Case Study: Internationalization in Education
The 21st century had witnessed an intense interest and debate on the international dimension of education. Internationalization of education made possible the emergence of new realities in both local and global contexts apart from presenting changes, introducing new trends and posing different challenges. At this point, internationalization of education is now a priority because of the reasons of mobility, academic standards and quality, teaching and research collaboration, profile of institution and curriculum development. Student mobility is more apparent internationalization of education abroad, crossing borders and adhering to internationalized programmes, courses, curriculum and projects and even teaching staff whereby student mobility implicates teacher mobility as well. Other drivers of the educational internationalization initiative include intercultural understanding, diversification of faculty and student, international student recruitment and regional issues and integration. One among the several countries that consider internationalization as the key for cultural, economic and political development is China. Clearly, the Chinese educational system seems to be more willing to internationalize for the purpose of status advancement.
As I already noted in my previous assignments that internationalization occurs at national and institutional levels through the process of integrating international, intercultural and/or global dimension into the purpose, functions and or delivery of education. Taking from this definition, internationalization of education has several dimensions and it is a dynamic process requiring institutional change. Internationalization also puts emphasis on exchange between different nations and cultures hence such internationalization happens through a precondition of different nations and cultures are inexistence. For instance, internationalization could occur if China could share the same ideals with other nations specifically the Asian countries which at some point acknowledges the importance of Confucianism (Welch, 2008, p. 4). One could also highlight the element that China is a non-English speaking nation which makes it more susceptible to internationalization. Further, China is also more than willing to introduce new innovations and developments in international academic mobility through becoming more competitive and strategic in their recruitment efforts.
Internationalization of education in China happened in the onset of 1990s wherein internationalization and globalization both have influences on the education system. This is the time when internationalization of education is gaining more importance and drawing away from simple mobility. Internationalization during this time makes possible the emergence of curriculum development and consortia of universities in regional and global levels. This is also the time of greater integration international perspective in various dimension of education including education programs, administrative structure and life on campus. Link and/or cooperation between governments and institutions through education-related policies are strongly emphasized. Commercialization of education was therefore apparent. China, nevertheless, long engaged in internationalization of education by means of dispatching students abroad as well as members of the faculty to further competence. Along with this, China is also increasingly adopting foreign academic patterns.
It would be necessary to note inhere that in the majority of developing countries internationalization of education is mainly affected by actors such as student and teacher mobility, advanced research as part of enhancing quality of education and to establish world class universities particularly in China. Thereby, internationalization of education in China is shaped by the transition from technical to escalating global competition and from personal mobility and transplantation of educational models and systems into standardization of programs, degrees, diplomas and transnational education. In China, the changes is being initiated by regional and/or international organizations the transfer from nation-oriented into institutions-based. What makes Chinese internationalization even more leveraging is the participation of the private sector and corporations especially that China expressed intents to join the WTO (Welch, 2004, p. 3).
With this said, China is both import and export-oriented when it comes to internationalizing its educational system. China’s internationalization is, however, not only affected by economic factors and development but is also affected by the status of English language usage. There is therefore the necessity to consider the normalcy of English language in China so that internationalization of the Chinese curriculum would be put in context (Wachter, 2008, p. 2). English language serves as a both barrier and catalyst to further internationalization of education, which generally shapes the academic marketplace internationally. As such, China imports English-language products and personnel for the purpose of enhancing the quality of learning and research while also exporting educational programs and outcomes with distinctive characteristics. China also attracts foreign students to experience what the Chinese academic institutions could offer academically. Program mobility is another aspect that characterize Chinese education internationalization. Chinese government also encouraged foreign universities to establish branch campuses in their soil.
The birth of the new wave of Chinese intellectuals is made possible by the dispatching abroad via public funding. The main point to consider is that students and even faculty members are sent abroad but are carefully chosen from leading universities hence are quite limited. Furthering studies and research is the key rationale in sending off intellectuals. It was in 1980s when students are permitted to study abroad by means of own expense, leading to dramatic rise in the number of Chinese students attaining education in foreign lands, mostly Western and developed countries. The limitation, however, is brain drain where home countries have evidently no benefits international education and student mobility because of context-dependence and unopenness to international commerce which produce legitimate jobs aligned with the knowledge, competence, capabilities and expertise of international students.
On the other hand, while Chinese students are opting to study abroad, the Chinese government had instituted various measures to attract foreign students to study in China. Nevertheless, considering the escalating importance of the Chinese language, only short-term language courses are prioritized. Evidently, sending out students constituted the most important factor of internationalization of education in China. China is considered to be one of the main importers of cross-border education through institution and program mobility. Students could pursue cross-border education provided that there will be an international recognition of degrees and professional qualifications. Welch (2005) stresses the values of mutuality and reciprocity, emphasizing that universities should continue to welcome foreign students minus the need for special effort to recruit them (p. 73).
The phrase internationalization of education was given a new context and meaning when it comes to Chinese academic setting and is eventual internationalization. Internationalization activities which include curriculum development and importation of foreign educational programs have come to play a central role in the process as well. Internationalization of curriculum is driven by introduction of English-language products in Chinese campuses, implementation of the medium of instruction as English or bilingually and integration of an internationalization dimension into teaching and learning process. For instance, recent original English-language textbooks are translated while also utilizing English-language textbooks that are published and used by leading universities in the world. Another thing, Chinese educational institutions are favoring the use of bilingualism if not pure English as a medium of instruction. Schools and campuses are also identified based on their English proficiency. Numbers of programs introduced concerning foreign language and/or cross-cultural studies become important aspect of internationalization, all for the sake of international professional qualifications.
Further, there had been the rapid increase in the number of joint and/or transnational programs through partnerships with foreign institutions. Hong Kong universities proved to be easy target of these joint programs. Collaboration is yet another aspect of Chinese education internationalization apart from the initiatives that are coming from the part of the Chinese government. While attracting foreign students, the Chinese government is also providing educational services for local students outside China. Internationalization is evident from two directions: degree programs provided on Chinese campuses and degree-conferred programs offered outside China although the latter is relatively smaller compared to the former. What China did was to encourage foreign academics, programmes and institutions to offer their services in China to contribute to capacity building. China explicitly stated its aim to attract high quality educational resources from overseas and to introduce globally advanced curriculum and teaching materials which are urgent in China (OECD and World Bank, 2007, p. 50).
Rapid progress has been made though through establishing branch campuses via partnerships with various educational institutions outside China. Several brand campuses of foreign education institutions opened in China recently. Through partnerships with offshore educational institutions, China and the host country where the partner resides were able to recruit students cooperatively and curriculum, credits, diplomas and degrees are mutually recognized. A transnational educational activity, Chinese educational institutions partnered primarily with other Asian countries. Urquidi (2001, p. 273) noted that educational institutions often take for granted communication and interchange with other educational institutions. To oppose, Chinese educational institutions have chosen the other way around to interconnect with other institutions alike. The reach of Chinese culture formed the very basis of these partnerships as countries considered are those greatly influenced by Chinese culture. Partnerships widened its reach to include mostly European countries. Transnational programs transported by China are not confined with the language and culture per se but now include professional programs (OECD and World Bank, 2007, p.38).
In terms of student access, China is among the few which collect reliable data on enrolments in cross-border education programs. Demographic changes, lifelong learning and the changing student requirements created by the knowledge economy are increasing the unmet demand for education and training particularly in post-secondary level (OECD and World Bank, 2007, p. 13). Joint programs, partnerships and establishment of branch campuses inside and outside China are the answers to the growing demand for further education. Increased access for students is often considered a driving motivation for acquisition of further education. In China, however, there remains the issue of equity of access and the quality and relevance of education provided. Mobility is becoming a secondary issue in light of the issues on rate of participation of Chinese students in cross-border programs. The Chinese academic internationalization is more tended on established educational institutions which are mostly housed student elites or simply the private institutions (Hayhoe and Lin, 2008, p. 1).
Same goes with their partners wherein participants of programs and the partner institution themselves are more often than not purports to the well-off. Chinese internationalization is evidently not for massification but commoditized to cater to privileged students. Peter (1996) assert that the mass of the people was satisfied with purely local knowledge traditions, based on custom and tradition rather than science and reason. Social elites with their metropolitan tastes for whom traditional university systems were principally designed, remained isolated although dominant within larger society (p. 1). This is explained, however, by the fact that the limitation of student and academic mobility lies in its cost, which may be unaffordable for Chinese students despite the fact that spending for own education is allowed. Access to student mobility partly depends on the host country’s fee policy and standard of living; study abroad is generally a big investment.
Given this limited resources, Chinese government can also support a handful of students. Most students are self-funded but only a limited number of families are able to meet the cost. Affording to send child or children abroad to study thereby depends on the capacity of the government if not of the families. Fee-paying students are attracted generally but are limited to the privileged members of the society (OECD and World Bank, 2007, p.23). Throsby (1996) noted that funding education which will be taken abroad or outside the country of origin has inherent issues of who is going to pay for it. Educational budgets and the methods of financing students places are undergoing radical changes. One of the most important indicators is the demography of the possible candidates to be sent abroad and second to which institutions these students will be placed (p. 91). In homeland, the Chinese government supports students who choose to study in foreign universities in China through specific legislations which aim to protect local students against the marketing of sub-standard non-local courses.
The establishment of several huge universities and through the elaborative funding of the government is yet another dimension of internationalization of education. This is aimed at becoming a world-class player through becoming well-renowned educational institutions. Such initiative has the support of Ministry of Education, central ministries and local authorities. Chinese government still exercises regulation of and authority over internationalization of education as a matter of policy. This policy is normally advocated for a very few limited leading universities due to the fact that the intention is to train elites. Farquhar (1999) made mention that the growing function of academic policy-making should encompass issues on erasing constraints on the admission of international students and endeavoring to streamlining processes of admission, fostering international student mobility in the process (p. 12).
Therefore, there is no stimulation of mass internationalization at China but rather internationalization is restricted to in several selected key institutions. Nonetheless, the goal is capacity development that is why cross-border education is emphasized by the Chinese government. It would be easy to predict that in the coming years, Chinese educational institutions particularly universities will consider becoming world-famous as their primary strategy to arrive at diversity in their student body. To wit, China is no longer lenient to personal mobility and provision of joint programs in partnership with foreign institutions but rather Chinese educational system is now aiming at building own centers of excellence and tapping global competitiveness. Welch and Zen (2007) noted that on one of the adverse outcome is to breed global inequality of knowledge creation and application.
As such, the internationalization of education in China is not solely influenced by economic reforms rather of more diverse driving forces and worldwide trends implicating domestic socio-economic background. The role of individual institutions that are taking initiatives for involvement in various activities concerning internationalization has been also significant. Internationalization is therefore driven by the challenges faced by the Chinese educational system especially the competitive environment at the global level. Enhancing and pursuing quality in line with internally acceptable standards is central to the internationalization of Chinese education.
Therefore, what motivates student mobility today, aside from possibilities of access and economic prospects, is the reputation and quality of institutions of learning and educational system. Quality issues to student mobility are resolved by national quality assurance and accreditation systems. International schools that provide utmost quality of programmes are perceived to heighten then reputation and profile and increase the value of their programmes on labor market. Nevertheless, China still exports predominantly more students abroad than they accept from abroad and in return, China is also importing more foreign educational programs and services. In terms of educational development, however, China had not yet established the universally-recognized excellence of its own academic system or maintains a quality of learning which can exert academic influence at an international or global level.
References
Furquhar, R. H. (1999). Integration or Isolation: internationalism and the internet in Canadian higher education. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 21(1): 5-15.
Hayhoe, R. and Lin, J. (2008). China’s Private Universities: A Successful Case Study. CIHE, 51.
OECD and World Bank. (2007). Cross-border Tertiary Education: A Way Towards Capacity Development.
Scott, P. (1996). Massification and Globalization: Two Principles in Conflict? International Strategies for Internationalization of Higher Education. Conference Proceedings, Hong Kong.
Throsby, D. (1996). Progress Report on financing and effects of internationalized teaching and learning. Internationalization of Higher Education, pp. 91-111.
Urquidi, V. L. (2001). International Understanding. In G. Neave, Abiding Issues, Changing Perspectives: Visions of the University Across a Half-Century, (pp. 273-277). International Universities Bureau of the International Association of Universities: Paris, France.
Wachter, B. (2008). Teaching in English on the Rise In European Higher Education. CIHE, 52.
Welch, A. R. (2004). ‘China ASEAN Cooperation in Higher Education,’ ASEAN and the Prospects for Increased Collaboration. BICA 2003/04 Report Booklet. Education Services in Southeast Asia. Ministry of Finance, Japan/Research Institute for Asia and the Pacific (RIAP).
Welch, A. R. (2005). From peregrinatio academica to the global academic: the internationalization of the profession. The Professoriate: Profile of a Profession. Higher Education Dynamics, vol. 7. Springer: Netherlands.
Welch, A. R. (2008). Internationalization of Vietnamese Higher Education: Retrospect and Prospect. In M. Hayden and T. N. Phams, (eds.), The Modernisation of Vietnam’s Higher Education System. Springer Publishers: The Netherlands.
Welch, A. R. & Zhen, Z. (2007). The Chinese knowledge diaspora: Communication networks among overseas Chinese intellectuals. In D. Epstein et al (eds.) Geographies of knowledge, geometries of power: framing the future of higher education (pp. 338-354). Rutledge: London.
0 comments:
Post a Comment