CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1.3 Internationalisation in higher education
國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
29 9. The search to enhance teacher quality.
10. The need for continuous professional development for teachers and principals.
The popularity and prominence of information technology has changed the nature of knowledge and is currently restructuring higher education, research and learning (Mok and Welch 2003). Higher education institutions perceive to see the need to provide more ‘diversified’ courses in order to make students more competitive world-wide. Whether higher education institutions can offer a larger context of simulative learning context becomes the key issue in discussions.
2.1.3 Internationalisation in higher education
Several elements of internationalisation were originally covered by international education and international education is mostly and frequently used in place of internationalisation of higher education (de Wit 2002). The growing border-crossing activities, which are resulted from the effects of internationalisation, between national systems of higher education are ‘losing ground’ to globalisation.
2.1.3.1 Meanings of International Education
Husén describes international education as ‘a cross-disciplinary study of international and intercultural problems in education’. He further explains that
‘international education refers both to the objectives and content of certain educational pursuits and to the internationalisation of such activities’ (Husén 1994, p.
2972). Anweiler describes that international education is ‘many different theoretical studies or practical activities, which are held together by the term of ‘‘internationism’’’
while comparative education is ‘comparing and contrasting different national systems of education’ (Anweiler 1977, p. 109, 113). De Wit elaborates that Husén and Anweiler’s discussions on what international education is bring into the debate two related elements that are relevant for the study of internationalisation of higher education, namely ‘the historical factor’ and ‘the term internationalisation’ which emphasises on the process not something static (de Wit 2002). There has been a prevailing use of the term international education by the organisations such as AIEA11
11 AIEA stands for International Education Administrators in the United States.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
30
in the United States, the CBIE12 in Canada and EAIE13 in Europe. In the 1960s, it could be that there was a close link between technical assistance, development education and internationalisation. However, de Wit points out that the term international education creates ‘confusion when used as an equivalent to the internationalisation of higher education’ because it disregards the crucial aspects of history and process in the internationalisation of higher education (de Wit, p. 110-111). Even so, as de Wit believes, one must recognise the general acceptance of the term international education ‘as covering’ and it ‘even being an abbreviation for the term internationalisation of higher education’ (de Wit, p. 110).
Harari suggests that ‘international education must encompass not only the curriculum, international exchanges of scholars and students, cooperative programmes with the community, training and a wide array of administrative services, but also distinct commitment, attitudes, global awareness, an orientation and dimension which transcends the entire institution and shapes its ethos (Harari 1989, p. 2). Mestenhauser questions the possibility to have a single definition to describe international education and therefore he proposes a contingency concept of international education creating a college of eight different pictures: namely, ‘target groups’, ‘the levels of education’,
‘the defining disciplines’, ‘theories about the nature of knowledge, ‘structure and goals’, ‘meta-knowing perspectives’, ‘the dramatically changing nature of changing international relations’, ‘the geography of international education’, and last but not least, ‘the nature of change’ (Mestenhauser 1998, p.70-71). De Wit (2002) makes the final concluding remarks as follows:
International dimension is used as a generic term to cover all aspects of higher education that have an international aspect or dimension, regardless of whether they are programmatically or strategically organised. The term international education refers to a more developed form of international dimension, a programme or organisation. Internationalisation is an extension of international education and refers to a more strategic process approach (p. 119).
Sometimes, the term globalisation and internationalisation of higher education are used interchangeably and yet in this study, particularly, the definition between the two terms must be clarified. Several scholars have their thoughts on why globalisation cannot be used interchangeably with internationalisation. For instance, Knight (1997)
12 CBIE stands for Canada Bureau for International Education.
13 EAIE stands for European Association for International Education.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
31
has given her opinions upon the different definitions between globalisation and internationalisation. Her view is as follows:
Globalisation is the flow of technology, economy, knowledge, people values, ideas…across borders. Globalisation affects each country in a different way due to a nation’s individual history, traditions, culture and priorities…internationalisation of higher education is one of the ways a country responds to the impact of globalisation yet, at the same time respects the individuality of the nation….globalisation can be thought of as the catalyst while internationalisation is the response, albeit a response in a proactive way (p. 6).
Scott links internationalisation with a world order dominated by nation states, where the emphasis is on strategic relationships. He believes that the contemporary university is the creature of the nation-state: ‘paradoxically perhaps, before it became an international institution the university had first to become a national institution—
just as internationalisation presupposes the existence of nation states’ (Scott 1998, p.
123). He also gives three main reasons why globalisation cannot be simply regarded as a higher form of internationalisation (1998, p. 37):
1. Internationalisation presupposes the existence of established nation states, where globalisation is either agnostic about, or positively hostile to, nation states.
2. Internationalisation is most strongly expressed through the ‘high’ worlds of diplomacy and culture; globalisation in the ‘low’ worlds of mass consumerism and global capitalism.
3. Internationalisation, because of its dependence on the existing (and unequal) pattern of nation states, tends to reproduce—even legitimise—hierarchy and hegemony; globalisation, in contrast, because it is not tied to the past, because it is a restless, even subversive, force can address new agendas.
2.1.3.2 Definitions of Internationalisation
It is very challenging to develop a single definition for internationalisation which can broadly accepted especially when this concept is to be applied to multi-nations and multi-cultural context under the influence of globalisation. One fundamental problem in the studies of higher education’s internationalisation is that when dealing with the internationalisation of higher education, there is the diversity of related terms.
Sometimes it is used to refer to a concrete element of a broad field of
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
32
internationalisation and yet sometimes it is more referring to the overall situation of a higher education institution or higher education development. It is generally acknowledged that the United States has a longer tradition of research on the internationalisation of higher education. They use the term of international education rather than internationalisation of higher education. It is those Non-Americans authors, mainly from Europe, Canada, and Australia who tend to use more a process approach and their use of the term internationalisation of higher education is a reflection of the emphasis on such process (de Wit 2002).
In the late 1980s, according to Knight (2008), internationalisation was commonly defined at the institutional level and in terms of a set of activities. The definition by Arum and Van de Water is a good example to present. For instance, they define internationalisation as ‘the multiple activities, programmes and services that fall within international studies, international educational exchange and technical cooperation’ (Arum and Van de Water 1992, p. 202). Later on, Van der Wende proposed a broader definition of internationalisation, which is broader than an institutional-based approach as Arum and Van de Water proposed, that ‘any systematic effort aimed at making higher education (more) responsive to the requirements and challenges related to the globalisation of societies, economy and labour markets’ (Van der Wend 1997, p. 18-19). This view of her is believed to explain more on the national policies side of internationalisation in higher education.
Schoorman (1999) defines internationalisation as ‘an ongoing, countering-hegemonic educational process that occurs in an international context of knowledge and practice where societies are viewed as subsystems of a larger, inclusive world.
The process of internationalisation at an educational institution entails a comprehensive, multifaceted programme of action that is integrated into all aspect of education’ (p .21).
Knight in her earlier works provides a working definition of what internationalisation is. According to Knight, internationalisation of higher education is
‘the process of integrating an international/intercultural dimension into the teaching, research and service functions of the institution’ (Knight 1999, p. 16). Later on, she emphasises that internationalisation can mean very differently in different ways, different countries and by different stakeholders. She clarifies that internationalisation should be looked at both at the institutional and national level. She defines that
‘internationalisation at the national/sector/institutional levels is the process of
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
33
integrating an international, intercultural or global dimension into the purpose, functions or delivery of higher education at the institutional and national levels (Knight 2008, p.21). She continues to state that the ‘process of internationalisation’
should be described in terms of ‘promoting cooperation and solidarity among nations, improving the quality and relevance of higher education, or contributing to the advancement of research for international issues’ (p. 21).
Teichler believes that internationalisation has received substantial attention in public debate during the 1990s and he expects that basing on those debates, internationalisation might lose its priority status in the public debate. While he proposed that internationalisation should be best defined as ‘the totality of substantial changes in the context and inner life of higher education relative to an increasing frequency of border-crossing activities amidst a persistence of national systems, even though some signs of ‘‘denationalisation’’ might be observed’, he suggests that terms such as ‘knowledge society’, ‘global village’, ‘global social cohesion’, ‘global learning’ and ‘global understanding’ should not be neglected in the future discussions on internationalisation in the context of higher education (Teichler 2004, p.23). He also opines that higher education could raise their views above the operational issues and substantively address the ‘international’ or ‘global’ mandates.
Internationalisation has been one of the most powerful and pervasive forces at work within HE around the world during the last two decades. For the purposes of this study, globalisation is characterised by ‘the broad economic, technological and scientific trends that directly affect HE and are largely inevitable in the contemporary world’ (Altbach 2006, p.123). Internationalisation, meanwhile, is defined that
‘internationalisation at the national/sector/institutional levels is the process of integrating an international, intercultural or global dimension into the purpose, functions or delivery of higher education at the institutional and national levels’
(Knight 2008, p.21). Today, internationalisation is considered central to the academic enterprises, and yet the concept of internationalisation is still shifting.
2.1.3.3 Approaches to Internationalisation
The above various definitions for international education and internationalisation of higher education give the ground to different approaches to the role of the international dimension in higher education. De Wit (2002) summarises the four
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
34
approaches that are seen in literature and practice of internationalisation of higher education as below (p. 116):
Activity approach: This approach describes internationalisation in terms of categories or types of activities. It focuses on the content of the activities and not necessarily include any of the organisational issues need to initiate, develop and sustain the activities. Terms that are in relational to curriculum as an activity approach are international studies, intercultural education, cross-cultural education, education for international understanding, peace education, global education, development education, international studies, transnational studies and global studies.
Rationale approach: This approach defines internationalisation in terms of its purposes or intended outcomes. Terms that are frequently used in relation to this approach are peace education, education for international understanding, development education, and technical assistance.
Competency Approach: It looks at internationalisation in terms of developing new skills, attitudes and knowledge in students, faculty, and staff. It focuses on the human dimension, not on academic activities or organisational issues.
Process Approach: It frames internationalisation as a process that integrates an international dimension or perspective into the major functions of the institution.
Terms such as infuse, integrate, permeate and incorporate are used to characterise of this approach.
2.1.3.4 Rationales for Internationalisation of Higher Education
Knight (2008) suggests that there are rationales driving the internationalisation of higher education. The rationales can be separated into national level and institutional level. Table 2.1 provides a comparison of different rationales that are driving the internationalisation at national as well as institutional level.
Table 2. 1 Actors and Their Roles in the Internationalisation of Higher Education
Rationales Existing Rationales Of Emerging Importance
Social-Cultural National cultural identity Intercultural understanding Citizenship development Social and Community development
National level
Human resources development Strategic alliances
Income generation/commercial trade Nation building/institution building
‧
Source: Jane Knight 2008, p. 25.
According to Knight, the national level rationales are as follows (Knight, p.26-27):
1. Human resources development: brain power
Here, it refers to the demographic shifts, the knowledge economy, the mobility of the labour forces and increased trade which are driving nations to place more importance on developing and recruiting high qualified people/brain power through international education initiatives.
2. Strategic alliances
It looks at the strategic alliances whether they exist in academic, economic, political or social/cultural context. This is especially true at the regional level where countries intend to achieve higher and stronger economic and political integration with neighbours through increasing international education activities on a regional basis.
3. Income generation and commercial trade
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
36
New franchise arrangements, foreign or satellite campuses, online delivery and the increased recruitment of fee-paying students are the examples of the commercial approach to internationalisation.
4. Nation building/institution building
Some countries are interested in exporting education to generate income revenue while others are more interested in importing education programmes/ institutions for nation/capacity building purposes.
5. Social/cultural development and mutual understanding
These are especially relating to the promotion of intercultural understanding and national cultural identity although in some countries the importance of these rationales is not as important as economic and political rationales.
2.1.3.5 Features of Internationalisation in Current Higher Education
As discussed above, the international dimension is a key factor shaping and challenging the higher education sector in countries all over the world (Knight 2008).
There are some landmarks of the aforementioned changing horizon (Knight, p. 3):
1. The development of new international networks and consortia
2. The growing numbers of students, professors, and researchers participating in academic mobility schemes
3. The increase in the number of course, programmes, and qualifications that focus on comparative and international themes
4. More emphasis on developing international/intercultural and global competencies
5. Stronger interest in international themes and collaborative research 6. A growing number of cross border delivery of academic programmes
7. An increase in campus-based extracurricular activities with an international or multicultural component
8. The impetus given to recruiting foreign students 9. The rise in the number of joint or double degrees
10. The expansion in partnerships, franchises, offshore satellite campuses
11. The establishment of new national, regional, and international organisations focused on international education
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
37
12. New regional and national-level government policies and programmes supporting academic mobility and other internationalisation initiatives.
Theories of convergence in the context of higher education also suggest that there has been an evolution taken place in recent higher education development. Tovar &
Cardeñosa (2003) list out these features, which evolve in the process of globalisation, as follows:
1. Demand for enrolment in higher education is increasing.
2. New technologies have led to an increment in jobs that require high level qualifications.
3. Competition, although is not a new concept, acquires more importance due to the possibility of internalisation. An institution must now compete with another institution for its pool of local students.
4. Technologies are changing the curriculum of the courses thus as academic research interests, reshaping the pedagogical methods, making possible the e-learning.
Expressed in many varied ways, Rumbley, Altbach and Reisberg give an examination of several aspects of the phenomenon of the internationalisation in higher education. These ‘elements’ for framework analysis of the studies of internationalisation can also be seen as the features in internationalisation in higher education (Rumbley, Altbach and Reisberg 2012, p. 6):
1. The increasing numbers of internationally mobile students and scholars, moving to and from ever more diverse locations.
2. The rapid growth in cross-broader educational provision.
3. The push to achieve world-class status.
4. The interest in producing globally competent graduates capable of understanding the functioning in a complex and interconnected world.
5. The increasing prevalence of the English language for teaching and research.
6. The significant emphasis on cooperative networking among higher education institutions and national higher education systems.
7. The overt efforts by individual institutions and national higher education systems to compete internationally.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
38
8. The dramatic increase in the commercialisation of international education, particularly in terms of the growing opportunities available to for-profit enterprises.
Although they have argued that there is by no means an exhaustive list of manifestations of internationalisation, they have given a quite ‘comprehensive picture’
of the changes of internationalisation in higher education and these elements ‘should serve to highlight the multifaceted nature of the phenomenon and its effects at multiple levels and across many aspects of the higher education enterprise, from mission and management, to teaching and learning, enrolment and staffing and more’(Rumbley, Altbach and Reisberg, p. 6) .
2.2STATE AND HIGHER EDUCATION 2.2.1 Theories of the states
Historically, the study of politics has incorporated an understanding of the state.
The mainstream theories of the state have basically four perspectives: (1) Pluralist capitalist perspective; (2) Institutional perspective; (3) Corporatist perspective and (4) Bureaucratic authoritarian perspective. There are also alternative theories of the state.
They are (1) Pluralist socialist perspective; (2) Instrumentalist perspective; (3) Structuralist perspective; and (4) Feminist perspective (Chilcote 1994). 14 The following discussion reviews mainly the emergence of ‘bringing the state back in’ in the 1980s, and examine neo-statism points of view, which can trace its roots back to neo-marxism in the first part. Also, internal and external factors that pose challenges to current states function will be discussed in the second part.
The state has received relatively little attention in contemporary political science (Fukuyama 2013). A state is not equal to a government, bureaucracy, a coercive apparatus, or any political institution. The states can be universally represented as the official incorporation of political power. The state can be conceptualised or defined on a variety of levels which emphasises either universal characteristics or ideological specific roles. Jessop describes states as ‘distinct ensemble of institutions and organisation whose socially accepted function is to define and enforce collectively binding decisions on the members of a society in the name of their common interests
14 More detailed discussions can refer to Chilcote’s book Theories of comparative politics: The search for a paradigm reconsidered, chapter 5.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
39
or general will’ (Jessop 1990, p. 341). Benjamin and Duvall argue that there are several conceptualisations appearing in the literature (quoted from Krasner 1984, p.224):
1. The state as government, ‘by which is meant the collective set of personnel who occupy positions of decisional authority in the polity’
2. The state as ‘public bureaucracy or administration apparatus as a coherent totality’ and as ‘an institutionalised legal order’
3. The state as ruling class 4. The state as normative order
Karagiannis and Madjd-Sadjadi defined the role of a state as ‘a designer, defender,
Karagiannis and Madjd-Sadjadi defined the role of a state as ‘a designer, defender,