Session Submission Summary
Share...

Direct link:

Between global norms and local policies: Comparative perspectives on the internationalization of higher education

Mon, March 9, 8:00 to 9:30am, Washington Hilton, Floor: Concourse Level, Georgetown East

Session Submission Type: Group Panel

Description of Session

A rich field of research has emerged in the past decade centered on the internationalization and globalization of higher education as a worldwide phenomenon. Yet existing accounts tend to cluster around two foci: either general observations of worldwide trends, like student mobility, international branch campuses, and the rise of global rankings; or institution-specific accounts of efforts to internationalize the curricula, encourage study abroad, or develop international strategies. These twin areas of scholarship are rarely brought together effectively, such that we have little sense of how campus-based ‘internationalization’ efforts vary in different national contexts, or how individuals in universities make sense of and/or contribute to the broader ‘globalization’ trends.

This panel aims to help bridge these two worlds, offering a range of comparative perspectives on internationalization. The panel asks:

1. What does internationalization look like in different national contexts?
2. What does internationalization mean to different actors, stakeholders or beneficiaries?
3. How can we understand the development of global norms in this arena?
4. What are the implications of these new norms for the future of higher education worldwide?

To answer these questions, the panel brings together four scholars engaged in current empirical study of internationalization as a broad enterprise. Together, these four panelists not only examine internationalization in different national contexts; their research encompasses a wide range of aspects of internationalization. These include: government policy in Germany (Streitwieser); the perspectives of university administrators in the U.S. and U.K. (Friedman); academic science in Luxembourg and Qatar (Powell); and the effects of academic capitalism in South Africa (Spreen). Two of the four papers are explicitly comparative, but as a group, each is directed toward using empirical analysis to make sense of this broad movement to ‘internationalize’ universities and higher education by studying its manifestation in different contexts. In utilizing a variety of research techniques targeting multiple arenas of academia, the papers in the panel collectively reveal the diverse ways that this phenomenon can be studied, but also, the range of actors and stakeholders involved, from scholars to students to administrators to governments.

Though scholars often recognize these different actors and varied spheres of activity under the banner of ‘internationalization,’ there remains little attempt to systematically explore the perspectives of these different groups, or the way they vary cross-nationally or along other divisions. The panel will thus offer those interested in understanding the field of internationalization a broad survey of its different components, while at the same time, a rich comparative understanding of perspectival variation in this global movement to those already familiar with it. The purpose of the panel, beyond this surveying, is to energize new comparative study of higher education internationalization as a means of furthering our collective examination of education globally. Often assumed to be an example of universal standardization, international convergence, or Anglo-American homogenization, there remains little empirical examination of what internationalization ‘looks like’ in different contexts or to different audiences. In essence, this panel will deepen our understanding of internationalization as a process occurring between global norms, and the enactment of local policies.

The panel will follow a conventional paper panel structure, beginning with some introductory remarks from the session organizer, progressing through the four panelists’ presentations, and then allotting time for comments from the discussant (Miller-Idriss). Panelists will be asked to restrict their presentations to ten minutes each, to allow for ample time for questions and intellectual exchange among the panelists, the discussant, and the members of the audience

Sub Unit

Chair

Individual Presentations

Discussant