Graduate Education and Research in the Geopolitics of Higher Education

• In Event: 18.026 - International Higher Education and Geopolitical Power: Critical Perspectives on University Activities in the United States

Abstract

In 2016 there were over 200,000 international graduate students enrolled in STEM fields, totaling approximately 42% of science and engineering graduate students. Similarly, US universities employed nearly 35,000 international STEM postdocs, accounting for over 53% of all postdoctoral researchers (NSF, 2016). International students and researchers make extraordinary contributions to US Academic science (Stephan, 2012), are sought after by universities wishing to improve their research performance (Cantwell & Lee, 2010; Taylor & Cantwell, 2015). International graduate students and postdocs may also contribute to the geopolitical power of the United States and stability of the global science system. In short, internationalization of graduate education and scientific training is an example of the way American institutions have exploited globalization in ways that result in national gain. The purpose of this paper is to consider the geopolitical implications of international graduate education and postdoctoral training in the context of a contemporary politics defined by nationalism, populism, and xenophobia.

This paper draws on recent work on power relations in global higher education. Relevant concepts include neo-nationalism (Lee, 2017; Lee, Jon, & Byun, 2017), which considers the way ethno-national identities shape the way individuals are included and excluded in higher education systems, techno-nationalism and scientific nationalism (Cantwell & Girmm, 2018), that addresses the way states use academic science to capture advantage, and the geopolitics of higher ducatoon (Hazelkorn, 2016). Together, these are combined to develop an analytical frame that considers the ways in which states, universities, and individuals cooperate through higher education to achieve political and economic advantage in the global economy.

A synthesis of secondary data from the US Department of Education, National Science Foundation, and international organizations like UNESCO, news reports and primary source documents, and related empirical literature provide the underpinnings of this scholarly paper. In this type of inquiry, the goal is to develop well-evidenced arguments rather than to uncover new empirical findings.

The primary argument of this paper is that internationalization of graduate education and research of the American research enterprise poses a quandary. Research internationalization operates through asymmetrical power-relations that exploit graduate students and postdocs from abroad. A result is that the labor of scientific migrants supports American institutions and the power of US academic science. At the same time, global science produces considerable non-exclusionary benefits and opportunities for individuals. A partial closure, driven by nationalist politics and rhetoric, would likely diminish the power of American academic science but at the same time could destabilize the global science system and harm the aspirations and careers of early career researchers around the world. Zero-sum aspects of geopolitical power that contributed to asymmetrical internationalization but the central position of the US academic system in global science also produced opportunities for international collaboration and public goods. The evidence and arguments advanced in this paper will help scholars and policy analysists more to more fully consider the geopolitical dilemmas associated with internationalization of the academic research enterprise.

Author

• Brendan Cantwell, Michigan State University