the rapid expansion of higher education in the country.” “European Higher Education Fairs ‘conquer’ Vietnam.”
As we progress into the 21st century, the international dimension of higher education is becoming increasingly important and at the same time, more and more complex. There are new actors, new rationales, new programs, new regulations, and the new context of globalization. Internationalization has become a formidable force for change as evidenced by the following developments and initiatives:
• The creation of new international networks and consortia• The growing numbers of students, professors, and researchers participating in academic mobility schemes
• The increase in the number of courses, programs, and qualifications that focus on comparative and international themes
• More emphasis on developing international/intercultural and global competencies
• Stronger interest in international themes and collaborative research
• Steep rise in the number of crossborder delivery of academic programs
• More interest and concern with international and regional rankings of universities
• An increase in campus-based extracurricular activities with an international or multicultural component
• The investment in recruiting foreign students and dependence on their income
• The rise in the number of joint or double degrees
• Growth in the numbers and types of for-profit crossborder education providers
• The expansion in partnerships, franchises, branch campuses
• The establishment of new national, regional, and international organizations focused on international education

As internationalization changes to meet new challenges it is important to examine the key concepts that inform and shape the internationalization process and some of the unexpected developments and results. The multiple and varied benefits attributed to internationalization are acknowledged, but the primary focus here is on the unintended consequences that need to be addressed and monitored.
Confusion and complexity in what internationalization means
Internationalization is a term that means different things to different people. While it is encouraging to see the increased use and attention given to internationalization, there is a great deal of confusion about what it means.
For some people, it means a series of international activities such as: academic mobility for students and teachers; international networks, partnerships and projects; new international academic programs and research initiatives. For others it means the delivery of education to other countries through new arrangements such as branch campuses or franchises using a variety of face-to-face and distance techniques. To many, it means the inclusion of an international, intercultural and/or global dimension into the curriculum and teaching learning process. Still others see internationalization as a means to improve national or world rankings of their institution and to recruit the best and brightest of international students and scholars. International development projects have traditionally been perceived as part of internationalization, and, more recently, the increasing emphasis on trade in higher education is also seen as internationalization. Finally, there is frequent confusion about the relationship of internationalization and globalization. Is internationalization the same as globalization? If so, why, how, and to what end? If not, how is it different or what is the relationship between these two dynamic processes? Thus internationalization is interpreted and used in different ways in Canada and countries around the world.
A changing agenda?
In addition to questions about what exactly does it mean, there are other important issues being raised about internationalization. Questions such as: What is the purpose for internationalization? What are the expected benefits or outcomes? What are the values that underpin it? What are, the positive consequences? What are the unintended results? What are the negative implications? What about new risks attached to internationalization? How are institutions and policy makers responding to the competing interests within the domain of internationalization? What are the funding implications? How are governments and non-governmental organizations addressing the issue and moving forward? Are for-profit and non-profit internationalization strategies compatible? Does internationalization have a role in the brain drain, homogenization/hybridization of culture, and international labour mobility? Clearly, there are important issues and questions to address. As the internationalization agenda changes, it requires close scrutiny.
Defining Internationalization
Internationalization is not a new term, nor is the debate over its meaning. Internationalization has been used for years in political science and governmental relations, but its popularity in the education sector has soared only since the early 1980s. Prior to this time, “international education” and “international cooperation” were favoured terms and still are in some countries. In the 1990s, the discussion centred on differentiating “international education” from such overlapping terms as “comparative education,” “global education,” and “multi-cultural education.” But today, the nuances of meaning among “crossborder,” “transnational,” “borderless,” and “international” modes of education are more important and causing much confusion.
The challenging part of developing a definition is the need for it to be generic enough to apply to many different countries, cultures, and education systems. This is no easy task. While it is not the intention to develop a universal definition, it is imperative that it can be used in a broad range of contexts and for comparative purposes across countries and regions of the world. With this in mind, it is important to ensure that a definition does not specify the rationales, benefits, outcomes, actors, activities, and stakeholders of internationalization as they vary enormously across nations and from institution to institution. What is critical is that the international dimension relates to all aspects of education and the role that it plays in society. Internationalization at national/sector/ institutional levels is defined as “the process of integrating an international, intercultural or global dimension into the purpose, functions or delivery of higher education.”
This is intentionally a neutral definition of internationalization. Many would argue that the process of internationalization should be described in terms of improving quality and relevance of higher education, promoting cooperation and solidarity among nations, or advancing research on international issues. While these are noble intentions, and internationalization can contribute to these goals, a definition needs to be objective enough that it can be used to describe a phenomenon which is in fact, universal, but which has different purposes and outcomes, depending on the actor or stakeholder.
A significant development in the conceptualization of internationalization in the last five years has been the introduction of the terms “internationalization at home” and “crossborder education”. Campus-based strategies are most often referred to as internationalization “at home” and off-campus initiatives are called “crossborder education”. As a result of a heightened emphasis on international academic mobility, the “at home” concept has been developed to give greater prominence to campus-based elements such as: the intercultural and international dimension in the teaching learning process, research; extra-curricular activities; relationships with local cultural and ethnic community groups; as well as the integration of foreign students and scholars into campus life and activities. It is important to point out that internationalization consists of these two separate but closely-linked and interdependent pillars. Crossborder education has significant implications for campus-based internationalization and vice versa. Interestingly enough, many of the new developments and unintended consequences are associated with the crossborder aspects of internationalization.
New Developments and Unintended consequences
The Brain Train
Little did we know 25 years ago that the highly-valued and promoted international academic mobility for students, scholars, and professors would have the potential to grow into a highly-competitive international recruitment business. Several countries are investing in major marketing campaigns to attract the best and brightest talent to study and work in their institutions in order to supply the “brain power” for innovation and research agendas. The complexities and challenges related to academic and professional mobility should not be underestimated. Nor should the potential benefits. But it is impossible to ignore the latest race for attracting international students and academics for “brain power” and for “income generation”. The original goal of helping students from developing countries study in another country to complete a degree and return home is fading fast as nations compete for retaining needed human resources.
While “brain drain and brain gain” are well known concepts, research is showing that international students and researchers are increasingly interested in taking a degree in country A, followed by a second degree or perhaps internship in country B, leading to employment in country C and probably D, finally returning to their home country after eight to 12 years of international study and work experience. Hence, the emergence of the term “brain train”. In the final analysis, whether one is dealing with brain gain, brain drain, brain train or even brain chain, this phenomenon is presenting benefits, risks, and new challenges for both sending and receiving countries. From a policy perspective, higher education is becoming a more important actor and is now working in closer collaboration with immigration, industry, and the science and technology sectors to build an integrated strategy for attracting and retaining knowledge workers. The convergence of an aging society, lower birth rates, the knowledge economy, and professional labour mobility is introducing new issues and opportunities for the higher education sector and producing some unanticipated results and challenges in terms of international mobility.
Quality, Accreditation, and Credential recognition: whither thou goest?
It is forecast that by 2025 the demand for international education will grow to 7. 2 million students—a quantum leap from 1.2 million students in 2000. Some, but certainly not all of this demand, will be met by student mobility. Consequently, the number of new providers—commercial companies and non-governmental entities—delivering programs to students in their home countries is accelerating at an unprecedented rate. It is no longer just students, faculty, and researchers who are internationally mobile. Full academic degree/diploma programs are being delivered across borders, and branch campuses or new, stand alone institutions are being established in developing and developed countries around the world.
While these new developments are intended to increase access to higher education and meet the appetite for foreign credentials, there are serious issues related to the quality of the academic offer, the integrity of the new types of providers, and the recognition of credentials. The increase in the number of foreign degree mills (selling “parchment”-only degrees) and accreditation mills (selling bogus accreditations for programs or institutions), and rogue for-profit providers (not recognized by national authorities) are realities that students, parents, employers, and the academic community now need to aware of. Who would have guessed two decades ago that international education would be struggling to deal with fake degrees and accreditations; that is, academic credentials that are earned but not recognized and non-regulated “fly by night” institutions. Of course, it is equally important to acknowledge innovative developments by bona fide new providers and traditional universities who are delivering high quality programs and legitimate degrees through new types of arrangements and partnerships (franchise, twinning, branch campuses). The perpetual issue of balancing cost, quality and access significantly challenges the benefits and risks of crossborder education.
Double and Joint Degrees: Twice the benefit or Double counting?
Improvement in the quality of research, the teaching/learning process, and curriculum has long been heralded as a positive outcome of international collaboration. Through exchange of good practice, shared curricular reform, close research cooperation, and mobility of professors/students, there is much to be gained through internationalization. A recent trend has been the establishment of joint programs between institutions in different countries that lead to double (or multiple degrees) and in some cases a joint degree, although the latter faces steep legal constraints. Joint programs are intended to provide a rich international and comparative academic experience for students and to improve their opportunities for employment. But with all new ideas, come questionable adaptations and unintended consequences. For instance, in some cases, double degrees can be nothing more than double counting one set of course credits. Situations exist where two or three credentials (one from each participating institution) are conferred for little more than the work load required for one degree. While it may be very attractive for students (and potential employees) to have two degrees from two institutions in two different countries, the situation can be described as academic fraud if course requirements for two full degrees are not completed or differentiated learning outcomes not achieved. It is important to point out that there are many excellent and innovative joint and double degree programs being offered—especially by European institutions given the priority they are given in the Bologna process. But one of the unanticipated consequences has been the misuse or abuse of this new internationalization initiative. More work on the quality assurance and credential recognition of double degrees is necessary because they span two or more jurisdictions and can be exempt from any national regulations.
Commodification and Commercialization: For-profit Internationalization
While the process of internationalization affords many benefits to higher education, it is clear that there are serious risks associated with this complex and growing phenomenon. According to the results of the 2005 International Association of Universities (IAU) Internationalization Survey, there is overwhelming agreement (96 per cent of responding institutions from 95 countries) that internationalization brings benefits to higher education. Yet, this consensus is qualified by the fact that 70 per cent also believe there are substantial risks associated with the international dimension of higher education.
Overall, the number one risk identified in the survey was the commodification and commercialization of education programs. Of interest is that both developing and developed countries identified commercialization as the number one risk, convincing testimony of its importance. A regional level analysis showed that four regions (Africa, Asia Pacific, Europe, and North America) ranked commercialization as the top risk. Latin America placed brain drain as number one, and the Middle East ranked loss of cultural identify in first place.
The General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) has been a wake-up call for higher education around the world. Higher education has traditionally been seen as a “public good” and a “social responsibility.” But with the advent of this new international trade agreement, higher education has become a tradable commodity, or, more precisely in GATS terms, an internationally tradable service. Many see GATS as presenting new opportunities and benefits, while others see it as introducing serious risks. In addition, there are many who question why the trade sector needs to impose regulations at all, given that the education sector has been using its own agreements and conventions for decades.
At the heart of the debate for many educators is the impact of increased commercial crossborder education on the purpose, role, and values of higher education. The growth in new commercial and private providers, the commodification and market orientation of education, and the prospect of new trade policy frameworks are catalysts for stimulating serious reflection on the role, social commitment, and funding of public higher education institutions in society. The trinity of teaching, research, and service to society has traditionally guided the evolution of the university and its contribution to the social, cultural, human, scientific, and economic development of a nation and its people. Is the combination of these roles still valid, or can they be disaggregated and rendered by different providers?
Finally, an unknown consequence is the impact of commercialization on the motivation for institutions to internationalize. One of the leading rationales at the institutional level for internationalization is preparing graduates to be internationally knowledgeable and interculturally skilled to live and work in more culturally diverse communities both at home and abroad. An important question to ask is how an increased emphasis on the “buying and selling” of education across borders will affect the nature and priority given to academic, social, and cultural rationales of non-profit international education activities. Cultural Diversity or Homogenization?
The impact of new forms and types of international academic mobility on the recognition and promotion of indigenous and diverse cultures is a subject that evokes strong positions and sentiments. Many believe that modern information and communication technologies and the movement of people, ideas, and culture across national boundaries present new opportunities to promote one’s culture to other countries and to provide more chances for the fusion and hybridization of culture. Supporting this position is the assumption that this flow of culture across borders is not new at all, although its speed has been accelerated and its modes broadened.
Others see both the movement and the speed as alarming. They contend that these same forces are eroding national cultural identities and that instead of creating new, hybrid cultures, they are homogenizing native cultures—by which, in most cases, they mean Westernized. Because education has traditionally been seen as a vehicle of acculturation, these arguments focus on the specifics of curriculum content, language of instruction (particularly the increase in English) and the teaching/learning process in international education. The impact of colonization on education has long been a subject of research, but internationalization as a tool for neo-colonization, especially in terms of culture, requires for further study.
Internationalization of higher education was originally conceived in terms of exchange and sharing of ideas, cultures, knowledge, values, etc. Formalized academic relations between countries were normally expressed in bilateral cultural and scientific agreements. Today, the agreements are often based on trade, economics, and politics, showing a significant shift from the original idea of academic exchange. Thus, there are two factors at play. One is the potential, and for many, threat of cultural homogenization, and the second is the weakening of cultural exchange in favour of more economically and politically-oriented relationships.
Status and Profile: World Rankings
International and regional rankings of universities have become more popular and problematic in the last five years. The heated debate about their validity, reliability, and value continues. But at the same time university presidents declare in their strategic plans that a measurable outcome of internationalization will be the achievement of a specific position in one or more of the global ranking instruments. Internationalization is perceived by some institutions as a means to gaining worldwide profile and prestige. The intense competition for world rankings would have been impossible to imagine a mere 20 years ago, when international collaboration among universities through academic exchanges and development cooperation projects were the norm. Of course, these types of activities still take place, but the factors driving internationalization are becoming increasingly varied, complex, and competitive. Is international cooperation becoming overshadowed by competition for status, bright students, talented faculty, research grants, and membership in global networks?
What next?
With innovation come new opportunities, successes, and also threats. It is imperative that the international, intercultural, and global dimensions of higher education continue to be proactive, responsive, and innovative, while keeping a close watch on unanticipated spin-offs and implications. As internationalization matures through its ages and stages of growth, a critical eye and strong will are needed to monitor intended and unintended results -for this year and twenty-five years hence. AM
Jane Knight is a globally-recognized expert on the internationalization of higher education. She is adjunct professor at OISE/University of Toronto and a Fulbright New Century Scholar 2007-2008.
Loading...

Internationalisation the Key towards Quality Education and Services in Higher Education

By
Prof. Dr. Yang Farina Abdul Aziz
Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia
This article was written when she was on sabbatical in University of Otago, New Zealand

The mention of “internationalisation” conjures up a multitude of images in people’s minds. To some internationalisation would mean foreign students and perhaps mobility and exchange programmes for local students. To others internationalisation would mean setting up of foreign universities in Malaysia or provision of Malaysian education overseas such as Lim Kok Wing University in London. People especially those dealing in higher education react differently to internationalisation. The majority sees the bigger picture of the positive effect internationalisation can bring to higher education in Malaysia but there will pockets of people with images of colonisation and fear embedded in their minds.

So what is internationalisation? The advances made in information technology coupled with the mass transportation of people have turned the world into a global village. The mobility of ordinary people and the ease plus speed with which we communicate with each other has meant that we now live in a smaller world. In higher education, the term globalisation may generally be described as trends in higher education that is connected to cross-national implications. Knight in 1994 defined internationalisation as “Process of integrating an international and intercultural dimension into the teaching, research and service functions of the institutions” while van der Wende in 1997 broadened the definition to extend internationalisation beyond the institutional level with “Any systematic effort aimed at making higher education responsive to the requirements and challenges related to the globalisation of societies, economy and labour market”. In 2004 Knight redefined internationalisation as “The process of integrating an international, intercultural or global dimension into the purpose, functions or delivery of post-secondary education”. Internationalisation thus, may be seen as the term widely used for the response of higher education systems and institutions to trends of globalisation. The concept of internationalisation has evolved through the years depicting an ever-changing landscape where higher education is concerned. Issues pertinent to higher education over the last decade are varied and would include the knowledge economy and research, global choice for tertiary education, democratisation of education, funding, international growing scope for employers, the Internet and communication technology.

In my opinion the best way to understand internationalisation is to ponder over what Prof. Denise Bradley, former Vice-Chancellor and President of University of South Australia said when she delivered a keynote address in a conference hosted by Universiti Teknologi MARA in 2006, “Internationalisation strategies, when put into effect, require change at every level of the university as well as change how people think and how they behave. The culture of the University must be transformed.” Take for instance the world university rankings. It is phantom to be like a curse to some institutions but the reality of the situation is that globalisation has caused education to become like a service in trade, a commodity with lucrative money gains for those who knows what it takes to deliver the goods i.e. quality education. Hence, those in the business of higher education will have to respond to these new challenges brought on by globalisation in order to remain competitive. One of the challenges that would be common for the new borderless world is the introduction of the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) that is an offshoot of the World Trade Organisation (WTO). Under GATS, there should be progressive liberalisation in services that will include education. Under GATS all trade barriers must be removed and in education this will mean no subsidies for local providers, minimum delays in approvals, no tax discrimination and many other incentives that will provide advantage to the local providers. Basically, under GATS the competition will be made on a level playing field with no advantage given to local providers. Over the last 10 years we have witnessed the setting-up of foreign campuses in Malaysia. The question would be; can the local universities maintain the competitive edge? We don’t really have a choice, the market forces (the students and parents) would demand for the best that their money can “buy”. Anybody in the business of providing higher education would acknowledge that competitiveness can only be achieved by being productive but keeping your costs down. Even public institutions are under scrutiny with anticipated less funding from the government. Yes, the public universities are expected to generate more and more of their own income and thus productivity would be a crucial issue. It is exciting times ahead for higher education in Malaysia. We have to be effective in delivering quality education be it at the postgraduate or undergraduate level. The key word to compete at the global level would be quality at affordable cost.

Raising the quality of your programmes and keeping your costs down would involve raising the competency of everyone working at every level in the university. For the research universities for instance quality may be reflected by the numbers of patents, research products, publications in high impact journals, number of PhDs produced per year. These numbers have been translated into key performance indicators for the academic staff. We are expected to deliver by the year end when it is assessment time! A strong research culture may be enhanced by the presence of a strong professional technical service. Yes equipment maintained and usage optimised will go a long way towards publication in a high impact journal. Support staff too must play their role in ensuring records are dutifully kept in order and problems with bureaucracy are dealt with efficiently.

The transition to a knowledge-based economy has meant that the demand for tertiary education has increased. In Malaysia it is anticipated that the number of students in the 17-23 age cohort seeking further education will rise to 40% by 2010. On top of this local market there are the ever increasing international students. These international students provide foreign exchange for a country and Malaysia is targeting an enrolment of 100,000 foreign students by 2010. However, greater access to tertiary education has necessitated that programmes offered are subjected to quality assurance procedures. We are on the right track on matters pertaining to quality of programmes as the Malaysian Qualifications Agency monitors that issuance of degrees must conform to standards as outlined in the Malaysian Qualifications Framework. However, it is not enough to ensure quality degrees if support services accorded to the students are not up to par with world standards. Students’ services play an important role in giving the optimum conducive experience a student may have.

And what would a student demand and expect from a tertiary education? The students’ expectations will be greatly influenced by the requirements of potential employers. Increasingly, employers now look for a graduate with an international outlook. Employees are expected to adapt to changes quickly, possess good communication skills, are exposed to multicultural experiences, reliable, open minded, tolerant and ever ready to face the challenges of globalisation. The curricular in a university must therefore reflect the international component, which, may be interpreted as curricula aimed at preparing students for performing (professionally/socially) in an international and multicultural context. In Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia for instance, the double degree programme with University Duisburg Essen has attracted a lot of applicants. Families are willing to spend the additional funding for such a programme because it is seen as good investment for the students’ future. Of course, it would be impossible for everyone to be given the chance to experience a foreign country immersion programme. For the masses, the presence of foreign students on a local campus may add that extra international dimension.

A key thrust in the internationalisation programme of a university is the research activity. During my stint in the international office, many visitors come to UKM to seek collaborations in research. Research may be viewed as the main product offered to the community outside the university especially the international community. Research is the source for new knowledge ensuring the economic sustainability of a country. The importance of research to a university may be highlighted by a recent report in the University World News website. In an article aptly titled “Knowledge the only currency” it was reported “Lord (Digby) Jones, the ebullient Minister for Trade and Investment, and former Director General of the Confederation of British Industry, delivered a rousing introduction to the "Rethinking higher education" conference in London. Jones expressed a strong belief in the importance of universities as businesses to help promote 'Brand Britain'”.

I could not agree more with Lord Jones as higher education in this globalisation era would reflect the strength of a country. It is thus imperative that the Ministry of Higher Education move the internationalisation agenda which forms one of its seven thrusts in the strategic plan launched in August last year. The main issue that must be addressed is that tertiary education providers must adapt to the rapid changes brought on by globalisation in order to ensure a sustainable future and more importantly to turn Malaysia into a centre of excellence for education.

Internationalisation at its highest level will help promote Malaysia as a country and brand Malaysia as the country that offers quality products and services.