A Comparative Study of Internationalization Policies in Chinese and Canadian Higher Education

• In Event: Breakthroughs and bottlenecks: Chinese higher education 1978-2018.

Proposal

Abstract
This study aims to explore and compare the contexts and priorities of the internationalization of Chinese and Canadian higher education through analyzing different levels of educational policies. By applying the “Global Higher Education Matrix” created by Jones (2008) and the “Four Approaches to Internationalization of Higher Education” (Knight, 1997; Zha, 2003) as an analytical framework, this study examines the priorities of internationalization policies implemented by global organizations, national governments, provincial governments, and institutions. Besides, using the comparative policy approach, this study informs the policies and practice of the internationalization of Chinese and Canadian higher education. By comparison, the internationalization policies at the three levels in China and Canada have different priorities. Also, due to the different governance structures of higher education, the internationalization policies of China are more aligned among the three levels compared to Canada. Last but not least, although the challenges facing by internationalization shape the formulation of policies at the three levels in both China and Canada, there are still gaps in policies regarding all the challenges.
Keywords: internationalization, policy, higher education, China, Canada
Conceptual Framework
This study applies the “Global Higher Education Matrix” (Jones, 2008) to probe the alignment or parallel among policies at different levels of the Chinese and Canadian higher education system. Moreover, the Four Approaches to Internationalization of Higher Education, including activity, competency, ethos, and process, is utilized as a tool to categorize and analyze the policies (Knight, 1997; Zha, 2003). In this study, there are two functions of the conceptual framework: one is to examine the coherence between the internationalization policies from global, national, provincial and institutional levels; another is to identify the different priorities of internationalization policies at national, provincial and institutional levels in China and Canada.
Methodology
This study employs the comparative policy analysis under qualitative methods. Under the research purpose and the conceptual framework, directed content analysis will be suitable for this study. Directed content analysis is a deductive method, which usually starts with a theory or relevant research findings in order to get codes as guidance for initial codes. It was defined as “the use of more analytic codes and categories derived from the existing theories and explanations relevant to the research focus” (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005, p.1278). The data analysis procedure is: first, policies will be collected in both electronic and paper forms; second is to read through the policies and skim the related information or content from the policy documents; third is to translate the Chinese version policies into English. fourth is the first-cycle coding, which is identifying the key concepts or codes in the text; next is to identify the themes by examining the codes; the last step is to interpret and compare the themes in light of the conceptual framework and the research purpose.
Data Source
In this study, the internationalization policies refer to the plans, strategies, blueprints and regulations that implemented by the governments, the relevant authorities, and the non-governmental organizations to face the challenges of internationalization. At the global level, the policies weremainly collected from the website of UNESCO, the International Association of Universities (IAU), and the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). At the national level, the Chinese policies were collected on the website of five authorities: Central Committee of the Communist Party of China (CCCPC), State Council of People’s Republic of China, Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress (NPCSC), and Ministry of Education (MOE). The Canadian policies were collected on the websites of the following authorities: Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada (AUCC), Canadian Bureau for International Education (CBIE), Council of Ministers of Education, Canada (CMEC), and Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development (DFATD). At the provincial level, the policies were collected from the website of the Government of Saskatchewan, Government of Beijing and Beijing Municipal Education Commission. At the institutional level, the data collection was conducted at the University of Saskatchewan and Beijing Normal University.
Results
The comparison of historical contexts of internationalization in China and Canada shows that the internationalization of higher education has a long history in China. The origins and the focus on different periods of internationalization are different. Both Chinese and Canadian higher education face internal and external challenges of internationalization. However, most of the challenges are different because of different backgrounds. Moreover, the priorities at the three levels have similarities and differences. First, at the national level, Canada focuses more on the process, while China focuses on activity. At the provincial level, both Saskatchewan and Beijing focus on activity, but the policies of Beijing are more detailed and concrete. At the institutional level, BNU focuses more on activity, while U of S prioritizes on process. Additionally, due to the centralized governance of higher education, the policies at the three levels of China is more coherent and aligned compared with that in Canada. Last, the challenges facing by the internationalization of Chinese and Canadian higher education shape the policies; yet, there are still gaps in policies concerning challenges.
Educational Significance
This study is a timely investigation of the development of the current context of internationalization of Chinese and Canadian higher education. At the theoretical level, by applying the “Global Higher Education Matrix” created by Jones (2008) as an analytical framework, this study allows us to understand the interrelationship between the internationalization policies at three levels (national, provincial and institutional). Regarding the policy level, the analysis of contexts and challenges of internationalization of higher education will contribute to the understanding of the existing policies. Vice versa, examining the existing policies will enhance our comprehension of the internationalization context of higher education. Additionally, concerning the practice, exploring the different contexts and the priorities on the internationalization of higher education in a comparative context may help policymakers and institutional leaders to understand existing initiatives or policies better. More importantly, through the comparative analysis of the internationalizatio

Author

• SHUAI YU, University of Saskatchewan