Internationalisation of Higher Education

An exploratory study in 6 UK universities

Felix Maringe25 June 2008

2

The central thesis Despite its strategic importance, internationalisation in UK

universities remains inchoate and marginally integrated

Key threats to greater integration of the international dimension include:

• The prevalence of a restricted view of internationalisation

• Weak organisational framework for institutional internationalisation

• Staff inertia to internationalising the university curriculum

• Perception of growth of inequity in teaching and learning by home students due to efforts to internationalise

3

Internationalisation: the growing significance • Most frequently recurring university strategic goal (UNESCO 2006)

• Increasing numbers of students studying abroad (0.6m in 1975; 3.5m in 2007; 5m in 2020)

• Major conferences focusing on internationalisation

• 22 VC adverts all required an international perspective

• 43% of universities have a Deputy VC with an international brief

• Universities UK now has an international Unit

• Increasing number of publications focusing on internationalisation

4

The focus of the presentation• How is internationalisation understood in UK universities? In

particular, to what extent does the understanding underpin a determination to integrate an international dimension into the working of the university?

• What are the dominant models and strategies for internationalisation in UK universities?

• Are the current strategies effective for their purposes?

Massoud and Ayoubi (2007) concluded that the evidence base for measuring the quality of integration of an international dimension in universities is weak.

5

Internationalisation, the son of globalisation?Is internationalisation driven by globalisation?

• An imperialist perspective (driven by a desire for political and economic domination, aimed at self enrichment at all costs)

• A colonial perspective (aimed at cultural domination by obliterating indigenous cultural values)

• A post colonial perspective (aimed at re-establishment of nationhood often by creating new rainbow cultural models)

• An Islamic perspective (religious cultural domination under the spotlight)

6

Globalisation Three broad views about globalisation

• The Hyper-globalist approach: celebrates the triumph of global capitalism and the total integration of societies into a global village (Donald 1992, Usher and Edwards 1994, Kress 1996, Tikly 2001)

• The Sceptical approach: increased polarisation between nation states, between rich and poor (Green 1997, Herd 1999

• The Transformationalist approach: questions the plausibility of the global village; globalisation as a selective developmental theory creating a core periphery pattern of world development (Giddens 1990, Castells 1996)

7

A definition of globalisation (a transformational perspective)Held et al. (1999:16)

A process or set of processes which embodies a transformation in the spatial organisation of social relations and transactions, assessed in terms of their extensity, intensity, velocity and impact, generating transcontinental or interregional flows and networks of activity, interaction and the exercise of power

Driving the questions:

• How far widespread are views about

• How deeply embedded

• How quickly is change taking place

• What obstacles are being met

8

Internationalisation “The process of integrating an international dimension into the teaching,

research and service elements of the university” (Knight and De Wit 1999)

• The process of integrating this international dimension results in an uneven strategic orientation in different universities

Five strategic internationalisation orientations (Foskett 2008)

• Domestic focus (serving local labour markets)

• Imperialist focus (campuses abroad)

• Internationally aware (cultural awareness and responsiveness, recruitment via agents, international students placements)

• Internationally engaged (international fee key income source, strong partnership arrangements, growing research collaborations and distinct recruitment markets)

• Internationally focused (strive to be in top 200 globally, strong emphasis on international research, engagement with world university networks, internationally focused mission

9

Approaches to integration• Students and staff mobility approaches (Erasmus Mundus etc.)

• Curriculum reform approaches (global labour skills/competences approaches)

• University ethos approaches (embedded in university mission)

• Research collaborative approaches (research with international partners as a modus operandi)

• Centralised university approaches (central international/students office

• Informal/formal university networks on internationalisation (USIF)

• Cross university networks (WUN)

10

Rationales of internationalisation in HE (see Maringe and Gibbs forthcoming December 2008)

• Economic

• Political

• Cultural integration

• World peace rationale

• Educational/quality

11

Key elements of university organisationO’Neill’s (1994) model of educational organisations

invites us to focus on three key elements:

• Structure

• Process

• Culture

This will have a bearing on the empirical elements identified for study in this research

12

Empirical study• Mixed methodological approach including questionnaire survey

of individuals and stakeholders, focus group and interviews with key stakeholders in universities

• 6 universities selected to represent 2 pre 92; 2 post 92; 2 post 94 former HE colleges

• In each, 6 in-depth interviews were conducted with members of senior staff with some responsibility over internationalisation; one mixed staff focus group (average 4 members per group); self completion questionnaires completed by 92 staff in the six universities)

• Documentary evidence based on institutional websites, strategic plans and university prospectuses

13

The key questions/aspects investigatedInterviews and focus groups:

• Views about internationalisation and globalisation

• Institutional mission

• Key structural and organisational elements for internationalisation

• Challenges and threats faced

• Intercultural implications

Questionnaire focus:

• Biographical data

• Values and beliefs around internationalisation (related to institutional focus, strategies/organisation and organisational threats based mainly on Likert type items

14

Findings (culture and strategic orientations) Unevenness in the internationalisation terrain of UK universities

• Pre-92 tended to be most ethos driven

we aim to be a top ten university and to be established within the top 200 global universities. Everything we do must underpin an international focus… our staff and students are here because of that international reputation and it is our aim to sharpen that focus over the next few years (DVC of a pre-92 University)

• Post 92 tended to be student and staff mobility driven/global competences led

we aim to expand our student recruitment base from the 130 or so countries and to increase our recruitment of international students by a third from 1600 we have at the moment. These young men and women will be prepared through a vibrant and stimulating learning environment to be productive citizens of the world

• Post 94 former HE tended to have the sharpest domestic focus

our loyalty is about contributing to regional development, build a national reputation, and develop an international recognition for our specialist areas of expertise

15

Findings: Structures• Pre and post 92 all DVC with an internationalisation portfolio

• Post 94 did not have a high ranking senior appointment for internationalisation

• All had an international students/relations office

• One of the pre 92 was a member of the WUN (a group of 12 world class universities)

• Proportion of international students decreased from 11% in post 92, to 8% in post pre 92 to 4% in post 94

• Informal/formal internationalisation structures existed in pre 92 and did not exist in post 92 and post 94

16

Findings: Dominant Internationalisation Processes• International Research Collaborations more

prevalent in pre and post 92

• Little evidence of collaborative international curriculum development partnerships except in one pre 92 with joint degrees

• In one post 92 university, 10 of its 25 Masters courses carry the term international in their titles

• Heavy emphasis on international student recruitment especially in post 92

17

Findings: Threats to Internationalisation• Perceived decline in enthusiasm for cross border learning among UK home students

• Difficulties in meeting international students expectations

• Fees drying up for some international students after first year

• An increasing demand for more English language support for international students especially from non English speaking countries

• An increasing demand for dissertation support

• Culturally embedded learning styles which stifle creativity and critical approaches

• Inadequate understanding among staff of culturally bound learning styles of international students

• Shrinking recruitment market as EU countries move to the use of English as a medium of instruction

• Growing claims by home students of dumping down of academic standards

• Disproportionate representation of international students in some post graduate courses

18

Survey findings: a summary• 65% agreed that internationalisation was a top strategic priority (45% were from former HE

institutions)

• 77% agreed that recruitment of international students is the most important internationalisation process (pre 92 posted 64%)

• Only 31% thought that developing collaborative international curriculum development partnerships was the most important internationalisation process

• 59% considered collaborative research partnerships as the most important internationalisation process (75% posted in pre 92)

• 12% agreed that home students believed standards were in decline

• 66% agreed that staff tended not to have a secure understanding of culture bound learning styles of international students

• 75% believed that home students were becoming increasingly reluctant to engage with cross border learning

• 95% believed that international students needed more support for language and dissertations

• 65% considered that generating funds was the most important goal of the internationalisation processes2

• 25% thought that they do not make fundamental changes to their teaching programmes in light of internationalisation

19

In conclusion• Internationalisation on the march

• The terrain seems uneven across different institutions

• Threats operate at structural, cultural and process levels

• Although staff do not feel overly concerned about dumping down of standards, sparks of evidence suggest that the problem can not be ignored

• Until universities place issues of the curriculum at the heart of their internationalisation efforts, the process of integrating an international dimension will remain a cosmetic effort.

20

Contact details (for collaborative research developing an ESRC funded proposal on a wider scale)

Felix Maringe

School of Education

Building 32 University Road

University of Southampton

SO17 1BJ

fm2@soton.ac.uk

Telephone: 00 44 (0) 2380593387