A Comparative Examination of University Responses to COVID-19 in 94 Countries

• In Event: Highlighted Session: Leading during a global crisis: Institutional responses to the COVID-19 pandemic

Proposal

< Introduction >

The COVID-19 pandemic forced schools to shut down across the globe. As colleges and universities continue to confront the challenge of offering tertiary education to students, initial responses to the pandemic offer much space from which to learn and grow. To continue to provide quality education and deliver on missions of equity, tertiary institutions from initial institutional responses and develop more informed plans for future crises. This paper seeks to provide insight into the international landscape of higher education in the era of COVID-19 in an effort to enhance the planning process of international tertiary education institutions. The paper recognizes cultural and public health differences between the international contexts in its analysis of data and grounds its findings in reopening plan data for 905 international tertiary education institutions collected by the College Crisis Initiative (www.collegecrisis.org/dashboard). We present an exploratory study guided by the research questions, “What mode(s) of instruction did higher education institutions choose in response to the COVID-19 epidemic? How did these decisions differ across country and continental contexts?”

< Conceptual Framework >

We examine two specific hypotheses related to reopening plans:

1) Institutions may have responded to COVID-19 differently based on the colonial pasts of their countries.
2) Institutions may have chosen modes of instruction used by other exemplar institutions.

As such, we draw on the concepts of neocolonialism and institutional isomorphism to understand the decisions and trends made by higher education institutions in response to COVID-19. The rise of massive open online courses has led to newfound neocolonialist forms of domination which gives rise to the term ‘digital neocolonialism’. (Adam, 2019). With the increase of online universities and courses with COVID-19, we analyze the responses of international education systems through this digital neocolonialist lens. We question if the potential for neocolonialism leads institutions in post-colonial states to prefer in-person instruction or no clear plan as opposed to online instruction.

Institutional isomorphism refers to the relationship between institutions and how they follow each other to gain legitimacy (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983). We looked at the role of isomorphic change on an international scale in how educational institutions interact to respond to COVID-19. Due to the myriad of institutional isomorphic changes, we aim to see if institutions facing the uncertainty of the pandemic will homogenize or mimic other institutions they perceive as successful.

< Data and Methods >

The data for post-secondary international institutions’ 2020 reopening plans spans 905 institutions from 94 countries and semi-autonomous communities, not including the United States. Reopening plans for no more than 200 of the top-ranked universities (as ranked in UniRank.org and Quacquarelli Symonds World University Rank website) in each continent (Africa, Asia, Europe, The Americas, and South America, and Oceania) were collected in mid-August of 2020. Researchers translated the websites of each institution, if not available in English, using their language expertise or online dictionaries and translation tools.

“Institutional reopening plan” refers to the mode of delivery that the institution chose to adopt for the Fall of 2020 and students’ access to campus for academic purposes. However, not every institution had published or decided a COVID plan at the time of data collection in August, so some institutions are categorized as having an undecided plan or having no COVID plan.

In our initial analysis, we used graphical and descriptive methods to interpret the data. As we develop this paper, we will examine trends by country and interpret patterns found using OLS regression models.

< Preliminary Findings >

Oceania has the highest percentage of schools primarily in person. We speculate that this is due to the relatively lower threat of the coronavirus in Oceania, given it is completely eliminated in New Zealand, and the Australian government has set strict measures on those who can enter/exit the country. All institutions in Oceania that are primarily in person are in New Zealand and Australia, specifying that the schools that are open this semester are in two specific countries of Oceania. The similarities among institutions that compete cross-nationally for student enrollments suggests some isomorphic pressure within Oceania.

Latin America exhibited the largest proportions of universities with no reopening plan. The bulk of schools in the Americas that did not have a formal opening plan, with the exception of those in Canada, Brazil, Argentia, and Chile. We do not include the United States in our analysis. It is possible that the lack of reopening plans in the Americas relates to a rejection of digital neocolonialism, and a lack of a “leader” to exhibit isomorphic pressures.

Europe has the second highest proportion of schools that are primarily in person. We divided the reopening plan by country in Europe, Asia, Latin America, Oceania, and Africa. This helped us understand reopening plan country by country within continents; for example, all schools in Finland are primarily online, despite having fewer cases of coronavirus relative to other European countries. It is clear that countries are handling COVID-19 differently - even among those with similar cultural backgrounds. For example, all institutions in Denmark were still at ‘To Be Determined’ when these data were gathered. On the other hand, all institutions in Norway were in hybrid format. Differential plans by country suggest coercive isomorphic pressure on the part of governments to determine national strategies for university modes of instruction.

Most universities in Asia are not primarily in person (with the exception of some schools in Azerbaijan and Taiwan). Similarly, most schools in Africa do not have a reopening plan this semester, but there are outliers. Egypt is the only country in Africa with most schools in Hybrid format. Also, all schools in Ghana are primarily online.

< Conclusions >

While our findings are preliminary at this time, our paper examines trends in COVID-19 reopening plans in multiple country contexts. Ultimately, this paper provides more context to the conversation surrounding the landscape of international tertiary education in the era of COVID-19 and puts tertiary institutional responses in dialogue with one another, which is essential to improving and informing responses to crisis in the future.

Authors

• Christopher R. Marsicano, Davidson College, The College Crisis Initiative

• Alexandria Marianna Marsicovetere, Davidson College

• Emily Gillespie Rounds, Davidson College

• Jessica Villiger, Davidson College