Rethinking the internationalisation agenda in UK higher education

Abstract

Internationalisation of higher education (HE) affords an opportunity to engage in critical reflection on practices across the sector and to pursue a programme of widespread reform based on outcomes of practitioner dialogue and debate. This opportunity is, however, being largely shunned thanks to the prominence of a marketisation discourse that has claimed the internationalisation agenda as its own, redefining it narrowly in commercially expedient terms. Adopting a broadly Foucauldian perspective on discourse, this article offers a critique of HE internationalisation in the UK. It begins with an analysis of the global trade in HE courses on international markets, arguing that it is inappropriate to treat curricula as though they were merely commodities reducible solely to exchange value. Having questioned the marketisation discourse, the article proceeds to expose the inadequacies of a piecemeal 'infusion approach' to curriculum internationalisation. Simply flavouring curricula with 'international' or 'global' elements fails to address more fundamental issues of the educational process posed by multicultural recruitment and teaching. The critique is founded on a questioning of the cross-cultural validity of purchaser/provider models in general and the student-as-customer metaphor in particular. A 'learning as eating' conception of education finds its apogee in Ritzer's McDonaldised university, with its programmatic reduction of HE, casualisation of teaching labour and 'product' standardisation. The article ends with a polemical call for a reclamation of the internationalisation agenda on the part of practitioners who are interested in creating culturally inclusive, fair and genuinely educational forms of multicultural HE teaching and assessment.

Empowerment and ownership in effective internationalisation of the higher education curriculum

“…Such variation across an institution in understanding is significant and suggests not only the limits of engagement with institutional strategy but also the existence of multiple and diverse local cultures of internationalisation. Discussion about IOC as a strand of the internationalisation of higher education goes as far back in the literature as the 1990s (van der Wende 1997), and although it is now recognised as an important and growing aspect, there is still no consensus on a definition (Bell 2004;Clifford 2009;Green and Whitsed 2012;Hayden 2013;Harrison 2015), or an identified "best approach" to IOC in practice in all contexts (De Vita and Case 2003;Green and Whitsed 2012;Leask 2013). Bell (2004) offers a possible reason for this, stating "…internationalising the curriculum is a construct, not a clearly defined set of ideal or best practices" (p. 2) while Green and Whitsed (2012) posit that "…IoC is the most difficult to define because it couples two fuzzy, ideologically laden terms: "internationalization" and "curriculum" (p. 3).…”

Competitive and cooperative impulses to internationalization: reflecting on the interplay between management intentions and the experience of academics in a British university

“…Their participation has influenced programming and curriculum, notably though the development of one-year taught postgraduate programmes in vocational subjects (Sastry, 2004;Turner, 2006). In addition, British universities have also looked towards overseas students as a source of revenue (Humfrey 1999;de Vita and Case, 2003;HEPI, 2006). Shifts in domestic UK government policy which restructured HE funding during the late twentieth century encouraged universities to attempt to maximize the revenue contribution from premium-fee-paying students, including those from overseas (Hodges, 2001;Bekhradnia, 2006).…”

Reflecting on the 'International Group Working Experience': a study of two MBA programmes

“…However, it is increasingly being recognised in the management education community that 'learning is a highly problematic concept' (Griffiths et al 2005, p.275) and that the growing internationalisation sets new pedagogic challenges for universities (Tomlinson & Egan 2002;De Vita & Case 2003). De Vita (2000 suggests that such a context should be 'an opportunity to learn from our differences, achieve cultural synergies and celebrate everyone'.…”

“…Since the mid 1990s the internationalisation agenda has been in full swing in UK universities (Scott 1998;Callan 1998;De Vita & Case 2003) and more specifically in UK business schools (Raimond & Halliburton 1995;Case & Selvester 2000). The internationalisation of formal management education has two distinct parts: a) the internationalisation of the student body (Brunch & Barty 1998) and b) making the courses and institutional structures more international (De Vita 2001;Case & Selvester 2000;De Vita & Case 2003).…”

“…The internationalisation of formal management education has two distinct parts: a) the internationalisation of the student body (Brunch & Barty 1998) and b) making the courses and institutional structures more international (De Vita 2001;Case & Selvester 2000;De Vita & Case 2003).…”