International partnerships of Japanese universities: Reciprocity and stratification of studying abroad

• In Event: Exploring the dynamics and outcomes of exchanges and internationalization

Proposal

Internationalization has become a significant theme of higher education, driven by the ongoing process of globalization. The establishment of international partnerships serves as a fundamental pillar for the internationalization of higher education (IHE). These partnerships are generally assumed to be mutually beneficial, emphasizing the principle of reciprocity. However, the benefits derived from international exchanges may not be evenly distributed among participating universities (Yarmoshuk et al., 2020). Furthermore, there are regional variations in the dynamics of these partnerships. Reciprocity tends to be weaker for U.S. universities when partnering with institutions in Africa, while stronger in partnerships with institutions in South America (Umoren et al., 2012).
The international partnerships between universities encompass a wide range of collaborative activities, including academic staff and student exchanges. Among these activities, paper-based agreements represent only a fraction. Nonetheless, the advantage of analyzing these agreements lies in their visibility and measurability, facilitating empirical analysis. Therefore, this study focusses on agreements specifically related to student exchange, recognizing the crucial role of educational improvement within the realm of IHE.
Analysis of international partnerships, especially those related to student exchange, has been limited as previous studies have primarily analyzed from micro and macro perspectives, rather than the meso level. The issue of data collection may also contribute to this limitation. However, the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, Japan (MEXT), has conducted surveys towards the most Japanese universities about their international exchange agreements, and has published the results since the Academic Year (AY) 2007. This study utilizes this valuable data using Japan as a case.
"Reciprocity" is not well-defined in university partnerships. In Student Exchange Agreements (SEAs), students typically pay tuition fees at their home university but not at the host university, and a precondition for continuing the agreement is to balance the number of exchanged students between the partner universities (Atalar, 2020). However, both tuition fees and the number of students exchanged are not necessarily reciprocal and balanced between institutions. Considering the context of international partnerships in Japanese universities, where tuition costs are relatively lower compared to English-speaking advanced countries as popular destinations for Japanese students, reciprocity could be understood as a mutual waiver of tuition fees.
Reciprocity may vary depending on the stratification of universities. The issue of interuniversity stratification has received recent attention in the study abroad participation, notably in the U.S. (Whatley, 2020). While previous studies have highlighted differences in the likelihood of studying abroad based on institution types, agreements play a role in influencing these differences. Therefore, this study aims to examine Student Exchange Agreements (SEAs) quantitatively at the national level in Japan. Subsequently, we seek to understand and discuss how reciprocity is observed and varies across different strata of universities.
The data provided by MEXT encompasses various types of agreements, and a single Japanese institution possibly have multiple agreements with one overseas institution. To focus specifically on student exchange and institutional partnerships, the data was refined to establish a one-to-one correspondence between Japanese universities and their overseas partners for study abroad purposes. After revising the data to reflect this one-to-one correspondence, a total of 26,747 agreements were identified. This study analyzes the agreement in AY2017 because AY2018 was the last record year for international studies without the impact of COVID-19.
The results indicated that among the Student Exchange Agreements (SEAs), Asia accounted for approximately half (50.86%), followed by Europe (24.89%) and North America (15.21%). At the country level, China held the largest share (16.75%), followed by the United States (12.39%) and South Korea (9.19%). On average, national universities had over a hundred international agreements. Although the focus is shifting from quality rather than quantity due to significant investments in human resources or finances for meaningful partnerships (Knight, 2015), the quantity can still serve as an indicator of success in IHE.
More than half (57.2%) of the SEAs included a mutual tuition waiver with regional differences; being close to average rate in Asia, higher in Europe, and lower in North America. Lower reciprocity in English-speaking countries, where demand for studying abroad is high, suggests the possibility of commercialization. These trends view student exchange as a source of revenue rather than a mutually beneficial partnership. Furthermore, the recent increase in short-term study abroad programs undertaken by Japanese students may indicate the presence of agreements that are not linked to tuition fees.
The results also revealed differences based on university stratification. Although the presented results are derived from Japanese data, the variations in study abroad program among organizations as indicated by previous studies targeting other countries, could be attributed to the diversity of international agreements. The number of agreements per student also differed depending on the type of university. National universities had three times as many agreements, while municipal universities had roughly twice as many agreements compared to private universities.
Differences based on university tier were also evident for both national and private universities. As expected, higher-tier universities exhibited a greater quantity and higher quality of partnerships. The results also demonstrate that higher-tier national universities have a diverse range of SEAs with varying content. This finding aligns with Whatley's (2020) conclusion, which highlights that study abroad programs at U.S. research universities, characterized by longer durations or diverse destinations, differ from those at non-research universities. This suggests that higher-tier universities have an advantage in international partnerships, which could further exacerbate the existing disparities among Japanese universities, contributing to the funding gap in government initiatives for IHE (Yonezawa & Shimmi, 2015).
Several future themes have been identified for further exploration. Firstly, there is a need to delve into the utilization of agreements in international partnerships. Secondly, exploring the matching criteria for potential partners is of particular interest. Factors such as student enrollment, university ranking, and other relevant indicators can play a crucial role in establishing successful partnerships. While this study primarily focused on outputs due to limitations in available data, future analyses should examine the outcomes of agreements by conducting comparative studies with other countries.

Author

• Maki Kato, Nagoya University