The International Branch Campus 2.0: Developing a Charter between the Home Institution and the Host Country

• In Event: Roundtable Session (Tuesday VI)
  In Refereed Round-Table Session: Planning, legitimacy, and sustainability in international branch campuses

Proposal

Over the past twenty years, international branch campuses (IBC’s) have expanded due to several motivating factors grounded in rational planning and global competition. From the perspective of the “host” country, an IBC can be one vital component of a broader strategy to expand capacity in the higher education sector, develop a twenty-first century workforce, encourage collaborative research, or enhance institutional prestige. From the perspective of the “exporting” institution, an IBC can propel institutional branding efforts, forge international ties, lead to the recruitment of talented students and faculty, or simply be financially advantageous.

Despite these potential benefits, IBC’s continue to suffer from internal and external legitimacy concerns. The faculty of exporting institutions regularly question the purposes and value systems of IBC’s and, at times, actively campaign against their development. The benefits to the majority of people in the “host” country are also unclear, as IBC’s usually appear to have little engagement with their communities.

Therefore, this paper argues that the discussion around IBC’s has been far too circumscribed by neoliberal philosophies that extol economic gain and competitive advantage. As a result, many IBC’s reify elite global networks while having a limited (perhaps even negative) impact on educational equity and basic human rights, such as free speech and the protection of minoritized people. Hence, this paper takes a different conceptual perspective by asking the following question: What would it look like if IBC’s developed a charter with their respective societies?

To answer this question, the paper reviews relevant theories on globalization, the charter between education and society, and higher education as a public good. It then proposes four elements that would be important for such a charter. First, the institution’s capacity to serve the public good should be explored; for instance, outreach efforts should be maintained with local community organizations to provide support for marginalized groups that might otherwise be overlooked or exploited. Second, IBC’s should include in its mission statement the responsibility to train globally-minded citizens who are willing to promote basic human rights. Third, the fruits of artistic endeavor and scientific development should be available to individuals in the community, as well as members of the institution. Fourth, an IBC should not solely be the bastion of the elite; instead, a long-term goal of greater access should be developed so that the institution can truly be a hub for diverse thought and different perspectives.

The central argument of the paper is that internal and external legitimacy can be achieved if decisions and strategies made prior to the establishment of an IBC focuses on equity, access, and the institution’s broader impact on society. Furthermore, this type of strategic planning can serve as a model as a transparent, accountable, and effective global educational project.

Author

• Melody Su, University of Southern California