Recognizing the expatriate and transnational distance student: A preliminary demographic exploration in the Republic of Korea

Abstract

Descriptions of distance students in the literature are robust. Yet when speaking about students outside of a national context, nuance is lost by the failure to identify the complexity in borderless higher education. The global student body is often too broadly categorized as "international" when in reality, this can be further refined to produce two additional classifications that more appropriately identify and describe a hitherto invisible phenomenon: the expatriate and transnational distance student. Utilizing respondent-driven sampling, student demographic and academic program data were collected using these two operational definitions. The resulting data suggests a potential profile for the expatriate/transnational distance student phenomenon as manifested in South Korea, along with broader demographic and program characteristics. As a nascent phenomenon and introductory inquiry, the research is limited in scope with the intention of a) establishing a taxonomy for the distance education community, b) a practical method for investigation, and c) avenues for further research such as student characteristics, motivation, attrition/retention, etc. Such insight would assist policy/guidelines for universities, their programs, and instructors.

Open Praxis vol. 11 issue 1

“…The research methodology for this study was to review published scholarship regarding transnational distance students which included studies over a 10 year period from 2008 to 2018. For purposes of this review, transnational distance students were defined using Stewart's (2017) definitions of the expatriate or transnational distance student (see Figure 1). These categories are distinguished using three criteria: national origin, local sojourn status, and geographic location.…”

“…The Internet has unbound the individual from any particular geographic location, and in light of globalization and the movement of people, distance education opportunities, instructors, students, and institutions are not necessarily confined to national borders (Garret, 2003;Gemmell & Harrison, 2017;Stewart, 2017;Wilkins, 2016). There are numerous reasons, both historically and currently, that are responsible for population movement such as government/military postings, missionary work, overseas corporate assignments, international education, self-initiated expatriation, or marriage.…”

“…Although academic institutions have long made distinctions between national and international students for various practical, logistical, and legal purposes, this is still a work-in-progress in the realm of transnational distance education since students can cross borders electronically (Andrews & Tynan, 2010;Dobos, 2011;Gemmell & Harrison, 2017;Stewart, 2017;Wilkins, 2016). Although a uniform consensus does not exist in regards to transnational policy and adult education (Knight, 2016;Milana, 2012;Wilkins, 2016), transnational education delivery models provide some insight into how borders are crossed.…”

“…However, the Internet has acted as a catalyst and enabler of transnational distance education in ways and scales that are fundamentally different (Andrews & Tynan, 2010). International distance student enrollment in the United States (see , international, transnational, and "home" distance student enrollment in the United Kingdom (see Gemmell & Harrison, 2017), the phenomenon of expatriate and transnational distance students in Korea (see Stewart, 2017), or even national MOOC platforms with a disproportionately globally distributed student body (see Glass, Shiokawa-Baklan & Saltarelli, 2016) illustrate this effect. What Francois (2016) pragmatically highlighted, however, is that in transnational education, distance education is a part of the family.…”

“…There are also investigations into the "international" student experience which may or may not fall into a transnational space given the conventional use of the term (see Erichsen & Bolliger, 2010;Habib, Johannesen, & Øgrim, 2014; Reed, 2013;Selinger, 2004;Selwyn, 2011a;Selwyn, 2011b;Wilkins & Balakrishnan, 2013). This single homogenous label, however, oversimplifies potential nuance in a transnational population (Andrews & Tynan, 2010;Gemmell & Harrison, 2017;Stewart, 2017;Wilkins, 2016). This subtlety can be more tangible and better understood by looking at some examples of transnational education as they exist in the real world.…”