International Relations, Volume 3 (International Perspectives on Higher Education Research)

INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

i

INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVES ON HIGHER EDUCATION RESEARCH Series Editor: Malcolm Tight Volume 1: Academic Work and Life: What it is to be an Academic, and How This is Changing – Edited by Malcolm Tight Volume 2: Access and Exclusion – Edited by Malcolm Tight

ii

INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVES ON HIGHER EDUCATION RESEARCH VOLUME 3

INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS EDITED BY

MALCOLM TIGHT Department of Educational Research, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK

2005

Amsterdam – Boston – Heidelberg – London – New York – Oxford Paris – San Diego – San Francisco – Singapore – Sydney – Tokyo iii

ELSEVIER B.V. Radarweg 29 P.O. Box 211 1000 AE Amsterdam, The Netherlands

ELSEVIER Inc. 525 B Street, Suite 1900 San Diego CA 92101-4495 USA

ELSEVIER Ltd The Boulevard, Langford Lane, Kidlington Oxford OX5 1GB UK

ELSEVIER Ltd 84 Theobalds Road London WC1X 8RR UK

r 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. This work is protected under copyright by Elsevier Ltd, and the following terms and conditions apply to its use: Photocopying Single photocopies of single chapters may be made for personal use as allowed by national copyright laws. Permission of the Publisher and payment of a fee is required for all other photocopying, including multiple or systematic copying, copying for advertising or promotional purposes, resale, and all forms of document delivery. Special rates are available for educational institutions that wish to make photocopies for non-profit educational classroom use. Permissions may be sought directly from Elsevier’s Rights Department in Oxford, UK: phone (+44) 1865 843830, fax (+44) 1865 853333, e-mail: [email protected]. Requests may also be completed on-line via the Elsevier homepage (http://www.elsevier.com/locate/permissions). In the USA, users may clear permissions and make payments through the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc., 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, USA; phone: (+1) (978) 7508400, fax: (+1) (978) 7504744, and in the UK through the Copyright Licensing Agency Rapid Clearance Service (CLARCS), 90 Tottenham Court Road, London W1P 0LP, UK; phone: (+44) 20 7631 5555; fax: (+44) 20 7631 5500. Other countries may have a local reprographic rights agency for payments. Derivative Works Tables of contents may be reproduced for internal circulation, but permission of the Publisher is required for external resale or distribution of such material. Permission of the Publisher is required for all other derivative works, including compilations and translations. Electronic Storage or Usage Permission of the Publisher is required to store or use electronically any material contained in this work, including any chapter or part of a chapter. Except as outlined above, no part of this work may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission of the Publisher. Address permissions requests to: Elsevier’s Rights Department, at the fax and e-mail addresses noted above. Notice No responsibility is assumed by the Publisher for any injury and/or damage to persons or property as a matter of products liability, negligence or otherwise, or from any use or operation of any methods, products, instructions or ideas contained in the material herein. Because of rapid advances in the medical sciences, in particular, independent verification of diagnoses and drug dosages should be made. First edition 2005 British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record is available from the British Library. ISBN: 0-7623-1244-0 ISSN: 1479-3628 (Series)

∞ The paper used in this publication meets the requirements of ANSI/NISO Z39.48-1992 (Permanence of Paper). Printed in The Netherlands.

Working together to grow libraries in developing countries www.elsevier.com | www.bookaid.org | www.sabre.org

iv

CONTENTS LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS

vii

INTRODUCTION Malcolm Tight

1

EXPLAINING DOMESTIC RESPONSES TO EUROPEAN POLICIES: THE IMPACT OF THE ERASMUS PROGRAMME ON NATIONAL HIGHER EDUCATION POLICIES Jeroen Huisman, Anneke Luijten-Lub and Marijk van der Wende

5

STUDENT MOBILITY IN EUROPE: AN ACADEMIC, CULTURAL AND MENTAL JOURNEY? SOME CONCEPTUAL REFLECTIONS AND EMPIRICAL FINDINGS Vassiliki Papatsiba

29

RESEARCHING THE BENEFITS OF RESIDENCE ABROAD FOR STUDENTS OF MODERN FOREIGN LANGUAGES Jonathan Rees and John Klapper

67

LIVING UP TO EXPECTATIONS: A SURVEY OF INTERNATIONAL STUDENTS’ CONCERNS AND THEIR PERCEPTIONS OF CHANGE ON A U.K. DEPARTMENTAL PRE-SESSIONAL PROGRAMME Judith Lamie and Steve Issitt

99

v

vi

CONTENTS

POLITICISING STUDENT DIFFERENCE: THE MUSLIM EXPERIENCE Christine Asmar

129

ACADEMIC MIGRATION: THE CASE OF NEW AUSTRALIAN UNIVERSITIES Anthony Potts

159

VOICE AND ACADEMIC IDENTITY IN ‘CHANGING PLACES’ Jan Parker

185

INTERNATIONALISATION OF AUSTRALIAN HIGHER EDUCATION Grant Harman

205

MONITORING THE INTERNATIONALISATION OF HIGHER EDUCATION: ARE THERE USEFUL QUANTITATIVE PERFORMANCE INDICATORS? Kerri-Lee Krause, Hamish Coates and Richard James

233

THE IMPACT OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF NEO-LIBERAL POLICIES IN TERTIARY EDUCATION IN MEXICO Linda Russell

255

RE-WRITING HISTORY: THE UNIVERSITY OF LONDON AS A GLOBAL INSTITUTION IN THE NINETEENTH, TWENTIETH AND TWENTY-FIRST CENTURIES Malcolm Tight

289

ABOUT THE AUTHORS

307

LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS Christine Asmar

Research Office, Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand

Hamish Coates

Centre for the Study of Higher Education, University of Melbourne, Australia

Grant Harman

Centre for Higher Education Management and Policy, University of New England, Armidale, Australia

Jeroen Huisman

ICHEM (International Centre for Higher Education Management), University of Bath, UK

Steve Issitt

English for International Students Unit, University of Birmingham, UK

Richard James

Centre for the Study of Higher Education, University of Melbourne, Australia

John Klapper

Centre for Modern Languages, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK

Kerri-Lee Krause

Centre for the Study of Higher Education, The University of Melbourne, Australia

Judith Lamie

English for International Students Unit, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK

Anneke Luijten-Lub

Centre for Higher Education Policy Studies, University of Twente, The Netherlands

Vassiliki Papatsiba

Centre for Higher Education Research and Information, Open University, UK

vii

viii

LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS

Jan Parker

Center for Research in Education and Educational Technology, Open University, UK

Anthony Potts

Education Studies, La Trobe University, Bendigo, Australia

Jonathan Rees

English for International Students Unit (cf Lamie), University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK

Linda Russell

Autonomous University of Campeche, Campeche Mexico

Malcolm Tight

Department of Educational Research, Lancaster University, UK

Marijk van der Wende

Center for Higher Education Policy Studies, University of Twente, The Netherlands

INTRODUCTION Malcolm Tight Welcome to the third volume of International Perspectives on Higher Education Research, a series which aims to feature something of the variety of research being undertaken into higher education systems and issues outside of North America. The theme of this volume is International Relations, or, in other words, how students, academics, universities and colleges, and higher education systems relate to each other across international borders. As with the first two volumes in this series, this one deliberately sets out to convey a diversity of ideas and approaches. Thus, it includes:  contributions from researchers working in Australia, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zealand and the U.K.;  examples of quantitative and qualitative strategies for data collection and analysis;  methodological approaches ranging from historical and policy analysis to self reflection. What is being considered under the theme of International Relations has also been kept deliberately broad. Thus, the 11 chapters in this volume examine the movement across borders and between systems of not only students and academics, but also policies and ideas. The first contribution, by Jeroen Huisman, Anneke Luijten-Lub and Marijk van der Wende, evaluates the impact of the European Union’s (EU’s) ERASMUS programme since 1987 on national higher education policies in its member states. Their research involved the analysis of relevant International Relations International Perspectives on Higher Education Research, Volume 3, 1–4 Copyright r 2005 by Elsevier Ltd. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISSN: 1479-3628/doi:10.1016/S1479-3628(05)03001-7

1

2

MALCOLM TIGHT

policy documents and interviews with civil servants. They conclude, as they had expected, that the direct impact of ERASMUS has been at best modest, and argue that future EU initiatives should, therefore, be designed for easy adaptation and integration with national policies. Vassiliki Papatsiba also examines the impact of the ERASMUS programme, but focuses on its effects on students’ individual lives rather than national policy. He makes use of an unusual database, in the form of reports produced by French students as a condition of the support given to them, employing both content and lexico analysis. He explores the academic and non-academic gains reported by students, and also their personal development and changing awareness. One issue for him, echoing some of the concerns of the previous chapter, is whether the sum of all of these personal experiences really does justice to such an ambitious programme. In continuing critical mode, Jonathan Rees and John Klapper consider the particular case of modern foreign language students, and what benefits a period of residence abroad conveys upon them. After reviewing the methodological problems associated with such research, they focus on their longitudinal project into the progress of a cohort of British undergraduates studying German. This involved the repeated administration of a series of language tests, the administration of questionnaires and interviews, and the analysis of the students’ degree results. While their analysis does demonstrate benefits from study abroad, the overall positive conclusion masks considerable variations in individuals’ performances. Judith Lamie and Steve Issitt then consider what might be thought of as the reverse issue, that of international students adapting to study in a host country, in this case the U.K. Their focus is on how well the pre-sessional English language provision works for these students, their reasons for sojourning abroad, their expectations, concerns and attitudes to change. As with Papatsiba’s study, they find plentiful evidence of beneficial development, but also indications of where host institutions need to further modify and add to their practices. Christine Asmar then looks at the international experience of another group of students, this time defined by religion rather than subject of study. She examines the perceptions and experiences of Muslim students – as both home and international students – in Australia and the U.S.A. Since her study started in 1999, she is also able to provide some insights into the impact of 9/11 on these students’ experiences. What comes out of this interview-based study is the increased politicisation and adaptability of the students concerned.

Introduction

3

The next two chapters consider different aspects of academics’ international experiences. First, Anthony Potts reviews the experience of academic migrants to two Australian newer universities, looking at both migrants from the U.K. and those coming from other Australian states. In another interview-based study, he shows the significance of lifestyle factors in migrants’ decision-making. He also considers the implications of this for a future in which academic migration may be a much commoner experience. Jan Parker offers an individual perspective on academic migration, in reflecting upon her experience as a visiting academic in the U.S.A. As a researcher interested in the development of disciplinary identity through student writing, she was naturally conscious of the issues surrounding her own role as a keynote speaker at a seminar on disciplinary writing. In facing these challenges, she provides a very engaging account of how she lost her voice, and how she then recovered. In his chapter, Grant Harman reviews Australia’s progress in internationalising their higher education system. He examines successively the Australian record in exporting higher education services (through teaching international students both in Australia and in other countries), supporting its own students studying abroad, internationalising the curriculum, teaching foreign languages and researching internationalisation. He concludes that, while recent achievements have been impressive, considerable challenges remain. In another, related Australian contribution, Kerri-Lee Krause, Hamish Coates and Richard James consider how universities’ progress in internationalising can usefully be assessed. They offer an exploratory framework of performance indicators relating to institutional strategy, teaching and curriculum, students, staff and research. They argue that much more work is needed, however, before such indicators can be effectively used. Linda Russell looks at the impact of policies – in this case neo-liberal economic policies – moving across international frontiers to effect systems and institutions. Her particular focus is on the case of the National University of Mexico, and how reforms designed to modernise educational financing there led to a strike. Quoting extensively from key actors involved in these events, she shows how developments were very differently understood by the various parties involved. She argues that the adoption of neo-liberal policies restricted the discursive space for the discussion of those reforms, and led to this polarisation, and that to progress from this requires substantial re-thinking. In the final chapter, Malcolm Tight takes a historical perspective in examining the impact of globalisation in higher education. He offers a

4

MALCOLM TIGHT

re-interpretation of the development of the University of London – emphasising its examining and external functions – from the early nineteenth century until the present day. In acting as an examining and support body for both institutions and students, throughout and beyond the British Empire and Commonwealth, it has, he argues, provided a prototype for how universities might respond to internationalisation.

EXPLAINING DOMESTIC RESPONSES TO EUROPEAN POLICIES: THE IMPACT OF THE ERASMUS PROGRAMME ON NATIONAL HIGHER EDUCATION POLICIES Jeroen Huisman, Anneke Luijten-Lub and Marijk van der Wende ABSTRACT This chapter tries to explain the impact of the European Commission’s ERASMUS programme on national higher education policies of 18 European countries. Based on an analysis of the literature on Europeanisation and policy impact, it is hypothesised that the impact will be very modest, but that there may be indirect impacts and differences in impact across countries dependent on institutional features of the higher education system. The empirical findings support the hypothesis: ERASMUS certainly has increased policy-makers’ awareness of the importance and possible consequences of further internationalisation. Nevertheless,

International Relations International Perspectives on Higher Education Research, Volume 3, 5–27 Copyright r 2005 by Elsevier Ltd. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISSN: 1479-3628/doi:10.1016/S1479-3628(05)03002-9

5

6

JEROEN HUISMAN ET AL.

ERASMUS has a more profound effect on higher education institutions and students. In addition, policy-makers have been much more influenced regarding their internationalisation policies by the Sorbonne and Bologna Declarations. There are some noteworthy differences between the countries that relate to specific domestic characteristics (e.g. language and colonial history).

INTRODUCTION Much has been written on internationalisation, and, particularly in recent years, the strengthened international dimension of higher education has spurred scholars to analyse current developments (Teichler, 1999). The main focus of the academic contributions has been on describing internationalisation activities, including issues like student and staff mobility (e.g. Maiworm & Teichler, 1996; Teichler, 1996), joint and international curricula and curriculum change (van der Wende, 1996), exporting and marketing higher education (e.g. Mazzarol & Soutar, 2001), and national policies regarding internationalisation (e.g. Ka¨lvemark & van der Wende, 1997). Kehm (2003) concludes that analyses, systematic overviews and critical assessments dominate in the higher education literature. Despite the considerable attention to the issue of internationalisation, theory-based (or -inspired) analyses are rare (see also Tight, 2003). This chapter attempts to contribute to bridging the gap between research on internationalisation in higher education and the discipline of public administration and public policy. The focus will be on the impact of the European Commission’s ERASMUS programme (1987 till now) on national policy-making in higher education in the (then) 15 member states (and Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein). The empirical data stems from an European Community (EC) commissioned project on the evaluation of ERASMUS. The project was carried out by PriceWaterhouseCoopers, the Netherlands, and the Centre for Higher Education Policy Studies, University of Twente (see van Brakel, Huisman, Luijten-Lub, Mausen, & van der Wende, 2004). We are both interested in the impact itself and the process, including its dynamics, along which the impact has developed. The two guiding research questions are: To what extent has ERASMUS affected national higher education policies, and how can we explain different impacts on national higher education systems? The structure of this contribution is as follows: First, the conceptual model underlying the research project is explained and then a (theoretically

Explaining Domestic Responses to European Policies

7

inspired) section follows on the impact of Europe on domestic change. This delves into the European policy study and public administration literature, and compares these developments with ‘‘mainstream’’ policy analysis literature. We then take four sets of factors explaining domestic change as the point of departure for analysing the potential impact of the ERASMUS programme. Our methodology and empirical results are described. The final section formulates the conclusions of the research.

THE CONCEPTUAL MODEL The ERASMUS programme is a European-level policy initiative with accompanying instruments. Whereas the programme intended to have an impact on students and staff and on higher education institutions, we suggest that this policy has (had) also an impact (either direct or indirect) on national higher education systems, and on national policy-making in those systems as well. At the same time, we are aware that not only Europeanlevel policies such as the ERASMUS programme affect national policies. Nationally mediated types of change (i.e. changes dependent on priorities and directions set by national governments, such as massification, increased stakeholder involvement, marketisation, but also financial contingencies) and global warming types of changes (i.e. changes that take place because of developments in the environment on which national governments have no direct control, such as the transition to knowledge-based economy, and economic globalisation) also have an impact on policies of higher education. The distinction between the two types of change is for conceptual reasons: In practice the difference may sometimes be less profound. An interesting question as to whether or not global warming type changes are welcome is not part of the investigation. Fig. 1 outlines the (possible) impacts of the ERASMUS programme. The way we view the impact of the ERASMUS programme coincides with Olsen’s conceptualisation. Europeanisation as the ‘‘central penetration of national systems of governance’’ (Olsen, 2002, pp. 923–924) closely fits our concern. It deals with the changes ‘‘in core domestic institutions of governance and politics, understood as a consequence of the development of European-level institutions, identities and policies’’ (Ibid., p. 932). With this observation, we more or less immediately enter two, interrelated, debates: First, to what extent change takes place and second, why and how change takes place?

8

Fig. 1.

JEROEN HUISMAN ET AL.

Policy Development at the National Level (van Brakel et al., 2004, p. 25).

DOMESTIC CHANGE The Extent and Mechanisms of Domestic Change Regarding the question to what extent change takes place, there is some relevant literature, although much of the work is of recent date and some maintain that ‘‘actual consequences of European-level action have not been a matter of empirical investigation’’ (Kassim & Menon, 1996, p. 1). More recent research hints in the same direction (see e.g. Olsen, 2002). Political scientists and public administration researchers, in particular, have focused on the impact of European developments on national policy-making, following a period of considerable attention to (the emergence of) institutions at the supra-national level. Authors often distinguish the extent of change on a scale, ranging from low levels of adjustment (from the perspective of the imposition of supra-national policies) to high levels of adjustment. Radaelli (2000), for instance, distinguishes between inertia, absorption, transformation and retrenchment (see also He´ritier, Kerwer, Knill, Lehmkuhl, & Teutsch, 2001). In a recent overview, Olsen (2002, pp. 935–937) maintains that there is considerable empirical evidence to suggest that national patterns are

Explaining Domestic Responses to European Policies

9

resistant to, but also flexible enough to cope with, changes at the European level. National governments have differentially adapted to European pressures. Adaptation reflects institutional resources and traditions, the preexisting balance of domestic institutional structures and the values defining the appropriate national political forms. European-level developments do not dictate specific forms of adaptation, but leave considerable discretion to domestic actors and institutions. In addition, European-level changes are just one among several drivers of domestic change. Olsen concludes that domestic institutional structures, and the values, norms, interest and power distributions in which they are embedded, are monuments of historical battles, joint problem-solving and peaceful conflict resolution. Institutions should not be expected to change easily and quickly, except under extraordinary conditions (Olsen, 2002, p. 944; see also Hanf & Soetendorp, 1998; Menon & Hayward, 1996; Me´ny, Muller, & Quermonne, 1996; see Peterson, 1996 on European research and development policy). Regarding the how (mechanisms, processes) and why (explanatory factors) of domestic change, analysts seem to disagree more. Bo¨rzel and Risse (2000) distinguish two theoretical approaches that more or less indicate opposing views on domestic change. In their view, rational institutionalism – following the logic of consequentialism (March & Olsen, 1989) – assumes that, in the case of a misfit between European and domestic policies and institutions, societal and political actors are provided with opportunities leading to a domestic redistribution of power. This redistribution is dependent on the capacities of actors to seize opportunities and to avoid constraints. Such capacities are affected by the existence of multiple veto points in the domestic institutional structure and the existence of formal institutions. Sociological institutionalism posits, following the logic of appropriateness, that misfits between European and domestic norms and collective understandings exert pressure on domestic institutions. Whether the misfit leads to adjustment of the domestic institutions is dependent on norm entrepreneurs (that mobilise, persuade and redefine interests) and political culture (conducive to consensus-building and cost-sharing). Not surprisingly, given the opposing views on the explanation of domestic change and the debates on whether these views might be compatible, those studying the impact of Europeanisation have developed different perspectives on the mechanisms and process of changes. Knill and Lehmkuhl (1999) – studying the cases of environmental policy, road haulage and European railway policies – distinguish three mechanisms: The prescription of an institutional model to which domestic arrangements have to be adjusted; altering domestic opportunity structures (and thus the distribution of power

10

JEROEN HUISMAN ET AL.

and resources of domestic actors); and altering the beliefs and expectations of domestic actors. In a similar vein, Schmidt (2002) distinguishes between coercion at a high level (where member states have to follow a highly specified set of rules); coercion at a less high level (where the rules are less highly specified, leaving leeway for the domestic actors); mimesis (where the supranational actor only suggests rules) and regulatory competition (where rules are not specified). To explain different domestic responses to similar European challenges, Schmidt (2002), analysing European Union (EU) policies characterised by different levels of adjustment pressures, points at the role of economic vulnerability (the presence or absence of economic crisis; competitiveness in capital and product markets), political institutional capacity (policy actors’ ability to impose or negotiate change, depending upon political interactions and institutional arrangements), policy legacies (‘‘fit’’ with long-standing policies and policy-making institutions), policy preferences (‘‘fit’’ with the old preferences and/or openness to new) and discourse (ability to change preferences by altering perceptions of economic vulnerabilities and policy legacies, and thereby enhancing political institutional capacity to impose or negotiate change). Menon and Hayward (1996), reflecting on the impact of European industrial policies and trying to explain the varying impacts at national levels, refer to ambiguities in the supra-national regulations, the absence of supportive European resources, the power of the nation states and the preferences of those involved in national policy-making. At the same time they point at other factors of influence, beyond European policies, that impact national policies (e.g. globalisation, technological developments, and finance; see Ohmae, 1990). Reframing the Impacts of European Policies An interesting question is to what extent the literature on the domestic impact of Europe is (or should be!) fundamentally differing from ‘‘traditional’’ policy analysis. In other words, do we need a specific theory of domestic change, taking into account the peculiarities of Europeanisation, or would it be as (or more) profitable to rely on the abundant existing literature on policy development and implementation? At first sight, the mechanisms and explanations formulated above resemble the factors of influence discerned in the policy sciences literature. What follows is not so much a plea to go back to the roots of policy analysis, but to reframe the factors of influence mentioned by the authors in the previous section. In general, the literature on policy development and implementation distinguishes the following factors that impact the effects of policies: The

Explaining Domestic Responses to European Policies

11

nature of the (objectives and instruments) policy to be implemented; the capacities of the actors assumed to carry out the policy as well as the dispersion of power across the actors involved; the objectives (including the norms and values) of those actors; and the institutional structure of the field in which the policy should be implemented (see e.g. Hill, 1993; Howlett & Ramesh, 1995; Sabatier, 1999). Of course, analysts differ in their views regarding the importance of different factors. Some stress the role of institutional rules (e.g. Ostrom, Gardner, & Walker, 1994), or emphasise the formation of coalitions of actors in the policy process (Sabatier & JenkinsSmith, 1993; Sabatier, 1999), while others stress the preferences and cognitions of actors involved in the policy process (Scharpf, 1997). If we reorganise the factors of relevance mentioned by researchers on Europeanisation, and put them under the headings of the ‘‘traditional’’ policy analysis literature, the overview in Table 1 can be presented. Admittedly, some of the factors mentioned by analysts of Europeanisation might fit other factors of relevance from the ‘‘traditional’’ policy analysis literature (as well). At the same time, it is clear that the distinction between the four (sets of) factors stemming from the policy analysis literature is not unambiguous, that is, the conceptual differences may not always be empirically recognisable. The point is that the, however short, journey into the Europeanisation literature shows that many factors fit those derived from the general policy analysis literature. At the same time, most of the European analyses do not cover all potentially relevant factors from that literature. An explanation would be that the analysts have focused on the specific area of interest, in which certain factors are obviously more important, but thereby neglecting other theoretically important factors. This explanation does not disqualify the analyses, but simply indicates that the generalisability of their findings (in addition to the problem of different conceptualisations of important factors) is low. Therefore, we will use the factors from the policy analysis literature and apply these in the context of our research question.

THE FACTORS IN THE CONTEXT OF EUROPEAN POLICIES REGARDING HIGHER EDUCATION The Nature of Objectives and Instruments of the European Policy Before describing the actual objectives and instruments of ERASMUS, we pay attention to the context of the EU’s authority in education. Education,

12

JEROEN HUISMAN ET AL.

Table 1. Factors Impacting Policy Effects/Domestic Change. Policy Analysis Literature The nature of objectives and instruments of the policy

Institutional structure

Objectives (including norms and values) of actors

Capacities and powers of actors

Research on Europeanisation The extent of adjustment pressure (Schmidt, 2002), ambiguity of Europeanisation (Sverdrup, 2000), the cognitive impact of Europeanisation (Radaelli, 1997), nature of European requirements (Knill & Lehmkuhl, 1999), joint decision trap: separation of decision-making and policy implementation (Scharpf, 1988) Policy legacies; economic vulnerability (Schmidt, 2002), path-dependency of European-level developments (Sverdrup, 2000), multiple veto points and formal institutions (Bo¨rzel & Risse, 2000), histories, traditions, cultures, constitutional arrangements and administrative systems (Menon & Hayward, 1996), stage of integration into EU (Hanf & Soetendorp, 1998) Policy preferences and discourse (Schmidt, 2002), institutional misfit between European and domestic policies and processes (Bo¨rzel & Risse, 2000), political culture and other informal institutions (Bo¨rzel & Risse, 2000; Mouritzen, Weaver, & Wiberg, 1996) Political institutional capacity (Schmidt, 2002), norm entrepreneurs (Bo¨rzel & Risse, 2000), interest intermediation (Kassim & Menon, 1996)

in contrast to many other policy areas, is by and large outside the formal realm of supra-national authority. Throughout the history of European integration, national governments have been very hesitant to transfer national responsibilities in education (but also culture) to the European level (see e.g. Brouwer, 1996; Neave, 2003). Education was considered a principal responsibility of the nation state. Consequently, the competencies are very limited and based on the subsidiarity principle (the Commission’s power to take initiatives is limited to those instances where member states cannot achieve an objective of their own; a compromise between proponents and opponents of an active communitarian education policy), positioning the EU in a supplementary and supportive role, fully respecting the responsibilities of

Explaining Domestic Responses to European Policies

13

national governments regarding the contents of education, the structure of the educational systems, and the nations’ linguistic and cultural diversity. In Scharpf’s (2001) terminology, the multi-level interactions between the European level and the national governments are most aptly captured by ‘‘mutual adjustment’’ and ‘‘intergovernmental negotiations’’ (instead of ‘‘hierarchical direction’’ and/or ‘‘joint decision’’). This neither implies that the nation states were against co-operation, nor does it imply that there are no competencies at all at the European level. The EU has, for instance, an important role in the recognition of professional qualifications. Also, through time, it has become clear that it is hardly possible to clearly distinguish between areas where the EU has competencies and those where the EU has no competencies, particularly given the presumed importance of the role of education in the European economy (mobility of labour). The Maastricht Treaty (1992) more or less codified the existing practice of supra-national (financial) support for co-operation (Verbruggen, 2002), and formalised the extension of EU activity from vocational training into higher education. The New European Treaty (Convention) that was agreed in 2004 left the legal framework for Community action in the field of education unchanged. However, the European Commission’s role in promoting coordination (e.g. by introducing guidelines, indicators, promoting best practice, etc.) is growing through the so-called ‘‘open method of coordination’’, especially in the context of the Lisbon process (Huisman & van der Wende, 2004). The limited competences of the EU in the area of education policy obviously restricted the choice of policy instruments. The support of student mobility and institutional co-operation were in first instance the only legitimate instruments, which constitute the basic elements of the ERASMUS programme. The first version of the ERASMUS programme was decided upon by the European Council in 1986. It would run for 4 years, but in 1989 the programme was extended for 5 years. The main objective of ERASMUS was the increase of the number of higher education students spending an integrated period of study in another member state, meant as a step towards the creation of manpower with experience of economic and social conditions in other member states (de Wit & Verhoeven, 2001, p. 189). A target of 10% of EC students was mentioned. The instruments at hand were:  Student grants (the European budget to be distributed proportionally across the member states; national agencies being in charge of the administration of the programme) covering mobility costs for those students being mobile in the framework of networks of departments of the

14

JEROEN HUISMAN ET AL.

Inter-university Co-operation Programmes (ICPs). The departments were required to recognise the mobile students’ achievements abroad and had to accept that students did not pay fees to the foreign host institution (Teichler, 1996, p. 154). The participating higher education institutions would also receive moderate budgets for institutional support of mobility.  Financial support for projects enhancing mobility, such as projects on academic recognition of diplomas and periods of study, projects on developing information networks (e.g. the Network of Academic Recognition Information Centres, NARICs), projects relating to the development of an European Community Course Credits Transfer System (ECTS), projects relating to the development of joint curricula, and small research projects. In 1995, the instruments and procedures changed somewhat, when the ERASMUS programme was integrated in the 1995–1999 SOCRATES programme (an EU umbrella programme for general and higher education). The aim of SOCRATES was to contribute to the development of quality education and training and the creation of an open European area for cooperation in education. An important development shortly before the launch of the new programme was that education had been taken up in the 1992 Maastricht Treaty. Education was considered important in the development towards economic and monetary union, and therefore taken up as one of the competencies of the European Commission. However, the principle of subsidiarity was maintained: What the member states could achieve independently should be arranged by the member states. The overall objective of ERASMUS did not change that much, although the objective of creating a European dimension in higher education was more explicitly formulated. The instruments also changed somewhat: A greater stress on benefits for a larger group of students (including nonmobile students), notably through curricular innovation and teaching staff mobility, as well as improving administrative support for mobile students. As a consequence, a larger share of resources were reserved for curricular development and intensive programmes, and the promotion of ECTS. Also the concept of thematic networks (stimulating innovative concepts of educational change in networks of experts and key actors, focusing on individual fields of study or special issues) was introduced. Managerial aspects also changed (Lanzendorf & Teichler, 2002):  Each higher education institution had to submit an application containing all exchange and co-operation activities. The application would form the basis for an institutional contract (IC) with the European Commission.

Explaining Domestic Responses to European Policies

15

Part of the IC would be a European policy statement (EPS) detailing the institution’s European policy and the role of SOCRATES herein.  Participating higher education institutions were supposed to keep and provide on request written traces of established co-operation activities between them and other higher education institutions (by bilateral cooperation agreements). The managerial change of replacing ICPs by ICs (containing EPSs) seems trifling, but it is important to note that implicitly the new procedures put greater emphasis on the coherence of institutional goals, the role of the central level of the institutions, and strategic thinking in terms of setting clear targets (Kehm, 1998, pp. 9–10). However, the shift to institutional-decision-making and targeted strategies turned out to succeed best in institutions that wanted to move in that direction anyway, which was the case only for a small minority. The step towards co-operation at the institutional level also proved to be a difficult one. Institutionalisation of new curricula, and especially new type of degrees, was hindered by great barriers related to national system characteristics. Consequently, SOCRATES did not have the snowball effect which would lead to a new stage of co-operation in higher education in Europe. However, it did enhance the awareness of national system barriers to further European co-operation (Barblan, Reichert, Schmotte-Knoch, & Teichler, 2000; Huisman & van der Wende, 2004). The current ERASMUS programme (again part of SOCRATES, 2000– 2006) maintains the same objectives and instruments as the previous programme. The same activities are listed: Student mobility grants (action 2), support to organise student mobility, teaching staff mobility, intensive programmes, preparatory visits, ECTS, joint curriculum development, and thematic networks (action 1). From 2003–2004 onwards, for technical and efficiency reasons, the ICs are to be replaced by ERASMUS university charters (EUCs), fulfilling similar functions (www.europe.int.eu). Institutional Structure Regarding the possible inhibiting or stimulating elements of institutional structures, our attention goes particularly to the structure (and underlying norms and values as well as the history) of the higher education systems. One of the concomitants of the ERASMUS programme (or internationalisation activities in general) is that national systems of higher education, formerly mostly under the control of national governments, are becoming more open to the international scene. Of course, higher education systems

16

JEROEN HUISMAN ET AL.

have been permeated internationally for ages, but the scope has increased considerably. This openness makes higher education systems potentially vulnerable to external scrutiny, both of a positive and negative nature. In particular, negative scrutiny (e.g. mismatch between study structures, lack of quality or quality control, lack of credit-point systems and recognition, imbalance of in- and outflow of students and teachers) may challenge national governments to change their national strategies and policies, or as Neave (2003, p. 151) formulates it: ‘‘Institutional characteristics that once expressed national identity, genius, and preservation were now recast as obstacles to student mobilityydifferences in such matters as student fees, residentiality, variations in curricular content, and methods of student evaluationywere now viewed less as monuments to diversity than as examples of opacity, absence of transparency, and general agents of hindrance and obscurantism’’. It is of importance to highlight those institutional characteristics that debase national governments, in the sense that they can be held responsible for the stimulation or blocking of mobility. That is, the country’s climate may impact the attractiveness to foreign students, but not much can be done about it. Considering the possible features of influence (e.g. based on students’ motivations for studying abroad and the main problems encountered while staying abroad, see e.g. Maiworm and Teichler, 2002), we estimate that governments are most concerned about the (perceived) quality of the higher education system. Quality should be understood in a broad sense in this context, including the academic level of education, the smooth organisation of credit transfer, good academic and non-academic guidance, language courses, access to infrastructure, etc. In addition, it is important to look beyond the institutional structure of higher education and to take into account general arrangements, such as the regulatory conditions (e.g. visa or administrative matters in general) and mobility-related issues not directly related to higher education as such. For example, finding accommodation and the cost of living in the host country. A final point which we think is of influence is the country’s position in the EU. We think that the national government’s perspective on EC programmes and policies will be coloured, dependent on whether the country is a longstanding member of the EU, a new member state or an accessing country.

Objectives of Actors The Europeanisation and public policy literature suggests, maybe not so surprisingly, that a clear mismatch between European objectives and

Explaining Domestic Responses to European Policies

17

domestic policy objectives decreases the chances for easy acceptance and implementation. This set of factors coincides to some extent with the factors relating to the nature of European objectives and instruments as such, but under this heading the focus is on the distance between European and domestic objectives or possible side-effects of European policies that run counter to domestic objectives. We expect that, in general, national governments will endorse internationalisation activities, for – as has been mentioned above – they are part and parcel of higher education (and research), and in line with academic values and ideas regarding the quality of education and research. Therefore, when a country has a predominantly academic rationale for internationalisation (considering it mainly as a means to improve the quality of education and research), European objectives (such as those of the ERASMUS programme) and national objectives can match very well. However, when countries have a more economic rationale for internationalisation (seeing it mainly as a source of institutional income and/or as a way to enhance economic competitiveness) education, European objectives focusing on co-operation may be seen as less supportive to the countries’ objectives. In Europe, a trend towards more economic rationales for internationalisation is observed (van der Wende, 2001; Huisman & van der Wende, 2004). Furthermore, there are some limits to unconcerned support for mobility. Mobility may be a catalyst for brain-drain (temporary mobility leading to long-term mobility and domestic shortages in manpower). Another element worth considering is the objective of national governments to preserve the domestic culture, including the language. Internationalisation can, of course, be seen as a means to promote the national language, but particularly for countries with ‘‘small languages’’, increasing mobility may put a pressure on the higher education system to use a much-spoken language as the language of instruction. A final barrier to be mentioned, particularly in the context of ERASMUS, is that national governments, in terms of student and staff mobility and international co-operation, may want to focus on other geographical areas than Europe: The U.S. and former colonies being the most obvious examples. The latter barrier should not be seen as the most important barrier, for a focus on Europe in the ERASMUS programme does not block mobility to other continents completely. In the worst case (from the domestic perspective) the mobility flows may change towards mobility within Europe. In the best case, mobility increases: The ERASMUS programme attracts students who otherwise would not have thought about spending a study period in another country. The situation in the U.K., however, should be seen as the

18

JEROEN HUISMAN ET AL.

possible exception to this pattern. Here, ERASMUS could counteract the considerable stress on the export of higher education. Efforts in the area of ERASMUS mobility go at the cost of offering positions to full fee paying international students, the latter being of much more interest to higher education institutions from an economic perspective.

Capacities and Powers of Actors Regarding the capacities of actors, we are almost immediately inclined to translate this into financial capacities. Indeed, when national governments lack the financial means to support internationalisation activities (in particular student and staff mobility), this will be a barrier. In the case of the ERASMUS programme, however, the financial support is granted by the European Commission and national governments are free to offer additional support (either by supplementing grants or by establishing mobility grant systems). With respect to the powers of actors, there may be important actors that are able to block policy initiatives if such policies are detrimental to the objectives of those actors. Of particular relevance is the possible resistance of the academic oligarchy against intended change brought about by governmental policies. In the case of internationalisation in general, and student and staff mobility in particular, we estimate that the resistance will be marginal given that these aspects of internationalisation are part and parcel of higher education.

Expectations on the Impact of ERASMUS Analysing the nature of the objectives and the instruments, we come to the following expectations. The objectives regarding mobility and co-operation are considered not to be at odds with domestic objectives: Knowledge production and exchange are almost by definition an international activity, although the importance may differ from discipline to discipline and profession to profession. Objectives related to improving mobility and cooperation are, therefore, not seen as detrimental to national objectives. The instruments are directed at (departments of) higher education institutions; they engage in a contract with the European Commission, which involves grants for student mobility and subsidies for activities relating to improving the mobility in exchange for compliance with administrative efforts (e.g. annual reporting). In conceptual terms the instruments offer the participant,

Explaining Domestic Responses to European Policies

19

on a voluntary basis, extensions to their ‘‘regular’’ activities; they do not restrict higher education institutions, nor force them to comply with the opportunities. The quantitative impact of the relatively soft instruments is considered limited, for the total budget per higher education institution is only a fragment of the total budget of the institution, and only a minority of students is involved in the programme (although it is fair to state that through time participation, both in terms of students and higher education institutions involved, and accompanying budgets increased). Furthermore, mobility through the ERASMUS programme was not the only mobility or exchange programme. In a number of countries, existing programmes already took care of mobility and exchange, also involving other than EU countries, leaving aside ‘‘spontaneous’’ mobility (Gordon & Jallade, 1996). In some countries, only a minority of mobile students are supported through ERASMUS. It is important to note that the objectives and instruments of ERASMUS do not pertain directly to the national governments, apart from the fact that the ERASMUS programme requires a national agency to administer the national execution, and that national representatives have a seat on the EU SOCRATES Committee. As such, we hypothesise that the ERASMUS programme – given the nature of the policy objectives and the specific instruments – hardly impacts national policies (this is not a disqualification, for it was not the intention of the programme to influence national policies!). Teichler (1996, p. 176) concludes that ‘‘ERASMUS was extremely successful in contributing to a breakthrough in the public awareness of the value and relevance of temporary study in another country’’. According to Field (1998, p. 115), it is more critical. He maintains that the EU’s influence should not be exaggerated, pointing at the low percentage of students involved (4% instead of the 10% aimed at: Although it has always been unclear whether the ‘‘10%’’ refers to the total amount of students enrolled, to first-year students, or to the number of graduates (van der Wende, 2002)), the differences between the member states regarding import and export of students, and at the considerable role of non-EU mobility. This expectation is supported by previous findings of studies on the impact of ERASMUS. van der Wende (2001, p. 435) concludes, on the basis of a survey among persons involved in internationalisation policy-making: ‘‘It seemed that respondents had difficulties in indicating any concrete or direct impacts beyond the specific area of internationalisation.yit seems justified to state that the SOCRATES programme so far has not led to direct system level changes or other types of new orientations in the national higher education policies. Its clear impact seems to be limited to the level of

20

JEROEN HUISMAN ET AL.

institutions, curricula and the experience of individual students and academics’’. One could argue that ERASMUS increased the awareness of national governments regarding the (growing) importance of internationalisation. However, here it should be noted that the increasing importance was also already visible in the increasing interaction on higher education policy between national governments in the context of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, for example, the establishment of the Centre for Educational Research and Innovation (CERI) in the 1970s, and the national education policy reviews; and UNESCO, for example, the establishment of the International Institute for Education Planning in 1963 (see van der Wende, 2002). The theoretical argument and the higher education literature suggest a very modest impact of the ERASMUS programme. There may, however, be differences across countries, particularly relating to mismatches between:  Objectives of national governments and general internationalisation objectives of ERASMUS (relating to the problem of brain-drain and preservation of the national culture and language).  Institutional structure (e.g. perception of the quality of the higher education system)  Capacities of actors involved (e.g. financial barriers). In addition, it can be argued that there are long-term indirect impacts of the ERASMUS programme, specifically relating to institutional structure. As has been stressed above, increasing mobility and, consequentially, increasing openness of domestic higher education systems, may raise questions of comparability of degrees and quality. Such questions may prompt national governments to develop suitable policies addressing issues concerning degree recognition, credit transfer and the like. We expect, however, that these long-term indirect impacts will be modest, the most important reason being that internationalisation in many European countries is, despite increasing mobility, still not a core element of the higher education system and policymaking. In other words, issues like degree recognition and credit transfer have been important and are through time becoming more important, but still the issues pertain to a small percentage of the student body. In sum: We expect a modest impact of ERASMUS on national policymaking, and if there are impacts these will mainly be indirect and in the long term. If there are differences across countries, these will mainly be due to differences in national objectives and institutional structures.

Explaining Domestic Responses to European Policies

21

METHODOLOGY To test our expectations, we designed the following methodology. We analysed, for the (then) 15 EC countries and for Liechtenstein, Norway and Iceland, the policy developments regarding internationalisation since the mid-1980s, and carried out individual and group interviews with those involved in policy-making in general and internationalisation policies specifically. The interviewees consisted of civil servants of the relevant ministries, and sometimes representatives of national organisations involved in carrying out elements of the internationalisation policies were interviewed as well. The desk research analysis of policy developments was used as the input for the interviews, as well as a set of three statements regarding the possible impact of ERASMUS on domestic policy-making (see van Brakel et al., 2004 for details).

RESULTS The analysis of internationalisation policies (and the role of ERASMUS) in the respective countries revealed the following. In most of the countries, internationalisation policies emerged in the 1970s and 1980s. Encompassing internationalisation policies are however of a more recent date (see also Ka¨lvemark & van der Wende, 1997; Huisman & van der Wende, 2004). The Bologna process has reinforced the linkages between internationalisation and general higher education policies. The ERASMUS programme, particularly in its first years of existence, has contributed to the integration of internationalisation into general higher education policies. The analysis makes at the same time clear that ERASMUS predominantly had an impact on the higher education institutions themselves (see also Barblan et al., 2000). At the same time, the growing internationalisation activities of both students and higher education institutions increased the awareness of national governments of the importance of internationalisation. It stimulated the governments to take action in areas closely linked to mobility, such as additional mobility programmes or additional grants for ERASMUS students. In some countries, however, ERASMUS did not have this impact because internationalisation policies were already high on the policy agenda of either the government or the higher education institutions. In addition, it should be mentioned that a large amount of mobility takes place outside the

22

JEROEN HUISMAN ET AL.

ERASMUS programme; policy effects should in this case be attributed to mobility in general and not ERASMUS solely. In this context it is also relevant to mention that specific national contexts were to a considerable extent determining the pace and direction of internationalisation policies. The documentary analyses and interviews revealed that, for instance, growing international competitiveness, globalisation, marketisation and the increasing role of the knowledge society (developments we captured under the heading of global warming type changes) have been important as well in impacting domestic policies regarding internationalisation. Further evidence of ERASMUS’ limited impact is that interviewees confirmed the growing awareness of the importance of internationalisation in higher education policy, but were not able to explain clear-cut connections between the ERASMUS programme and specific domestic policy initiatives (beyond complementary domestic mobility programmes and additional grants for ERASMUS students). In more recent years, governments have paid attention to policy issues other than those closely linked to mobility: The comparability of degrees, the convergence towards an undergraduate/ graduate structure, quality assurance mechanisms, etc. Whereas there are certainly links between the ERASMUS programme and these domestic policies, the Bologna process was considered to be of much more importance than ERASMUS. A number of interviewees, however, stated that the Bologna process would have been different (particularly would have developed much slower) if ERASMUS would not have been launched. Fig. 2 graphically depicts the essence of the dynamics regarding the impact of ERASMUS on national policy-making: ERASMUS particularly had a direct impact in terms of raising the awareness of national governments. Further direct impacts, more important than the impact on governments, were on the higher education institutions themselves and on students. Indirectly, the increase of internationalisation activities put certain issues (credit transfer, quality assurance and portability of student loans) on the higher education agenda of national governments. At the same time certain developments in the supra-national context of higher education (Bologna process, globalisation and marketisation) put pressure on national governments to pay attention to issues closely related to internationalisation. Through the documentary analysis and the interviews it became clear that the developments in the supra-national contexts should be deemed more important as triggers for policy change than the specific ERASMUS programme. Regarding the different impacts of ERASMUS across countries, it became clear that specific national characteristics (relating to the objectives of

23

Explaining Domestic Responses to European Policies

NATIONAL CONTEXT

Student experience

awareness Erasmus

INTERNATIONAL CONTEXT

Globalisation, marketisation, competitiveness

National governments’ policies: -quality assurance -undergraduate/graduate -credit transfer -portability of grants -student grants/loans -ECTS -mobility programmes

Issue attention: -structures -credit transfer -quality -degree recognition

Sorbonne and Bologna Declarations

International activities and structures

Fig. 2.

Impacts of ERASMUS and other Policies/Factors on National Governments’ Policies.

governments, the institutional structure, capacities of actors) played a role. Amongst the most important factors were: 1. The size of the community (within and outside Europe) speaking the country’s language (Greece and Sweden versus the U.K. and Spain). 2. The (colonial) history of the country (Portugal and the U.K. versus Austria and Norway). 3. The importance of internationalisation vis-a`-vis other domestic issues (access issues in Ireland, long-study duration in Germany and Italy, underemployment in Spain in the 1980s, lack of balance between incoming and outgoing students in the U.K. and Greece). 4. The role and power of certain stakeholders vis-a`-vis the government (the relative independence of higher education institutions in the U.K. and Sweden, the strength of the academic community and employee organisations in Greece). 5. The length of the membership of the EU (the Netherlands and Germany versus Sweden, Liechtenstein and Austria).

24

JEROEN HUISMAN ET AL.

Most of these factors (1, 2 and 5) belong to the category of institutional structure (Table 1). The third and fourth factor can be categorized under the heading of the objectives of actors, although factor 4 may also be seen as an example of capacities and powers of actors.

CONCLUSIONS Our theoretical expectation on the modest direct impact of ERASMUS was confirmed by the empirical data collected. The nature of the programme and its specific instruments neither intended to nor actually did encroach national responsibilities for higher education. However, also in line with the expectations, there were important indirect effects that both affected the general pattern across Europe as well as some of the differences between the countries. Since ERASMUS had a considerable impact on the higher education institutions, certain issues (credit transfer, differences between national structures and degree recognition) became more important elements on the higher education policy agendas of responsible national ministries. Even more important, these elements appeared on the supra-national agenda in the context of the Bologna and (later) Lisbon process. The data show that, across Europe, national governments acted upon the elements on the policy agenda. In theoretical terms, the factors of influence on the indirect impact of ERASMUS were mainly in the domain of the institutional structure (policy legacies, see Schmidt, 2002) and the domain of the nature of objectives (adjustment pressure, Schmidt, 2002). Differences between countries are mainly due to elements of the institutional structure (language, [colonial] history and length of membership) and to some extent elements of the objectives of actors and/or their power positions. This leads us to the conclusion that elements of the institutional structure determined the impact of ERASMUS. We realise that one of the shortcomings of the research (as is the case with much research focusing on institutional structures) has been the lack of clearness on which factors belong to which category. The findings of this research allow us however, and this will be the next step, to go back to the policy literature for further clarification. We are less conclusive regarding the practical consequences of our research: What is/should be the future of the ERASMUS programme? Two issues are worth discussing in this context. First, if the aims of the Bologna process are realised it could very well be that mobility patterns change considerably. That is, instead of short exchange periods, the pattern could change to taking up a Bachelor’s programme in the country of origin and a

Explaining Domestic Responses to European Policies

25

Master’s programme in a foreign country. If such a pattern becomes dominant, mobility programmes limiting the length of the stay in a foreign country will be under pressure. Second, if the question on the future of ERASMUS is rephrased into the question of whether the ERASMUS programme should be extended beyond its initial objectives and instruments or whether the EU should use other instruments, the research hints at two important requirements for EU initiatives. EU initiatives should be of such nature that they can be easily adapted to and integrated with national policies; and the instruments should be targeted – as far as they do not yet contribute to it – towards the achievement of the Bologna objectives.

REFERENCES Barblan, A., Reichert, S., Schmotte-Knoch, M., & Teichler, U. (Eds) (2000). Implementing European policies in higher education institutions. Werkstattberichte 57. Kassel: WZI/ Universita¨t Gesamthochschule Kassel. Bo¨rzel, T. A., & Risse, T. (2000). When Europe hits home: Europeanization and domestic change. European Integration Online Papers, from http://eiop.or.at/eiop/texte/2000-015a.htm. van Brakel, R., Huisman, J., Luijten-Lub, A., Mausen, M., & van der Wende, M. C. (2004). The national and institutional impact of ERASMUS. Amsterdam/Enschede: PwC/CHEPS. Brouwer, J. (1996). De Europese Gemeenschap en onderwijs. Geschiedenis van de samenwerking en het communautair beleid op onderwijsgebied (1951–1996). Baarn: BKE. Field, J. (1998). European dimensions: Education, training and the European Union. London: Jessica Kingsley. Gordon, J., & Jallade, J.-P. (1996). ‘‘Spontaneous’’ student mobility in the European Union: A statistical survey. European Journal of Education, 31, 133–151. Hanf, K., & Soetendorp, B. (Eds) (1998). Adapting to European integration. Small states and the European Union. London: Longman. He´ritier, A., Kerwer, D., Knill, C., Lehmkuhl, D., & Teutsch, M. (Eds) (2001). Differential Europe. New opportunities and constraints for national policy-making. Boulder, CO: Rowman & Littlefield. Hill, M. (1993). The policy process. A reader. New York: Harvester-Wheatsheaf. Howlett, M., & Ramesh, M. (1995). Studying public policy: Policy cycles and policy subsystems. Toronto: Oxford University Press. Huisman, J., & van der Wende, M. C. (Eds) (2004). On cooperation and competition. National and European policies for internationalisation of higher education. Academic Cooperation Association’s Papers on International Cooperation. Bonn: Lemmens. Ka¨lvemark, T., & van der Wende, M. C. (Eds) (1997). National policies for the internationalisation of higher education in Europe. Stockholm: National Agency for Higher Education. Kassim, H., & Menon, A. (1996). The European Union and national industrial policy. In: H. Kassim & A. Menon (Eds), The European Union and state autonomy (pp. 1–10). London: Routledge.

26

JEROEN HUISMAN ET AL.

Kehm, B. M. (1998). SOCRATES and the European university agenda. In: A. Barblan, B. M. Kehm, S. Reichert & U. Teichler (Eds), Emerging European profiles of higher education institutions (pp. 9–65). Kassel: Wissenschaftliches Zentrum fu¨r Berufs- und Hochschulforschung, Universita¨t Gesamthochschule Kassel. Kehm, B. M. (2003). Internationalisation in higher education: From regional to global. In: R. Begg (Ed.), The dialogue between higher education research and practice (pp. 109–119). Dordrecht: Kluwer. Knill, C., & Lehmkuhl, D. (1999). How Europe matters. Different mechanisms of Europeanization. European Integration Online Papers, from http://eiop.or.at/eiop/comment/1999007c.htm. Lanzendorf, U., & Teichler, U. (2002). ERASMUS under the umbrella of SOCRATES: An evaluation study. In: U. Teichler (Ed.), ERASMUS in the SOCRATES programme. (pp. 13–28). Academic Cooperation Association’s Papers on International Cooperation. Bonn: Lemmens. Maiworm, F., & Teichler, U. (1996). Study abroad and early career: Experiences from former ERASMUS students. London: Jessica Kingsley. Maiworm, F., & Teichler, U. (2002). The students’ experience. In: U. Teichler (Ed.), ERASMUS in the SOCRATES programme: Findings of an evaluation study (pp. 83–115). Bonn: Lemmens. March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1989). Rediscovering institutions. New York: Free Press. Mazzarol, T., & Soutar, G. N. (2001). The global market for higher education: Sustainable competitive strategies for the new millennium. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. Menon, A., & Hayward, J. (1996). States industrial policy and the European Union. In: H. Kassim & A. Menon (Eds), The European Union and state autonomy (pp. 267–290). London: Routledge. Me´ny, Y., Muller, P., & Quermonne, J.-L. (Eds) (1996). Adjusting to Europe. The impact of the European Union on national institutions and policies. London: Routledge. Mouritzen, H., Weaver, O., & Wiberg, H. (Eds) (1996). European integration and national adaptations. A theoretical inquiry. Commack, NY: Nova Science. Neave, G. (2003). The Bologna declaration: Some of the historic dilemmas posed by the reconstruction of the community in Europe’s systems of higher education. Educational Policy, 17, 141–164. Ohmae, K. (1990). The borderless world: Power and strategy in the interlinked economy. London: Collins. Olsen, J. P. (2002). The many faces of Europeanization. Journal of Common Market Studies, 40, 921–952. Ostrom, E., Gardner, R., & Walker, J. (1994). Rules, games, and common-pool resources. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan. Peterson, J. (1996). Research and development policy. In: H. Kassim & A. Menon (Eds), The European Union and national industrial policy (pp. 226–246). London: Routledge. Radaelli, C. M. (1997). How does Europeanization produce policy change? Corporate tax policy in Italy and the U.K. Comparative Political Studies, 30, 553–575. Radaelli, C. M. (2000). Whither Europeanization? Concept stretching and substantive change. European Integration Online Papers, from http://eiop.or.at/eiop/texte/2000-008a.htm. Sabatier, P. A. (Ed.) (1999). Theories of the policy process. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Sabatier, P. A., & Jenkins-Smith, H. C. (Eds) (1993). Policy change and learning. An advocacy coalition approach. Boulder: Westview Press.

Explaining Domestic Responses to European Policies

27

Scharpf, F. W. (1988). The joint decision trap: Lessons from German federalism and European integration. Public Adminstration, 66, 239–278. Scharpf, F. W. (1997). Games real actors play. Actor-centered institutionalism in policy research. Boulder: Westview Press. Scharpf, F. W. (2001). Notes towards a theory of multilevel governing in Europe. Scandinavian Political Studies, 24, 1–26. Schmidt, V. A. (2002). Europeanization and the mechanics of economic policy adjustment. Journal of European Public Policy, 9, 894–912. Sverdrup, U. I. (2000). Ambiguity and adaptation. Europeanization of administrative institutions as loosely coupled processes. Oslo, Norway: University of Oslo. Teichler, U. (1996). Student mobility in the framework of ERASMUS: Findings of an evaluation study. European Journal of Education, 31, 153–180. Teichler, U. (1999). Internationalisation as a challenge for higher education in Europe. Tertiary Education and Management, 5, 5–23. Tight, M. (2003). Researching higher education. Maidenhead: Open University Press. Verbruggen, M. (2002). De Bolognaverklaring en het Europees onderwijs: Enkele juridische kanttekeningen. In: Onderwijsraad (Ed.), Het Europa van het hoger onderwijs (pp. 29–55). The Hague: Onderwijsraad. van der Wende, M. C. (1996). Internationalising the curriculum in higher education. In: OECD (Ed.), Internationalisation of higher education (pp. 87–137). Paris: OECD. van der Wende, M. C. (2001). The international dimension in national higher education policies: What has changed in Europe over the last five years? European Journal of Education, 36, 431–441. van der Wende, M. C. (2002). Higher education globally. Towards new frameworks for research and policy. Inaugural lecture. University of Twente. de Wit, K., & Verhoeven, J. (2001). The higher education policy of the European Union: With or against the member states? In: J. Huisman, P. Maassen & G. Neave (Eds), Higher education and the Nation State. The international dimension of higher education (pp. 175–231). Amsterdam: Pergamon.

This page intentionally left blank

28

STUDENT MOBILITY IN EUROPE: AN ACADEMIC, CULTURAL AND MENTAL JOURNEY? SOME CONCEPTUAL REFLECTIONS AND EMPIRICAL FINDINGS Vassiliki Papatsiba ABSTRACT The rise of the era of mobility, or at least of a rhetoric on the benefits of mobility for individuals, can closely be connected with the late modernity and optimist views of the self ’s capacity to adapt to the challenges posed by globalisation. Mobility thus becomes an act expressing the individual appropriation of an ‘‘enlarged’’ action-space, supposed to become less constrained by social determinism. According to this assumption, mobility can also be seen as a form of elective biography (do-it-yourself biography) and would favour the emergence of a freer individual. Results of the analysis of 80 student accounts on experiences of Erasmus mobility within Europe have shown that student mobility reinforces the individual belief of being able to face changing environments, to monitor the self and to be monitored as a self, and to take control on one’s life-path in a reflexive way, by accepting risks impelling new dynamics. From the students’ perspective, mobility experience seems to release impulses for personal International Relations International Perspectives on Higher Education Research, Volume 3, 29–65 Copyright r 2005 by Elsevier Ltd. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISSN: 1479-3628/doi:10.1016/S1479-3628(05)03003-0

29

30

V. PAPATSIBA

growth and individual autonomy. Yet this advantage, however important it may be, often dominates the other outcomes of a mobility period, such as cultural and political awareness, intercultural competence and enlarged feeling of belonging. This result creates a tension with views and expectations for students to become ‘‘culture carriers’’ and vectors of Europeanisation, since the pro-social and societal dimensions of student mobility outcomes, as an experience supporting cultural awareness and understanding, tolerance and civic conscience were less systematically present at the end of the stay abroad.

CONTEMPORARY DISCOURSES, IDEAS AND ASSUMPTIONS ON MOBILITY A Sign of Individual Appropriation of a Space of Action As in all forms of deliberate movement of persons, the hope for a better present or future elsewhere drives the individual to experience migration or mobility. In the context of the European Union (EU), to circulate freely, to take up employment and residence within a different EU country is a basic right provided by European citizenship. From a political viewpoint, this freedom of movement of goods, capital and people constitutes the key right of EU citizenship likely to give raise to European integration (Veil, 1998). Beyond the legalistic view of the free movement and the political project of integration, geographical mobility inside Europe, as a professional option or a style of life, rests on a gradually increasing social acceptance. One of the reasons for this recent trend is that European mobility breaks with previous and more recent forms of migration, which were marked by the seal of socio-economic inequality. Indeed, mobility is directed at new populations, especially the high skilled (Wihtol de Wenden, 1999, 2002; Kostakopoulou, 2001; Recchi et al., 2003), and consequently at more advantaged sociocultural milieu. However, one has to bear in mind that the ‘‘rosy’’ facet of mobility does not stand alone. Mobility also reflects existing socio-economic forces and constraints, and follows current socio-cultural models of behaviour. For instance, we should not lose sight that the rise of the era of mobility, or at least of a discourse on the benefits of mobility for individuals, coincides with the era of work segmentation, characterised by the decline and erosion of traditional social contracts between employers and employees (Carnoy,

Student Mobility in Europe: An Academic, Cultural and Mental Journey?

31

2000). Occupational structures and work arrangements are being transformed, initiating new work patterns. The conventional model of a stable, lifelong, linear career after one’s formal education no more appears as granted or as the only legitimate and worthy career path. Simultaneously, part-time and short-term jobs, job changes, and involuntary re-training and re-skilling are part of many people’s reality (Green, Wolf, & Leney, 1999; Moutsios, 2004). Consequently, life trajectories and projects undergo frequent revision. As Bauman emphasises, ‘‘‘sameness’ and ‘continuity’ are feelings seldom experienced nowadays either by the young or by adults’’ (Bauman, 2001, p. 148). However, recent sociological research on individuals who have experienced mobility within Europe reveals that there are not only benefits to free movement but also costs: therefore, building a complete, fulfilled life out of ‘‘mobility’’ is not as easy and obvious lifestyle as has been advocated (Favell, 2004). Mobility is mostly associated with non-definitive relocations and with active forms of individual linkage with the home country. Thus, unlike migration, mobility does not appear as a form of ‘‘uprooting’’, often accompanied by the feeling of loss of the home country, but like an experience of flexible ‘‘connectedness’’. Indeed, in the present context of exchanges of goods, information, scientific knowledge and cultural products, mobility is seen as an act of individual appropriation of an ‘‘enlarged’’ action-space (Papatsiba, 2003). The latter is perceived as being materially and symbolically widened, as less shaped by forces of social determinism. According to this assumption, mobility would favour the emergence of a freer individual.

Individualisation, New Possibilities and New Myths In this advanced phase of modernity, if, for the sake of discussion, we admit that the individual benefits from a greater scope for action compared to the past, these new possibilities would also imply uncertainty, and even risk taking. Hence, in an individual trajectory, the departure does not automatically predict the point of arrival. Indeed, this trajectory can include unpredicted phases concealing personal transformation, changes of social or occupational status, unexpected encounters or relational ruptures. As contemporary theories of modernity (Giddens, 1991; Beck, 1992; Lash & Urry, 1994) confirm, it is through both taking and dealing with risks that opportunities for development occur and the realm of possibilities opens up. The concept of risk is thus central to this societal conception. In his theory on reflexive modernity and the risk society, Beck accounts for the change in

32

V. PAPATSIBA

mentalities, concerning the unknown and less certain or pre-set, as akin to a new way of learning and acquiring mastery: ‘‘sources of danger are no longer ignorance but knowledge; not a deficient but a perfected mastery over nature; not that which eludes the human grasp but the system of norms and objective constraints established with the industrial epoch’’ (Beck, 1992, p. 181). The counterpart of this contemporary trend, bearing not only possibilities but also new forms of social conformism, pressure and coercion, is the increased feeling of individual responsibility towards one’s own realisation. In this context, the contemporary individual is pushed to embrace the objective to continuously promote oneself, and to be entirely in charge of inventing one’s own trajectory and life, and relationships with others. To be mobile thus becomes evidence of this capacity of active orientation, control taking and guiding one’s life-path. It indicates that the individual is able to face changing environments, instead of undergoing them passively (Baumgratz-Gangl, 1993), and of directing his/her life towards new learning acquisitions and also subjective growth and well-being. In other words, mobility becomes an act of individualisation. These trends bring with them supportive attitudes towards mobility. Positive representations are being woven into the practice of mobility, and transform it from a quasi-unavoidable choice into a wished-for and worthwhile experience. These representations evoke, on the one hand, the challenge of unknown settings bringing about enriching lessons, and, on the other hand, the distinctive potential of those who decide to take the mobility adventure path. For these ‘‘mobile’’ individuals, mobility is a multi-faceted experience. Sometimes it is seen as a personal challenge, a test to take up in order to become aware of one’s own abilities, or to push one’s own limits. Sometimes, it is a tactical decision in a rational educational or professional strategy. It can also combine elements of an entertaining break, or be motivated by the wish to escape from the routine and the already known. In addition to these rather conscientious characteristics, mobility can also involve an existential search for new psycho-social investments and new identifications. Yet, in all these cases, mobility represents a new form of expression, emergence and development of the self, a symbolic expression of individualisation. It is thus perceived as reflecting contemporary representations of individuality, which appeal for achievement, life choices and freedom. In other words it ascribes with the myth of individualisation. However, mobility can also be read through a more pro-social lens, focusing more on collective societal outcomes. Mobility experience can potentially militate against increasing social fragmentation and cultural particularism, as

Student Mobility in Europe: An Academic, Cultural and Mental Journey?

33

it is believed to support the development of global awareness, international understanding and cultural tolerance, especially when addressed to youth (Percheron et al., 1978). Since the 1970s, research on overseas students has stressed their role as culture carriers (e.g. Deutsch, 1970; Eide, 1970). Furthermore, given the present socio-economic context, requiring youth to prepare in order to live in a pluralist world, mobility is assumed to be a precursory sign of future citizenship behaviour and a feeling of belonging unbound by national frontiers (King & Ruiz-Gelices, 2003; Federico, 2003). A Feature of Elective Biography for Training by Default Mobility is thus understood to be a qualifying initiative, a form of training by default or experiential education. The assumption is made, and some research results support this, that experience of mobility enables individuals to better control unknown situations and to operate appropriately and efficiently in a foreign setting (e.g. Baumgratz-Gangl, 1993), to interrupt everyday routines and automatic judgements, and to question taken-forgranted assumptions of reality (e.g. McNamee & Faulkner, 2001), to be ‘‘open’’ to others and to co-operate with them in achieving objectives and resolving problems, to value diversity and to adopt a global perspective and worldview (e.g. Carlson & Widaman, 1988; Stier, 2003), and finally to increase reflective thought, self-reliance, self-confidence and personal growth (e.g. Kuh & Kauffman, 1984; Stier, 2003). Furthermore, mobility, more than a simple act of geographical relocation, becomes indeed a feature of ‘‘elective biography’’ (Beck & Beck-Gernsheim, 1999). In other words, it is a life stage built in a reflexive way, by accepting risks impelling new dynamics. According to Beck and Beck-Gernsheim, the elective biography is a form of ‘‘do-it-yourself biography’’, which always tends to be a ‘‘tightrope biography’’, understood as a ‘‘permanent state of endangerment’’ (Beck & BeckGernsheim, 1999, p. 157). In this view, mobility appears to be an option or even a lifestyle chosen for its potential for change, the unknown and risk, and therefore for bearing a promise of learning and personal fulfilment.

Student Mobility in Europe: A ‘‘Fine-Sounding’’ Political Concept but Pedagogically Forgotten As to mobility with educational purposes, in other words student mobility, this has progressively gained more legitimacy, in particular throughout the last

34

V. PAPATSIBA

15 years or so. It is not a simple coincidence that an unusual political promotion has been at work at the same time, especially given the EU’s initiatives in the higher education sector. A typical example of this development is the creation in 1987 of the Erasmus programme for student exchanges, and consequently for student mobility. For those who are familiar with this field, claims concerning the benefits of mobility for students (e.g. gains in maturity and personal enrichment, opening and socio-cultural resilience, and finally advantages in future professional career) are commonplace. These claims have been mainly formed on the basis of expressions of satisfaction from students who participated in student exchange schemes or other institutionally organised study abroad periods. They have also been backed up from various evaluations of these programmes, especially of the Erasmus programme (Maiworm, Steube, & Teichler, 1993; Teichler & Maiworm, 1997; Rosselle & Lentiez, 1999; Gordon, Maiworm, & Teichler, 2000). Some small-scale and fragmented studies have contributed to the longevity of a particularly positive picture of successful ‘‘study abroad’’ stories. The scattered literature on student mobility, and the very few in-depth studies, in addition to the weak conceptual work on this phenomenon, are some indicative signs of a field that has not reached maturity and has some way to go before doing so. Other researchers have also pointed to the lack of scientific enquiry concerning the processes involved and the effects on the individual of studying abroad (Ruiz-Gelices, King, & Favell, 2000). The value of international exchange (e.g. in terms of intercultural competencies) and pedagogical considerations (Stier, 2003) are also both largely unresearched. Several reasons have contributed to this situation. We could classify them into two large sets of political and scientific reasons, the first dealing with evaluation issues and the maximisation of benefits, and the second with the conceptualisation and the analysis of the nature of mobility outcomes. Within the first set, the assessment of organised mobility outcomes has proven to be a rather complex enterprise. The difficulty lies in there being no single rationales and expectations behind the promotion of student mobility (Papatsiba, 2003, 2005). Indeed, there are few universally accepted goals for international higher education and exchanges (Altbach & Teichler, 2001). For instance, the expectations of academics, business leaders, professional groups or policy bodies may be very different. As Altbach and Teichler have highlighted, ‘‘There are no commonly held goals for exchange and, as a result, no way of assessing results. Accountability without appropriate benchmarks and measures is impossible, and so far, these do not exist in the field of international exchanges.’’ (Altbach & Teichler, 2001, p. 18).

Student Mobility in Europe: An Academic, Cultural and Mental Journey?

35

Diverse goals and rationales do not only characterise student exchanges. Exchanges of secondary school pupils also reproduce this pattern. According to Bernard, the nature of pupils’ exchanges has a paradoxical aspect: although it provides satisfaction and a certain degree of success, it relies on a chain of constant ‘‘misunderstandings’’ between the involved parts (e.g. students, teachers, parents, institution) pursuing, each of them, diverse objectives and having different expectations (Bernard, 1996). Hence, sharing the same view, approach and aims is not a condition sine qua non for an initiative to be ‘‘successful’’ to some extent. Nonetheless, the maximisation of positive outcomes is a major concern for educators, policy-makers and researchers. Hence, it is important to gain insight on who benefits the most from study abroad experiences, in which conditions, and on the nature of these benefits. Yet, the first intimations that idealist views of student exchanges are weakening (within the community involved in supporting student mobility) can be found in caveats raised by Altbach and Teichler, and others about the growing awareness of the mixed outcomes of international mobility and exchanges (Altbach & Teichler, 2001). Within the scholarly community, social psychologists have repeatedly reported mixed outcomes of inter-group interactions including these of foreign students and their native counterparts (Selltiz & Cook, 1962; Stroebe, Lenkert, & Jonas, 1988; Coleman, 1996; Stangor, Klaus, Stroebe, & Hewstone, 1996). Concerning the second set of reasons evoking scientific motives, the conceptualisation of learning outcomes that stand outside the formal curriculum is in progress. Educational research has not focused on mobility as a pedagogical tool, since mobility does not fit within the mainstream activities of an educational institution, emphasising more conventional settings and regulated forms of learning. In addition, mobility is not a central feature of the life of an institution, which is primarily characterised by stability: in other words by those who stay and not by those who are on the move. Another characteristic of educational research is that few connections have been made between research on schools and pupils, and research on higher education and students. Therefore, potentially interesting investigations of pupils’ exchanges and the specific nature of mobility as an educational activity have not frequently informed research on higher education student mobility, and vice versa. With regard to research in social psychology, this has mainly tackled the question of stereotype formation and inter-group relations, and has not served as a strong research paradigm for analysing the effects of European mobility. Again here, political reasons interfere, not necessarily purposefully,

36

V. PAPATSIBA

with adopting a scientific stance. For instance, student mobility in Europe has been connected with the political goal of European integration. Mobile students are seen as agents of Europeanisation and vectors of ‘‘Europeanness’’ (e.g. Federico, 2003; Recchi & Nebe, 2003). Therefore, this political ideal has posed a filter on, or even a bias in the formulation of, research questions aiming at investigating ethnocentrism, intercultural competence, or students’ feeling of belonging and the degree of acceptance by locals. It is worth mentioning though that an important research concept in the field, known as the ‘‘contact hypothesis’’ (Allport, 1954; Amir, 1969) seems to have penetrated through larger spheres of audience than the scholarly community, and to motivate beliefs on the benefits of immersion in another society and culture. According to the idea entailed in the contact hypothesis concept, stereotypes are born out of social isolation and broken by personal acquaintance. Therefore, proximity would encourage personal contact and in turn would reduce cultural distance, prejudice and so on. However, as already reported, the universal and unconditional or naive validity of this idea has been highly contested by empirical results reported in the literature. Three major requisites have been reported as crucial determinants of successful contact: the status (equality vs. inequality) of the different groups in contact; the co-operative or competitive interdependence in the pursuit of common goals; the presence or absence of social norms supporting inter-group contact (Forbes, 2004). Consequently, simple contact does not systematically bring about understanding and tolerance. The intercultural approach has traditionally given an important place to the investigation of cultural shock and individual adjustment in cultural encounters (Oberg, 1960; Furnham & Bochner, 1968; Gudykunst & Kim, 1997), entailing a high degree of cultural distance which does not prevail within European cultures. Sociological enquiry has privileged the analysis of more conventional forms of migration where inequality has been the main component of the experience of less advantaged groups than students (Favell, 2003).

Empirical Investigation of Erasmus Experiences through Student Reports Within this political and scientific background, it is important to empirically investigate the effects on those who have experienced student mobility and to analyse the extent to which the expected benefits took place. This research project has questioned the student’s experience of mobility within the Erasmus/Socrates framework which enables students to undertake an agreed

Student Mobility in Europe: An Academic, Cultural and Mental Journey?

37

part of their studies in a European partner institution. During their stay, the so-called ‘‘Erasmus students’’ are confronted with a different academic system and culture, whilst they discover the ways of life in the host country. Beyond the recurring commonplaces on the benefits that the stay abroad is supposed to bring about, several questions have to be raised. A first set of questions concerns the specifics of studying and sojourning in a European country within the Erasmus programme. How do these students apprehend their Erasmus study-stay, and how do they perceive it from a personal viewpoint? A second set of questions tackle the outcomes of the immersion in another European country. How do students deal with change, difference or unfamiliarity in the academic, social and everyday life contexts? Finally, how do students perceive change in themselves? A set of 80 texts giving accounts of ‘‘Erasmus’’ periods abroad was randomly selected from the institutional archives of the French Regional Council of the Rhoˆne-Alpes in order to provide the empirical basis for investigating the above-mentioned questions. This regional (local) government was the first in France to set up an active policy for supporting studies and training abroad for higher education students in 1987. The regional scheme of relatively generous student grants and the European Community (EC) Erasmus grants appeared almost simultaneously, but the former had an international scope. This policy had a second characteristic of particular interest. During 10 years (1987–1997), a personal account of experiences of ‘‘studying and living abroad’’ was requested from those students who benefited from the regional financial support. Despite the instruction to produce a 10-page typed text, the number of words per text varies between 819 and 7.551. The mean value is 3.117 words and the median is 2.932. The total number of words for this corpus is 249,750. This administration had insisted on the personal character of the account which was meant to holistically embrace students’ experiences. A preliminary reading showed that the Erasmus stay was often described from the perspective of: steps to take to deal with administrative procedures and various practicalities related to initial settling in the new country; courses to choose and to validate; tourist visits to make and leisure activities; and finally everyday routines to install. This pronounced descriptive component gives these accounts a somewhat superficial aspect. However, it also facilitated the identification of the various challenges that students faced. During their temporary stay abroad, students were immersed in a multi-faceted foreign setting and not only had to observe, but especially to understand, learn, act and interact with others. The move from familiar settings involves adjustment, initiative and elaboration. It requires successful functioning in a

38

V. PAPATSIBA

foreign academic system, the building of new social networks and the testing of old ones, the adjustment of socio-cultural norms, the enrichment of personal cultural references, and the modification of representations of boundaries and the relationships between different types or levels of belonging. However, all these challenges were taken up to different degrees. In spite of the inevitable presence of social desirability aspects, the reader is confronted with texts that, in their own different ways, indicate differences in degrees of how individuals benefited from an expatriate experience. Several divergences were noticeable. Some of the writers confined themselves to describing settings and people, and telling a few anecdotes without expressing a substantial understanding of the specific nature of the contexts (academic or social) and culture they encountered. On the contrary, other writers adopted a reflexive position and their texts evoke deep changes in the student’s personal and social identity. A large variety of subjects (e.g. sciences, medical studies, business studies, human sciences, language studies, vocational training, etc.) and types of higher education institutions (university, selective higher education sector, technological institutes) were represented in the sample of 80 reports in which 37 students were male and 43 female. The students were in their third, fourth or fifth year, with the majority in their third year. Lastly, 11 European countries (Austria, Denmark, Germany, Great Britain, Greece, Italy, Ireland, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain and Sweden) constituted the host land for the temporary stay.

Methodological Premises and Analyses Choosing a corpus that falls under a particular institutional context was part of a purposeful research strategy. It aimed to ensure that the researcher’s assumptions and expectations about the benefits of intra-European student mobility did not interfere with the students’ views. The chosen texts constituted what historians would identify as a ‘‘primary source’’ (i.e. they were not produced as a response to specific research questions or a specific research design). This is not to say that the corpus is bias-free, or that the analyses conducted could not have introduced research bias later on. The institutional bias and the challenge of finding meaningful results from these student reports which existed independently from the research have been reported elsewhere (Papatsiba, 2001, 2003). A general underlying principle in all the analyses conducted was that the texts under scrutiny were revealing more about the reactions, stances,

Student Mobility in Europe: An Academic, Cultural and Mental Journey?

39

attitudes, representations and stereotypes of their writers than they did about the encountered settings. In other words, the analyses did not aim at establishing any truth statement about the host country, culture, people, academic system and so on, or whether students accurately observed and ‘‘objectively’’ reported the various situations. On the contrary, I was interested in the relationship that students developed with the encountered contexts and not in the peculiar ‘‘reality’’ of these contexts. The corpus of 80 texts was analysed at four levels using various techniques: 1. Content analysis (e.g. L’Ecuyer, 1987) and grounded theory (Glaser & Strauss, 1967). 2. Lexico analysis (e.g. Benze´cri, 1981; Bolden & Moscarola, 2000) supported by data-analysis software. 3. Critical discourse analysis (e.g. Benveniste, 1966; Perelman & OlbrechtsTyteca, 1970; Kerbrat-Orecchioni, 1999; Magri, 1995). 4. In-depth qualitative analysis based on concepts drawn from social psychology and intercultural studies (e.g. Boesch, 1995; Kae¨s et al., 1998; Schutz, 1987; Simmel, 1979; Todorov, 1986; Wagner & Magistrale, 1997). The research methodology focused on systematic analysis of three types of elements and indicators: first, the categories that students used to recount their experience; second, some indications of linguistic subjectivity vs. neutrality (or involvement vs. distance); and third, communication with the recipient as named in the texts (e.g. administration, peers or oneself) where rhetorical strategies containing truth claims or relativisations were made. Triangulation with results of quantitative analysis confirmed the validity of the initial qualitative design and subsequent results and interpretation. I will report here the methodology applied at the first stage of the research, which aimed at identifying the categories that students used to recount their experience, in other words the intelligibility of the Erasmus experience dimensions. In order to detect regularities and to identify the constant fields of Erasmus experience, the corpus was treated like a ‘‘single’’ text. This first approach sought to capture the invariant characteristics of the Erasmus stay, independently of the infinitely unique ways of dealing with the experience, which were analysed at a later stage of the analysis. Two techniques were used here: content analysis and lexico analysis, both assisted by data-analysis software (Alcest and Sphinx Lexica for French language). With regard to the content analysis, it was conducted on the

40

V. PAPATSIBA

whole content of the corpus following an inductive approach. It was based on two conceptually close approaches: 1. An ‘‘open model’’ of category-building (L’Ecuyer, 1987), according to which the researcher neither applies pre-existing categories to the data, nor favours certain topics. 2. A ‘‘grounded approach’’ (Glaser & Strauss, 1967) that developed a 43unit taxonomy based on topics emanating from the data itself, without being guided by any hypothesis that would have required the selection of discrete units of the discourse. Coding all the data provided a grid of analysis grouping the 43 sub-categories in 12 categories and in five second-order categories. Concretely, the grouping of items (at the level of the student texts) resulted in sub-categories (e.g. monuments, collective celebrations and customs, house market and prices, student behaviour in the lecture rooms, teachers’ authority, sports, encounters, etc.) which in their turn were gathered in categories (e.g. cultural inheritance, housing, studies, leisure, relationships), then, more synthetically, in second-order categories (e.g. landmarks and their functionality, sphere of individual action, images and traces of the subject) which indicated the main dimensions of the Erasmus experience. The categories remained close to rationales of natural categorisation, that people make spontaneously without any conceptual aim. These are indicated by terms ‘‘borrowed’’ from the vocabulary of the corpus, or, if they were re-phrased, it was without introducing a real change in the semantic level of the vocabulary used by students (e.g. cultural characteristics of people, housing, studies, practical environment of everyday life, etc.). On the contrary, the second-order categories constituted an attempt at conceptualisation. As such, they introduced a break with ordinary categorisations spontaneously composed by individuals in their effort of classifying and understanding the world. For instance, the second-order category ‘‘sphere of individual action’’ is not a spontaneous definition of a explicit phenomenon immediately available to the individual perception, but a proposition that reflects a certain analytical effort based on acquaintance with that phenomenon and its systematic exploration. Although the whole design aimed at the intelligibility of the dimensions of the Erasmus experience, it was not confined to the descriptive level only. Indeed, it allowed a progression towards a conceptual construction that had as its objective the elaboration of the type of relationship that students developed with their new settings, the host society and the ‘‘others’’. Thus,

Student Mobility in Europe: An Academic, Cultural and Mental Journey?

41

the panorama of situations exposed in the texts was organised on a continuum that aimed at presenting the students’ approaches to these situations: from an external or ‘‘outsider’’ positioning expressing cultural distance (second-order categories: (A) background context and (B) first landmarks and their functionality), towards a quasi-insider positioning expressing acquaintance and attitudes of proximity and understanding (second-order categories: (D) sociability and interpersonal relations and (E) images and traces of the subject). The categorisation is presented below: A

Background context A.1 Country, area, city A.1.a Geopolitical, economic and historical information A.2 Cultural inheritance A.2.a Monuments and churches A.2.b Urbanisation and architecture A.2.c Nature and climate A.3 Cultural characteristics of people A.3.a Cultural personality A.3.b Collective celebrations and customs A.3.c Life styles and rhythms B First landmarks and their functionality B.1 The university site B.1.a Buildings B.1.b Facilities and number of students B.1.c Administrative formalities B.2 Housing B.2.a House market and prices B.2.b Private vs. collective space B.2.c Comfort C The sphere of individual action C.1 Studies C.1.a Teaching and educational aims C.1.b Student personal work/workload/evaluation (credits) C.1.c Pedagogy C.1.d Teachers’ authority C.1.e Student behaviour in the lecture rooms C.2 The practical environment of everyday life C.2.a Transport, distances C.2.b Shops C.2.c Cost of living

42

V. PAPATSIBA

C.2.d Medical system and health care C.2.e Safety C.2.f Administrative procedures C.3 Leisure C.3.a Student societies, evenings and events C.3.b Sports C.3.c Trips and cultural visits C.3.d Leisure provision in the city D Sociability and interpersonal relations D.1 Communication D.1.a Linguistic aspects D.1.b Socio-cultural aspects D.2 Encounters D.2.a Solidarity and proximity D.2.b Distance and lack of understanding D.2.c The student seen by others E Images and traces of the subject E.1 The subject writing about his/her experience E.1.a Introducing oneself and motivations E.1.b The student-traveller: affective aspects of the transition E.1.c Success of a test/challenge E.1.d Learning outcomes and benefits E.1.e Expression of awareness E.1.f Back to France/future projects E.2 Personal positions in ‘‘commissioned’’ writing E.2.a Advice to successors: between instruction and subjective experience E.2.b Meta-level comments E.2.c Thanks/acknowledgements In addition to the qualitative analysis based on extracts from student texts, a quantitative lexical analysis, assisted by software, was used for the content analysis. The purpose was to measure the presence of each category in the texts and, therefore, the (quantitative) importance of each second-order category. It involved a first stage requiring the construction of lexical sets, named ‘‘dictionaries’’. This consisted in choosing words from the items, at the level of the student texts. These words were connected with a certain theme and were likely to represent this theme during the various measurements. Eleven dictionaries, of 19 to 88 words specific to the categories (A.1, A.2, etc., with the exception of the categories E1 and E2 that were

Student Mobility in Europe: An Academic, Cultural and Mental Journey?

43

represented by one common dictionary), were built, with a total of more than 600 words. To avoid the superposition of the categories, all the selected words were systematically examined to verify their semantic context. Several words were rejected because of their multi-semantic use. These lexical sets then represented the categories (A1, A2, etc.) of the categorisation, and after grouping them the five second-order categories (A, B, C, etc.) during the various measurements. The latter were measurements of intensity (i.e. total number of words of a dictionary found in the corpus divided by the total number of words in the corpus), and can be interpreted as follows: during the utterance, the writers consciously or not decide to use one word or another while drawing from the various repertories available to them that correspond to the dimensions they want to express. Measuring the intensity gives us an indication of the relative weight of these dimensions in the analysed discourse. In addition, a correspondence analysis enabled us to gain insight into the way these categories and second-order categories were related to each other.

EMPIRICAL RESULTS Gains, Acquisitions and Expression of Awareness For the purpose of this chapter, I will focus on a part of the findings drawn from the qualitative content analysis, based on the sub-categories that were not the object of lexical measurements. The latter were conducted at the level of the categories and above. In particular, three sub-categories, condensing utterances about: 1. the degree of success attributed by students to their experience (E.1.c); 2. their self-assessment of learning outcomes (E.1.d); 3. their expression of awareness (E.1.e), will provide the extracts discussed. These topics were included in the second-order category E, named ‘‘images and traces of the subject’’, which was formed by the most personal information given by students. Let us approach in a more detailed way the various student evaluations related to outcomes and formative effects of the stay abroad. The texts do not indicate what Erasmus students objectively learned during their studies and life abroad. Neither do they systematically designate the totality of acquisitions of which students would be aware at a given time. But it can be

44

V. PAPATSIBA

said that, at the time of writing, students mentioned certain acquisitions they attributed to their Erasmus experience, and that they personally valued or thought of interest to the various readers of the report. In other words, the assumption can be made that, without receiving an explicit request for providing an assessment of their experiences and subsequent benefits, students named some of the outcomes presenting intrinsically or extrinsically sufficient importance and value. From the start, we should highlight the very positive character of these evaluations, usually located in the conclusion section of the report. These evaluative statements can be distinguished from the rest of the text. They often provide a more positive picture of the stay, and are also written in an enthusiastic tone. However, throughout their texts, students provided many criticisms which contrast with their ‘‘rosy’’ conclusions and, therefore, with the overall particularly positive assessment of Erasmus experience. Trying to interpret the amendment of the final picture of the experience appears rather difficult. Indeed, several assumptions or explanations seem plausible, as for instance: the formal character of the report and students’ feeling of ‘‘duty’’ to assert ‘‘return on investment’’, legitimating the funding of the stay; issues of ‘‘loss of face’’ by revealing weak outcomes; finally, genuine satisfaction to have successfully taken up the challenge of studying and living in another country, accompanied by a possible overestimation of the positive aspects, through a global and posterior analysis of the experience. If we try to rely on students’ declarations, very few meta-comments were provided by them on their way of retrospectively looking at their experience. According to these indications, students valued acquisitions, since they have a lasting character, but considered the encountered problems as temporary. For instance, the writer of Report 74 recognised that the statements expressed a more ‘‘end-of-the-stay’’ positive stance. However, s/he argued that, beyond personality traits (i.e. being an optimist), the assets of Erasmus stay constituted a sustainable capital, whereas the encountered difficulties were only momentary: The assessment of this year is rather positive, but afterwards everything appears increasingly easier than during the stay. Then as I am an eternal optimist, only the benefits remain important and take the advantage on the transitory troubles and disappointments. [Report 74]

A frequent characteristic of the sections on the value that students attributed to the year abroad is the density of the remarks, like the relative absence of more explanatory comments. Often a single paragraph, even a single

Student Mobility in Europe: An Academic, Cultural and Mental Journey?

45

sentence, evoke a multitude of effects and in a great number of fields, as shown by the following quote: The personal, cultural, linguistic and professional enrichment is quite real. [Report 26]

The following extract is also eloquent regarding the multiple benefits of the stay and also more explicit at the same time. It condenses the potential benefits: linguistic competence, personal development, adaptability, and finally another positioning vis-a`-vis studies and home culture as well: This year of studies abroad was for me an experience of an exceptional richness. First of all, while continuing my training as civil engineer, I significantly deepened my knowledge of German. But especially, this stay offered to me what schools cannot teach, namely a development of personality, an adaptability, that is useful in both the personal and professional life. I took some distance which I believe to be particularly beneficial with respect to my studies in France and to my own culture. [Report 29]

By examining the semantic context of relevant words related to the vocabulary concerning outcomes, a first outline on the ‘‘lessons from abroad’’ and how the students indicate them can be provided. We observed that the notions of learning and enrichment (in different grammatical forms, e.g. verbs, nouns, etc.) were the most frequent. As regards the verb ‘‘to know’’ [savoir] (in all its forms – 241 occurrences), this leads to the register of strong advice and obligation (e.g. one needs to know, I should have know, it is necessary to know, etc.). It then does not seem relevant for the analysis of outcomes. However, the verb ‘‘to learn’’ [apprendre] (181 occurrences) provided a good introduction to the range of acquisitions. As far as students developed what they have learned (or not), they mostly referred to disciplinary and linguistic outcomes (linguistic outcomes are connected to the studies), followed by the benefits related to self-knowledge or acquisition of personal qualities. General outcomes are also mentioned frequently, as for instance: ‘‘I learned a lot throughout the stay’’, ‘‘I learned enormously during this year’’, etc. It is also interesting to note that, when personal outcomes are reported, the style of the speech is also personal and the impersonal form ‘‘one learns’’ is not used. As for the noun ‘‘learning’’ [apprentissage] (34 occurrences), it is mainly employed to indicate the learning of language, and new methods of teaching. Using it to indicate types of social learning is rare and rather revealing of a feeling of personal difficulty: difficult learning of life ‘‘in community’’, learning of the everyday life in a big city, etc. Whereas ‘‘learning’’ is used more in connection with the studies, or the experience of social situations giving the impression of a test, the word ‘‘enrichment’’ [enrichissement, used metaphorically to designate immaterial benefits] (13 occurrences) is

46

V. PAPATSIBA

closer to the private sphere and is often accompanied by the adjective personal (in 11 occurrences). Its adjective ‘‘enriching’’ [enrichissant] is more frequent (59 occurrences) and its analysis showed a balanced use between the academic, personal, general, relational and cultural benefits. Let us develop the content of acquisitions, as identified by the content analysis. We primarily classified them in to three main categories: 1. Academic, linguistic and intellectual outcomes. 2. Socio-cultural and relational outcomes. 3. Personal outcomes or outcomes related to self-perception. This analysis will be complemented by the presentation and discussion of statements of awareness emitted by students.

Academic, Linguistic and Intellectual Outcomes Above All, to Learn Something Different To start with, we should highlight that the academic experience was the most developed component in the students’ accounts. A synoptic insight into the sections presenting the experience of studying in a new academic environment with the Erasmus programme shows that students endeavoured to explain, in a detailed and lengthy way, several structural aspects of the academic system as multiple facets of their student’s experience as well. They described the general functioning of the system, its organising principles, the attended lectures and the content of their courses. They commented on the quality of the educational provision (compared to the French one), the required assignments and subsequent personal workload, the examinations and received grades, the role of the teachers, their pedagogic style, students’ participation during lectures and so on. In the part of the texts containing evaluative statements, students especially underlined having been confronted with the difference of another educational system and methods of teaching. This experience of difference, whether appreciated, or on the contrary perceived with a certain reserve during the stay, was widely valued by students as a self-evident good at the end of the stay. The writer of the Report 37 was informative on this aspect: according to his/her personal experience, but also according to the opinion of other Erasmus students, the strongest benefit of this academic year lied in the experience of a different organisation of the higher education system,

Student Mobility in Europe: An Academic, Cultural and Mental Journey?

47

approach of subject, methods of teaching, and finally requirements for the personal work of students: Abroad, one learns and sees different things that what would have seen at home. This is a common observation that I heard from all Erasmus students. The following year, it is necessary to catch up with the courses of one’s own institution. But, the most important is that one saw another way of teachingy[Report 37] This year in Germany enabled me to widen my knowledge, and moreover I was confronted with a new educational system and thus with new working methods, which compel to adapt more easily to new situations. [Report 74]

Concerning the evaluation of attended courses in terms of quality, it remains mixed: on the one hand, some affirmed to have widened [Report 74] or to have deepened their disciplinary knowledge, even their reflection about their subject [Report 39]. On the other hand, others appreciated less the academic outcomes, either because other assets were regarded as more distinctive and valuable [Report 53], or because the curriculum did not introduce new fields and objects, but repeated topics that students were already acquainted with [Report 51]: This Year Abroad, fully integrated into the curriculum offered by the Ecole centrale de Lyon, enabled me to deepen an advanced and demanding subject, and this in a foreign language. [Report 64] This last academic year in Italy, in Pisa, was for me of great importance concerning my personal development, as well as my reflection on my field of studies, i.e. History of Art. The Italian example enabled me to reflect on things that remain to be done in France and should be further developed. [Report 39] The assessment of this year, out of the French borders, is inevitably positive. Many innovative aspects, and an important training of which the technical aspect represents finally only a small part. Humanly, the outcomes are important, and not necessarily dissociated from the technical progression during this year. [Report 53] I think not to have acquired new knowledge, in the sense that I repeated what I did during the previous year, but I have discovered other working methods, another way of teaching that leaves students freer, more autonomous and thus more responsible. [Report 51]

Reading these quotes enables us to notice that, even if the academic content did not always satisfy students, their remarks, as a whole, preserved a positive tone. Language Learning Studying in a foreign academic system enabled students to acquire linguistic competence in the foreign language. The analysis showed that statements

48

V. PAPATSIBA

concerning language issues were more closely associated with the studies and professional prospects, and less with situations of informal communication. But, paradoxically, students did not further develop the linguistic aspect of their experience, except at the beginning of their account, where they recounted their arrival in the country and the subsequent phase of adaptation. Can one consider that this omission is a sign of an obvious evolution and a satisfactory command of the language at the end of the stay? It would seem that this is the case, since all students attested progress: Admittedly it [the stay] is enriching for my studies: different working methods and courses, fluent practice of the English languagey[Report 52] This exchange will have been for me of a great richness from an academic, cultural and personal point of view. It will have been the factor of a wide personal fulfilment, and will have allowed me to approach foreign languages with more facility and self-confidence. [Report 31]

The improvement of one’s linguistic abilities and capacity of communication in a foreign context represents an additional qualification to put forward on the labour market. Already, a small number of students took advantage of their stay to familiarise themselves with the conditions and the functioning of the labour market of the host country: From a professional point of view, the proficiency in English and my adaptation to British culture have allowed me to seek a job in Great Britain and to get familiarised with the job market mechanisms, the interviews and so on. I hope to be recruited in some months, bearing in mind that the British market is more dynamic than the French. [Report 49]

The Hoped-for Professional Added Value The analysis showed that students had assimilated the various discourses about the future benefits of studies and residence abroad in terms of career. Several hoped to be able to professionally benefit from this experience of expatriation, and to transform the various assets into professional competencies. Some evoked the prospect either of working for a company which operates on a European or international scale, either working abroad or staying in the host country: I know now how Germans work and carry out their life. That seems very important to me, especially if later, my job incites me to have contacts with Germany: I will have a vision of the structure and functioning of the German society. [Report 12]

Whereas students gave professional motivation as an important reason for participating in the Erasmus programme, at the end of their stay they approached this issue differently. This experience would bring about intellectual

Student Mobility in Europe: An Academic, Cultural and Mental Journey?

49

competencies which generally correspond to ways of thinking, being enriched and diversified by new and different points of view. Students, given the current social and economic context requiring mobility, open-mindedness and flexibility, considered it as an essential capital. They also placed it within the European economic context that modifies the professional ‘‘map’’ of possibilities and constraints by offering a larger space, but also, by requiring new qualifications: This six-month period spent in Germany was for me an invaluable experience. In the European era, studying and working abroad became a compulsory path in order to discover other mentalities, other ways of working and to acquire a kind of broadmindedness. [Report 25]

Broadening one’s intellectual scope, in other words acquiring new ways of thinking was considered relevant to future professional responsibilities. Students also reported outcomes on the psychological level evoking increased adaptability, seen as both flexibility and resilience, useful for professional purposes: This year enabled me to progress and prepared me very well for the working live of companies. Also, working in the field of Civil Engineering often requires many travels and now I know how to apprehend such a situation and how to live in a completely unknown city. [Report 13]

Socio-Cultural and Relational Outcomes Awareness of Cultural Diversity Students developed the cultural aspect of their experience that, according to them, resulted in an intense ‘‘cultural enrichment’’. A strong assertive tone characterised their evaluative statements about the cultural benefits of this period abroad without any mitigated or mixed conclusions: The experience of this Erasmus stay is thus very positive, the enrichment which one can draw from a socio-cultural point of view, as in one’s personal life, is invaluable. [Report 15]

The Erasmus stay was often an opportunity to create more contacts with other European or international students than with the local ones. Hence, the adjective ‘‘enriching’’ was frequently used to evoke cultural exchanges with other foreign students, whose diversity but also coexistence gave the impression of living in an exceptional context: I truly adored immersing myself in this enriching international environment, made of encounters with more tolerant people in general and more open-minded than those I had

50

V. PAPATSIBA known until then. I learned a lot about the various ways of being and thinking, the traditions and cultures of many countries. [Report 78]

In the following extract, the writer highlighted the discovery of the cultural difference that facilitated old perceptions, shaped by mono-cultural references, to evolve: Ultimately, the discovery of Spain constitutes the major experience of this year of Erasmus exchange. It clearly appears to me that this stay enabled me to refine my perceptions on human relationships, multiplicity of cultures and references. It also developed my taste in journeys and change of scenery. It was an intellectual training in parallel with a cultural discovery: there is much to learn from the everyday life, since one is compelled to confront the unusual and to develop adaptability. [Report 66]

Many other students also felt that the cultural difference tested and stretched their limits and enhanced their malleability. Seen from a different perspective, it can be said that the different socio-cultural context offered new opportunities to the individual to see what s/he is able to undertake, to surmount and to solve. Thus, in terms of benefits, cultural discovery appears to have provided a path towards a better self-knowledge, and thus is perceived as most beneficial at a personal level. In other words, the understanding of another culture as a complex symbolic system, and how to position oneself within it, or the acquisition of intercultural competence, was a weaker outcome compared to the personal outcome of adaptability and resilience. At an interpretative level, this operation of taking more advantage of the encounter with cultural difference and otherness at a personal level can contribute to understanding why students finally expressed an unreserved enthusiasm in their conclusions, whereas throughout the account of the stay, several signs of difficulties and incomprehension, even frank criticisms, were emitted with regard to the culture of the country host. The experience of cultural difference was less treated as a source of knowledge itself, enabling the individual to decentre from national norms and to acquire tolerance towards otherness, and more like a situation enabling, above all, the enhancement of the individual potential. Another part of the explanation lies in the meaning of the expression ‘‘cultural enrichment’’, as used by the students. That probably does not correspond to an intercultural learning, or to the development of a competence of mediation between the two cultures. Indeed, for the majority of the students, the contribution of the stay at a cultural level can rather be understood as an awareness of cultural diversity, which is often formulated as cultural discovery. This would only correspond to a first stage of a long and complex process related to the confrontation with otherness.

Student Mobility in Europe: An Academic, Cultural and Mental Journey?

51

Cultural Exchanges, Interpersonal Relationships Before further developing the socio-cultural and relational outcomes, we should highlight another finding that derived from the analysis of the whole content of the reports regarding student’s experiences of otherness. Two categories emerged from the accounts that were purposefully placed in two different places in the categorisation presented earlier: in the second-order category ‘‘background context’’ (A), and especially within the category ‘‘cultural characteristics of people’’ (A3), and in the second-order category ‘‘sociability and interpersonal relations’’ (D), and especially within the category ‘‘encounters’’ (D2). The former revealed a rather stereotypical perception of ‘‘people’’ as a homogeneous group of ‘‘others’’, sited at some distance from the student, acting as a non-involved observer. The latter, concerning sociability and encounters, condensed more detailed comments on students’ relationships, expressing socio-affective investments and more significant personal interactions than short-term contacts. For these students who privileged the relational approach to the other culture (second-order category (D)), the inter-individual bonds were given an important place in the Erasmus experience narrative. For them, confronting oneself with the cultural otherness meant encounters, relationships and communication with others, whereas for others the feeling of testing one’s own limits and increasing one’s own adaptability was predominant. Students who emphasised the relational aspect of the encounter with otherness, underlined the outcome of greater disposition towards pro-social behaviour. Thus, the cultural exchange was perceived as an opening to others with whom they learned to interact on a daily basis and to live together: Sharing the everyday life with students of various nationalities helps to better learn cultures, societies, individuals. It is indeed, while living permanently in a certain environment, that one can familiarise oneself with this environment and can thus better understand it. After ten months spent abroad, one acquires a greater broadmindedness, and therefore is able to turn more easily to others. [Report 69] The fact of being in a foreign environment enables to develop sociability. The sense of one’s human contact is being tested on several occasions during the phase of adaptation through which each student has to pass. This phase of adaptation involves several types of integration: integration within the institution, but also integration in the everyday life of the host country, and especially integration in people’s life. [Report 31]

To sum up, the major outcome for those who explored cultural difference by adopting a relational approach was not only the awareness of cultural difference, but also its recognition and acceptance without hierarchies

52

V. PAPATSIBA

and favouritism: societies continue to evolve ‘‘successfully’’ while being organised differently, with other ways of thinking and living, with different values and sensitivities. In our sample, this approach was adopted by approximately one-third of students. More commonly the cultural context was treated less like a complex and evolving set of shared values and knowledge, and more as an access towards a new individual potential, as a new sphere of individual activity.

Personal Outcomes Evolution of the Perception of Oneself I previously highlighted the positive and unconditional character of the evaluative statements emitted by students at the end of their stay. The possibility to verify the extent to which these reported assets did really correspond to genuine acquisitions, or rather expressed an exaggerated view of benefits, does not exist. As to personal benefits, it is possible to resolve the issue of objectivity by focusing on the self-perception. Thus, the subjective aspect prevails and what is important is to see what the person believes s/he is, having become or can become. The difference in how students perceive and portray themselves constituted one of the most remarkable individual evolutions which occurred after the Erasmus stay. The person, the individual abilities, aspirations, projects were placed in the centre of the experience and became an object for introspection, analysis and knowledge: This year spent away from the French university life enabled me to take distance and to examine my ambitions, my expectations, but also my capacities. [Report 74]

There certainly the value of the stay resides, such as it is perceived by students just after their return. Maturity, Autonomy, Responsibility Let us try to approach this evolution of the self-perception. The preceding extract mentions the possibility of taking some distance and reflecting on oneself. This attitude brings about a feeling of maturity, understood as conscience to better know oneself. For the writer of Report 52, the idea of maturity is associated with accumulation of experiential lessons through discovery, in other words through unknown, unexpected, new situations that provide the individual

Student Mobility in Europe: An Academic, Cultural and Mental Journey?

53

with a capital of experience: I think that one year abroad brings a lot! I think of having become more mature more tolerant and more knowledgeable in many fields, thanks to this year of discovery. [Report 52]

Maturation can also be regarded as a process which leads to adulthood. What are its characteristics such as presented in the texts? Initially maturation is approached like emancipation from family support. Youth learn how to count on their own resources, how to regulate their relationships to themselves and to the world without external intervention from their family. In other words students speak about acquisition of autonomy: There is something else: the kind of experience offered to voluntary students by Erasmus is, according to me, an excellent therapy to learn how to deal alone. Far from one’s family, and it’s assistance (invaluable), it is necessary to learn how to manage one’s own time, money, and general rhythm of life. It is, without doubt, the best means of managing with only one’s own resources. [Report 15]

Students are unanimous concerning this beneficial facet of a stay abroad. This reported increased autonomy is also linked to an increased feeling of responsibility towards the others, and oneself ’s present and future: To find myself alone and obliged to deal with myself, to manage my time and my work, made me certainly much more autonomous and independent (I was not before). In fact, now I feel more responsible for my own destiny. [Report 78]

Thus, through all these situations, allowing discovery and experience of different realities, students were given the opportunity to reach less known and affirmed facets of themselves, to adjust their ambitions and expectations, to set objectives and to acquire self-confidence: Moreover, being alone and confronted with oneself, one is obliged to give the best of oneself, simply in order to benefit from the stay abroad. Everyone makes his own relationships, takes his near future in hand and gives evidence of initiative. [Report 69]

To Change, to Become Different Acquiring self-confidence enables one to find support in oneself and also to be more inclined to decision-making. All these negotiations between oneself and the world, oneself and the others, oneself and oneself, are a sign of identity changes. By confronting oneself with the difference, the individual can develop new answers, new behaviours, new attitudes and representations which give him/her the impression of having changed: My stay in Germany, one year of studies, one year of another culture, other people, I cannot prevent myself from looking at it as a successful experience. Am I only satisfied?

54

V. PAPATSIBA No, I am delighted and content to have taken up the challenge. I changed, everyone tells me that, but I can also feel it. [Report 79] Personal Enrichments: I did not think, while arriving in Siegen first and in Newcastle a few months later, than in one year’s time, I could change so much. At the end of June and without any doubt, it is another person who will get back to France. [Report 69]

In the above cases, it seems that a discontinuity has been introduced into the representation of oneself; thus, there is a before and an afterwards. To Become Adaptable A less radical and more frequent reported change was the acquisition of adaptability. The person believes that the range of adaptive answers, attitudes and even capacities has widened. The ways of considering oneself are not completely new, like in the previous examples, but rather enriched and evolved by the perception of an increased flexibility and resilience. The latter provided self-confidence for projection in similar future situations: The contribution of this year was also very important from a personal point of view, since you must adapt to new ways of living, to regulate yourself, to manage your problems accentuated by the limits of linguistic skills and embarrassments. In my future professional life, I will be able to better adapt to changes of frequent places of work. [Report 13]

To Widen One’s Action-Space Perceive oneself as more flexible and more resilient, having to learn how to deal with obstacles or new situations, developing new attitudes, borrowing new models of thought and behaviour and so on, offers possibilities for widening one’s sphere of action. It is self-evident that this sphere is more than moving within a new geographical space. Indeed, it is the representation of one’s potential for action that expends and appears less constrained or inhibited. In this sense, the writer of Report 69 illustrated in an exemplary way the awakening of awareness of his/her limits, which is a necessary condition, to a certain extent, for going beyond them. Becoming aware of an enhanced potential of action enabled him/her to feel free from a kind of mental restriction that had prevented him/her from undertaking gratifying achievements: Thanks to the ERASMUS programme, I became not only aware of my limits, but I surpassed them. So, I do not confine anymore myself to the ‘‘space’’ where I was previously restricted. [Report 69]

This widening of one’s potential of action can also be expressed differently: like an increased capacity to manage complicated or unforeseeable

Student Mobility in Europe: An Academic, Cultural and Mental Journey?

55

situations [Report 13], or as a new life stance that mobilises desire to live fully and blossoming with vitality [Reports 79 and 36]: From the personal point of view, I feel enormously enriched and much more able to deal with any complicated situation. [Report 13] Broadmindedness: Concerning the space, I pushed the borders a little further and I want to travel more. Concerning the time, the fact of encountering older people, finishing my studies, becoming more sensitive to serious problems that people can get, makes me seeing further than before. Life appears to me less distressing and I have the desire to live by enjoying each moment. [Report 79] And then, I kept the desire of discoveries and trips. I think this kind of experience either discourages to leave one’s home, or gives the desire of going always further! It is my case! I now have the ‘‘fidgets’’. [Report 36]

A Self-Connected to Others Finally this evolution of the perception of oneself, a self which is affirmed either on a reflexive mode (e.g. to take distance, to know one’s capacities and limits, to feel more mature and more autonomous, etc.) or on an expressive mode (e.g. joy of life, explosion of vitality, desire to explore further and to meet more people) can be also accompanied by a self-decentring attitude: at the same time as the observation of oneself occupies a central place in the subjective perception, the conscience of the other can develop. In other words the development of self-awareness can be accompanied by the development of a pro-social conscience in a double movement of both self-affirmation and opening to others: On the personal level, I acquired a greater broadmindedness, another views of the others and myself. [Report 26] I think that an experience such as this one helped me enormously, from a personal point of view. In France, the studies could have been the same or almost, but I learned very much on the others and myself by carrying out this year abroad. [Report 20]

These students reported to having become more sensitive, pro-social and tolerant. They can make contact with others with ease and be attentive to them, or even more important, accept their difference: The personal enrichment is the least negligible facet of this stay. These few months in a new environment gave me valuable lessons of savoir-vivre and ways of behaving with others. Being a foreigner in another country increases our capacity of encountering and listening to others. [Report 15] This year abroad has been for me an excellent life-training. In particular I have discovered the notion of tolerance. In short, one becomes much more mature, independent, and opened to others and their differences. [Report 58]

56

V. PAPATSIBA

At the end of this presentation concerning self-reported outcomes, we can highlight the opportunities for intellectual, socio-cultural, relational and emotional development that a stay abroad with Erasmus programme offers, and students either take or miss. In this context, where life escapes from the security and familiarity of the already known, and becomes enriched by diversity and situations that cannot always be apprehended by pre-reflexive and available knowledge, it is possible to modify one’s relationships to the world, others and finally oneself. However, this outcome does not systematically appear as the most prevalent. Whereas some students took up the challenge and made the best out of it, others remained little perceptive and thus this period abroad had the limited effect of an anodyne parenthesis.

Awareness: An Uncompleted Process The Erasmus stay, rich in experience and lessons, as students liked to underline, also impelled a certain number of awakenings. Approximately about 15 students left a trace in their text of this process and of its results. Certainly, this awareness is not final since the experience can continue to operate a long time after the return. Moreover, like one student noted, submitting a report just at the end of the stay is ‘‘premature, because I cannot yet measure the real impact of this academic year’’ [Report 36]. Others shared this opinion, and did not precipitate to draw up a list of all the outcomes and benefits. Instead they preferred to be more careful, even more discrete as the following student who, although s/he adopted a reflective approach to the Erasmus experience, acknowledged that: ‘‘I am not conscious of everything, of how I changed, of what I gained’’ [Report 79]. Issues of Identity and Belonging In spite of the necessity to be cautious concerning conclusions to be drawn from the student statements about their stage of awareness, a type of awakenings related to identity issues emerged from the census of the corresponding sections. In the core of these statements regarding oneself, and one’s connections with the world as an object of knowledge, is the cultural or national identity. To sum up, confrontation with the difference, with what one is not, partly reveals what one is: It is funny, but one never becomes as aware of one’s identity as when one is abroad, in contrast to that of others. [Report 42]

Student Mobility in Europe: An Academic, Cultural and Mental Journey?

57

The experience of living abroad is apparently associated with the suspension of an obviousness, a certain naivety in identity perception, and therefore can trigger questions about the person, and issues of belonging, trajectory and origins: Thus, in parallel with the discovery of the host country, one discovers his own country, his own nation, his own region with a new and unexpected facet. To be under the skin of a foreigner, for a certain period, enables to doubly feel one’s own identity and to understand one’s origins. [Report 80]

The Individual As Member of a Culture This self-awareness comprises intra-individual aspects, as in the selfperception, previously presented, but also psychosocial aspects related to the collective identity and feeling of membership. The move, involving spatial, cultural and relational rupture, and confrontation with otherness motivates a reflection about the self and its collective dimension and connections: Now, it appears obvious to me that the best way of learning and apprehending one’s own culture and home country is to live abroad. One can better see it’s qualities and shortcomings from there, and it is important to relativise the latter, because as the proverb says: ‘‘the grass of the neighbour’s garden looks always greener’’, but it is not necessarily true. [Report 33]

The comparison between the two cultures (i.e. home culture and host culture) had as its effect the recognition and even appreciation of the home culture, and, more rarely and only for a small number, the reduction of ethnocentrism and capacity for relativisation. At the time of writing of these texts (i.e. just at the end of the stay), what prevails in the process of renegotiating identity definitions is the reinforcement of national identity. Maybe, for these young people, this is a necessary stage before they feel more inclined to develop a broader, European or cosmopolitan membership. In the following extract, one can clearly see the strengthening of national identity, expressed both on an affective (‘‘I miss a multitude of details’’) and ethical modes (‘‘importance of certain values’’): I also compared the life in France with the life abroad and I discovered in me a ‘‘patriotic’’ fibre. I miss a multitude of details relating to everyday life in France, which I do not find in Sweden. I also became aware of the importance of certain values. One can only compare when one has had two different experiences. This is why I feel more than ever attached to my country and the French culture. [Report 26]

Whereas students testified to this awakening of their national membership, it has also been possible for some of them to express sensitivity to others.

58

V. PAPATSIBA

The rise of feeling of national belonging did not necessarily lead to national withdrawal and the rejection of others. In Report 37, one notes that during a first phase the student affirmed the safeguarding of his/her identity, even an increase in attachment to France: Maybe, they taught youths [Germans] that one can leave his country without losing one’s identity! It is enough to take along its beer and shorts or its vine and Camembert cheeseyIn any case, French people are less conscious of that. If they used to travel more, they would have found their countryymore beautiful, eh yes! [Report 37]

However, later the same student put in parallel the existence of a strong feeling of national membership with his/her deepening of sensitivity to others. In this case, a greater availability to and consideration of others accompanied identity’s strengthening: As the year abroad is evolving, one feels growing and carrying his culture with oneself (With the weapons, citizens!) as at the same time, feels the other different, more deeply and intensively! [Report 37]

To continue with the positive effects on awareness, we will comment on a rare case. The latter shows that an increased conscience of one’s national identity can be accompanied by investment in the collective life: The foreigner, by discovering a new country (or by discovering a country again), also discovers his motherland. During this experience abroad, I discovered the importance of being able to get involved in the civic life of one’s country. [Report 80]

In the case of this student, the development of a civic conscience allowed not a national identity ‘‘clenching’’ and emotional statements about the greatness of one’s nation, but a reflection on the conditions of inclusion of immigrants in France: Because what one lived there, makes us inevitably returning on our premises. Thus the welcome that I received as a foreigner led me to question: ‘‘How is one received at home?’’ [Report 80]

Marginal Place of the Political and Civic Issues Students generally did not appear aware of the Erasmus programme objectives, except for those who were studying law, political sciences or economy. In addition they rarely expressed interest in the construction of Europe and the chosen means for going forward. For the small number of students who commented on this process, they evoked the idea of Europe as geopolitical unit adopted by its citizens. Some exceptional cases confirmed their support to the European political project, and affirmed their willingness to

Student Mobility in Europe: An Academic, Cultural and Mental Journey?

59

play an active part in this political process: Like a lot of young people of my generation, I am an enthusiastic supporter of European integration. Developing exchanges among countries of the Community can contribute to the realisation of this European project. It is us, the young Europeans, who will build the Europe of tomorrow! The Erasmus programme contributes to the realisation of this objective. This is one of the reasons that motivated my departure abroad. [Report 77]

However, if the topic of European integration constituted a ‘‘politically correct’’ motivation to support one’s application for studies in Europe with an EU funded programme, it seldom constituted the object of an explicit awareness at the end of the stay. Indeed, the comments made at the end of the stay hardly show an outlined European identity. Only three students expressed themselves concerning signs of formation of a European identity. One of them tackled the complexity of the political integration process: Having lived for nine months in another country of Europe enables one to better identify the present problems faced by politicians trying to build the Europe of tomorrow. [Report 64]

Another student explicitly evoked the impact of the Erasmus stay, which does ‘‘not a priori constitute the indispensable condition for developing a certain European identity’’, but provides the student with a valuable experience given the context of ‘‘opening of the borders and its consequences on the labour market’’ [Report 66]. Lastly, only one student expressed sensibility to the issue of broadening the feeling of belonging. S/he evoked the birth of a European identity by underlining the possibility for several identities (national, European, international) coexisting: The fact of immersing myself in the English culture and encountering several foreign students, and foreigners in general, made me at the same time feel very French, very European and very International. [Report 78]

Conclusion: An Initiatory Personal Experience – Does It Do Justice to an Ambitious Programme? Students concluded the account of their Erasmus experiences by expressing themselves in an enthusiastic way. Their excitement is perceptible, even when critics and acknowledgement of difficulties had preceded this final overly positive picture of the experience. In other words, students expressed

60

V. PAPATSIBA

a great satisfaction at the end of a course, which was not without problems, disappointments and discouragement: This year spent in Germany has taught me a lot from an academic and a personal point of view. Nevertheless, I insist on highlighting that, during the stay, some phases were difficult to cope with and to overcome and the temptation to go back to France was big. [Report 74]

The vocabulary used by students is marked by the presence of words associated with the register of the test and the challenge: Going abroad is landing in a new world that completely or partially differs from everything we had known up to this moment. The transition can be harsh but the challenge is worth living because it is a rich experience from both an intellectual and a personal point of view. [Report 57]

Attesting simultaneously satisfaction and difficulties can be seen as a sign of recognition of the educational potentialities of the stay abroad in the conditions that the Erasmus programme creates (Papatsiba, 2001, 2003). This period thus seems driven by a specific rationale, which made any situation, positive or negative, potentially educational: test, effort, distresses, disillusionment, or on the contrary, satisfaction, enjoyment, accomplishment and achievement, everything became an opportunity to learn and a lesson learned. One can then deduce that the stay abroad had an initiatory value for these young people whom by challenging obstacles, but also by discovering and being taken by surprise, forged and taught themselves (Papatsiba, 2003). This result is closely connected with theorisation of the era of late modernity that puts forward the idea of taking and dealing with risks as generating opportunities for individual development and enlarging mental horizons (Giddens, 1991; Beck, 1992; Lash & Urry, 1994). Hence, dealing with the unknown and through ‘‘risk-taking’’ (i.e. far from the comfort of familiar settings) were proven to be a source of learning for these students, and can thus lend support to Beck’s theorisation about risk as akin to a new way of learning and acquiring mastery (Beck, 1992). The stay gave to students a tangible proof of their capacities to be adaptable to the changing environment of our times. This result is in line with other analyses of student’s mobility experiences, which have shown that to be mobile reinforces the individual belief of being able to face changing environments and to take control on one’s life-path (Baumgratz-Gangl, 1993). Our results also showed that students’ perception of their actionspace, in other words their potential for action was dramatically enhanced. Students reported feeling more entrepreneurial, willing to pursue exploration, and, at the same time, adaptable and resilient. Consequently, it appears

Student Mobility in Europe: An Academic, Cultural and Mental Journey?

61

that the mobility experience contributed to the individual appropriation of an enlarged action-space (Papatsiba, 2003) and opened up the horizon of possibilities. In parallel, the way in which the stay abroad contributed to reinforcing a positive image of oneself is to be underlined. Definitely, this experience, under the conditions that Erasmus created, was at the origin of personal development (e.g. self-reliance, self-confidence, reflective thought, resilience, etc.). The latter has also been highlighted by other researchers (Kuh & Kauffman, 1984; Stier, 2003). At the same time, these characteristics correspond to the idea of a ‘‘contemporary individual’’, as portrayed in the sociological discussion in the first part of this chapter. This main result is in line with the assumptions and beliefs of the potential of mobility as act of individualisation, and its subsequent rationales of achievement, life choices and flexibility. Thus, student mobility inscribes within the myth or the era of individualisation, since it contributes to the emergence of the individual, or its belief, and the ‘‘value’’ of self. Yet this advantage, however important it may be, often dominates the other outcomes of a mobility period. The Erasmus stay, while it is potentially a powerful tool for a broader and multi-faceted experience, remained primarily expressed like a personal experience. However, considering all the potential outcomes through the lens of personal experience raises questions about the way students interpret awareness of the benefits of the Erasmus mobility, which is also a political and a cultural experience. Regarding cultural benefits, we noted that the cultural context was treated less like a set of shared values and knowledge, but more as an access towards a new individual potential, as a new sphere for individual activity. Thus, the cultural and political awareness, the intercultural competence and an enlarged feeling of belonging appeared less obvious and solid. We should bear in mind that students have been seen as potential culture carriers (e.g. Deutsch, 1970; Eide, 1970) and vectors of Europeanisation (e.g. Federico, 2003; King & Ruiz-Gelices, 2003). Mobility also has been assumed to be a pro-social experience, supporting cultural awareness, understanding, tolerance and civic conscience (Carlson & Widaman, 1988; Stier, 2003). Last, but not least, since the creation of Erasmus programme in 1987, a civic and political objective has been connected with the programme. Reading through the official text establishing Erasmus (De´cision du Conseil du 15 juin 1987), we note that the latter aimed at the reinforcement of ‘‘relations between citizens of the various Member States with a view to consolidating the concept of a ‘‘People’s Europe’’ (one of its five objectives). It is thus important to multiply investigations on intra-European student mobility

62

V. PAPATSIBA

outcomes in order to confirm this tendency to value more personal than cultural and political outcomes, as shown from our sample. It is also essential to confront these outcomes by the objectives of such an educational and political initiative, in order to device possible actions to overcome such possible shortcomings. Overseas experiences can be a powerful multi-facet educational tool, if we keep away from naive assumptions about the miraculous effect of immersion in a different socio-cultural setting. It is also crucial for the educational communities and the political bodies to go beyond finesounding rhetoric on the importance of student mobility, and thus seriously commit to preparing youth to live in a pluralist and tolerant world.

REFERENCES Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Reading: Addison-Wesley. Altbach, P., & Teichler, U. (2001). Internationalization and exchanges in a globalized university. Journal of Studies in International Education, 5(1), 5–25. Amir, Y. (1969). Contact hypothesis in ethnic relations. Psychological Bulletin, 71, 319–342. Bauman, Z. (2001). The Individualised Society. London: Polity. Baumgratz-Gangl, G. (1993). Compe´tence transculturelle et e´changes e´ducatifs. Paris: Hachette. Beck, U. (1992). Risk Society: Towards a new modernity. London: Sage. Beck, U., & Beck-Gernsheim, E. (1999). Individualization and ‘‘precarious freedoms’’: Perspectives and controversies of a subject-oriented sociology. In: A. Elliott (Ed.), Contemporary social theory. Oxford: Blackwells. Benveniste, E. (1966). Proble`mes de linguistique ge´ne´rale (Vol. 1). Paris: Gallimard. Benze´cri, J. -P. (Ed.) (1981). Pratique de l’analyse des donne´es: Linguistique & Lexicologie. Paris: Dunod. Bernard, M. (1996). Bre`ve esquisse d’une philosophie des e´changes scolaires. In: L. Colin, & B. Mu¨ller (dir.) (Eds), La pe´dagogie des rencontres interculturelles (pp. 43–53) Paris: Anthropos. Boesch, E. (1995). L’action symbolique. Fondements de psychologie culturelle. Paris: L’Harmattan. Bolden, R., & Moscarola, J. (2000). Bridging the quantitative–qualitative divide: The lexical approach to textual data analysis. Social Science Computer Review, 19(4), 450–460. Carlson, J. S., & Widaman, K. F. (1988). The effects of study abroad during college on attitudes toward other cultures. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 12(1), 1–18. Carnoy, M. (2000). Sustaining the new economy: Work, family, and community in the information age. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Coleman, J. A. (1996). Studying languages. A survey of British and European students. The proficiency, background, attitudes and motivations of students of foreign languages in the United Kingdom and Europe. London: Centre for Information on Language Teaching and Research. De´cision du Conseil du 15 juin 1987 (87/327/CEE) portant adoption du programme d’action communautaire en matie`re de mobilite´ des e´tudiants (Erasmus), JOCE, n1 L 166 du 25/ 06/1987, pp. 0020–0024.

Student Mobility in Europe: An Academic, Cultural and Mental Journey?

63

Deutsch, S. E. (1970). International education and exchange: A sociological analysis. Cleveland: The Press of Case Western Reserve University. Eide, E. (Ed.) (1970). Students as links between cultures: A cross-cultural survey based on UNESCO students, Paris/Oslo: Unesco/International Peace Research Institute. Favell, A. (2003). Games without frontiers? Questioning the transnational social power of migrants in Europe. Archives Europe´ennes de Sociologie, XLIV(3), 106–136. Favell, A. (2004). London as Eurocity: French Free Movers in the Economic Capital of Europe, GaWC (Globalization and World Cities – Study Group & Network) Research Bulletin 150, available from http://www.lboro.ac.uk/gawc/rb/rb150.html4 Federico (de), A. (2003). Re´seaux d’identification a` l’Europe. Amitie´s et identite´s d’e´tudiants europe´ens. France: Universite´ des Sciences et Technologies de Lille and Spain: Universidad Publica de Navarra. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis. Forbes, D. (2004). Ethnic conflict and the contact hypothesis. In: Y.-T. Lee, C. McCauley, F. Moghaddam & S. Worchel (Eds), Psychology of ethnic and intercultural conflict. Westport, CN: Praeger. Furnham, A., & Bochner, S. (1968). Culture shock: Psychological reactions to unfamiliar environments. London: Routledge. Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and self identity: Self and society in the late Modern Age. London: Polity Press. Glaser, P., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory, strategies for qualitative research. New York: Aldine Press. Gordon, J., Maiworm, F., & Teichler, U. (2000). Etude d’e´valuation du programme Socrates 2000, Etude re´alise´e a` la demande de la Commission europe´enne. Green, A., Wolf, A., & Leney, T. (1999). Convergence and divergence in European education and training systems. London: Institute of Education. Gudykunst, W., & Kim, Y. Y. (1997). Communicating with strangers. An approach to intercultural communication. New York: McGraw-Hill. Kae¨s, R. R., Correa, O. R., Douville, O., Eiguer, A., Moro, M.-R., Revah-Le´vy, A., Sinatra, F., Dahoun, Z., & Lecourt, E. (1998). Diffe´rence culturelle et souffrances de l’identite´. Paris: Dunod. Kerbrat-Orecchioni, C. (1999). L’e´nonciation (4th ed.). Paris: Armand Colin. King, R., & Ruiz-Gelices, E. (2003). International student migration and the European Year Abroad: Effects on European identity and subsequent migration behaviour. International Journal of Population Geography, 9(3), 229–252. Kostakopoulou, T. (2001). Citizenship, identity and immigration in the European Union. Manchester: Manchester University Press. Kuh, G.K., & Kauffman, N.F. (1984). The impact of study abroad on personal development of college students. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University School of Education. (ED 245 591). L’Ecuyer, R. (1987). L’analyse de contenu: notion et e´tapes. In: J.-P. Deslauriers (dir.) (Ed.), Les me´thodes de la recherche qualitative (pp. 49–65). Que´bec: Presses universitaires du Que´bec. Lash, S., & Urry, J. (1994). Economies of signs and space. London: Sage. Magri, V. (1995). Le discours sur l’autre a` travers quatre re´cits de voyage en Orient. Paris: Honore´ Champion e´diteur. Maiworm, F., Steube, W., & Teichler, U. (1993). Les expe´riences des e´tudiants Erasmus en 1990/ 91. Kassel: Erasmus Monographs no. 17a.

64

V. PAPATSIBA

McNamee, S., & Faulkner, G. (2001). The international exchange experience and the social construction of meaning. Journal of Studies in International Education, 5(1), 64–78. Moutsios, S. (2004). The identity of the European Union and the European pedagogic identities. In: E. Buk-Berge, S. Holm-Larsen & S. Wiborg (Eds), Education across borders: comparative studies. Oslo: Didakta Norsk Forlag. Oberg, K. (1960). Culture shock and the problem of adjustment to new cultural environments. Practical Anthropology, 7, 170–179. Papatsiba, V. (2001). Le se´jour d’e´tudes a` l’e´tranger: formation, expe´rience. Analyse des rapports d’e´tudiants franc- ais ayant be´ne´ficie´ du programme Erasmus. University of Paris X. Ph.D. thesis. Available from ANRT atelier national de reproduction des the`ses /the`ses a` la carteS, Reference: 01PA100189. Papatsiba, V. (2003). Des e´tudiants europe´ens. Erasmus et l’aventure de l’alte´rite´. Bern: Peter Lang. Papatsiba, V. (2005). Political and individual rationales of student mobility. A case-study of ERASMUS programme and a French regional scheme. European Journal of Education, 40(2), 173–188. Percheron, A., Bonnal, F., Boy, D., Dehan, N., Grunberg, G., & Subileau, F. (1978). Les 10–16 Ans & La Politique. Paris: Presse de la Fondation Nationale des Sciences Politiques. Perelman, C., & Olbrechts-Tyteca, L. (1970). Traite´ de l’argumentation La nouvelle rhe´torique. Bruxelles: Editions de l’Universite´ de Bruxelles. Recchi, E., & Nebe, T. (2003). Migration and political identity in the European Union: Research issues and theoretical premises. Pioneur, Working Paper no. 1. Recchi, E., Tambini, D., Baldoni, E., Williams, D., Surak, K., & Favell, A. (2003). Intra-EU migration: A socio-demographic overview. Pioneur, Working Paper no. 3. Rosselle, D., & Lentiez, A. (1999). Le programme Erasmus 1987–1995. Une re´trospective qualitative, un regard vers le futurey, volume 1: Synthe`se, Rapport a` la demande de la Commission europe´enne, Lille. Ruiz-Gelices, E., King, R., & Favell, A. (2000). International student migration in Europe and the institutionalisation of a ‘‘European identity’’ Paper given in the Conference on international migration: New patterns, new theories, 11–13 September. Nottingham Trent University. Schutz, A. (1987). L’e´tranger. Essai de psychologie sociale. In: A. Schutz (Ed.), Le chercheur et le quotidien Phe´nome´nologie des sciences sociales. Paris: Me´ridiens Klincksieck. Selltiz, C., & Cook, S. W. (1962). Factors influencing attitudes of a foreign students towards host country. The Journal of Social Issues, 18(1), 7–23. Simmel, G. (1979). Digressions sur l’e´tranger. In: Y. Grafmeyer & I. Joseph (Eds), L’e´cole de Chicago: naissance d’une e´cologie urbaine. Paris: Champ Urbain. Stangor, C., Klaus, J., Stroebe, W., & Hewstone, M. (1996). Influence of student exchange on national stereotypes, attitudes and perceived group variability. European Journal of Social Psychology, 26, 663–675. Stier, J. (2003). Internationalisation, ethnic diversity and the acquisition of intercultural competencies. Intercultural Education, 14(1), 77–91. Stroebe, W., Lenkert, A., & Jonas, K. (1988). Familiarity may breed contempt: The impact of student exchanges on national stereotypes and attitudes. In: W. Stroebe, A. Kruglanski, D. Bar-Tal & M. Hewstone (Eds), The social psychology of intergroup conflict. Theory, research and applications (pp. 167–187). Berlin: Springer Verlag.

Student Mobility in Europe: An Academic, Cultural and Mental Journey?

65

Teichler, U., & Maiworm, F. (1997). The ERASMUS experience: Major findings of the ERASMUS evaluation. Luxembourg: Office of Official Publications of the European Communities. Todorov, T. (1986). Le croisement des cultures. Communications, 43, 5–24. Veil, S. (1998). Report of the high level panel on the free movement of persons. Luxembourg: Office of Official Publications of the European Communities. Wagner, K., & Magistrale, T. (1997). Writing across culture, an introduction to study abroad and the writing process. New York: Peter Lang. Wihtol de Wenden, C. (1999). Citoyennete´ et immigration. Contribution a` une identite´ europe´enne, Cahiers de l’actif, 272–273; 89–95. Wihtol de Wenden, C. (2002). Logiques migratoires, figures de migrants. Cahiers franc- ais, 307, 3–7.

This page intentionally left blank

66

RESEARCHING THE BENEFITS OF RESIDENCE ABROAD FOR STUDENTS OF MODERN FOREIGN LANGUAGES Jonathan Rees and John Klapper ABSTRACT This chapter highlights the growing body of international research into the benefits of residence abroad for foreign language students, surveying studies from the past 35 years originating in both the U.S.A. and the U.K. It examines some of the problematic issues confronting researchers in this area and shows how these issues have contributed to a paucity of studies in the area and led to a diversity in research design. It reports on longitudinal study, the first of its kind in the U.K., which examined the linguistic benefits of residence abroad for a cohort of modern language students from a leading university. This 4-year study used repeated measures proficiency testing, involving a C-test, a grammar test and a range of qualitative measures, to chart the progress made by students on 6- and 12-month study placements in Germany. Findings confirm substantial proficiency gains on both of the main measures but fail to confirm gender and length of residence abroad as predictors of progress. Results also reveal strong differential individual performance during residence abroad. The chapter concludes with recommendations for future research aimed at exploring this key finding further. International Relations International Perspectives on Higher Education Research, Volume 3, 67–97 Copyright r 2005 by Elsevier Ltd. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISSN: 1479-3628/doi:10.1016/S1479-3628(05)03004-2

67

68

JONATHAN REES AND JOHN KLAPPER

INTRODUCTION Over the past 30 years, there has been a growing international research interest amongst applied linguists in the residence abroad component of higher education modern foreign language programs. There are two principal reasons for this growing research interest. Firstly, applied linguists have been eager to compare and contrast the process of foreign language acquisition in two theoretically very different learning contexts; that is, the formal language learning classroom at home and the naturalistic language learning environment of the target-language country. This allows for detailed investigation into methodological issues in foreign language teaching (i.e. the value of a particular teaching methodology in different contexts) and into the development of features of a foreign language under different experimental conditions, for example, the order and speed of acquisition of morphosyntactic features or the development of passive recognition and the active use of lexical items. It must be noted, however, that in certain cases the two language learning contexts are not so distinct, in that some study abroad programs include a formal classroom learning component in the target-language country. Secondly, applied linguists, in their role as academics and educationalists, have been eager to substantiate their intuitive feeling that residence abroad brings great educational benefits, not least in terms of strong linguistic gains for foreign language students. The substantiation of this claim is extremely important, in that greater mastery of a foreign language figures strongly in the thinking of many who study abroad, even for subject-specific reasons (e.g. a Chinese student studying civil engineering at a U.K. university). It is also important in the thinking of governments and higher education policy makers who are constantly reviewing the cost–benefit ratio of allowing students to study abroad. Despite this high level of interest, there has been limited international research to date into the educational benefits of residence abroad for students of a foreign language. Researchers in the U.S.A. have led the way and their interest in this field is reflected in a number of ways. Firstly, the growing number of national research bodies devoted to inquiry and information in this area (e.g. National Association of Foreign Students Advisers (NAFSA), Council on International Education Exchange (CIEE) and Section on U.S. Students Abroad (SECUSSA)). Secondly, the disproportionate number of studies in the literature involving American students studying overseas (for a comprehensive online bibliography see NAFSA and SECUSSA, 2003). And

Benefits of Residence Abroad: Students of Modern Foreign Languages

69

thirdly, the emergence of several American academic journals devoted to all aspects of residence abroad research (e.g. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad). U.K. research has been surprisingly limited in this area, given that the U.K. is one of the major ‘‘sending’’ countries. It is difficult to provide a precise figure for the number of U.K. students who go abroad each year, but Coleman’s (1996a) estimate, based on figures from the mid-1990s, was 12,000 language students; that is, not including non-language students opting to pursue part of their university studies in another country. Interest in the purpose and value of the residence abroad period for foreign language students has, however, been growing recently amongst U.K. researchers. Indeed, the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) has funded three separate projects under its Fund for the Development of Teaching and Learning, which have examined various aspects of residence abroad (see http://www.ncteam.ac.uk/ftdl). One of these, the ‘‘Language and Residence Abroad’’ (LARA) project (see http://www. ncteam.ac.uk/projects/fdtl/fdtl2/projectdescriptions/50-97.htm) considered, amongst other things, the perceived purpose of research abroad. Through a survey of a large number of U.K. university foreign language departments, it found a strong consensus concerning the principal objective of this component of foreign language courses. This was, of course, ‘‘improved linguistic competence.’’ Before reviewing the findings of the international research, and presenting the findings of the most recent study originating in the U.K., it is worth examining some of the practical barriers to research into the measurement of foreign language gains by higher education students during residence abroad. In the next section we highlight one philosophical area and five research design problems which may have deterred some from being active in research in this area, and which may help to explain the limited number of studies to date.

BARRIERS TO RESEARCH Dealing with Anecdotal Folklore Some may feel that it is axiomatic that residence abroad has a beneficial effect upon foreign language acquisition, and that sufficient anecdotal evidence exists to obviate the need for detailed research. We believe this to be erroneous, in that it fails to address important questions such as follows:

70

JONATHAN REES AND JOHN KLAPPER

 What level of gains can be expected from residence abroad?  What is the optimum length for language acquisition purposes of residence abroad?  Could equal or superior gains be made by a group that continues to study at home rather than taking a residence abroad period?  Do all individuals make equal gains during their residence abroad?  What can be done to help residence abroad students maximize their linguistic benefits? Practical Research Design Problems Basis of Comparison It is not sufficient for a study to show that the subjects make linguistic gains during residence abroad. A basis of comparison is required to place these gains in perspective, and to show that gains are greater than those that could be expected from the subjects if they had continued their studies in the home university environment. The ideal basis of comparison would of course be to include an ‘‘athome’’ control group in the study, and simply to compare the progress of the residence abroad group with that of the at-home group. The control group would have to be matched with the residence abroad group in terms of academic profile (age, previous language level), affective profile (motivational or aptitude level) and ‘‘on-task’’ requirement, to provide a meaningful answer to the question: ‘‘What progress would the residence abroad group have made if it had stayed at home?’’ Unfortunately, such matching is almost impossible to achieve in either the American or British systems. The modular and elective nature of the American college/university system means that students choose to stay at home or study abroad, and are often at different points in their language learning if they do elect to have a residence abroad period. The more linear nature of the British higher education system, on the other hand, while ensuring a more homogeneous residence abroad sample, precludes the possibility of employing an at-home control group for comparison purposes, in that all foreign language students are required to spend a period abroad as part of their undergraduate degree program. Another possible basis of comparison is that provided by longitudinal case data; that is, the comparison of progress data from the at-home phase of the degree program with progress data from the residence abroad period for the same group. Such data can only be provided by research at institutions with linear rather than modular programs.

Benefits of Residence Abroad: Students of Modern Foreign Languages

71

Problems, however, exist with using longitudinal case study data:  It is more difficult to collate, in that it requires multiple repeat administrations of progress measurement instruments over a longer period of time.  It is difficult to balance the need to use the same measuring instruments in order to secure comparative data, with the need to employ a variety of proficiency instruments to measure different aspects of proficiency developed in different learning contexts.  It is difficult to ensure comparability of on-task time between the at-home period and the residence abroad period. Definition of Foreign Language Proficiency Any researcher seeking to determine whether residence abroad students have made foreign language proficiency gains during residence abroad faces one of the most intractable questions in applied linguistics: what constitutes foreign language proficiency? Amongst applied linguists, there exists a range of views about the nature of foreign language proficiency. At one end of this continuum, proficiency is regarded as indivisible from a generic competence applicable to all skill areas (see Oller, 1979). At the other end of the continuum, proficiency is regarded as being composed of a number of inter-related competencies, for example, socio-cultural competence, pragmatic competence, discourse competence, textual competence, strategic competence, fluency (see Bachman, 1990) or discrete areas of knowledge allied to the four basic language skills of listening, speaking, reading and writing (see Lado, 1961; Carroll, 1968). If the researcher adopts the view that proficiency is essentially indivisible, and uses ‘‘integrative’’ tests for measurement purposes, then critics will claim that the researcher has failed to measure proficiency gains in other important aspects of proficiency (e.g. discourse competence or fluency in speaking). If, on the other hand, the researcher adopts an atomized view of proficiency, then critics will point out that it is impractical to test all the different skills or competency areas involved in such models, since it would require a massive battery of tests and a large amount of intrusive testing time to adequately sample all the theoretical components of proficiency. Choice of Testing Instruments The adoption by the residence abroad researcher of a particular model of proficiency will largely dictate the choice of testing instruments to be employed in any study. All types of testing instruments are, however, subject to

72

JONATHAN REES AND JOHN KLAPPER

criticisms. Instruments designed to measure generic competence (e.g. cloze tests) have been criticized for lacking both content and face validity (KleinBraley, 1997). Instruments that aim to measure discrete areas of knowledge (e.g. multiple choice grammar or vocabulary tests), whilst benefiting from a high degree of psychometric reliability, have also been criticized for a lack of content and face validity (Savignon, 1972). They have further been criticized for producing a ‘‘ceiling effect,’’ whereby it is more difficult for high scoring than for low-scoring students on the pre-test to gain additional points on the post-test. Meanwhile, instruments purporting to measure distinct competencies have been criticized for being extremely unreliable in measurement terms and lacking in construct validity. These measurement instruments are often referred to as language tasks, but their profile fits well with Cronbach’s (1971, p. 26) definition of a test ‘‘as a systematic procedure for observing a person’s behavior and describing it with the aid of a numerical scale or category system.’’ Logistical Problems: Gathering Data Whatever definition of proficiency is adopted, and whichever testing instruments are chosen, research into residence abroad still requires the collation of large amounts of data through the use of repeated measures of proficiency assessment. If the research is to be meaningful, it often requires the collation of cognitive (e.g. aptitude, motivation, IQ) and biographic data (e.g. learner history, previous achievement). This type of data collation is inevitably intrusive upon the tight schedules of undergraduate programs and requires the close co-operation of students and teaching staff alike. Usually only a small number of researchers (most likely academics closely associated with the management of foreign language undergraduate programs) are well enough positioned to be able to ensure the conditions for successful research in this area. Selecting a Representative Sample There are several issues surrounding sampling issues for residence abroad researchers. Certain issues are more problematic to researchers from particular countries than from others. For example, European (particularly British) researchers find it extremely difficult to ensure a good gender balance in their sample, in that there exists a major imbalance in the modern languages undergraduate population in favor of women. American researchers, on the other hand, face another problematic issue in sampling, that is, the difficulty in ensuring a homogeneous undergraduate sample in terms of age and current level of attainment. Such a sampling

Benefits of Residence Abroad: Students of Modern Foreign Languages

73

problem again derives from the elective and modular nature of the higher education system they are working within, a system which allows students of different ages and attainment levels to study together for credit modules.

PREVIOUS STUDIES Studies from the Period 1970 to 1995 Studies from the 1970s to the mid-1990s have been reviewed and summarized by a leading British researcher (Coleman, 1997) and by a leading American researcher in the field (Freed, 1999). They both provide useful overviews of the limited body of residence abroad research for that period, highlighting the two main types of study undertaken into foreign language gains during residence abroad: comparative studies, in which the progress of a residence abroad group is compared to that of an at-home group, and predictive studies, in which cognitive and affective variable data is employed to analyze proficiency gains for a residence abroad sample. Both types of studies are shown to rely upon a pre- and post-residence abroad testing procedure. The limitations of the studies reflect many of the research difficulties outlined above. Freed (1999, p. 7) points to the over-reliance on discreteitem test scores in isolation, the short duration of the studies (in terms of the time spent abroad by subjects) and the lack of comparative data employed in the studies. Coleman focuses more on the lack of representative samples in studies. For example, commenting on Dyson’s (1988) longitudinal study of 229 students who spent a year studying in France, Germany or Spain, he states that ‘‘the generalizability of Dyson’s findings is, however, attenuated, since subjects were self-selected volunteers, of above-average proficiency and nearly all on assistantships’’ (Coleman, 1997, p. 14). Noticeably, neither reviewer is critical of each other’s work, despite the fact that their studies display some of the same weaknesses they identify in the early studies (i.e. Coleman’s work is reliant only on test scores and has no true comparative data, and Freed’s residence abroad samples are self-selecting). Despite their reservations concerning the studies to date, both reviewers conclude that there is a growing body of qualitative and quantitative evidence (however flawed and inadequate) to support the belief that residence abroad brings ‘‘global’’ linguistic gains to foreign language students. Freed (1998, p. 20) concludes that the studies to date ‘‘provide welcome documentation to established beliefs in the power of study abroad experiences to

74

JONATHAN REES AND JOHN KLAPPER

influence the linguistic skills of program participants.’’ Coleman (1997, p. 14) states that ‘‘residence abroad clearly plays a part in raising overall foreign language proficiency levels.’’ The reviewers report not only on findings relating to global proficiency gains during residence abroad but also to the development of particular aspects of proficiency. Thus, they note an apparent consensus concerning the beneficial effect of residence abroad on vocabulary growth (Lennon, 1990; Walsh, 1994; Milton & Meara, 1995) and spoken fluency (Lafford, 1995; Freed, 1995). Interestingly, both reviewers present evidence to suggest that residence abroad brings only marginal gains in global grammatical knowledge (Cox & Freed, 1988; Moehle, 1984; Raupach, 1987; DeKeyser, 1991). The reviewers further report on investigations into the predictive validity of various cognitive and affective factors with reference to residence abroad linguistic gains. They cite studies that seem to show the following:  differential performance by gender during residence abroad (Brecht, Davison, & Gingsberg, 1993),  differential performance by prior learning experience (Lapkin, Hart, & Swain, 1995; Brecht, Davison, & Gingsberg, 1995),  differential performance by length of stay (Teichler, 1991; Coleman, 1996a),  differential performance by cumulative prior residence abroad experience (Coleman, 1996a). Both reviewers conclude that far more research is required in the field. Coleman (1997, p. 15) comments that ‘‘there is a demonstrable need for more research, particularly longitudinal studies embracing multiple interacting factors, both linguisticyand cognitive/affective,’’ while Freed (1998) claims that ‘‘an obvious need remains to replicate the findings of smaller studies, enlarging the populations as well as refining and expanding the data analysis procedures.’’ In the second half of this chapter, we report on the findings of our own recently completed research project, which goes some way towards answering the reviewers’ call for particular lines of new research.

Most Recent Research The latest American research seems to have pursued two main objectives. Firstly, there has been an attempt to expand the data analysis procedures by

Benefits of Residence Abroad: Students of Modern Foreign Languages

75

introducing a broader basis of comparison. For example, Freed, Segalowitz, and Dewey (2004) make a three-way comparison of progress between a residence abroad group, an at-home group and a summer immersion athome group, using an atomized measure of oral fluency. This type of study has, however, failed to address the need for larger sample sizes (it relies on an inclusive sample size of 28). Secondly, over the last 10 years there has been an expansion in ‘‘socio-cultural’’ studies of residence abroad second or foreign language learners, which seek explanations for, rather than to establish evidence of, differences in individual progress proficiency gains during residence abroad. In this regard, they study the influence of both learner characteristics (i.e. gender, ethnicity, previous learning history) and societal practices which hinder or help the integration of the learner into the target-language community. Lantolf and Pavlenko (2001, p. 155) neatly summarize the views of a number of researchers in the field, defining second language learners as ‘‘agents whose actions are situated in particular contexts and are influenced by their dynamic ethnic, national, gender, class and social identities.’’ To date, the socio-cultural research would seem to indicate that gender may play a role in determining the rate of proficiency progress during residence abroad (see Brecht & Robinson, 1993; Polanyi, 1995). In these studies, analysis of learner journals and narratives of American students studying in Russia indicates that women are at a disadvantage in obtaining equally meaningful communication opportunities, in that the interaction is determined by gender roles in the target culture. This manifests itself either in the adoption by males of ‘‘predatory’’ directions in discourse (Polanyi, 1995), or in the marginalization of women in discourse (Brecht & Robinson, 1993). Schumann (1980) also reports in her study of Farsi learning in Iran that interaction and communication opportunities are greatly reduced for the female learner, due to gender roles within the target-language community. Research in this area is, however, also subject to a number of criticisms, most of them openly acknowledged by the researchers in the field. These include over-reliance on qualitative data, problems in the interpretation of introspective data, use of small sample sizes and over-generalization from limited study contexts.  Over-reliance on qualitative data Socio-cultural studies of second language acquisition in the residence abroad context rely upon the recording of introspective learner observations, perspectives and ideas, either by the learners themselves or by others

76

JONATHAN REES AND JOHN KLAPPER

closely shadowing the learners. Pellegrino (1998, p. 114) summarizes the criticisms of this type of qualitative data, stating that ‘‘case studies, personal diaries and introspective interviews are often criticized as unscientific due to their idiosyncratic nature and lack of objectivity.’’ She draws attention to the vagaries of such data, commenting that ‘‘learners’ perspectives are volatile, changing from moment to moment, depending on the events of the day.’’  Problems in the interpretation of introspective data The analysis of data collated through the quantitative methods mentioned above is inevitably subjective to a greater or lesser degree. Two dangers in interpretation exist. Firstly, the researcher may well interpret the data from their own perspective or bias. Secondly, the researcher may fail to acknowledge that narratives, diaries and journals are themselves the product of the learner’s own prejudices, preconceptions and emotional status. For example, the description by a female writer of her interaction with a male interlocutor will be influenced by her own gender perspective, and reflect simply her own perception of the interaction. It is interesting to note that Pellegrino (1996) finds that subjects express their own preference for interaction with interlocutors in the foreign language according to their gender (American students in Russia context). There may, of course, be an issue of cause and effect in this finding. Subjectivity in the analysis and interpretation of data from socio-cultural studies is often reflected in the highly selective use of large amounts of evidence collated from narratives and learner journals. Polanyi (1995), for example, drawing on the diaries of 160 students, presents a case for gender barriers to communication based on excerpts from the diaries of a few individuals. There is no indication of how representative this material is of the much larger volume of diary material available to the researcher.  Small sample sizes Allied to the issue of data collation methods is that of sample size. Where large volumes of introspective data are required, the researchers are often obliged to focus on the experiences of a very small number of respondents. Indeed, one of the main studies cited as evidence of gender barriers to second language acquisition in the residence abroad context (Siegal, 1995) draws on data from just two case studies. Other examples abound: Wilkinson (1997) uses just two subjects in her ethnographic study of the belief that residence abroad will inevitably lead to language acquisition; Schmidt and Frota (1986) draw on the learner diary of just one subject (i.e. Schmidt) in

Benefits of Residence Abroad: Students of Modern Foreign Languages

77

their analysis of the interaction between the classroom and naturalistic environment in the target community.  Problem of generalizability Whilst researchers into the residence abroad experience of undergraduate foreign language students often refer to socio-cultural studies in their work and reviews (e.g. Freed, 1999), they fail to highlight the restricted contexts in which these studies have been conducted. Indeed the vast majority of the socio-cultural studies to date are not founded in the undergraduate residence abroad experience but rather deal with other contexts of second language acquisition. Some represent ‘‘transition studies’’ and investigate the language acquisition experience of individuals from different age groups moving to a new country. For example, Pavlenko and Lantlof (2000), conduct a socio-cultural analysis of the now famous language diary of Eva Hoffman (1989), the Polish woman who emigrated at the age of 13 years to Vancouver, Canada. Other studies relate to younger students: for example, Miller’s (1999) study of English as a second language students integrating into high school in Australia. Interestingly, Siegal (1995, p. 226) actually draws attention to the fact that her study is not embedded in the undergraduate experience. She states of her two case studies, ‘‘while not the typical study abroad ‘‘undergraduate’’ population, both were full time students studying Japanese in Japan for the year.’’ Her study is nonetheless often cited in the undergraduate context. Nor are the studies to date sufficiently representative of international contexts for researchers to be able to generalize from the findings. Indeed, most of the socio-cultural studies to date relate only to the experiences of Americans studying or living abroad (Siegal, 1995; Polanyi, 1995; Blender, 1997). Findings, for example, relating to the issue of gender barriers to proficiency progress in the residence abroad setting must be interpreted with great caution given the ‘‘atypical’’ nature of the host countries involved, that is, Japan in Siegal (1995), Russia in Polanyi (1995) and Iran in Schumann (1980). Arguably, since socio-cultural research seeks to investigate the interaction between the idiosyncratic characteristics of the learner and the idiosyncratic practices of the host society, findings from this line of second language acquisition research are by definition non-transferable. Prior to the study reported in later sections of this chapter, the most recent U.K. study was Coleman’s (1996a) European Language Proficiency Survey (hereafter ELPS). This major study, large in scale and sampling, certainly addresses Freed’s concerns about the small sample sizes employed in previous studies. Coleman gathered precise information on the duration

78

JONATHAN REES AND JOHN KLAPPER

of the residence abroad period for the 25,000 students in his European sample, the majority of which were enrolled on modern languages courses at universities in the U.K. He then attempted to measure foreign language proficiency before and after residence abroad, employing a C-test measure (a variant of the traditional cloze test with initial letter prompts for deleted words and with several shorter texts). His data, however, is cross-sectional and derives from different year groups, not from the same group followed through year on year (i.e. his pre-residence abroad data is from one group, whereas his post-residence abroad data is from another). He reports strong proficiency gains for students studying a number of different foreign languages. However, the study fails to address differences in individual progress rates during residence abroad or to explain the reasons for these differences (the consequence of employing cross-sectional data). Klapper and Rees (2003, 2004) provide the most recent U.K. study of residence abroad issues within the context of the Birmingham Project (see subsequent sections). Employing a longitudinal basis for progress comparison in line with Coleman’s (1997) suggestion, they compare the residence abroad progress of a group of undergraduate German language students with their previous ‘‘at-home’’ progress. They seek to replicate findings from previous studies concerning the following:  limited gains in grammatical knowledge during residence abroad;  differential performance by gender during residence abroad (Brecht et al., 1993);  differential performance by length of stay (Teichler, 1991; Coleman, 1996a);  large differences in individual progress rates during residence abroad.

THE BIRMINGHAM PROJECT The Birmingham Project was a 4-year longitudinal research project into the foreign language proficiency gains of a cohort ðn ¼ 57Þ of British undergraduate students of German on degree programs at the University of Birmingham. This section contains details of the overall project research framework, including its aims, its limitations and the data collation methods employed. It also gives information concerning the residence abroad component of the project, including information on the sample and results for this stage of the project. These findings are then compared with results from

Benefits of Residence Abroad: Students of Modern Foreign Languages

79

other stages of the project and are discussed in the light of previous residence abroad research and issues raised earlier in this chapter.

Research Project Framework Over the 4 years of the research project, the following data gathering procedures were carried out: Entry to Degree Program (October 1999) Administration of AH5 IQ Test. This standard verbal and non-verbal IQ test was chosen to measure the general academic ability of the sample because of its suitability for the 18+ age range. It was administered in its entirety and strictly in accordance with recommended procedures. Administration of German C-test. The C-test was chosen for its holistic measurement of language competence. It was the same test used in the ELPS survey where it had been extensively trialed. Based on data from the ELPS pilot study, Coleman (1996b) reports an alpha coefficient of 0.891 for the test. A C-test sample, very similar in style and format to the five short texts used in the study is included in Table 1 (see Ru¨diger Grotjahn’s website ‘‘C-test. Der Sprachtest’’ available at: http://www.c-test.de/). The exact Ctest used in the study cannot be reproduced for copyright reasons. Administration of German Grammar Test. The grammar test consisted of 125 multiple choice items, covering 13 major topics in German grammar, for example adjective endings, word order, prepositions, passive and subjunctive. During the year preceding the main study, the test was piloted with 80 students and an item-reliability analysis was conducted. Sample grammar test items are included in Table 2. Collation of Biographic Data on Cohort. This included prior language learning experience, school background and ‘‘A’’-level grades. End of Second Year of Degree Program (June 2001)  Repeat administration of German C-test.  Repeat administration of German grammar test.  Administration of pre-residence abroad questionnaire (adapted from Coleman, 1996a).

80

JONATHAN REES AND JOHN KLAPPER

Table 1.

C-test Sample.

Vom 16. bis zum 19. Jh. war GroXbritannien die weltweit fu¨hrende See- und Kolonialmacht. Daher ko_____ es, da_____ Englisch schli_____ zur Welts_____ wurde. D_____ Industrielle Revol_____, die z_____ entscheidenden sozi_____ und politi_____ Umwa¨lzungen fu¨h_____, begann u_____ 1760 in GroXbri_____ und versc_____ dem La_____ auch ei_____ wirtschaftliche Fu¨hrungs_____.

Table 2.

Sample Grammar Test Items from the Study.

41. Bei einem Menschen zu wohnen, _____ immer so laut Musik macht, muX ja schrecklich sein. (a) welchem (b) wer (c) der (d) dem 42. Er arbeitet bei der Firma, _____ Arbeiter zur Zeit streiken. (a) dessen (b) deren (c) denen (d) die 43. Er gab Ratschla¨ge, _____ wir unsere Haut vor der Sonne schu¨tzen ko¨nnten. (a) was (b) wie (c) wogegen (d) wofu¨r 44. Das ist meine Tante, bei ____ ich zur Zeit wohne. (a) deren (b) der (c) ihr (d) dessen

Start of Final Year of Degree Program (October 2002)  Repeat administration of German C-test.  Repeat administration of German grammar test.  Administration of post-residence abroad questionnaire (with supplementary post-experience questions).  Selected interviews with 12 students (6 best and 6 worst progressors during residence abroad). End of Final Year of Degree Program (June 2003)  Recording of language marks in finals examinations.  Recording of degree classification. Aims of Research Project The aims of the project were to replicate the following: 1. The general findings of strong linguistic gains by U.K. students during the compulsory residence abroad period (see Coleman, 1996a), using longitudinal rather than cross-sectional data and employing two measures of proficiency, one discrete and one holistic. This was to allow for a comparison of progress rates during residence abroad with initial progress rates during the first 2 years of classroom-based instruction.

Benefits of Residence Abroad: Students of Modern Foreign Languages

81

2. Previous findings from a number of residence abroad studies concerning the power of factors such as gender, previous language learning experience, general educational history and length of stay, in predicting linguistic success. 3. Previous findings concerning the range of individual differences in progress rates amongst residence abroad students. The study also sought to investigate the predictive validity of IQ scores and recent methodological treatments in the residence abroad context, as well as socio-cultural factors influencing individual or sub-group progress.

Limitations of the Research Project Framework The authors acknowledge a number of limitations to the research design employed, in particular the restricted range of foreign language proficiency measures employed and the gender imbalance in the sample. Range of Measures The choice of foreign language proficiency measurement instruments remains a difficult issue for researchers in this area (see Introduction). The choice of instruments in this study does not reflect a strong attachment on the part of the authors to a particular model of second language proficiency, but rather reflects practical considerations within the research project. The choice was based on the following:  The desire to replicate Coleman’s ELPS findings with longitudinal data using the same testing instrument (i.e. a C-test).  The pragmatic need to limit the number of testing instruments to be used, in order to restrict intrusive research testing time.  The desire to examine the development of grammatical proficiency in particular (an area of some controversy, especially concerning the effect of residence abroad).  The desire to employ objective standardized testing instruments, already subjected to rigorous functioning analysis (many of the testing instruments used for the assessment of sub-components of proficiency or language skill areas are still experimental and unproven in terms of reliability and validity). These considerations led to the choice of the German language C-test employed by Coleman in the ELPS, and an in-house German grammar test.

82

JONATHAN REES AND JOHN KLAPPER

The authors readily acknowledge that the choice of instruments in the study may have led to an under-assessment of the development of various aspects of foreign language proficiency and that the underlying model of proficiency (essentially generic in nature) is a restricted one. Gender Imbalance A further limitation to this study is the lack of gender balance within the study sample (male, 9; female, 48). This imbalance reflects the gender uptake of foreign languages in U.K. universities and is inherent in virtually all U.K.-based studies.

Data Collection The scores from the repeated administrations of the proficiency tests (C-test and grammar test) were entered onto a database on SPSS (Version 10.1). The database facilitated calculation of mean progress rates for the sample on both tests over the initial stage of their studies and after their residence abroad period, and also comparison of these mean rates of progress using independent sample t-tests. Biographic data (including gender, school background, degree grouping) together with IQ scores was entered onto the database, allowing for independent sample t-tests of differences in mean progress between sample subgroups. Interval scale data from the pre- and post-residence abroad questionnaires was entered onto the database, and taped interviews were conducted using a standardized set of questions with the top 6 and bottom 6 progressors during the residence abroad period. Both sets of data were analyzed to investigate possible socio-cultural factors affecting progress.

The Study Sample The sample ðn ¼ 57Þ had all successfully taken the British standard school leaving examinations, ‘‘A’’ levels, at age 18 or 19 years, involving the study of three or four subjects over 2 years (this predated the introduction of the Curriculum 2000 reforms). Approximately three quarters of them were enrolled on either a Single Honors or Joint Honors degree in German studies devoted to study of various aspects of the society and culture of Germanspeaking countries and the German language (the so-called ‘‘specialist’’

Benefits of Residence Abroad: Students of Modern Foreign Languages

83

program). The remainder of the sample were studying German on a 4-year institution-wide language program in combination with a degree in Commerce, Social Sciences or Law (the ‘‘less-specialist’’ program); the German element on such degrees is a minor component and the ‘‘society and culture’’ elements are not as substantial as on the specialist program. Crucially, however, the time devoted to German language is almost identical in the two modes of study. Students had comparable prior learning experiences and near identical ‘‘A’’-level point scores and all were aged 18 or 19. Moreover, every student in the sample spent a substantial period studying in a German-speaking country during the third year of his or her degree; with the exception of dual-language students (12 in total), this amounted to a full year. The study abroad period was a central and compulsory part of the course for all students. For those studying two languages, the period was split between the two target countries; this meant 19% of our sample spent a maximum of 6 months in Germany or Austria. Students attended different universities, had a largely free hand in choosing which subjects to follow and were consequently enrolled on a variety of courses. However, they had to follow a prescribed number of courses at their chosen institution and the post-residence abroad questionnaires revealed the number of classes attended per week was in the majority of cases fairly similar, between 5 and 10. Information concerning the subjects is summarized in Table 3.

RESULTS Progress on Proficiency Measures The results of pre- and post-residence proficiency measures (Table 4) show that the sample made considerable progress on both measures.

Predictive Factors Prediction by Gender Using independent sample t-tests, differences in mean residence abroad progress by gender on the C-test and the grammar test were investigated. No statistically significant differences were found, despite a 5.05-point difference in mean progress rates between the men ðX ¼ 17:20Þ and women ðX ¼ 12:15Þ in the sample on the grammar test.

84

JONATHAN REES AND JOHN KLAPPER

Table 3. Subjects

Age range ‘‘A’’-level range Gender distribution Degree program Length of stay

Table 4.

Information Relating to Study Subjects.

57 third-year students based at the University of Birmingham, U.K. and enrolled at various universities in Germany for their compulsory study abroad period 20–21 years (during residence abroad) All students in the sample possessed an ‘‘A’’ level in German (36 with ‘‘A’’ grade, 19 with ‘‘B’’ grade and 2 with ‘‘C’’ grade) 9 male, 48 female 43 specialist (Joint or Single Honors) foreign languages students 14 less-specialist (institution-wide language program) students 12 ¼ 6 months 45 ¼ 12 months

Progress Gains (%) Over Residence Abroad on Grammar Test and C-test. Mean

SD

C-test (pre-RA) C-test (post-RA)

53.90 63.37

10.06 9.87

Grammar test (pre-RA) Grammar test (post-RA)

59.34 70.53

13.45 13.44

Table 5.

Mean Progress Rates (%) for Half- and Full-Year Residence Abroad Stays. Length of stay (months)

n

Mean

SD

C-test progress

6 12

12 45

7.75 8.98

5.43 7.34

Grammar test progress

6 12

12 44

10.75 13.68

8.41 8.78

Prediction by Length of Residence Abroad As indicated in the summary table, some of the students in the sample stayed for a period of 6 months, whilst others had an extended stay of 12 months. Table 5 shows the mean progress rates on the two tests for both lengths of stay.

Benefits of Residence Abroad: Students of Modern Foreign Languages

85

Prediction by IQ Scores IQ was shown not to be a group factor in determining progress during residence abroad. Using the AH5 (IQ test) scores obtained in the first round of test administrations, the sample was divided into two equal halves. The top group ðn ¼ 23Þ all had IQ test scores above 33.4, the bottom group ðn ¼ 23Þ all had IQ test scores below 33.4. The mean gain scores on both proficiency tests for the top group and bottom group (as defined by the IQ scores) were then subjected to an independent t-test analysis. No statistically significant differences were observed and the mean gain scores were very similar for both groups on the two tests (only 46 students were able to attend for the administration of the IQ test, hence the lower n figure cited here). The lack of relationship between IQ and residence abroad progress was confirmed through a Pearson product moment correlation procedure (r ¼ 0:05 for C-test progress and r ¼ 0:01 for grammar test progress).

Individual Differences in Proficiency Progress during Residence Abroad Figs. 1 and 2 confirm that there is a wide spread of individual movement on both tests. ‘‘Progress’’ rates on the C-test range from a regression of 6 points to a gain of +26 points. ‘‘Progress’’ rates on the grammar test range from a regression of 4 points to a gain of +42 points.

DISCUSSION Progress on Proficiency Measures C-test The sample made a mean progress gain of 9.47% on the C-test over the residence abroad period. The mean gain, which proved to be statistically significant on a paired samples t-test ðPo000Þ was greater than that obtained during the initial 2-year period of formal instruction on the degree program (a mere 6.49%). This finding would seem to support Coleman’s (1996a) view that residence abroad brings foreign language proficiency gains to U.K. university students. The results from the study do, however, differ from Coleman’s findings in two significant ways. Firstly, the progress made by the subjects on the C-test in the study is substantially less than that reported by Coleman, and the final proficiency level is lower not only than the comparator figure for similar

86

JONATHAN REES AND JOHN KLAPPER

20

10

Std. Dev = 6.89 Mean = 8.8 N = 57.00

0 -5.0

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

progress and regression rates on C-test during RA period

Fig. 1.

Histogram of Individual Progress Rates on C-test for Whole Sample.

higher education institutions – (i.e. those established as universities before 1970) but also, most surprisingly, the global ELPS figure, which included the so-called ‘‘new’’ universities with their generally lower entry qualifications (Table 6). This difference in findings may be explained by the fact that Coleman’s year-2 figure denotes proficiency at the start of the second academic year. This accentuates the residence abroad proficiency gains of ELPS samples and partly explains the differences in Table 6. Secondly, the large standard deviation obtained in both progress calculations (C-test and grammar test) would appear to contradict Coleman’s (1996a, p. 46) claim that residence abroad not only increases language proficiency but also reduces the heterogeneity of that proficiency. Interestingly, the standard deviation for the C-test is higher than the equivalent figure for progress over years 1–2 and reflects a wide-ranging performance from 25% progress to 5% regression.

87

Benefits of Residence Abroad: Students of Modern Foreign Languages 16 14 12 10 8 6 4

Std. Dev = 8.68

2

Mean = 13.2 N = 57.00

0 -5.0

Fig. 2.

0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0 individual progress rates on grammar test during RA

Histogram of Individual Progress Rates on Grammar Test for Whole Sample.

Table 6.

Whole Sample Mean C-test Scores Comparison with ELPS (%).

ELPS (all) ELPS (pre-1970) Sample

Pre-Residence Abroad

Post-Residence Abroad

47.51 54.08 53.90

65.51 70.65 63.37

Grammar Test The findings for our sample do not appear to replicate the general findings from previous research that residence abroad brings only marginal gains in global grammatical knowledge (Cox & Freed, 1988; Moehle, 1984; Raupach, 1987; DeKeyser, 1991).

88

JONATHAN REES AND JOHN KLAPPER

Indeed, the sample as a whole makes greater progress (11.19 points) on the grammar test during the 1-year residence abroad period than during the initial 2-year stage of their degree program at home (10.30 points). The difference in mean gains is statistically significant ðPo01 – paired samples t-test). An explanation for this marked difference in findings may be found in the perceived weaknesses of previous studies of ‘‘global’’ grammatical development during residence abroad. Indeed, Collentine (2004, pp. 228–229) identifies a number of weaknesses in studies of grammatical development in the residence abroad context from the 1980s and 1990s, calling into question the precision of data obtained in some studies and the generalizability of the findings of other studies. The findings of the study reported here are not, however, subject to the same criticisms, in that the measure used is specifically grammar item focused (and not a multi-skill test): comparative data is employed through the longitudinal ‘‘case study’’ design and the sample size is adequate in terms of sampling theory ðn ¼ 57Þ: If the finding is accurate, it is in line with the findings of a minority of previous studies (e.g. Krashen & Seliger, 1976). Caution, however, needs to be exercised with the precise interpretation of the finding, in that the study relies solely upon a measure of discrete grammatical knowledge rather than on a measure of pragmatic competence dependent on grammatical knowledge. As Collentine (2003, p. 89) points out, a distinction needs to be made in acquisition studies between morphologic knowledge and pragmatic usage. He comments, with reference to the acquisition of the subjunctive by foreign language learners of Spanish (the focus of many researchers’ work): ‘‘Knowing the subjunctive configuration is one matter; knowing the semantic and pragmatic conditions under which those forms are employed [y] is another.’’ This distinction is exemplified in a further study by Collentine (2004), where at home students show greater gains on measures of discrete grammatical knowledge, whereas residence abroad students show greater gains in using grammatical devices, and lexical combinations to convey ideas and produce natural discourse.

Predictive Factors Prediction by Gender The study finding (that gender is not predictive of proficiency progress) is open to question given the clear gender imbalance in the sample. If valid, it contributes to a very limited body of research into the role of gender in

Benefits of Residence Abroad: Students of Modern Foreign Languages

89

determining the rate of proficiency progress during residence abroad. The finding stands in contrast, but not necessarily in conflict, with the findings of the main study of predictors of foreign language gains in the residence abroad context (Brecht et al., 1995). In this study, proficiency was assessed through measures of speaking, listening and reading skills and male subjects were shown to outperform female subjects in terms of progress on speaking and listening skills. The divergence in findings could be attributed to a range of factors: the difference in proficiency testing instruments employed in the two studies, the difference in socio-cultural conditions between the two studies (American students in Russia, British students in Germany).

Prediction by Length of Residence Abroad As noted earlier, the sample is divided between those who spent 6 months ðn ¼ 12Þ and those who spent 12 months abroad ðn ¼ 45Þ: Both groups start the residence abroad period with a similar proficiency base. Contrary to expectations, the ‘‘12-monthers’’ show only a slightly greater gain (which fails to reach statistical significance) than the ‘‘6-monthers.’’ As seen in Table 5, the difference in proficiency gain on the grammar test between the 12-monthers and the 6-monthers is quite marginal (2.93%). Similarly, the difference on the C-test of 1.23% seems to represent meager added value for the whole-year students, given that they had the opportunity to spend at least twice as long abroad as the dual-language students who divided their time between two countries. This finding on the C-test seems to be at variance with that of Coleman’s (1996a), who reported a 5.00% difference in C-test progress rates between one-semester and one-year residence abroad students. This difference in findings is, however, explained by the fact that his pre-residence abroad Ctest scores were obtained at the start rather than the end of the second academic year of study. Assuming a similar rate of progress to the year-1 ELPS German cohort of about 3%, one is left with little more than a 2% progress advantage for the 12-monthers. Furthermore, although in the ELPS, total duration is shown to be a significant factor in predicting proficiency in German (at 0.3954), once residence abroad is factored in, this drops to 0.2578 (Coleman, 1996a, p. 186). One possible explanation for these apparently counter-intuitive findings is that they simply reflect both the measurement inadequacies and the narrow focus of the testing instruments used in the study. Freed (1999) rightly points out that such tests may not adequately measure socio-cultural, pragmatic proficiency gains and may fail to reflect improvements in the four

90

JONATHAN REES AND JOHN KLAPPER

language skills. They may also be subject to the ‘‘ceiling effect,’’ whereby advanced gains are not as accurately measured as lower-level gains. The finding is, however, consistent with the comments of the students ðn ¼ 12Þ interviewed following residence abroad. The majority of these reported experiencing diminishing returns towards the end of their residence abroad period, saying they felt that they were no longer progressing linguistically, that they had reached a sort of plateau, similar to the one they experienced early in their university career, following ‘‘A’’-level examinations. The finding is also consistent with Teichler’s (1991) study of Erasmus students, which uses testing instruments very different to those used in the study reported here. Teichler notes that receptive skills tend to plateau at 4 months and that speaking and writing reach a plateau after 7 months. Prediction by IQ Scores As detailed in the results section, IQ scores were shown to be neither a group nor an individual factor in predicting success for the sample. This finding is difficult to examine since, as far as the authors are aware, it is the first of its type (relating to general ability) to be reported. Other researchers have, however, investigated the predictive validity of other cognitive measures. Brecht et al. (1995) employed three sub-tests from the Modern Language Aptitude Test (MLAT) (Carroll & Sapon, 1958), in the early stages of their longitudinal study of proficiency gains during residence abroad. They conclude that ‘‘MLAT3’’ (analytic) and ‘‘MLAT4’’ (synthetic) are good predictors of listening and reading but do not predict speaking as reflected in the OPI (the Oral Proficiency Interview of The American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages) (Brecht et al., 1995, p. 60).

Individual Differences in Proficiency Progress during Residence Abroad The finding of large differences in individual progress rates during residence abroad is one of the most striking features of the current study. The range of differences is extremely large, and exceeds that reported as incidental findings in earlier residence abroad studies (Dewey, 2004; Freed, 1995; DeKeyser, 1986, 1991). To date, there has been little discussion in the literature of the cause of these large individual differences, as the focus of research has been on group or sub-group analysis of progress. In this case, it is clear that the differences are not attributable simply to membership of the specialist/non-specialist groups (the grouping factor that reveals the biggest difference in performance; see above and Klapper and

Benefits of Residence Abroad: Students of Modern Foreign Languages

91

Rees, 2003). This is clearly illustrated by the histograms for the two groups on both tests, which show a similar range of individual scores. See, for example, Figs. 3 and 4, which give the results for the grammar test. Further discussion of possible reasons for the individual differences in performance is reserved for a later article (Klapper & Rees, forthcoming). In this, data drawn from pre- and post-questionnaires, post-residence abroad interviews and cognitive style assessment, are employed to investigate the following range of possible causative factors: affective factors (motivation, personality), cognitive factors (learning style, foreign language learning aptitude) and socio-cultural factors (student learning history, student expectations and beliefs). Since large individual differences in test scores may also be attributable to the inadequacies of testing instruments employed in studies (either in terms of their reliability and validity, or in terms of the ceiling effect in scoring they may generate), data concerning the functioning of the tests is also presented in this forthcomming paper. 12

10

8

6

4

2

Std. Dev = 7.63 Mean = 11.5 N = 43.00

0 -5.0

Fig. 3.

0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 individual progress rates on grammar test during RA

Histogram of Individual Progress Rates on Grammar Test for Specialist Group.

92

JONATHAN REES AND JOHN KLAPPER

3.5

3.0

2.5

2.0

1.5

1.0

Std. Dev = 10.02

0.5

Mean = 18.2 N = 14.00

0.0 5.0

Fig. 4.

10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0 individual progress rates on grammar test during RA

Histogram of Individual Progress Rates on Grammar Test For LessSpecialist Group.

CONCLUSION This chapter has focused on the continuing need to research the linguistic benefits for undergraduate students of a period of residence abroad. It has shown the difficulties inherent in this kind of research and has argued for a range of studies with varied research designs, emphases and assessment instruments. It is hoped that this will transcend the inevitable limitations and weaknesses of each individual study and provide a clear picture of the linguistic benefits of residence abroad. The research reported above is the first of its kind, a longitudinal case study of a cohort of foreign language students at a U.K. university. The findings add a little more detail to the overall picture, confirming with longitudinal data the results of previous studies concerning strong overall global proficiency gains during residence abroad. Indeed, gains for the study

Benefits of Residence Abroad: Students of Modern Foreign Languages

93

sample on the C-test during residence abroad exceed those recorded for the initial 2-year instructional stage. The gains are, however, less than those reported by Coleman (1996a) using cross-sectional data for U.K. undergraduates studying in Germany, France and Spain. The ‘‘positive’’ picture of the linguistic benefits of residence abroad is further enhanced by the study’s discovery of strong gains in grammatical knowledge during residence abroad. This finding, which contradicts less sanguine findings from previous studies, is significant in that this study is the largest to date. The research does not, however, replicate the results of a limited number of studies which found gender and length of residence abroad stay to be predictive of proficiency progress during residence abroad. With reference to the final variable, the study appears to indicate very little advantage in proficiency terms for those who stay for 12 as opposed to 6 months. This does seem to contradict the ‘‘more is better’’ position and to indicate that the number of hours of exposure at any one time may not be linked to uniform progress, that lengthy periods of immersion in the target language can lead to over-saturation and thus that extra time in the target-language environment does not necessarily lead to greater proficiency. One tentative conclusion we can draw is that, with regard to immersion learning in a naturalistic setting, there is a need for ‘‘language holidays,’’ for periods in which students can draw back for a while from naturalistic exposure. It may be that, when it comes to residence abroad, short but often is better than one long burst. Further studies are now needed to examine this crucial issue of optimum residence abroad period, which has received very limited research interest, despite its centrality to all foreign language learning programs that incorporate a period of residence abroad. The most important finding from the study, however, concerns strong individual variation in proficiency progress during residence abroad. This developing research picture of strong differential individual performance during residence abroad (Klapper and Rees, forthcoming) is of great significance in that it suggests that residence abroad, in its present form, may not be beneficial to all undergraduate foreign language students. Further research would help determine whether better preparation of students is required prior to residence abroad, and what specific forms of support are required during residence abroad, to ensure that all students can benefit from the experience. The investigation of individual performance must form the cornerstone of research design in this area in the future, combining both quantitative and qualitative research methods. This should involve the use of repeated

94

JONATHAN REES AND JOHN KLAPPER

measures proficiency testing, standardized affective and cognitive measures, the collation of biographic and learning history data for the sample, and the collation of controlled qualitative data (questionnaire and interview) and introspective qualitative data (learner journal, narrative). The U.K. may be in an advantaged position to pursue this type of research as it provides greater scope to investigate residence abroad experience with relatively homogenous samples, a prerequisite for the control of some of the potentially myriad factors involved in such research. This homogeneity, in terms of prior learning experience, foreign language level and age, is the product (for good or for bad) of a fairly rigid higher education system in the U.K., with a much more restrictive progression pattern than, for example, American colleges and universities and a clearer division between postgraduate and undergraduate studies. This rigidity in progression is also beneficial in terms of measuring consecutive progress with longitudinal data. Most importantly, in terms of sample homogeneity, the residence abroad period for U.K. undergraduate students is quasi-obligatory rather than elective as in the American system. In this sense, the residence abroad group does not constitute a group of highly motivated students to be compared with an at-home group who have elected to stay at home. Such research would also help to investigate whether the residence abroad period brings far more than linguistic benefits to individuals. Indeed, a further chapter would be required to investigate the argument for residence abroad as a stimulus for character development, growth in intercultural understanding and enhancement of interpersonal skills.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The authors are grateful to Professor Jim Coleman, The Open University, for making available to them the German C-test and student questionnaire employed in the ELPS project, and for information on various points of detail.

REFERENCES Bachman, L. F. (1990). Fundamental considerations in language testing. Hong Kong: Oxford University Press. Blender, E. (1997). Group dynamics and study abroad groups. Practical applications of theory. Paper presented at the annual conference of the American association of teachers of Slavic and East European languages.

Benefits of Residence Abroad: Students of Modern Foreign Languages

95

Brecht, R. D., Davison, D., & Gingsberg, R. (1993). Predictors of foreign language gain during study abroad. Washington, DC: National Foreign Language Center. Brecht, R. D., Davison, D., & Gingsberg, R. (1995). Predicting and measuring foreign language gains in study abroad settings. In: B. Freed (Ed.), Second language acquisition in a study abroad context (pp. 317–334). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Co. Brecht, R. D., & Robinson, J. L. (1993). Qualitative analysis of second language acquisition in study abroad: The American council of teachers of Russian (ACTR) and the National Foreign Language Center (NFLC) Project. Washington, DC: National Foreign Language Center. Carroll, J. B. (1968). The psychology of language testing. In: A. Davis (Ed.), Language testing symposium. A psycholinguisic perspective (pp. 46–69). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Carroll, J. B., & Sapon, S. M. (1958). Modern language aptitude test. London: The Psychological Corporation. Coleman, J. A. (1996a). Studying languages. A survey of British and European students. The proficiency, background, attitudes and motivations of students of foreign languages in the United Kingdom and Europe. London: Centre for Information on Language Teaching and Research. Coleman, J. A. (1996b). A comparative study of the proficiency and progress of language learners in British universities. In: R. Grotjahn (Ed.), Der C-test. Theoretische grundlagen und praktische anwendungen. Bochum: Brockmeyer. Coleman, J. A. (1997). Residence abroad within language study. Language Teaching, 30, 1–20. Collentine, J. (2003). The development of subjunctive and complex-syntactic abilities among FL Spanish learners. In: B. Lafford & R. Salaberry (Eds), Studies in Spanish second language acquisition: The state of the science (pp. 74–97). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press. Collentine, J. (2004). The effect of learning contexts on morphosyntactic and lexical development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26(2), 227–248. Cox, R., & Freed, B. (1988). The effects of study abroad on form and function: A comparison of students who have been abroad and those who have not. Report to the consortium for language learning and teaching. New Haven: Conn. Cronbach, L. J. (1971). Test validation. In: R. L. Thorndike (Ed.), Educational measurement, (2nd ed). Washington, DC: American Council on Education. DeKeyser, R. (1986). From learning to acquisition? Foreign language development in a US classroom and during a semester abroad. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. Stanford University, Stanford. DeKeyser, R. (1991). Foreign language development during a semester abroad. In: B. Freed (Ed.), Foreign language acquisition research and the classroom (pp. 104–119). Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath. Dewey, D. (2004). A comparison of reading development by learners of Japanese in intensive domestic immersion and study abroad contexts. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26(2), 303–327. Dyson, P. (1988). The effect on linguistic competence of the year spent abroad by students studying French, German and Spanish at degree level. Report for the central bureau for educational visits and exchanges. Oxford: Oxford University Language Teaching Centre. Freed, B. (1995). What makes us think that students who study abroad become fluent? Language learning and study abroad. In: B. Freed (Ed.), Second language acquisition in a study abroad context (pp. 123–148). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Co.

96

JONATHAN REES AND JOHN KLAPPER

Freed, B. (1998). An overview of research in language learning in a study abroad setting. Frontiers, The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad, 4, 31–60. Freed, B. (1999). Retrospective views from the president’s commission on foreign language and international studies and prospects for the future: Study abroad and language learning. Online, available at http://language.stanford.edu/about/conferencepapers/freedpaper. html. Freed, B., Segalowitz, N., & Dewey, P. (2004). Context of learning and second language fluency in French. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26(2), 275–301. Hoffman, E. (1989). Lost in translation: A life in a new language. London: Minerva. Klapper, J., & Rees, J. (2003). Reviewing the case for explicit grammar instruction in the university foreign language learning context. Language Teaching Research, 7, 285–314. Klapper, J., & Rees, J. (2004). Marks, get set, go: An evaluation of entry levels and progress rates on a university foreign language programme. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 29, 21–39. Klapper, J., & Rees, J. (forthcoming). Exploring large differences in individual foreign language performance during residence abroad: A review of possible explanations. Klein-Braley, C. (1997). Redundancy testing: An appraisal. Language Testing, 14(1), 47–84. Krashen, S., & Seliger, H. (1976). The role of formal and informal environments in second language learning: A pilot study. International Journal of Psycholinguistics, 3, 15–20. Lado, R. (1961). Language testing. New York: McGraw-Hill. Lafford, B. (1995). Getting into, through, and out of a situation: A comparison of communicative strategies used by students studying Spanish abroad and ‘‘at home’’. In: B. Freed (Ed.), Second language acquisition in a study abroad context (pp. 97–121). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Co. Language and Residence Abroad. (1998). Learning and residence abroad in practice. Report of the HEFCE-funded language and residence abroad project. Online, available at: http:// www.lang.ltsn.ac.uk/lara/larainprac.html. Lantolf, J. P., & Pavlenko, A. (2001). (S)econd (L)anguage (A)ctivity theory: Understanding second language learners as people. In: M. P. Breen (Ed.), Learner contributions to language learning: New directions in research (pp. 141–158). London: Longman. Lapkin, S., Hart, D., & Swain, M. (1995). A Canadian interprovincial exchange: Evaluating the linguistic impact of a three-month stay in Quebec. In: B. Freed (Ed.), Second language acquisition in a study abroad context (pp. 67–94). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Co. Lennon, P. (1990). The advanced learner at large in the L2 community: Developments in spoken performance. IRAL: International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 28(4), 309–324. Miller, J. (1999). Becoming audible: Social identity and second language use. Journal of Intercultural Studies, 20, 149–165. Milton, J., & Meara, P. (1995). How periods abroad affect vocabulary growth in a foreign language. ITL: Review of Applied Linguisics, 17–34, 107–108. National Association of Foreign Students Advisers and Section on US Students Abroad. (2003). Research on US students study abroad: An update 2000–2003. Online, available at: http://www.lmu.edu/globaled/ro/index.html. Moehle, D. (1984). A comparison of the second language speech production of different native speakers. In: H. W. Dechert, D. Moehle & M. Raupach (Eds), Second language productions (pp. 26–49). Tu¨bingen: Gu¨nter Narr.

Benefits of Residence Abroad: Students of Modern Foreign Languages

97

Oller, J. W., Jr. (1979). Language tests at school: A pragmatic approach. London: Longman. Pavlenko, A., & Lantlof, J. P. (2000). Second language learning as participation and the (re)construction of selves. In: J. P. Lantlof (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Pellegrino, V. (1996). Factors affecting risk-management behaviour among students during studyabroad. American Association of Teachers of Slavic and East European Languages (AATSEEL) Covention, Washington, DC, December. Pellegrino, V. (1998). Student perspectives on language learning in a study abroad context. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad, 4, 91–120. Polanyi, L. (1995). Language learning and living abroad. In: B. F. Freed (Ed.), Second language acquisition in a study abroad context (pp. 271–291). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Co. Raupach, M. (1987). Procedural learning in advanced learners of a foreign language. In: J. A. Coleman & R. Towell (Eds), The advanced language learner (pp. 123–155). London: Centre for Information on Language Teaching and Research. Savignon, S. J. (1972). Communicative competence: An experiment in foreign language teaching. Philadelphia, PA: Center for Curriculum Development. Schmidt, R. W., & Frota, S. N. (1986). Developing basic conversational ability in a second language: A case study of an adult learner of Portuguese. In: R. R. Day (Ed.), Talking to learn: Conversation in second language acquisition (pp. 237–326). Rowley, MA: Newbury House Publishers, Inc. Schumann, F. M. (1980). Diary of a language learner: A further analysis. In: R. C. Scarcella & S. D. Krashen (Eds), Research in second language acquisition: Selected papers of the Los Angeles second language acquisition research forum (pp. 51–65). Rowley, MA: Newbury House Publishers, Inc. Siegal, M. (1995). Individual differences in study abroad: Women learning Japanese in Japan. In: B. Freed (Ed.), Second language acquisition in a study Abroad context (pp. 225–243). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Co. Teichler, U. (1991). Experiences of ERASMUS students. Select findings of the 1988/89 survey. Kassel: Gesamthochschule Kassel. Walsh, R. (1994). The year abroad: A linguistic challenge. Teanga, 14, 48–57. Wilkinson, S. (1997). Separating fact from myth: A qualitative perspective on language learning during summer study abroad. Paper given at Modern Languages Association (MLA) Convention. Toronto, December.

This page intentionally left blank

98

LIVING UP TO EXPECTATIONS: A SURVEY OF INTERNATIONAL STUDENTS’ CONCERNS AND THEIR PERCEPTIONS OF CHANGE ON A U.K. DEPARTMENTAL PRE-SESSIONAL PROGRAMME Judith Lamie and Steve Issitt ABSTRACT There has been a dramatic increase in recent years in the numbers of international students undertaking undergraduate and postgraduate study in the United Kingdom. This has been as a direct result of the huge influx of mainly postgraduates from the Far East, and in particular from China. After briefly setting the students in their educational context, this chapter presents the findings of two pre- and post-course questionnaires produced in order to reach a better understanding of the needs and expectations of international students attending a UK departmental presessional programme. In addition, the questionnaires explored the students’ notions of and attitudes to change as they proceeded though their programmes. The research revealed a consistent range of concerns and perceptions, which may help us to prioritise students’ needs and address them more International Relations International Perspectives on Higher Education Research, Volume 3, 99–127 Copyright r 2005 by Elsevier Ltd. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISSN: 1479-3628/doi:10.1016/S1479-3628(05)03005-4

99

100

JUDITH LAMIE AND STEVE ISSITT

effectively and sensitively in the future. The chapter concludes with a number of suggestions and recommendations to help us improve our provision and maintain and expand our position as a high-quality provider of courses for international students.

Our universities and colleges are second to none. Their world-class reputation means that they are among the most popular for international students. I am determined to build on this great strength with a long-term strategy to attract many more. The institutions, their students and our economy will reap considerable rewards. Blair (1999)

INTRODUCTION There has been a dramatic increase in recent years in the numbers of international students undertaking undergraduate and postgraduate study in the U.K. This has been a direct result of the huge influx of mainly postgraduates from the Far East, and in particular from China. This chapter examines the expectations of students on a university pre-sessional course, and investigates the multidimensional student experience during this period. It is intended to address a knowledge gap between our expectations as course providers and the students’ realities, both anticipated and actual. The chapter begins with a brief overview of the educational context, before moving on to introduce the research focus and methodology. The following section presents the results, and discusses the findings, of two questionnaires administered at two points during the pre-sessional programmes. An initial survey of over 250 students, 85% of the entire 2003 intake, was conducted, in which course participants were invited to express their main concerns regarding life and study in the U.K. In addition, we wanted to explore the students’ notions of, and attitudes to, change as they proceeded through their programmes. At the end of the course, we carried out a similar survey and paired 110 pre- and post-responses. Giving the students initial and follow-up questionnaires enabled us to look at their baseline expectations and attitudes, and to analyse their impressions of not only course provision, but also their experiences on the university campus and beyond. This revealed a consistent range of concerns and perceptions, information which may help us to prioritise students’ needs and address them more effectively and sensitively.

Living up to Expectations: Survey of U.K. Pre-sessional Programme

101

BACKGROUND China is in a phase of industrial, scientific and commercial expansion which will make it the world’s largest economy by the early years of the next century. In order to function efficiently in this role, it needs to bring large numbers of its people to high levels of proficiency in the use of English for a wide variety of functions. Maley (1995, p. 47)

In the U.K., international students are beginning to comprise a significant proportion of the student population in higher education, with over 300,000 now attending U.K. colleges and universities (UKCOSA, 2003). They come from different cultural backgrounds and have different expectations of the teaching and learning processes. This has serious implications for international student provision. At the University of Birmingham special courses are run, by the English for International Students Unit (EISU), to prepare and support the students, both academically and culturally, for study in Britain. In the past few years student numbers for these courses have increased dramatically. The reason for this increase would appear to be the huge influx of students coming from the Far East, in particular from China. The role and importance of English, and English language teaching, in China first became part of the educational agenda in the early part of the twentieth century (Boyle, 2000). At this stage it was modelled on the system present in Japan. First and foremost, the education process in Japan was intended as a servant to the state (Lamie, 2001). The happiness of the individual, though important, was of secondary importance to social harmony: The notion of Japanese dedication to role stems from the Confucian ideology dominant in pre-modern Japan, which de-emphasised the individual as an end in himself or herself, emphasising instead individual responsibilities and obligations. Shimahara (1998, p. 223)

Shimahara continues by observing that changes that have been successfully effected since the inception of the modern system of national education in Japan have been so when the curriculum has had less to do with individual learners’ personal, cognitive and imaginative development, and more to do with corporate industrial, business and economic requirements. Similar developments have taken place in China. During the founding of the People’s Republic of China in 1949, English was briefly replaced by Russian, but by 1955 the Ministry of Education became aware that this could potentially damage China’s long-term goals, and English was once again placed on the teaching and learning syllabus.

102

JUDITH LAMIE AND STEVE ISSITT

There was to be another period of uncertainty for English during the Cultural Revolution (1966–1976), but, by 1978, following a key conference on foreign language teaching held by the Chinese Ministry of Education, English had once again regained prominence. At this time a team from the US International Communication Agency visited five cities, and a number of educational institutions, in China and stated China’s reasons for learning English: The Chinese view English primarily as a necessary tool which can facilitate access to modern scientific and technological advances, and secondarily as a vehicle to promote commerce and understanding between the People’s Republic of China and countries where English is a major language. Cowan, Light, Matthews, and Tucker (1979, p. 465)

According to the Report of the English 2000 Conference in Beijing, sponsored by the British Council and the State Education Commission of the People’s Republic of China, this is a basic motivation which has not changed. It was at this point in time that the numbers of Chinese students applying for undergraduate and postgraduate courses in the U.K. significantly increased. The British Council stated: The efforts of U.K. universities and colleges to provide more support for overseas students and to create an international campus environment have paid off, new recruitment figures show. The British Council (2001, p. 1)

In 1999, Prime Minister Blair announced the launch of an initiative with the aim of attracting more international students to the U.K. Blair stated that: When the G8 leaders meet this weekend, we expect to agree a charter on our ambitions for lifelong learning. We all want to equip our countries for the knowledge-driven society of the next century, and to share our educational strengths with the rest of the world. One of the most important contributions we can make is to ensure that our universities and colleges are open to able students from around the world. Blair (1999)

The numbers of international students attending U.K. universities has indeed increased in recent years, with overall numbers in 2003 exceeding those of 2002 by 5.5%. However, universities in the U.K. have been experiencing mixed results, with the emergence of strong new international student markets coupled with the falling away of more traditional ones. A decrease in student numbers from a number of previously key markets, such as Spain, Germany and France, has coincided with large increases from Japan and China, as the statistics on international recruitment reveal:

Living up to Expectations: Survey of U.K. Pre-sessional Programme

103

Country

Change (%) (2002–2003)

Spain Germany France Japan China

–25 –17 –13 +5 +92

UKCOSA (2003).

This national recruitment situation has been mirrored at the University of Birmingham. In 1958, there were 40 international students at the University. By 1974 this number had increased to 169, 45 of whom were undergraduates. The majority (91) were studying science and engineering, although courses in commerce and social science (39) and education (20) were also popular. The highest number of students coming from a single country was 31, and that country was Turkey. There were also significant numbers coming from Iran (11), Iraq (11), Greece (11) and Malaysia (9). No students came from China. Statistics produced by the University in 2003 indicated that, of the 25,000 students studying at Birmingham, 4,200 were international. These students came from 140 different countries. However, over 1,000 were from China. In addition, business and economics had become the most popular programmes. One criticism to be levelled at U.K. universities is that international students have received a lack of support both in terms of language development and social interaction; if support is not forthcoming then universities and colleges will not be ‘‘open to able students from around the world’’ (Blair, ibid.). British universities, therefore, need to: manage expectations better. The better universities offer specially tailored induction courses for new Chinese arrivals – ranging from tips on shopping and public transport to thorough training in how to write essays and give presentations. The Economist (2003, p. 3)

The University of Birmingham provides such courses via the EISU, which was the first unit to be set up at a university in the U.K., in 1964, with the specific task of providing support for international students (Jordan, 2002). In its infancy the Unit provided:  a 4-day induction course for overseas students;  a 2-week pre-sessional course;

104

JUDITH LAMIE AND STEVE ISSITT

 a diagnostic test to ascertain which grammatical areas students required particular help with;  an in-sessional academic programme of lectures covering such topics as grammar, listening for note taking, vocabulary and writing academic texts;  a one-to-one tutorial service;  a general advisory service. The increase in international student numbers has led to an increase in the support provided. Currently, the main objectives of EISU are the following:  To provide in-sessional English language and study skills support for international students at the University of Birmingham.  To offer programmes in Executive English (under Birmingham International Business Communications) and training in Communication Skills.  To offer programmes in General English for other groups of tertiary-level international students.  To test incoming international students and identify students with potential English language difficulties.  To help international students develop their English language and study skills prior to their enrolment at the University through 20- (initiated in 2001), 10- and 6-week English for Academic Purposes (EAP) pre-sessional courses.  To offer 20-, 15-, 10- and 6-week programmes in Business and Management English (BME) courses (initiated in 2001). The key academic skills taught on the three EAP pre-sessional courses include: how to write an academic essay; how to participate in group discussion and debate; oral and written presentation skills; listening to lectures; how to develop and support an academic argument; strategies for reading and summarising texts; and how to critically review data and evidence. The 20-week course concentrates on language improvement for the first 10 weeks. The 10- and 6-week courses include:      

supplementary classes in grammar; regular individual tutorials; specialist lectures from different academic disciplines; library and reference skills; information technology (IT) tuition (including word-processing skills); preparation for the International English Language Testing System (IELTS) examination.

Living up to Expectations: Survey of U.K. Pre-sessional Programme

105

The BME pre-sessional courses focus on the language, key concepts and study skills needed for academic success in postgraduate, business-related study. The emphasis is on English language improvement in the four skill areas of reading, writing, listening and speaking. However, all classes utilise business and management content materials, such as case studies, management articles and exposure to business and management textbooks and lectures. Course components include:  English language improvement (with supplementary grammar as needed);  writing academic essays and business reports;  development of management and business vocabulary;  library, reference and word-processing skills;  listening to business and management lectures, and note taking;  presentation skills;  preparing and presenting a small business-related project;  strategies for answering examination questions;  evaluating and using different sources of business data;  individual tutorials;  preparation for the IELTS examination. In 1990, 81 students attended the EISU pre-sessional courses. These students came from 32 countries. The countries sending the most students were Indonesia (12), Pakistan (10), Thailand (7) and Turkey (6). No students came from China. In 2003, 304 students attended EISU pre-sessional programmes: 84% of these students were from the Far East. Before the findings of the questionnaires are presented and discussed, brief recourse will be given to the questionnaire design and objectives.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY Questionnaires are only one of several ways researchers can gather information, test hypotheses and obtain answers to research questions. A wellformulated planning structure, with clear objectives is the key when producing an effective questionnaire: The questionnaire may be considered as a formalised and stylised interview, or interview by proxy. The form is the same as it would be in a face-to-face interview, but in order to remove the interviewer the subject is presented with what, essentially, is a structured transcript with the responses missing. Walker (1985, p. 91)

106

JUDITH LAMIE AND STEVE ISSITT

Viewed in this way questionnaires can be designed to gather information, and test and suggest new hypotheses. As Munn and Drever (1991, p. 1) state: a questionnaire can provide you with:  descriptive information  tentative explanations associated with testing of an hypothesis. Subjects responding to the questionnaire must be able to understand the questions posed and their relevance. The designer should also be aware, particularly when dealing with respondents who are working in their second language, that there is a tendency for only those who are competent to reply. Therefore the questionnaire designer should ensure that all questions are easy to understand and answer at various levels of second language proficiency. Although the sample size is dependent to a large extent on the purpose of the study, a minimum of 30 respondents as a selection base is suggested (Cohen & Manion, 1994). Since validity is related to the size of the sample, researchers suggest that at least 100 respondents are desirable, as Munn and Drever (1991, p. 15) demonstrate:

Sample Size 100 250 1,000

95% Confidence Range (%) 710 76 73

The general rule for questionnaire design is that each item must measure a specific aspect of the objective. The questions can be open or closed, although quantification and analysis can be more easily carried out with closed questions. General questions should be placed first, followed by those that are more specific (Cohen & Manion, 1994). If possible the questionnaire should be piloted or pre-tested using a similar population which need not be large, but can be a ‘‘well-defined professional group’’ (Borg & Gall, 1983, p. 426). Space should be provided for comments and amendments made in line with the feedback given. A procedure, therefore, could be: 1. define the objectives, 2. select a sample,

Living up to Expectations: Survey of U.K. Pre-sessional Programme

3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

107

construct the questionnaire, pre-test, amend if necessary, administer, analyse the results.

Following these considerations, and after a piloting of the research instruments in the Autumn of 2002, two questionnaires (see Appendices 1 and 2) were produced in order to reach a better understanding of the expectations and concerns of pre-sessional international students in EISU, and, as a result, help EISU course providers to prioritise students’ needs and address them more effectively and sensitively. The specific objectives of the questionnaire were to: 1. Establish the current pre-sessional international student profile. 2. Discover the reasons why the students had come to study in the U.K. 3. Determine the expectations and concerns of the international students with regard to living and studying at Birmingham, and, in the follow-up questionnaire, ascertain how far these expectations and concerns had been realistic. 4. Explore the students’ notions of, and attitudes to, change as they proceed through their programmes. In order to achieve these, the questionnaires were divided into the following sections: Questionnaire 1 (Q1): A. General Information B. Reasons for Study and Expectations C. Changes in Attitudes and Practice Questionnaire 2 (Q2): A. Expectations and Concerns B. Changes in Attitudes and Practice The first questionnaire was administered in a lecture hall in order that the compilers could guide the students through the questionnaire, and answer any questions regarding comprehension that may occur. Of the 304 students attending the 2003 pre-sessional courses, 256 (85%) took part in the initial survey; 110 students completed the follow-up questionnaire at the end of the programmes.

108

JUDITH LAMIE AND STEVE ISSITT

DATA AND ANALYSIS Demographics Wolf (1997, p. 423) emphasises the ‘‘natural ordering or flow necessary to produce a well-made questionnaire’’. With this in mind, and the belief that a logical progression will make a questionnaire easier to complete, Q1 began with a section entitled ‘‘General Information’’. The data requested covered student age, gender, nationality, subject department and status. There were 256 respondents in the initial survey, 79% of whom were between 20- and 29-years old. The majority of students came from China (53%). This is representative of the trend in international student numbers, both nationally and regionally. In terms of gender, the respondents were evenly split, with both male and female students totalling 128 (Q2: 52 male; 58 female). Most students (214) were pursuing postgraduate study. Figs. 1 and 2 illustrate the age and nationality of the population, for both Q1 and Q2, respectively. The most popular subject of study nationally for international students is business and administration (UKCOSA, 2003). This statistic is reflected in the data obtained from the questionnaires, as shown in Fig. 3. Other areas of study popular with pre-sessional students were engineering, economics, computer science and law.

250

Number of Students

200

Q1 Q2

203

150 91

100

38

50 12

14

5

3

0 Under 20

20 - 29

Fig. 1.

30 - 39

Pre-sessional Student Age.

40 and over

109

Living up to Expectations: Survey of U.K. Pre-sessional Programme 160

Q1

137

140

Q2

Number of Students

120 100 80

64

60 37

40

17

20

14

13

10

5 3

2

1

9

9

4 2

2

4 1

4

Q1

79

80 Number of Students

Ira ni an

e

M ex ic an

ai

V

Th

ie tn am es

Ta iw an es e

Pre-sessional Student Nationality (Four Students and Over for Q1).

Fig. 2.

90

In do ne sia n

or ea n K

Sa ud i

Ja pa ne s

A ra bi an

e

Ch in es e

0

Q2

70 60

48

50 37

36

40 30

22

22

18

20

12

11

10

3

11

8

2

7 5

3

7 2

Fig. 3.

En gl is h

IS LS PO

La w

Bi os ci en ce s En gi ne er C in om g pu te rS ci en ce Ed uc at io n

Bu si ne ss

Sc ho

ol Ec on om ic s

0

Pre-sessional Student Department (Four Students and Over in Q1).

Reasons for Study Historically, China’s reasons for learning English have been to facilitate technological and scientific advances. Other Far East Asian countries have experienced similar developments. The Ministry of Education in Japan, for

110

JUDITH LAMIE AND STEVE ISSITT

Table 1.

Q1: Reasons for Studying at Birmingham.

Reasons Reputation Suitable course English language development Birmingham city Recommendation

Number of Students 149 56 21 20 18

example, has sought to respond to the changing nature of Japan’s relationship with the rest of the world, particularly its business and economic relationship, by placing higher emphasis on the importance of English (Shimahara, 1992; Lamie, 1998). The reasons pre-sessional students gave for choosing to pursue courses at the University of Birmingham centred on English language development, a suitable course, the city of Birmingham, recommendation and reputation, as shown in Table 1: 149 students (58%) cited the reputation of the university, easily the largest group; 56 (21%) recorded how the course matched their specific needs, with a further 30 (11%) referring to the reputation of the course or the department; and 20 (8%) referred to the reputation of the city of Birmingham itself (note that in this, and subsequent questions, students could give more than one answer). These responses may have more to do with question phraseology, where the emphasis may have been placed too greatly on ‘‘Birmingham’’, and less with deep-seated reasons why the students actually left their home countries, although the importance and impact of reputation cannot be ignored, as the following extracts from Q1 illustrate: The University of Birmingham is famous in China (Student no. 33). There are a lot of good universities in England, Birmingham is one of them (Student no. 48). Birmingham is one of the famous universities in the world and it has a warm welcome for international students (Student no. 100).

Students clearly attach great importance to the reputation of a university within their own countries (Patterson, Romm, & Hill, 1998). This has marketing implications in the sense that the acquisition of a positive reputation could be the key to attracting future high-calibre students. The same applies to the reputations of individual departments, and it is clear that academic

Living up to Expectations: Survey of U.K. Pre-sessional Programme

111

status is a key factor affecting choice of university and department. As far as the reputation of the city is concerned, it is heartening to see a positive response from students, especially with regard to its welcoming nature. Birmingham is not traditionally a ‘‘must visit’’ place, and universities in cities which are more generally known internationally, such as York, Edinburgh and of course London, may have a tremendous attraction potential, simply because of their location. There is a cachet to living in London, which no university can compete with, but the reputation of the remaining U.K. cities is still important. When students were asked why they had chosen their particular course, nearly 30% stated that interest was an important factor. According to Lord and Cheng (1987), knowledge of English correlates highly with income and social prestige, and this may lead to a strong abstract motivation for study abroad. Over 50% of students cited skill-based and career development reasons: I am interested in this course. It is useful for the future (Student no. 30). The course is very good for my career path (Student no. 25). I believe MSc in marketing programme fits my academic needs in an excellent way. I am very interested in the subject, particularly when applied to European countries, so I thought this is a very good option. I expect to be able to learn not only from lectures, but also from my classmates and my experience in the U.K. generally (Student no. 66).

Expectations and Concerns In 2003 the British Council advised that: Major new developments in course delivery methods and the U.K.’s marketing approach must take place to cope with the number of students and their changing demands. The British Council (2003, p. 1)

The British Council specifically referred to the need to ‘‘manage student’s expectations’’ (ibid., p. 5). Expectations and concerns could be regarded as two sides of the same coin, in that concerns could be referred to as negative expectations. There were several areas of overlap in the students’ responses to the first questionnaire, as shown in Figs. 4 and 5, and one positive point to emerge is the level of professional commitment that the students clearly have. There is an emphasis upon acquiring English language skills, and also the techniques to achieve success in the IELTS examination. There is a positive accent on the course content, and it is clear that students are focusing very much on the future and on the benefits they will gain from their

112

JUDITH LAMIE AND STEVE ISSITT Technology 4% Future 16%

English 28%

Professional Knowledge 23%

Academic English 12%

Acclimatisation 6%

IELTS 11%

Fig. 4.

Pre-sessional Student Expectations (Q1).

Living Conditions

44

Accommodation

17

Safety

18

Studying

21

Communicating Cost of living Culture

16 14 25

Food

44

Language

Fig. 5.

49

Pre-sessional Student Concerns (Q1).

Living up to Expectations: Survey of U.K. Pre-sessional Programme

113

studies. East (2001, p. 4) refers to the ‘‘halo effect’’ where students include the prestige of the university within their overall mindset. This tends to make them less likely to criticise their courses, but it could also afford them a determined outlook in terms of study. At the beginning of the course the students appear to know what they want, and what they are prepared to focus on in order to get it: What I expect from my course is to get an overall understanding of business learning methods (Student no. 39). How to be familiar with living and studying customs in the U.K. (Student no. 41). I care about my future study. I hope I can get knowledge, which really reflects the economics of Western countries (Student no. 59).

An interesting aspect to this issue is the idea of students as customers (East, 2001). International students pay a (substantial) fee and expect to be treated accordingly. As Qinglin (1999, p. 5) points out, ‘‘full-fee paying international students expect to be treated like customers and to receive a highquality service’’. Qinglin also states that there is a tendency to regard students as ‘‘cash cows’’, who are often considered to be elements in an industry (the international students business), but are not yet treated as customers. The extent to which students perceive themselves to be consumers, or buyers, of a product may have implications for the kind of comments they make, as the following remarks indicate: I’m a board member so I need to update my knowledge of business in this rapidly changing world (Student no. 67). I will get more information, learn as much as I can take, and I would bring it to my country and use it to have a better life (Student no. 76). To be able to speak English as a native speaker (Student no. 80). To communicate with people from various countries (Student no. 61). How I can have more chances to speak with native speakers (Student no. 119).

This latter response recurs in various forms and contexts, and does appear to be, quite reasonably, a common expectation. It would seem that in this area, as we observe subsequently, students can be disappointed. When we examine the students’ concerns (Fig. 5), a fairly consistent pattern emerges, and it is interesting to see how much importance is attached to food. This may well be compounded by East Asian food being quite difficult to obtain on the university campus, especially over the summer months, and we should take note of how much international students actively miss the

114

JUDITH LAMIE AND STEVE ISSITT

cuisine of their country: I am not used to English food (Student no. 8). There’s no Chinese food sold on campus (Student no. 11). I don’t like the food here (Student no. 122).

British food does have a somewhat negative reputation internationally and despite the improvements which have been made over recent years, it is a reputation that tends to linger: My main concern is that I am unable to get used to the British food, which is usually served such as a sandwich, hamburger, fish and chips, and so on (Student no. 127).

It is fair to say, however, that reputations can work both ways and that the U.K. benefits, for example, from being perceived as a relatively safe country, certainly in comparison to the U.S.A. Nevertheless, the issue of crime does feature in student concerns, as do accommodation issues and the cost of living: I worry about safety (Student no. 101). Security and communication are the main concerns of my family and I (Student no. 114). The security problem, I’m really afraid someone will bully me (Student no. 73). I’m concerned about my accommodation (Student no. 25). Everything is so expensive compared to China (Student no. 145).

On the EISU pre-sessional induction course, we try to allay students’ worries about safety and present a realistic picture of life on and off campus. It is probably true to say that Birmingham is no more or less dangerous than any other U.K. or even European large city, but new students, particularly women, are anxious about the unknown, especially if they have come from rural areas. The remaining areas of concern related to life and language: The biggest problem I have is if I can mix with U.K. life as quick as I expect (Student no. 53). There are many Chinese speakers so I’m afraid that I can’t improve my English (Student no. 183). The problems are speaking and listening with young British people because they speak very fast and are impatient (Student no. 195). I think the biggest problem I have is the English (Student no. 93) [Hopefully the article is used wrongly here!].

Living up to Expectations: Survey of U.K. Pre-sessional Programme

115

When we examine the actual experiences of the students after their period of study (Q2), some salient facts emerge. In response to the question: Did the course satisfy your expectations?, 87 (79%) replied with a definite yes, 14 (12%) gave a yes/no response, 7 (6%) said no and 2 did not respond. These are positive results and one could say that it is unrealistic for us to expect complete satisfaction, especially in such a pressurised environment as a university pre-sessional: It helped me to enhance my English ability as expected (Student no. 41). It’s completely different. I thought the course focused on language but it was for academic skills, which is where I really need to improve myself, so it helped me a lot (Student no. 99). You gave me a precious memory (Student no. 124).

That so many are prepared to give us their approval is reassuring. However, some students were not satisfied and this offers us no grounds for complacency. Some of the reasons the students gave were: I wanted to learn to write academic essays more (Student no. 216). I thought the 10-week course was not interactive (Student no. 222). Too many contents were writing (Student no. 116).

In response to the second question, Were the concerns you had at the start of the course accurate? 69 (63%) said definitely yes, 10 said yes/no, 21 replied no and 10 gave no response. The commonest unforeseen problem (eight responses) related to accommodation. Other problems included computer difficulties, homesickness, banking and communicating with native people: I had to go to housing services several times to check my accommodation (Student no. 40). Living in the university accommodation was a problem (Student no. 232). Computer problems seem to happen quite frequently in the university (Student no. 6). Apart from class, many people tended to use their own language, nasty (Student no. 165). Sometimes I can’t understand what people say off campus (Student no. 246).

Q2 also asked the students if they had encountered any problems that they had not foreseen. Twenty-eight students replied yes, and again, accommodation featured strongly, with other issues including banking, IELTS and listening in class: Accommodation and banking (Student no. 24).

116

JUDITH LAMIE AND STEVE ISSITT

I didn’t foresee the difficulty of finding a place to live (Student no. 2). I had to pass IELTS. Under this situation I cannot concentrate on my course, which I did not expect (Student no. 255).

International students expect things to be different in certain areas, and it is incumbent on us to prioritise those aspects of the student experience, which could be expected to be of high quality in their own countries. Food and housing, for example, are basic human needs, and, insofar as we can control these variables, they need to be made as a high a quality as is practically possible. Computer access is now an integral part of life, both in the university and outside. It needs to be made easily available. Jones, Robertson, and Line (1999), in referring to the socio-cultural adjustment problems of international students, propose reception on arrival, assistance with locating accommodation, city orientation, referral to other professional support services within the university, and recreational and cultural activities. Many universities will already provide these services, and it might be helpful to regard these items as a baseline for successful provision. Our international students are intelligent and receptive to new ideas and cultural differences. Indeed, these are some of the reasons that they have chosen to leave their home countries and study in the U.K. in the first place. Whilst there is little doubt that an important motivation for studying in the U.K. is their perceived marketability after having studied in an English medium (Lord & Cheng, 1987), as Littlewood (2000) observes, Asian students wish to explore their own academic and social environments, and to discover answers and solutions for themselves, as one student stated: I just wanted to try something new and different (Student no. 123).

Changes in Attitudes and Practice Examples can be found from a wide variety of sources, from eighteenth century historians to twentieth century independent management consultants, of change being viewed as a potentially negative force incurring resistance, concern and even fear, as Howardell (2001, p. 1) illustrates: It’s because many of us fear the unknown. We are afraid that the proposed change may involve loss. We may lose power, prestige, or position. We may fear loss of our ability to perform our assigned tasks. We may fear losing our place in the group, as an accepted member of the community of our fellows. When we perceive this potential loss, maybe even loss of our job itself, we feel threatened. It is this threatening change that we fear.

Living up to Expectations: Survey of U.K. Pre-sessional Programme

117

Change, however, may also be regarded as a positive force: Change always comes bearing gifts. Pritchett (1994, p. 10)

More frequently there are those that see change as being both positive and negative: Change is painful, yet ever needful. Carlyle (1795–1881) The world hates change, yet it is the one thing that has brought progress. Kettering (1876–1958)

We are all involved, every day, in some form of change. These may be small, deliberate changes: what we wear, eat or drink, or the style or colour of our hair. Then there are larger, and again often deliberate, changes. We change the type of car we drive, move house, get married, get divorced or have children. Other changes we may find are beyond our control: the weather, our increasing age or the actions and thoughts of others. Sometimes we think we have a choice about change, but find in fact we do not. We may think we have a choice about what we wear, or how long our hair is, but these may in part be dictated by others, by other individuals, by institutional norms or by the society as a whole in which we are placed. Other times we feel coerced into change, in which maybe we did in reality have a choice. More often than not we do not stop to consider these changes. It is usually only when a change occurs that is either of such magnitude that we cannot help but notice, such as a change of occupation or marital status, or one that is being imposed that we consider unwelcome and unwanted, that we confront it directly. All of the pre-sessional students, by choosing to leave their own countries and study in the U.K., had placed themselves in a, potentially threatening, situation where they would be directly confronting change. To determine the students’ opinions of, and attitudes to, change two questions were presented in the initial questionnaire: (1) What is change? (2) In what ways do you think you will change living and studying in the U.K.? These questions were followed up in Q2 in order to discover how far the students perceived they had changed in terms of attitudes and practices. In their definitions of change, the general consensus amongst the students was that change involved something from the original situation being

118

JUDITH LAMIE AND STEVE ISSITT

altered: Change is to be different from the original (Student no. 1). Change is something that is different from before (Student no. 17). It means that one thing becomes another thing (Student no. 52).

A number of students (39%) concentrated on the positive aspects of change: Change is wonderful (Student no. 62). Change is a beneficial thing (Student no. 87). Change is movement to get higher and to reach goals and to be persistent. I can only understand change in a good sense. The opposite is not change. In changing you are growing (Student no. 103).

Some students, however, did not agree with this notion: Change is something to deal with, a difficult situation where you find it is a painful process and it will take time for you to get over it (Student no. 79). Change is a difficult process (Student no. 86).

The majority of students emphasised both the positive and negative aspects of change, alluding to the identification of change through a series of paradoxes, or, as termed by Fullan (1993, p. 6), ‘‘seemingly incompatible pairs’’. That it could be not only good or bad, but also unconscious or conscious, physical or mental, imposed or self-motivated, or small or large: Sometimes is good. Sometimes is bad (Student no. 61). Change is both a good thing and a bad thing. It can improve and destroy. It can make something better or worse (Student no. 244).

Lamie (2005), in an analysis of a series of case studies which evaluated change in various English language teaching contexts, concludes that by examining the process of change a number of general principles can be reached. These are:       

Principle 1: Change involves the statement of an aim Principle 2: Change is problem solving Principle 3: Change is client-user focused Principle 4: Change involves a variety of actors Principle 5: Change is part of a complex system Principle 6: Change is part of a social and economic context Principle 7: Change is part of a personal context, evokes a variety of emotions and involves attitudes and beliefs  Principle 8: Change is a process and involves training, practice and time.

Living up to Expectations: Survey of U.K. Pre-sessional Programme

119

Fullan (1991, p. 22) asserts that the real agenda for introducing change into the school environment is the changing of the culture of the institution, and that, for this to take place, the attitudes and beliefs of those within the institution must be addressed: An innovation – a new or revised curriculum, a policy, a structure, an idea – is something that is new to the people encountering it for the first time. Dealing with innovation effectively means alterations in behaviours and beliefs. Changes in behaviours – new skills, activities, practices – and changes in beliefs – new understandings, commitments – are at the core of implementation. Thus the key issue from an implementation perspective is how the process of change unfolds vis-a`-vis what people do (behaviours) and think (beliefs) in relation to a particular innovation.

In presenting their definitions, pre-sessional students referred to change as being, more often, a process rather than an event. They also reinforced the complexity of change and highlighted the changes that can take place not only in practice, but in attitudes: Change is a process of adjusting yourself (Student no. 51). To change your culture or attitudes to cope with a new environment (Student no. 117). Change is the kind of thing that makes you feel different, maybe the way of life or the attitude to the outside world (Student no. 152).

There were two main areas of response to the question, In what ways do you think you will change living and studying in the U.K.?: Personal and professional. Personal aspects included practical changes such as acclimatisation, adaptation to a ‘‘new environment’’ (Student no. 26), living conditions, eating habits and food in general, and the changing of attitudes, particularly with regard to the British way of life: Get to know more English customs (Student no. 1). Get used to life in the U.K. (Student no. 14). Adapt to habits in terms of eating and communication, and form the ability to learn independently (Student no. 50).

Students also expected to become more independent, more flexible in their approaches to life, more confident and more open-minded. This is a feature of the U.K., which we do not always recognise. The U.K. is seen as a very tolerant place and one where international cultures are welcomed: Become more independent and confident (Student no. 6). I’ll fit into the U.K. culture with an open-mind (Student no. 16).

120

JUDITH LAMIE AND STEVE ISSITT

Living in the U.K. will change your mind about the important things in life and you will improve your attitude (Student no. 24). Live and study independently (Student no. 4).

Attitude change also occurred in the responses with a professional focus. These included attitudes towards different types of learning strategies and English language teaching methodologies and materials: The way of thinking and learning habits (Student no. 11). To adapt to the teaching way (Student no. 8). I will learn a new way of studying which I can apply after I return home (Student no. 117).

Although these are comparatively short, intensive courses, most students were very positive about change and that change would occur. Only one student responded negatively in the follow-up questionnaire when asked what changes, if any, had taken place. The definitions illustrated that the students continued to see change as a complex process. There were, however, more definite statements with regard to the potential impact of attitudes and beliefs, and of change being a complex, problem-solving activity, of ‘‘reacting differently’’ (Student no. 22) to new things ‘‘both physically and psychologically’’ (Student no. 34). There were a number of areas in which the students considered their attitudes had changed, or were beginning to change. These included attitudes towards the British people and culture, and in addition other nationalities and their cultures, and various aspects of language teaching and learning: This course changed my mind about English teaching (Student no. 4). I have changed the way I think about other foreign students (Student no. 226). I think I have become more flexible to change (Student no. 232).

The students’ perceptions of changes in practice centred largely, and quite naturally, on learning skills and study methods, although eating habits were also referred to. Many students had expressed concern, as already discussed, that it would be difficult to adapt to the different teaching methodology, and had anticipated that their role as students would also be different to that they assumed in their home countries. Their responses, however, indicated that the resulting change was welcome and had proved an asset to their studies, resulting in an increase in independence and confidence as well as

Living up to Expectations: Survey of U.K. Pre-sessional Programme

121

ability: I was not used to talking and exchanging my opinions during class, but now I can do that quite freely (Student no. 12). I am more comfortable writing essays and arranging my time, using it more accurately and effectively (Student no. 22).

Change takes time. Changes in practice can take a relatively short time, at least initial changes in practice. Lasting change may take longer, or, in many instances, original habits and practices are returned to. To expect dramatic change to occur in either practice or attitudes by the end of a pre-sessional course is unrealistic. However, the majority of students believed they had changed in both areas by the end of the programme. More importantly they believed that they would continue to change; that their journey had only just begun: At the beginning I have no confidence about my study. After the course I believe I can do better and better in my future (Student no. 17).

IMPLICATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS A more widespread study involving additional international students from a variety of U.K. higher education institutions is needed to confirm the reliability and validity of the findings of this exploratory research. However, from this limited study a number of suggestions and recommendations can be made which may help to improve our provision and hopefully maintain and expand our position as a high-quality provider of courses for international students. With regard to courses delivered by EISU, we propose to monitor them very closely and to modify and amend their content in line with student profiles. This may seem obvious, but it is easy to develop a course with a certain student profile in mind and then fail to modify the curriculum in subsequent years. Ten years ago, for example, a large number of our students were embarking upon higher degrees in sociology, politics, history, English and the arts. Whilst we still attract these students, a much greater number are planning to complete science degrees such as computing and engineering, together with a whole range of business and financial courses. The curricular implications are clear, the language and learning needs of science students need to be accommodated within a curriculum initially designed to cater for social scientists. This requires fine-tuning and an ongoing needs analysis framework. Students do not always comment on the

122

JUDITH LAMIE AND STEVE ISSITT

content of their courses, preferring to rely on our judgements as experts in the field. It is incumbent on us to prioritise course development to ensure that students’ curricular needs are being met. It is also possible and probably desirable to include a cultural element in the course design, where aspects of U.K. life and culture may be examined from an analytical and practical perspective, together with advice on how to access cultural avenues such as sports, arts, media and even politics. This could be done as an ‘‘add on’’, with, for example, discrete sessions on topics of interest, or even as an integral part of the programme, with a theme for every week. At EISU we do this as part of our 20-week Foundation Module, with each week being themed to a particular aspect of British culture, including arts and literature, media and leisure. East (2001, p. 10) poses the question, ‘‘Is it solely the [international] students’ responsibility to be alert to cultural difference or should the university be aware of cultural difference?’’ It could be argued that it is the university’s responsibility through its individual departments, as course providers, to engage the cultural issues where appropriate. This chapter has already referred to many of the students’ concerns and expectations and these areas are clearly the responsibility of the university as a whole. What needs to be emphasised is the relationship between the academic and teaching aspects of course provision, and the administrative and pastoral functions of the university. At EISU, as with many departments catering for international students, we design and implement the programmes and the university provides the infrastructure. The two aspects are interrelated to the extent that neither can function without the other. Students, for example, may underperform if they are concerned with housing problems, and, as we see the students every day, we are their point of contact and their conduit to university services. What may be a minor issue can seem to be very important to a stressed international student, and the problem can be compounded by the Summer period being vacation time for many university staff. This can put more pressure on the summer academic programme, and some of the students’ comments reflected this. One possible solution may be for the university to establish a Summer course liaison officer with a responsibility to address the students’ concerns, in close collaboration with the English Language Unit. There is little doubt that, nationally, two of our strongest selling points as a country are history and culture, and the English language. Many students will have the opportunity to sample our abundant supply of ancient remains, and all will grapple with English, especially the academic variety. If we prioritise the students’ concerns and address their needs, at least to the

Living up to Expectations: Survey of U.K. Pre-sessional Programme

123

standards they would expect in their home countries, then we can continue ‘‘to attract many more’’ international students and offer them a satisfying and rewarding experience. In view of the research findings, discussions and conclusions, the following recommendations are given:  Affirm the status of the U.K. as a tolerant and relatively safe place for international students to live and study, but also give students a realistic and practical assessment of possible difficulties and risks.  Be sensitive to the importance that students place on housing and accommodation, especially in the early weeks of arrival.  Be aware of the need to provide computer access and sound IT facilities, particularly in the first few weeks of the programme.  Liaise closely with the range of support services available across the university with an emphasis on the help available to international students.  Develop an effective relationship with banking and other financial service providers, especially those on campus, to ensure that students can open accounts as early as possible.  Inform the students of the availability of East Asian food, and suggest to campus-based retail outlets that they stock a wider variety of groceries from the Far East.  Promote contact with native speakers of English, either from the university or from the local environment.  Encourage student engagement with the host social environment and provide opportunities for cultural acclimatisation either within the academic programme, or as an add-on component.  Be aware of the changing nature of the international student profile and undertake regular monitoring and fine-tuning of course content.  Be sensitive to changing student’ expectations and maintain a strong determination to provide a high-quality level of service. Ballard and Clanchy state: Many of the difficulties international students experience in their study derive not from ‘‘poor English’’ (though lack of language competence is in many cases a real problem), but from a clash of educational cultures. Ballard and Clanchy (1997, p. viii)

In seeking to promote a better understanding of the expectations and concerns of international students embarking upon study at a U.K. university, this research has tended to emphasise the non-academic aspects of the student experience. In drawing attention to the students’ resilience as they embark upon what must seem to be a fairly daunting challenge, the study

124

JUDITH LAMIE AND STEVE ISSITT

highlights those areas, which may be in need of attention, by us as course designers and by our parent institutions. From the perspective of international students, who are rational, intelligent and sensitive to the fact they are studying in another academic culture, it might be more accurate to refer to a difference of priorities. The vast majority of international postgraduates and undergraduates complete their courses and return to their countries of origin with higher qualifications from U.K. universities. It is not necessary to view the students solely as customers, but if U.K. higher educational institutions are sensitive to the needs of their students, then they will be in a better position to provide a context for rewarding experiences. This will be of benefit to us all.

REFERENCES Ballard, B., & Clanchy, J. (1997). Teaching international students. Deakin: IDP (International Development Programme) Education. Blair, T. (1999). The Prime Minister’s initiative. Campaign launch at the London School of Economics, June 18. Borg, W. R., & Gall, M. D. (1983). Educational research: An introduction (4th ed.). New York: Longman. Boyle, J. (2000). A brief history of English language teaching in China. IATEFL (International Association of Teaching English as a Foreign Language) Issues, 155. British Council, The. (2001). UK’s global offer attracts more international students. At http:// www.britishcouncil.org/learning/intstudspr.shtml British Council, The. (2003). UK must plan now for international student increase, says British Council. At http://www.britcoun.org/ecs/news/2003/1201/index.htm Carlyle, T. (1795–1881). Thomas Carlyle quotes. At http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/t/thomas_carlyle.html Cohen, L., & Manion, L. (1994). Research methods in education. London: Routledge. Cowan, J., Light, R., Matthews, B., & Tucker, G. (1979). English teaching in China: A recent survey. TESOL Quarterly, 12(4), 465–482. East, J. (2001). International students identified as customers. Conference paper given at Language and academic skills conference, November 29–30. Learning Development Unit, University of Wollongong, Australia. http://learning.ouw.edu.au/LKAS2001/index.htm Economist, The. (2003). Western promise. March 27. Fullan, M. G. (1991). The new meaning of educational change. London: Cassell. Fullan, M. G. (1993). Change forces. London: Falmer Press. Howardell, D. (2001). Overcoming people’s fear of change. At http://www.theacagroup.com/ overcome.htm Jones, S., Robertson, M., & Line, M. (1999). Teaching and valuing the voices of international students in universities. Conference paper presented at Higher education research and development society of Australasia annual international conference, Melbourne, Australia. July 12–15.

Living up to Expectations: Survey of U.K. Pre-sessional Programme

125

Jordan, R. R. (2002). The growth of EAP in Britain. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 1(1), 69–80. Kettering, C. F. (1876–1958). Charles F. Kettering quotes. At http://www.brainyquote.com/ quotes/authors/c/charles_f_kettering.html Lamie, J. M. (1998). Teacher education and training in Japan. Journal of In-service Education, 24(3), 515–535. Lamie, J. M. (2001). Understanding change. New York: Nova Science Publishers. Lamie, J. M. (2005). Evaluating change in English language teaching. Basingstoke: PalgraveMacmillan. Littlewood, W. (2000). Do Asian students really want to listen and obey? ELT Journal, 54(1), 31–35. Lord, R., & Cheng, H. N. (1987). Language education in Hong Kong. Hong Kong: Chinese University Press. Maley, A. (1995). Landmark review of English in China. The British Council. Munn, P., & Drever, E. (1991). Using questionnaires in small scale research. Glasgow: Scottish Council for Research into Education. Patterson, P., Romm, T., & Hill, C. (1998). Consumer satisfaction as a process: A qualitative, retrospective longitudinal study of overseas students in Australia. Journal of Professional Services Marketing, 16, 135–157. Pritchett, P. (1994). The employee handbook of new work habits for a radically changing world. Dallas: Pritchett Publishing Co. Qinglin, C. (1999). Can international students become international citizens: Gaps in current policies and practices of Australian international education. Paper presented at the Australian international education conference, IDP Education, Australia. http:// www.idp.com/16aiecpapers/program/thursday/issues4/Chen_p.pdf Shimahara, N. (1992). Overview of Japanese education: Policy, structure and current issues. In: R. Leestma & H. Walberg (Eds), Japanese educational productivity (pp. 7–33). Michigan: University of Michigan. Shimahara, N. (1998). The politics of classroom life. London: Garland. UKCOSA. (2003). Higher education statistics. At http://www.ukosa.org.uk Walker, R. (1985). Doing research. London: Routledge. Wolf, R. M. (1997). Questionnaires. In: J. P. Keeves (Ed.), Educational research methodology and measurement: An international handbook (pp. 422–427). Oxford: Pergamon.

APPENDIX 1 Name/ID number ________ Pre-sessional STUDENTS QUESTIONNAIRE 1 – 2003 Part A: General Information 1. Age (years): 2. Gender:

Under 20 & Male

&

Female

20–29 & &

3. Nationality: ________________________________

30–39 &40 and over

&

126

JUDITH LAMIE AND STEVE ISSITT

4. Department: ________________________________ 5. Status:

Undergraduate

&

Postgraduate &

Part B: Reasons for Study and Expectations 1. Why have you decided to come and study at the University of Birmingham? _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ 2. Why have you chosen your particular course? _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ 3. What do you expect from your course? _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ 4. What are your main concerns with regard to living and studying in the U.K.? What problems do you think you might have? _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ Part C: Changes in Attitudes and Practice 1. What is change? _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ 2. In what ways do you think you will change living and studying in the U.K.? _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________

APPENDIX 2 Name/ID number ________ Pre-sessional STUDENTS QUESTIONNAIRE 2 – 2003 Part A: Expectations and Concerns 1. Did your course satisfy your expectations? How? _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________

Living up to Expectations: Survey of U.K. Pre-sessional Programme

127

2. Were the concerns (with regard to living and studying in the U.K.) you had at the beginning of your course accurate? Did you encounter any problems you did not foresee? Were there any areas that you thought would be difficult, but were not? _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ Part B: Changes in Attitudes and Practice 1. What is change? _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ 2. In what ways do you think your attitudes have changed during (and will/may change following) this course? _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ 3. In what ways do you think your practices have changed during (and will/may change following) this course? _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________

This page intentionally left blank

128

POLITICISING STUDENT DIFFERENCE: THE MUSLIM EXPERIENCE Christine Asmar ABSTRACT The impact of internationalisation and globalisation on western universities, together with the growing diversity of local communities, is sharpening a focus on religious difference, and on the responses such difference provokes. This chapter reports on a two-phase U.S. study of Muslim students, a growing but under-researched minority group in the west, in an attempt to explore the effect on such students of external events such as 9/11. The data reveal unforeseen developments such as heightened Muslim engagement and collaboration with fellow-students, suggesting that universities could (re-)consider how they might engage in similarly positive ways with what is perceived as different.

INTRODUCTION Among the many factors influencing how students experience their universities in the western system, issues of cultural difference are now being given more active consideration than in the past. The impact of internationalisation and globalisation has driven some of this shift in focus, but so has the International Relations International Perspectives on Higher Education Research, Volume 3, 129–157 Copyright r 2005 by Elsevier Ltd. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISSN: 1479-3628/doi:10.1016/S1479-3628(05)03006-6

129

130

CHRISTINE ASMAR

growing cultural diversity of local communities from which universities draw most of their student intake. I am not alone in arguing that these developments should not be seen as separate phenomena (Kalantzis & Cope, 2000). One of the effects of globalised communication systems is that international events can rapidly and directly affect local communities, including the daily lives of students from within those communities. The students whose experiences form the main focus of this chapter constitute one such group. As a dimension of what may broadly be called cultural difference, religion and spirituality are now attracting the attention of scholars and tertiary teachers. The University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA, 2004), for example, is currently conducting a national study of spirituality among college students. The UCLA study notes that, in other studies of religiousness, adherence to ‘a monotheistic/Judeo-Christian belief system’ was often assumed, and the authors assert that they had sought to avoid such assumptions (apparently overlooking that the phrase ‘monotheistic/ Judeo-Christian’ itself excludes the third major monotheistic Middle Eastern religion, namely Islam). In a globalising world, the need for greater religious inclusiveness in higher education systems is growing. Research in the Pacific region (Sterne, 2004), for example, has suggested that classroom tendencies to marginalise some students’ spiritual worldviews risk producing a sense of alienation and disconnect. Recent studies of religious issues on campuses in the USA by scholars such as Nash (2001) have begun to refer specifically to Muslims in the course of advocating a new and more imaginative approach to religious difference as manifested in western universities. Also in the US context, Laird (2000) and Speck (1997) have written brief but useful contributions where issues affecting Muslims as a specific student sub-group are addressed. Ph.D. students in western universities, often Muslim themselves (Halaweh, 1996), have written theses on Muslim issues in higher education and have started to publish their research. Ahmad’s (2001) interesting study of Muslim women in UK universities is in this category. UK scholars, such as Archer (2004), Pickerden (2002) and Preece (1999), have looked at issues of access and equity for Muslims entering higher education, mainly with a focus on women. At the time of writing, I am not currently aware of systematic research on Muslim students’ actual course experience at tertiary level. Since the events of 11 September 2001 (9/11), not surprisingly, there has been renewed research interest in this area and much more published work can be expected to appear in the near future.

Politicising Student Difference: The Muslim Experience

131

In places like the UK, the USA and Australia there are growing local communities of Muslims, with a corresponding growth in student enrolments from within those now established communities. As outlined above, scholarship and research in those countries have responded by focusing on access and equity issues affecting local Muslims, and also the broader educational implications of the new religious pluralism within historically secular institutions. Another area of research interest is the extent to which international students, including Muslims, are being integrated (or not) into the western academy (Rizvi, 2000). It was initially with a view to examining the perceptions and experiences of one growing but under-researched minority religious group that my surveys of Muslims in Australian and US universities were carried out. Some of the Australian findings have already been published, so it is the US surveys that will mainly be discussed here, although previous findings will also feature. The first US survey was carried out in 1999, and the second in 2003, thus enabling some useful comparisons before and after 9/11. Those events, together with global responses to them, have sharpened the need for more research into a little known and often misunderstood dimension of a rapidly diversifying and internationalising higher education system. That dimension of the student experience is located at the intersection of religion and politics.

BACKGROUND TO CURRENT STUDY My earlier research on Muslim students in Australia focused on the Muslim student ‘community on campus’ (Asmar, 2001): Whether university courses are experienced in the same way by male and female Muslim students (Asmar, Proude, & Inge, 2004); and whether courses are experienced in the same way by local and international Muslim students (Asmar, 2005). Questions of cultural and religious stereotyping have been a pervasive theme in all my work with Muslims, including work carried out pre-9/11. Given the current global situation, and the continuing responses of governments and institutions to that situation, it is likely that Muslim students (including international students from non-western countries) will continue to encounter potentially negative experiences. Among the many questions which arise here are: How are the students themselves, whether local or international, responding to this often risky environment? Does the politicising of their environment impact on their attitudes to learning and to their institutions? Finally, how are western universities dealing with this new situation?

132

CHRISTINE ASMAR

In asking these questions I am not focusing solely on overt personal discrimination, since by the students’ own reports this is rarely a serious issue on western university campuses. Rather, in this chapter, I want to go beyond the cultural and religious dimensions of the student experience to consider an aspect rarely discussed in the literature on students’ course experiences, namely the impact of politics on their lives and learning. This study challenges some current approaches to the student learning experience; in that it broadens the focus beyond the classroom, and pedagogic interactions with student peers and teachers, to include off-campus experiences and the impact on students of global events. While the phenomenographic model proposed in the student learning literature (e.g. Prosser & Trigwell, 1999) includes the association between students’ prior experiences and their chances of academic success at university, those experiences tend to be defined in strictly pedagogical terms (such as previous conceptions of mathematics). The ‘student characteristics’ featuring in such models do not explicitly address issues of culture (while not actually excluding them). The lack of attention to cultural issues has been acknowledged by some of these scholars themselves (Prosser & Trigwell, 1999), as well as critiqued by others (Hazel, Conrad, & Martin, 1997). This chapter will seek to examine the effect on students’ integration into the university community of external events and experiences not directly connected to their academic life. Muslim experiences occur in a highly politicised climate, directly affected by how others respond to the religious difference with which they are associated, but this aspect of how students experience university is usually overlooked in the higher education literature. Rizvi’s (2000) work with the Malaysian international student diaspora fills some of these gaps, in foregrounding students’ own perspectives, acknowledging both culture and religion, and noting the political and economic factors influencing the students’ educational experiences. This study has adopted a similar approach, but has gone further in its inclusion of local residents. In considering how the politicising of student difference can affect individuals, there is a connection to what higher education research tells us about the importance for student learning of active participation in a community of learners (Biggs, 1999). To be explicit, if Muslim students feel unwelcome in the community of learners, there will be implications for the quality of their whole learning experience. There may even be the possibility that what Steele (1997) calls ‘stereotype threat’ will diminish their chances of academic success. Biggs’ (1999) advocacy of involving students actively in their own learning links to teaching approaches which focus on inter-student similarities, rather than their differences. This is fine as far as it goes, but can

Politicising Student Difference: The Muslim Experience

133

we assume that students who are ‘different’ want to be treated as if they are invisible? The student views reported here illuminate some of these questions and issues. The study as a whole sits within a broader framework of current efforts by universities to educate all students as interculturally skilful global citizens. That is to say, I do not wish to argue for any kind of exceptionalism in how Muslim students should be treated, but rather for a more holistic and positive approach to difference, whereby all students, irrespective of background, will feel welcomed to contribute their perspectives to enrich the learning of all other students. A starting premise is that discovering knowledge of the world and knowledge of the self can occur as much outside the classroom as within it.

CONNECTION TO PREVIOUS FINDINGS The study reported in this chapter builds upon an earlier one conducted in Australia, involving interviews and a questionnaire administered to 175 international and local Muslim students in 13 universities (Asmar, 2001). That study was largely completed prior to 9/11. For the purposes of this chapter I wish to refer to one set of findings from that study, as set out in Fig. 1. As Fig. 1 shows, the students were generally positive about their classroom experiences. However they were less positive regarding institutional services and support. A more striking result was that local students were significantly more likely to express negative responses than international students. This was somewhat surprising to an Australian researcher, mainly because the relatively recent influx of international students, together with sometimes negative responses to them, has led to considerable concern that they are not being fully integrated and accepted into university communities. Similar concerns appear to exist in the UK (Harris, 1995), together with fears that the ‘scramble for lucrative foreign students is corrupting universities’ (Bright, 2004, p. 13). While studies in both Australia and Hong Kong have demonstrated that the ‘deficit’ approach to international students from East and Southeast Asia is rarely justified (Biggs, 1999; Chalmers & Volet, 1997; Kember, 2000), the concerns persist. The expectation, therefore, was that international students would be more likely to express dissatisfaction with their course experiences, not less likely to do so. In nearly every Australian institution where I interviewed, the Muslim students reported that their numbers were rising each year, often reflecting the growth of local Muslim communities. Local Muslims were starting to

134

CHRISTINE ASMAR 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

International Local

A.

B.

C.

A. I feel part of a group committed to learning B. Teachers treat Muslims the same as other students C. I am satisfied with support and services for students D. The University does its best to meet Muslims’ needs

Fig. 1.

D.

(p=0.017) (p=0.000) (p=0.000) (p=0.019)

How Muslim Students in Australia Perceive their Courses: International and Local Students, % Agreement (N ¼ 175).

outnumber the international ones, to take over the Muslim Students Association (MSA), and to be increasingly assertive in articulating their needs. Aware of their rights, the local students were critical of the fact that universities were sometimes slow to accommodate their needs, such as a space for prayer, and even slower in shifting towards a more inclusive curriculum. While international students paying high fees certainly expected consideration of their needs, they often appeared less vocal in asserting them. The voice of local diversity, meanwhile, was demanding to be heard. On the basis of findings such as these, it seemed to me that the tendency (at least in Australia) to locate and problematise cultural difference largely among international students can no longer be justified. The research in this field has tended to follow teachers’ preoccupations by focusing on the ‘foreign’ at the expense of the local. As a counterbalance to this, the decision was made to focus largely on local experiences and perceptions in the study reported here. The powerful sense among Muslims of a borderless global community of believers means, in any case, that local and international students on a given campus share common perceptions and concerns: ‘In Islamic teaching we are one brotherhoody Every Muslim feels the pain of other Muslims’. In focusing on religion I am also attempting to counterbalance another tendency in the literature, namely the US inclination to equate

Politicising Student Difference: The Muslim Experience

135

cultural diversity with race (rather than, say, culture or religion). Certain US institutions and scholars are already moving towards a more inclusive ‘global understanding’ which incorporates religious difference (Martin & Steward, 2000). Some of these distinctions are blurred, of course. Respondents themselves raised the question of intersectionality, in terms of the overlap between race, religion and gender: ‘At X University I was the only one with a veil, the only black woman, the only African – I was the only everything’.

SAMPLING AND METHODS In 1999, while on a 6-month visit to the USA, I conducted 15 interviews with undergraduate and graduate students (plus a few staff) at a number of universities in the Midwest. The interview schedule was modified very slightly from the one used in the earlier Australian study. Another similarity with the Australian experience was that the good offices of the MSA were utilised as a means of contacting students. This was the only practical method available because US universities cannot legally ask students to reveal their religious affiliation, but this also makes it impossible to identify a randomised sample. Working through the MSA was also culturally appropriate since, in a sensitive area such as this, establishing relationships of trust through personal networks is important. The male and female participants were all from local Muslim communities, although some were overseas-born, and most were practising Muslims with close links to the MSA. The relatively high level of religiosity across the sample had implications for representativeness, as will be seen. In early 2003, again on a 6-month visit, I conducted a further round of 21 interviews at Midwest universities, with an almost identical survey instrument but with a different student cohort. I also carried out informal interviews with some university staff (academic and administrative). A sample with broadly similar characteristics to the first group of participants was selected, although once again a sample representative of all Muslims on campus was not possible. Most were US residents, although six international students were included.

Protocols As a non-Muslim female researcher I respected Muslim religious sensitivities by dressing modestly; interviewing male students in the presence of a third

136

CHRISTINE ASMAR

person if requested; not attempting to shake hands with males; and scheduling interviews to fit in with prayer times. Several would-be interviewees asked searching questions regarding whether I was a Muslim or not (I am not), and what my intentions were, but once the MSA executive was convinced of my credentials, other members were very ready to cooperate. The political climate after 2001 meant that not everyone was comfortable with the taping of interviews, so in most cases I simply took detailed notes. When I was invited later to meet with groups of Muslims on and off campus to discuss the research project I felt confident that trust had been established.

Issues Participants were asked about issues affecting Muslim students on and off campus; whether any issues affected women in particular (including women wearing the hijab or headscarf); the nature of their interactions with the administration, teachers and fellow-students; whether they felt their beliefs and practices were valued by the university; and what universities could do to improve the situation for Muslims on campus. In 2003, I added two new items relating to the effect on the students of 9/11 and of the war in Iraq. Given the emotive nature of many of the issues, qualitative methods were preferred over a more quantitative approach.

Analysis and Synthesis In analysing the transcript data a modified content analysis approach was adopted. Repeated close readings of the transcripts resulted in first identifying all the issues arising in response to key questions, and then categorising those responses according to the frequency with which they were mentioned and/or the extent to which the interviewee saw them as important. Having done this with both sets of data, I then tried to synthesise them into a series of narratives with respect to how each cohort perceived and reported their experiences, indicating issues of greater or less salience. In a sense, the text thus recreated constitutes what Denzin and Lincoln (1994) refer to as ‘a working interpretive document’, an attempt to make sense out of what I have learned. These discrete narratives are enlivened with what I judge to be representative quotes from individual participants. Table 1 sets out the demographic characteristics of both samples. Reasonable balances of male and female, and of undergraduate and graduate,

137

Politicising Student Difference: The Muslim Experience

Table 1.

Female Male International Local Graduate Undergraduate

Demographic Characteristics of Participants in 1999 and 2003 Interviews. 1999 (N ¼ 15)

2003 (N ¼ 21)

8 7

12 9

– 15

6 15

8 7

9 12

were achieved. Most were local students, although not always US-born, and a few international students were included in the larger sample in 2003. Regarding ethnicity, the small size of the samples, plus the diverse backgrounds of the individuals involved, meant that no meaningful analysis could be done of any effect of ethnicity. The ethnic backgrounds of interviewees in 2003, for example, included African–American, Caucasian, Indian, Pakistani, Malaysian, Arab and African. While western researchers often see ethnicity as an important variable, most Muslims in this study identified themselves primarily in terms of their religious affiliation. Respecting this, I did not enquire about ethnicity, although it was sometimes volunteered.

Institutional Characteristics In both 1999 and 2003, 10 different universities were mentioned by participants (not exactly the same 10), and in both those years, 7 of the 10 institutions were located in the Midwest, mostly in Illinois. Some participants described their experiences at more than one institution, for example if they had done their undergraduate degree at one, then transferred to another for their graduate study. Overall, across both cohorts, a total of 18 different institutions, located in a total of nine states, were referred to by participants. In responding, interviewees often made inter-institutional comparisons. Table 2 categorises the institutional descriptions in relation to the type of institution. As the notes below Table 2 indicate, participants in both cohorts were predominantly enrolled in top-ranking ‘research-extensive’ institutions

138

CHRISTINE ASMAR

Table 2. Institution Descriptions Provided by Participants in 1999 and 2003 Cohorts,a by Institutional Commitment to Research. Institution Types Describedb

1999 (N ¼ 15)

2003 (N ¼ 21)

Research-extensive universities public private

5 8

13 9

Research-intensive universities public private

1 2

2 –

Masters colleges

1

1

17

25

Total institution descriptions a

These figures refer to the number of institutional descriptions provided by participants in either cohort, not to the actual number of institutions. N is the number of participants interviewed. b According to the Carnegie Foundation’s (2004) Classification of US colleges and universities, accessed August 26, 2004, from www.carnegiefoundation.org/classification, ‘research-extensive’ institutions award doctorates across at least 15 disciplines, while ‘research-intensive’ institutions award doctorates across at least 3 disciplines. Masters Colleges award only bachelors and masters degrees.

(77% in 1999, 88% in 2003). Almost all reported personal histories of high academic success and were intending to enrol (if not already enrolled) in a graduate research degree. Despite the pressures of study at their highly competitive institutions, most interviewees found time for some level of activity and involvement in the MSA, and many were members of the executive.

Representativeness MSA members do not represent Muslim students as a whole. The MSA members who formed the large majority of interviewees tended to be religiously observant. Almost all prayed daily, abstained from alcohol, and fasted in Ramadan, while most women wore the hijab. The MSA itself admits that many students of Muslim background or parentage choose never to come near the organisation. The less religiously committed tend to gravitate to more secular, ethnicity-based campus organisations (such as those for Arabs, or Malaysians, or African-Americans). In addition to the lack of representativeness, another limitation was

Politicising Student Difference: The Muslim Experience

139

the imperfect comparability of the two cohorts. Efforts were made to ensure broad similarities in individual and institutional characteristics, but the study cannot be regarded as longitudinal in the technical sense of the term. Follow-up studies are certainly needed, and the findings reported here remain suggestive rather than definitive. The political nature of the Muslim student experience on and off American campuses meant that many students were actively involved in campus and sometimes community politics as well as being academic high achievers. In some cases, as the findings below will show, extra roles had been thrust upon them by the events of 9/11. Given all of this it seems reasonable to regard the students in these samples as likely to develop into future leaders and opinion-makers either in the USA or, in the case of international students, in their home countries. In that sense, their views are of national and possibly international importance.

FINDINGS FROM THE 1999 STUDY I have emphasised above that, for students in both cohorts, religion was a very high priority in their lives. As Muslims, this meant above all that being able to pray (five times daily) was of paramount importance. I have written elsewhere about this central aspect of devout Muslims’ lives as students, so will not detail here the students’ feelings about their personal faith or belief other than in the context of institutional, teacher and peer responses to that faith. Issues of personal belief and faith were not seen as appropriate subjects for broaching by a non-Muslim interviewer. The issue of prayer constitutes for practising Muslims a kind of barometer of cultural understanding and responsiveness in western contexts. Institutional willingness to provide a prayer space was mentioned, unprompted, by 13 out of 15 participants. Other personal issues not focused on here included gender relations among Muslims, for example the prohibition on dating and intrafamily issues.

Major Issues in 1999 Discrimination In 1999 respondents were generally positive about their student experiences, but almost all made some mention of issues of discrimination, harassment

140

CHRISTINE ASMAR

or negative stereotyping, mostly off campus rather than on it: Because we pray five times a day, sometimes we have to pray outside, and I always feel uncomfortable. People think it is some kind of cult. They shout out things as they are driving by.

When asked about the off-campus dimension, a third of respondents at first asserted there were no problems, but later (in response to a question about women in hijab) recalled incidents of harassment affecting such women. Several respondents admitted that they carried within them an ongoing expectation of discrimination (often unrealised). Those expectations appeared to be based either on prior experiences, such as those at high school, or as a result of what they saw and heard reported in the media. Institutional Responsiveness In contrast to their perceptions of discrimination, participants frequently mentioned the extent to which institutions were responsive to their needs, mainly in connection with issues such as the provision of a place to pray. Comments made were in relation to how sympathetic the administrators had or had not been to their needs. While, on the one hand, universities, perhaps understandably, did not often anticipate the students’ needs, on the other hand students did not always have the confidence to ask. When they did ask, however, they often met unexpectedly positive responses. Prayer was an overwhelming imperative, the solution to which (in terms of space) was seen as located at institutional level rather than, say, within the classroom. Interactions with teachers and fellow-students did not feature prominently in the 1999 cohort’s concerns. An Islamic Curriculum? A major preoccupation of the 1999 cohort was the need for more courses in Islamic studies, as well as Arabic (the language of the Qur’an). These views were sometimes accompanied by critiques of what was seen as a Eurocentric curriculum in general. Thus, students entering university from expanding local Muslim communities felt strongly that universities ready to enrol them in increasing numbers should be more responsive to their interests and needs: It would be a start to have some professors at the University who are Muslims, people who aggressively identify themselves as Muslim, especially to teach classes on Islamy All the books on Islam that are being used are by Westerners not by Muslims.

Politicising Student Difference: The Muslim Experience

141

The perceived privileging of other groups through long-established courses in Judaic studies or Christian theology was sometimes cited. Where courses on Islam did exist, the appropriateness of both teachers and teaching was raised. The students were particularly resistant to the idea that academics whom they perceived as openly hostile to Islam and to Muslims should take it on themselves to teach about Islam: [Professors’ deductions] are sometimes very distasteful towards Muslims, or very negative, critical, and shed more light on the professor’s mentality than on a view of reality.

Some felt that only a Muslim should teach courses on Islam, but this was by no means unanimous. The students also hoped for the Islamicising of existing curricula, in that they wanted mainstream courses to begin to incorporate Muslim perspectives. Connections to the Community Frequent references were made by this cohort to various forms of what could be termed outreach. Since all the students were US residents, and since the women in particular mostly remained within the same city as their families, they retained close links to their communities. Connections for the men were sometimes maintained through the local mosque. Activities involving non-Muslims also occurred within and beyond the confines of the university. The persistence of negative stereotypes of Muslims was an incentive to reach out to non-Muslims and attempt to explain their beliefs and practices, although the students realised that they did not always manage to do this in an effective or systematic way. Linked to these community connections was an awareness that a culturally diverse local community and a correspondingly diverse campus community were important preconditions for integration into the world of academia. The Power of Numbers A central theme in the 1999 interviews was the growth of Islam as a western religion, or as a religion with ever more numerous adherents within western societies. This was a source of considerable satisfaction, as students saw concomitant flow-on effects, including more Muslims aspiring to higher education, a more visible and vocal presence on campus, growing membership in the MSA, local students increasingly outnumbering international students in the MSA, and the power of numbers to back up demands for universities to do more to accommodate them.

142

CHRISTINE ASMAR

Related but Less Important Issues The issues mentioned above constituted the major preoccupations of the 1999 cohort. A range of other issues were mentioned less frequently or with less intensity. The University As a Religicising Experience Coming to university and finding a well-organised group of fellow-Muslims sometimes had a religicising effect on individuals who had experienced discrimination at school or in monocultural communities. The opposite phenomenon could also occur: Some noted with a degree of disapproval that Muslim peers from overseas experienced American campus life as liberating in comparison with their homelands, and abandoned Islamic ways in favour of more exciting lifestyles. Issues in the Classroom The issue of how non-Muslims responded to them in the classroom was mentioned, albeit not very often. Teachers were seen as either neutral or supportive, or occasionally as biased and/or Orientalist. Fellow-students’ attitudes were also mentioned by some, mostly very positively, but one interviewee spoke of feeling a ‘burden of proof’, in terms of the need to counteract stereotypes among non-Muslims they encountered. Stereotypes categorised as ‘misconceptions of Islam’ tended to be associated with women wearing the hijab. On the whole there was satisfaction with the level of acceptance they found on campus but they aspired to more actual understanding (as opposed to mere tolerance). Inter-faith relations and political activism were referred to by some, but were not major preoccupations, and no one referred to American politics or government as affecting them personally in any way. While individuals were keen to promote better understanding, little concerted group activity was reported. The Impact of World Events Two-thirds made no reference to any external world events as impacting on their lives. Among the remaining one-third, open expression of a pan-Islamic concern for the plight of co-religionists in places like Kosovo, Iraq and Palestine sometimes brought controversy. An issue which regularly gave rise to negative responses from other groups was the ongoing situation in Palestine, where a pro-Palestinian stance by Muslim individuals or groups inevitably brought a hostile reaction from pro-Israel students, and occasionally from staff. On the whole, however, the students respected and

Politicising Student Difference: The Muslim Experience

143

appreciated the openness of university culture regarding freedom of expression, especially those who had spent time in less open societies, say in the Middle East.

Educating the University As distinct from their ongoing concern with obtaining favourable responses from the university regarding needs such as prayer, some students mentioned the less pressing but still important need for having a critical mass of Muslims on campus: ‘Feeling alone was one major issue because of the lack of Muslim students and faculty, a lack of practising Muslims who were really trying to follow Islam’. Some articulated the need for Muslim students to take on a role in ‘educating the university’. Connecting to one of their major points of reference – namely the growth of local Muslim communities – there were passing references to their involvement in those communities, the question of whether an ‘Islamic sub-culture’ already existed in the USA, and how they saw themselves as connected to the international Islamic community of believers.

An Optimistic Future The students interviewed in 1999 were mostly native speakers of English, brought up if not born in the USA, although often with close ties to an overseas homeland. The issues preoccupying them were not generally of a personal kind; for example, they rarely (only two cases) referred to a conflict of identity; rather, they felt empowered by the growing size and visibility of their community on and off campus. Their sources of satisfaction and of dissatisfaction seemed related to their group identity rather than to their individual lives. Strong in their faith, they expressed little sense of threat or of confusion. In general, the 1999 cohort exhibited a sense of optimism regarding the future of Muslims in the western higher education system, and in western society in general. Unable to foresee events a few years down the track, they saw themselves as a legitimate group articulating legitimate needs. At the time they had every expectation that those needs would ultimately be met. Despite certain ongoing concerns, such as the persistence of negative stereotyping and the absence of certain courses on campus, they saw themselves as en route to taking their place fully within the academic community. They also envisaged themselves, later, as graduating into what they perceived as a society basically committed to the values of cultural and religious diversity.

144

CHRISTINE ASMAR

FINDINGS FROM 2003 STUDY By the time the second round of interviewing took place in the USA, it was nearly 2 years since the events of 9/11. As mentioned earlier, items on the effects of 9/11 and of the 2003 war with Iraq had been added to the original set of questions, but those items were deliberately placed at the very end of the schedule, so as not to bias the responses. The pervasive and continuing impact of 9/11 was immediately clear, however, evidenced by the fact that 15 of the 21 participants spontaneously mentioned that event and/or the social and political fallout from it, often within the first few minutes of the interview. One asserted: ‘If it hasn’t changed you, you’re either a recluse or you don’t live in this country’. Categorising the responses revealed that most of the students’ major interests and concerns were connected in some way to 9/11, although a wide range of other issues were touched on. That their experiences were largely filtered through a 9/11 lens was not surprising, but what I had not anticipated was that the outcomes reported by students were far from being all negative.

Major Issues in 2003 As with the 1999 cohort, being able to perform daily prayer was of paramount importance; 17 of the 21 respondents spontaneously mentioned prayer, mostly in relation to whether their institution was meeting Muslims’ needs. In 2003, however, other issues were seen as of more pressing importance, and tended to be mentioned earlier in the interview. Discrimination Off-campus responses to Muslim difference appeared to have not only persisted but worsened in comparison to the 1999 experience, although the campus was seen as a kind of haven of acceptance, especially around the time of 9/11. A number of local students spoke in general terms of what they perceived as discrimination in areas like the job market. One of the Australian respondents had mentioned the ‘fears in the heart’ that Muslim students bring to university, and it appeared that such fears were being felt even by successful students graduating from prestigious American universities. There was a majority view that stereotyping, as well as actual harassment, had increased since 9/11. Again it must be emphasised that this rarely

Politicising Student Difference: The Muslim Experience

145

occurred on campus, but was hurtful when it did. Male adherents of Islam were now likely to be routinely associated with fundamentalism and/ or terrorism (whereas in the earlier study there was more focus on Islam as a religion seen to be oppressing women). Even staff were not immune. A newly tenured member of academic staff reported being jocularly greeted by one of his new colleagues with the remark: ‘I should probably run and close my door so you won’t bomb me’. A Hijab Effect? In my work with Australian Muslims (Asmar et al., 2004) I had wondered if the concept of a ‘hijab effect’ could be justified, namely that women in hijab might be more likely to experience discrimination than those who went uncovered. In that study anecdotal evidence suggested that for some people, mostly but not always external to the university, the hijab continues to signify oppression and inferiority. An older male student in 2003 commented: ‘For Muslim women their general concern is y that people look at them as inferior, as not being able to do the job’. In 2003, based on the US cohort’s responses, it appeared that such views not only existed, but also were more likely to be articulated in direct face-to-face interactions with hijab-wearers after 9/11 than before. Interestingly, some of the women initially asserted that they knew of no distressing incidents, but as the interview went on, later revealed that they (or a friend or relative) had been subject to some form of verbal or physical harassment. Several men likewise reported upsetting incidents where women in their immediate circle had faced a threatening situation. Among the American Muslims surveyed, men expressed a high degree of empathy and awareness in relation to female concerns. In the Australian survey (Asmar et al., 2004) there had been almost no significant gender differences in terms of attitudes, and no evidence of any kind of oppositional relationship between Muslim men and women in the sample. New Roles for Muslim Women On the basis of perceptions reported by the sample, the roles of women identifiable as Muslims by virtue of their wearing the hijab were evolving rapidly. Being obliged to respond to public confrontations had led some women to adopt new public positions: Some people ask us about our religion. This has happened more since 9/11y Women tend to encounter more of these situations than men.

146

CHRISTINE ASMAR

Some men had noticed this too: When I see a Muslim woman with a hijab I know right away she’s a Muslim. She’s kind of symbolising Islamy They would probably have much more accurate insights into public reactions to Islam than the men would. They are called on more often, they get asked more questionsy In many ways they are the spokespeople for Islam.

Far from feeling threatened by a ‘hijab effect’, the women took on new roles as spokespersons and cultural informants: ‘All of a sudden we were forced to defend ourselves, to say it wasn’t our fault’. On the other hand, one woman who practised her religion, but who chose not to cover, found it convenient that she attracted less attention: ‘I get away with a lot of stuff’. Institutional Responsiveness In contrast to the off-campus experience, male and female respondents emphasised the generally helpful responses of the university administrations at their respective institutions. This was not just in relation to issues such as prayer facilities, but also in relation to specific support in a crisis. In September 2001, one university president immediately e-mailed students and staff saying that 9/11 was an act of terror, and that there was no link to Muslims in the university – a gesture much appreciated by the latter. According to the students’ own reports, they passed through a testing time and on the whole the universities had supported and sustained them. It cannot be over-emphasised how important the students found this support: After 9/11 I felt more safe on this campus. I was like in this bubble, a happy bubble. We felt it was more like a shelter.

As will be seen, however, that sense of trust in the institutions of western society was in some cases diminished in relation to government. An Islamic Curriculum? If there was a consensus that facilities and support for Muslim students were generally either already in place, or had a good chance of being improved, there was less satisfaction with progress being made regarding the curriculum. Like the 1999 cohort, the 2003 respondents felt strongly that much more needed to be done in this area. Again, the concerns were that mainstream curricula should have more Islamic content, and that Islamic studies and Arabic should be offered: ‘Not having a course in Islamic studies here

Politicising Student Difference: The Muslim Experience

147

was a big drawback for me in coming here’. There was a feeling, too, that the general curriculum should be less Eurocentric: ‘There was one class on international business methods and I think they spent about 20 minutes on cultural and religious issues’. A few students felt that the influence of pro-Israel or conservative Christian alumni and board members (as well as some senior professors) was probably at the root of the resistance to change in this area: ‘The religious studies people have been there for a while and they don’t want to change their department, or add to it. There may be some political influences in the department, or on the Board’. Although the students had little evidence to support this suspicion, private US universities in particular are vulnerable to political or ideological pressures from alumni and other potential donors. So far, there are not many Muslims in the donor pool. Whereas in 1999 the feeling was that to demand an Islamicised curriculum was simply a logical consequence of the growth in local Muslim communities, the post-9/11 arguments in 2003 were more inclusive, envisaging nonMuslim participation in the new learning. The students made a direct connection between the need to educate themselves, and the obligation to inform and communicate with others. A Context of Diversity A number of students commented in the initial stages of the interviews on the importance of the university’s demographic context, in the sense of whether it was located within a culturally diverse community. They also saw a connection between the existence of a similar level of diversity on campus and the ease with which they were able to integrate into the community of learners: ‘I haven’t seen anything bad [in class]. Our university is pretty diverse. There are a lot of Asians and Indians. People are open to differences’. New Activism Of the major preoccupations of the 2003 cohort, and in marked contrast to the 1999 cohort, the final issues clustered around reports of heightened individual and group activism on campus. The events of 9/11 brought some non-Muslim individuals closer to Muslims, such as the Baha’i student who felt ‘It would be kind of cowardly to distance myself from Muslims at a time like this’. Collaborative political actions with other groups, connected both to 9/11 and the Iraq war, also increased. These developments in the post-9/11 era represented a kind of antidote, or perhaps corrective, to experiences of heightened discrimination, harassment and stereotyping. Judging by the

148

CHRISTINE ASMAR

students’ accounts, the events of 9/11 began to give rise to a newly proactive Muslim profile on campus: ‘Things are making me even more political. We can’t ignore what’s happening. Muslims feel the need to explain their religion to others now’. That tendency was reinforced, and stimulated further by the fact that, whereas reactions to 9/11 had an emotional and somewhat polarising impact on students and staff, there was more uniform campuswide opposition to the invasion of Iraq. It was in relation to the Iraq episode that Muslims and non-Muslims coalesced in new alliances of mutual opposition. These important new dimensions of being a Muslim on campus were widely commented on by the students, and included:  Increased individual activism in and out of class, in terms of initiating and joining conversations on questions of religion (and politics) with fellowstudents and with teachers. Said the female president of one MSA: ‘After 9/11ywe organised Islamic Awareness Week. We wanted to make people aware of the issues. It was a turning pointy’ One male student reported: ‘I have tried to make an effort to explain more about Islam, that we are not just crazy people’, while another had to overcome personal shyness: ‘After the Afghan war, Iraq, at the 9/11 vigils, I spoke at all those events. I forced myself to speak. I had butterflies but it was necessary’.  Intensified bonding with other Muslim students after 9/11 and even more so after the onset of the war on Iraq: ‘Right now I feel there is an increasing need, or desire, to be part of the MSA. Muslims feel more desire to bond y People are reacting to the whole political situation since 9/11, and they feel a need to come together’.  New collaborations with non-Muslim student groups such as peace activists and Christians, some post-9/11 but much more so in common opposition to the war on Iraq: ‘We’re always debating. This is the first time we’re actually talking politics with other people’.  Individual efforts to educate themselves religiously in order to feel qualified to respond to newly heightened public interest in Islam: ‘There are rallies, you have to read up on your own religion because people will ask you questions – I can’t stop the war, so the best thing I can do is educate myself and educate people around me’.  A re-aligning of gender roles among Muslims (mentioned above), with women finding themselves on the front lines of new dialogues and even confrontations within and outside the university – and not shrinking from the task: ‘We’re more involved with politics now. I went to three protests. My Mom even let me go to Washington in a bus for a protest’.

Politicising Student Difference: The Muslim Experience

149

Related but Less Important Issues The issues outlined above were those seen as very important to the 2003 cohort. In references to other issues seen as less important, or mentioned less frequently, the theme of 9/11 continued to recur. Impact of Government Policies Post-9/11 The 2003 interviews were approached with an expectation that the widely publicised US government actions and policies after 9/11 (at home and abroad) would constitute a major and distressing preoccupation for the interviewees. By no means all interviewees, however, mentioned this issue, perhaps because most were US residents rather than international students, or perhaps because they felt protected by their university’s commitment to liberal values: ‘They feel secure’, said one international student of his local peers, ‘even though they know they are part of the discrimination’. He added: ‘Most Muslims feel alienated and they have the right to feel that because of all the constitutional amendments geared to Muslims and Middle Easterners. Basically there’s a profiling thing going on, especially for the men. We feel less comfortable than we did before’. None of the 1999 cohort, it will be recalled, had mentioned government policy as in any way impacting on their lives. In 2003, by contrast, respondents knew of, and/or were affected by, surveillance of mosques; visits to homes by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI); severe new restrictions on immigration and student visas; harassment by officials in places like airports; and very occasional veiled threats from university staff. A US-born woman reported: ‘In the community some people refuse to go to the mosque any more. They say the FBI is watching the mosques and they don’t want to be seen to be part of that’. Psychological Effects International students were also psychologically affected. Some were afraid to go home in case they were unable to renew their visas in order to come back and complete their studies; and some simply felt that they were no longer welcome in the USA One international student who had thoroughly enjoyed his US experience up to 2001 said regretfully: ‘It’s like having Big Brother looking at you. You’re free but you don’t have that feeling of freedom. I’m glad I’m leaving’. At the time of 9/11, and for some time after, Muslims were not free from fear of physical violence; but, perhaps more lastingly, some also felt a sense of alienation, and of identity confusion. In tandem with this, some US residents reported a heightened awareness of

150

CHRISTINE ASMAR

their rights as citizens – an awareness sharpened by their knowledge of international students’ ordeals. Becoming More Muslim One response to these threats was to adhere more closely to the MSA and to fellow-Muslims in general. In 1999, some students had reported beginning to identify more strongly as Muslims once at university, and this seemed to apply even more within the 2003 cohort: ‘When I first came here, my faith was not very strongy Meeting all the brothers and sisters made my faith stronger, and made me realise who I am as a person’. After 9/11 there was a rise in general public interest in Islam both on and off campus. The response of some students to this was to realise that they needed to (re-)educate themselves regarding their own religion, in order to feel qualified to answer non-Muslims’ queries. Paradoxically, then, one effect of measures seen by some in this sample as anti-Muslim was to intensify their commitment to their religion. Classroom Interactions As with the 1999 cohort, events in the classroom were of less concern to the 2003 students than developments outside it. Serious about their study, they mostly just got on with it. As yet another spin-off from 9/11, however, and particularly in discipline areas such as social sciences, some classroom discussions ended up with opinions sharply polarised, and Muslims placed inevitably on the defensive. It was rare, although not unknown, for teachers to be openly hostile. On the other hand, participants appreciated those who went out of their way to be inclusive. In a few cases the Muslim students felt that an apparently non-committal stance taken by a teacher could actually leave the floor open to racist or hurtful remarks by other students. These experiences were less likely to be reported by students in disciplines such as engineering or sciences. Women were more spotlighted than men, one of whom remarked: ‘The hijab is a very distinguishing thing for a woman, apart from being a nun, but who sees nuns interacting in the classroom?’ As in 1999, the ongoing need for a critical mass of Muslims on campus was mentioned. On one campus with sizeable Muslim enrolments, a student was appreciative of the fact that, during Ramadan, her professor had postponed an examination from 5 p.m. on one day to the morning of the next day, so that all the Muslims in that class could break their fast in the evening.

Politicising Student Difference: The Muslim Experience

151

Inter-faith Relations The issue of relations with students from other faiths had several dimensions, touched on by various respondents. Pre-existing fault lines, dividing groups supporting Israel or Palestine respectively, were exacerbated post9/11, and the war on Iraq has continued to reinforce those divisions. Yet students also reported a noticeable increase in inter-faith collaborations (mostly with Christians). In general it appeared that those linkages are likely to persist, partly to do with an unprecedented and ongoing post-9/11 interest in Islam on the part of students, staff and the wider community. In several reported instances, collaborations such as inter-faith forums were initiated by the Muslim students themselves, adding a faith-based dimension to the new campus activism already alluded to: ‘We said a prayer for the victims [of 9/11] and their families and so did other religious groups’. Intersectionality Clearly religious and political responses overlapped, and other identifications also intersected. On some levels Muslims had tended to bond together after 9/11, but on other levels there were reports of divisions along the lines of religion on the one hand, and race and gender on the other. Some African–American Muslims and other non-Arabic-speakers reported feeling excluded by those Muslims whose preference for communicating in Arabic (at MSA meetings, say, or at the mosque) was seen as legitimised by it being the language of the Qur’an. Others feel that being Muslim affects their relations with their community of origin, like the African-American woman who mused that in her community: ‘Every event starts with a prayer, and it always ends with ‘‘In the name of Jesus we pray’’. They don’t understand that I can’t join in’. Some students dislike being arbitrarily assigned a single identity by others. Women who cover often feel labelled as uni-dimensional beings, and one African student stated: ‘I identify more with a non-Muslim black woman than I do with an Arab Muslim woman’. This ends the analysis of what the two cohorts considered to be important issues, together with those seen as somewhat less salient but still of interest or concern. Table 3 summarises and compares the categorising and prioritising of issues referred to by the 1999 and 2003 cohorts respectively.

DISCUSSION: WHAT DO THE FINDINGS SUGGEST? The comparison of how Muslim students in 1999 and 2003 reported their campus experiences revealed interesting and even paradoxical developments.

152

CHRISTINE ASMAR

Table 3. Important and Less Important Issues Affecting the 1999 and 2003 Cohorts. Important Issues in 1999

Important Issues in 2003

    

   

Discrimination (and the lack of it) Institutional responsiveness An Islamic curriculum? Connections to the community The power of numbers

Discrimination on and off campus Institutional responsiveness An Islamic curriculum? The hijab: target for harassment or symbol of empowerment?  A context of diversity  New Muslim activism

Related but Less Important Issues in 1999

Related but Less Important Issues in 2003

   

     

Becoming more/less Muslim at university Issues in the classroom Impact of world events Educating the university

Impact of government policies Psychological effects Becoming more Muslim Issues in the classroom Inter-faith relations Intersection of race/religion/gender

A heightened awareness of and engagement with the socio-political context within which they are studying was one new trend, with local students becoming more politically aware and active. This was partly facilitated by international students’ withdrawal from campus activism, and in some cases by their permanent departure from US universities. International students used to dominate the MSA, but times have changed and the MSA increasingly represents the new face of an American Islam. One aspect of that new face, as in Australia, is the dominance of local-born women within the leadership, and in campus activities generally. The new activism has also resulted in institutions being propelled into new awareness of Muslim students’ needs – a process begun some years earlier and accelerated by imperatives associated with 9/11. Viewed in political terms, it can be said that the 1999 cohort had experienced a reasonably satisfied if somewhat marginalised quietism. In 2001 the scene had changed dramatically. The 2003 cohort had responded to external events with a vocal and heightened pro-activism, leading to new relationships with others in the campus community. The first of several paradoxes in this volatile climate was that, although by 2003 women in hijab were still reporting increased public attention and sometimes actual harassment, the new roles thrust upon them as frontline spokespersons for their faith had led them to develop new roles and

Politicising Student Difference: The Muslim Experience

153

confidence. Similarly, although documented increases in anti-Muslim incidents off campus, and even on campus, might have been expected to cause many Muslims to retreat from public view, and even to reconsider how they chose to manifest their religious affiliations, this was not the case with the sample interviewed in 2003. Not only had the external threats led them to bond together and find new religious strength in connecting with fellowMuslims, they also set out to forge unprecedented new bonds with non-Muslims. Thus, although the events of 9/11 were terrible for everyone, and the aftermath particularly frightening for Muslims, the students are now better integrated into the community of learning than before and are likely to remain so. Moreover, although the subsequent invasion of Iraq might have been expected to cause polarisation and hostility on campuses in the USA, the widespread opposition to that invasion by Muslim and non-Muslim students (and staff) actually had a unifying effect. This having been said, the ongoing conflict in Palestine, if unresolved, will continue to divide students of some faiths and political persuasions. Steele’s (1997) research suggested that negative stereotypes have the potential to demotivate students academically, but in this instance the opposite seemed to be the case. While the men were now more likely to be associated with terrorism and/or fundamentalism than before, and while the women continued to be seen as oppressed, victimhood was strenuously rejected in favour of engagement. By 2003 men were still being targeted by government agencies and legislation, while women seemed to attract more responses from the community at large. More than one woman pointed out that stereotypes of them as oppressed were far less real than the oppression they felt as a result of the stereotypes. Nevertheless, bolstered by their faith, and despite the undoubted persistence and intensification of those anti-Muslim stereotypes, the students in this sample set out to demolish them. They also remained intensely committed to their studies, although continuing to have reservations about curriculum choices available to them, and indeed to others, in a period when understanding cultural and religious difference seems more crucial than ever. That there have been certain positive outcomes from the traumatic experiences connected to 9/11 should not conceal the short-term and long-term damage done to individuals, especially international students, and also to institutions. American universities are particularly concerned that, for example, between 2003 and 2004 the number of foreign students admitted to US graduate schools dropped by 18%. In noting this ‘sobering data on the continuing downward trend in graduate admissions since the terror attacks of 2001’, the US higher education media (Gravois, 2004) attributed the trend to increasingly

154

CHRISTINE ASMAR

stringent immigration scrutiny. Universities in countries other than the USA have been quick to take advantage, with governments such as that of Saudi Arabia actively looking for non-US higher education alternatives in Canada, Australia and New Zealand, while the UK has also intensified its recruiting (Jacobson, 2003). While this may be good for commonwealth University coffers, barring Muslim students from scholarly engagement with the world’s most powerful country is not a good long-term outcome. Being associated with religious difference at a time of global crisis has politicised the Muslim student experience both on and off campus, in negative but also positive ways. Universities have scrambled to respond to these new dynamics. In cases where responses had been appropriate, local students developed a newfound respect and appreciation for their institutions. Universities, it would seem, need to constantly monitor the changing nature and aspirations of local cultures, religions and communities. Preece (1999, p. 202) has described how families and communities are ‘continuously reconstituting themselves in the UK as British Muslims’, and the American Muslims’ references to ‘an Islamic sub-culture in the USA’ can be understood in the same way. Whether or not international student enrolments continue to grow, expanding local Muslim communities will continue to send their daughters and sons into the tertiary system. Institutions have both an incentive and an imperative to respond to the new diversity in creative ways, and while facilities such as prayer rooms are part of such responsiveness, changes to staff recruitment policies, and re-thinking of curriculum and teaching practices, are also needed. These students know they are here to stay, they know their numbers are increasing, and in their view it is only a matter of time until the universities recognise the need to make changes. A time and a place for daily and Friday prayer continue to be a concern, although universities are beginning to grasp the salience of this issue for Muslims. One Midwest university now has a ‘Provost’s hour’ free of classes between 12.30 p.m. and 2 p.m. on Fridays. Muslim students had lobbied for this, and although the Provost did not make any special mention of the new policy being connected to Muslim congregational prayer time, one satisfied student said: ‘That’s the effect it will have: It’s a significant move’. Curricular changes could include new courses in Islamic studies, or giving Islam a more prominent place in courses on comparative religion, or including Islamic accounting practices in business curricula. Research carried out with Pacific students (Sterne, 2004) suggests that students for whom Christianity is culturally important would benefit from learning that ‘Christian ways of doing things can feature as systems in business’. Perhaps what is really

Politicising Student Difference: The Muslim Experience

155

needed are imaginative new courses with titles such as ‘Comparative Religions and Business’? As mentioned at the outset, this study does not seek exceptional treatment for Muslims, but rather for western universities and scholars to develop more sophisticated responses to religious difference, along with greater awareness of cultural and political dimensions of the student experience. Rather than settling for Biggs’ (1999) focus on inter-student similarities, we need to celebrate the differences. The parameters of what constitutes ‘course experience’ need to be pushed outwards to accommodate the sometimes harsh realities of a globalised world. And, in preparing all our students to take their place in that globalised world, we need to equip them to engage fully and openly with diversity. Fortunately there is some excellent research on the pedagogic rationale for this. Antonio et al. (2004) report that their study of small group discussions involving black and white US students found ‘positive effects on integrative complexity’ when students interacted with racially diverse friends and classmates. And Smith and Schonfeld (2000, p. 19) conclude in their overview of several hundred US studies on diversity that: Studies on cognitive development show that critical thinking, problem-solving capacities, and cognitive complexity increase for all students exposed to diversity on the campus and in the classroom.

This two-phase study is limited in several important ways. It is neither fully longitudinal nor properly representative of the student group it purports to discuss. Further research is needed, both of Muslims who do not identify mainly in terms of their religious affiliation, and also of non-Muslims in terms of how they respond, say, to situations involving religious difference and/or political crises during their student years. The Muslim students surveyed in this study have shown themselves both resilient and inclusive, as well as committed to pursuing their education in the western system – if allowed. There were no calls for Islamic universities in the west, only for reasonable consideration of ways to Islamicise the universities which already exist. In small but significant ways this is already happening, as universities and others develop a growing awareness that Muslims are not only in the west – they are part of us.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The University of Sydney funded my early research on Muslim students in Australia, and supported both my trips to collect data in the USA. The

156

CHRISTINE ASMAR

University of Chicago hosted my research project in 1999, and the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign did likewise in 2003. I am grateful to these institutions, and even more grateful to the Muslim students and staff who gave so generously of their time, to make this study possible.

REFERENCES Ahmad, F. (2001). Modern traditions? British Muslim women and academic achievement. Gender and Education, 13, 137–152. Antonio, A., Chang, M., Hakuta, K., Kenny, D., Levin, S., & Milem, J. (2004). Effects of racial diversity on complex thinking in college students. Psychological Science, 15(8), 507–572. Archer, L. (2004) Diversity, inclusivity and equality: Revisiting critical issues for the widening participation agenda. Keynote address, 12th Improving Student Learning Symposium, Improving Student learning: Inclusivity and Diversity. Birmingham, UK, September 6–8. Asmar, C. (2001). A community on campus: Muslim students in Australian Universities. In: A. Saeed & S. Akbarzadeh (Eds), Muslim communities in Australia (pp. 138–160). Kensington, NSW: University of NSW Press. Asmar, C. (2005). Internationalising students: Reassessing diasporic and local student difference. Studies in Higher Education, 30(3), 291–309. Asmar, C., Proude, E., & Inge, L. (2004). ‘Unwelcome sisters’? An analysis of findings from a study of how Muslim women (and Muslim men) experience university. Australian Journal of Education, 48(1), 47–63. Biggs, J. (1999). Teaching for quality learning at university. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press. Bright, M. (2004). Scramble for lucrative foreign students. Guardian Weekly, (August), 13–19. Chalmers, D., & Volet, S. (1997). Common misconceptions about students from south-east Asia studying in Australia. Higher Education Research and Development, 16, 87–98. Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. (Eds) (1994). Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Gravois, J. (2004). Graduate admissions continue post-2001 decline. The Chronicle of Higher Education, September 9. Accessed September 16, 2004, from http://chronicle.com/temp/ email. Halaweh, I. (1996). Perceptions of international Muslim students toward social and faculty interaction, intellectual development and personal growth. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. Ohio University, OH, USA. Harris, R. (1995). Overseas students in the United Kingdom university system. Higher Education, 29, 77–92. Hazel, E., Conrad, L., & Martin, E. (1997). Exploring gender and phenomenography. Higher Education Research and Development, 16, 213–226. Jacobson, J. (2003). Foreign-student enrolment stagnates. The Chronicle of Higher Education, November 3. Accessed November 16, 2004, from http://chronicle.com/prm.weekly/v50/ ill/11a00101.htm. Kalantzis, M., & Cope, B. (2000). Towards an inclusive and international higher education. In: R. King, D. Hill & B. Hemmings (Eds), University and diversity: Changing perspectives, policies and practices in Australia. Wagga Wagga, NSW: Keon Publications.

Politicising Student Difference: The Muslim Experience

157

Kember, D. (2000). Misconceptions about the learning approaches, motivation and study practices of Asian students. Higher Education, 40, 99–121. Laird, L. (2000). Encountering religious commitments in the classroom. Washington Center News ðFallÞ, 25–28. Martin, C., & Steward, A. (2000). Making multiculturalism come alive at Pierce College: A learning institute. Washington Center News ðFallÞ, 10–13. Nash, R. (2001). Religious pluralism in the academy: Opening dialogue. New York: Peter Lang. Pickerden, A. (2002). Muslim women in higher education: New sites of lifelong learning. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 21, 137–143. Preece, J. (1999). Families into higher education project: An awareness raising action research project with schools and parents. Higher Education Quarterly, 53(3), 197–210. Prosser, M., & Trigwell, K. (1999). Understanding learning and teaching: The experience in higher education. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press. Rizvi, F. (2000). International education and the production of global imagination. In: N. Burbules & C. Torres (Eds), Globalization and education: Critical perspectives (pp. 205–225). New York: Routledge. Smith, D., & Schonfeld, N. (2000). The benefits of diversity: What the research tells us. About Campus ðNovember DecemberÞ, 16–23. Speck, B. (1997). Respect for religious differences: The case of Muslim students. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 70, 39–46. Steele, C. (1997). A threat in the air: How stereotypes shape intellectual identity and performance. American Psychologist, 52(6), 613–629. Sterne, G. (2004). Connecting with students of Pacific descent. Education Review (September 22–28), 7. University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA). (2004). Spiritual development and the college experience: An analysis conducted by the Higher Education Research Institute. University of California, Los Angeles, April 5. Accessed August 13, 2004, from http:// www.spirituality.ucla.edu

This page intentionally left blank

158

ACADEMIC MIGRATION: THE CASE OF NEW AUSTRALIAN UNIVERSITIES Anthony Potts ABSTRACT Currently a number of countries around the world grapple with the alleged issues of ‘‘brain drain’’ and ‘‘brain gain’’. These twin areas are especially felt in smaller nations such as Australia. They are particularly the subject of analysis with respect to the academic profession, which seeks to recruit the next generation of academics in an increasingly global and competitive world. Academic migration itself is not a new issue being as old as the profession itself. What perhaps is novel is that in a mass system of higher education with a great diversity of institutional types migration and migration decisions are even less one-dimensional than perhaps they once, if ever, were. If ever academic migrants were motivated only by academic decisions in making their migration choices does this also apply to those who work in newer and less traditional universities. This study using life history methods examines academic migrants and their migration choices with reference to two new Australian universities. The data is related to the wider literature on recent migration studies and academic migration. Questions are posed and conclusions drawn for academic recruitment by universities facing the challenges posed by imminent large-scale retirement of academic staff. International Relations International Perspectives on Higher Education Research, Volume 3, 159–183 Copyright r 2005 by Elsevier Ltd. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISSN: 1479-3628/doi:10.1016/S1479-3628(05)03007-8

159

160

ANTHONY POTTS

INTRODUCTION Increasingly researchers and writers in higher education make the point that there is a need to understand academic life as much more differentiated than it has been to date. Thus we see scholars in diverse countries, such as Australia (Beer, 1989, 1996, 1998), the U.S.A. (Caesar, 2000) and Norway (Friedman, 2000), calling for research on academic life, which investigates non-elite and non-research-intensive establishments. Some writers display an ironic sense of despair when they do write of aspects of academic life in such institutions. For example, Caesar’s (2000) work, Travelling Through the Boondocks: In and Out of the Academic Hierarchy reflects such an attitude. Beer (1996, p. 34) notes some studies of academic institutions and life display evidence of metropolitan condescension towards such institutions, which are seen by some as too far removed from larger population centres. There is especially a need for research on academic migration to newer universities. The research reported here goes some way to addressing this need. Van de Bunt-Kokhuis (1996, p. 29) suggests that the literature on academic migration is scarce. Birrell, Dobson, Rapson, and Smith (2001, p. 7) argue that there is little systematic analysis of migration movements in many recent academic works, which have examined social and economic aspects of the global world. They observe that there is little in depth analysis of the factors shaping migration to Australia, with too much of the discussion being anecdotal in nature and displaying a need for more systematic research (Birrell et al., 2001, p. 33). Following their suggestions for more systematic research on migration issues, this chapter examines aspects of academic migration to two new Australian universities. What led academic migrants to select careers at these institutions, and what were some of the influences operating? The research reported here is especially timely as we still know relatively little about the occupational careers of those academics who work in the less prestigious or ‘‘peripheral institutions’’, and who teach less prestigious disciplines (Friedman, 2000, p. 38). Much of the discussion of academic life and academic policy often proceeds from understandings derived from research on the more elite and prestigious establishments (Friedman, 2000, p. 38), which are vastly different to the majority of universities (Caesar, 2000, p. 5). There are differences in a range of factors associated with life in ‘‘peripheral institutions’’ (Friedman, 2000, pp. 2–43), and universities at the lower levels of the academic hierarchy (Caesar, 2000, pp. 4–26). To what extent do these differences extend to academic migration and recruitment?

Academic Migration: The Case of New Australian Universities

161

This chapter examines academic migration to two new Australian universities in its broader social context, and investigates some of the local dynamics of migration. It proceeds from the assumption that what applies to elite institutions is not necessarily the norm, due to the tremendous diversity and complexity among institutions of higher education, and their respective histories and development (Friedman, 2000, pp. 2–43; Caesar, 2000, pp. 4–122). Studies of these ‘‘peripheral institutions’’ allow for an examination of the ‘‘local and provincial as informing elements’’, and thus assist in determining the extent to which universities and their activities develop as part of local variations (Friedman, 2000, p. 39). They provide evidence of life in a part of the academic hierarchy that is too frequently ignored (Caesar, 2000, pp. 5–26).

ACADEMIC MIGRATION At the outset there is a need to be clear about the extent of general migration in the period under discussion. Castells (1996, p. 232) in his seminal work on life in the information age, strongly makes the point that the world’s labour force generally is still highly immobile, and predicts that it will be so for the foreseeable future because of institutions, culture, borders, police and xenophobia. Only about 1.5% of the global labour force of approximately 80 million workers is employed outside their country of birth, and half of these persons are concentrated in sub-Saharan Africa and the Middle East (Castells, 1996, p. 232). There is a global market for only a tiny proportion of the labour force, which includes academics, who may shift and commute between ‘‘nodes of the global networks that control the planet’’ (Castells, 1996, p. 234). Furthermore, there is a tendency towards an increasing interdependence of the labour force on a global scale through associated cross-border networks (Castells, 1996, p. 234). As far as Australia is concerned, the continent has always been subject to migration. The nation itself commenced a large-scale general migration programme after the end of World War II, based on the economic and strategic premise that the country must ‘‘populate or perish’’ (Castles & Miller, 1998, p. 75). Australian migration policy of the time aimed to attract 70,000 migrants per annum, with a ratio of 10 British migrants to every ‘‘foreigner’’ – but this proved impossible (Castles & Miller, 1998, p. 75). Frequently ignored is that Australia is also a significant emigration nation, with some of the world’s highest rates of outward movement of people on a permanent long-term basis (Hugo, 2000, p. 1).

162

ANTHONY POTTS

Sheehan, Welch, and Lacy (1996, p. 103) argue that higher education is more internationalised than many other professions. This is because academic work is essentially international in character (van de Bunt-Kokhuis, 1996, p. 1). Academic migration, or the movement of academics either permanently or short term from one setting to another, is as old as universities themselves (Schuster, 1994, p. 437). Such movement can be external academic migration (to a foreign country) or internal academic migration (within one’s own country) (De Ridder-Symoens, 1992, p. 280). In the academic world of today, international travel is an integral part of academic life of some faculty members, but there are variations in this with some hampered in their mobility by professional, personal and institutional situations (van de Bunt-Kokhuis, 1996, p. 1). Both van de Bunt-Kokhuis (1996, p. 19) and Caesar (2000, p. 26) are aware of some of the less than favourable aspects of international academic mobility. The former, for example, quotes van den Berghe (1975, p. 130), who notes that the most effective way of establishing prestige is to be frequently away from campus on long-distance travel, doing almost everything except that for which he or she draws salary. Caesar (2000, p. 26) notes that when academics from non-elite institutions attend disciplinary conferences, their students effectively do not exist, because the issues that are central to the conferences have virtually nothing to do with them. Van de Bunt-Kokhuis (1996, p. 3) suggests that a number of determinants influence the international mobility of faculty members, and these include rank, age, discipline and gender. She suggests that there is a need to differentiate between personal and professional factors in academic migration, because changes in an academic’s personal situation may become a catalyst for changes in their career, with personal circumstances often related to the stage of an academic’s life cycle; for example, a double career family, or one with young children, may find academic migration more problematic (van de Bunt-Kokhuis, 1996, p. 22). Women academics may find their mobility hampered by their husband’s careers or parenting issues (van de BuntKokhuis, 1996, pp. 22–45). Furthermore, disciplinary and age differences operate with respect to academic migration. Academics in the social sciences, engineering and law are less likely to consider migrating than those in the natural sciences and medicine (van de Bunt-Kokhuis, 1996, pp. 67–68). Age and duration of employment strongly influence an academic’s willingness or unwillingness to migrate, with more senior academics being influenced by educational and professional reasons more frequently than junior academics, and academics with international reputations at prestigious institutions considering migration less frequently (van de

Academic Migration: The Case of New Australian Universities

163

Bunt-Kokhuis, 1996, pp. 37–59). A world-class academic will be well known at many different places, and may well be able to obtain employment almost anywhere – the issue here is that universities find it difficult to make their top talent immobile (van de Bunt-Kokhuis, 1996, pp. 59–62). Van de Bunt-Kokhuis (1996, pp. 21–24) suggests that there can be distinguished internal and external professional migration determinants, and within these there can be further distinguished what can be classified as migration triggers or barriers. Thus academics may consider migration because of: career advancement; financial incentives; inspiring academic environment (library, colleagues, research funds, reputation); the focus of teaching and research in the new country; the ability to experiment with new ideas and technologies in a new environment; the opportunity to establish international links and benefit from the reputation of the new institution (van de Bunt-Kokhuis, 1996, p. 21). Academic migration can mean: an escape from a less than ideal home situation; an opportunity for the family to live abroad; an opportunity for personal growth and development; professional rejuvenation following career burn out; improved quality of life and an experience of different lifestyles and cultures for self and family (van de Bunt-Kokhuis, 1996, pp. 21–24). However academic migration can also mean: interruptions to one’s current position; no readily observable links with possible future career prospects; lack of appropriate financial rewards; separation from family and friends; stress in family relationships; disruption of spouse’s career and children’s education; language difficulties; psychological distance; poorer salary options; poorer housing and living conditions; adapting to different cultures; issues with children’s education in a new country; issues concerned with health, diet and medical care in the new country and issues connected with international terrorism and political unrest (van de BuntKokhuis, 1996, pp. 21–24). Issues concerned with academic migration to Australia today focus on a number of themes. One concerns the composition of the academic profession and the extent to which it is a profession dominated by migrants, while another theme is the issue of whether Australia is experiencing what is referred to as a ‘‘brain drain’’ or ‘‘brain gain’’. Associated with these themes is that of how Australia will recruit academic personnel in the future. These and associated issues, as we shall see, are not only relevant to Australia. Sheehan et al. (1996, p. 103) argue that the Australian higher education system is one of the more internationalised, with its academic staff having degrees from many countries. They note that, whilst ‘‘highest earned degree from another country’’ is not a measure of foreign citizenship of the

164

ANTHONY POTTS

academic staff employed, the measure is nevertheless an important and often used surrogate index of internationalisation (Sheehan et al., 1996, p. 103). They write that some 30% of Australian academics had earned their highest degree from another country, and the majority of these were earned in the U.K., the U.S.A. and Canada (Sheehan et al., 1996, p. 21). They refer to the work of Baker, Robertson, and Sloan (1993) who calculated that some 41% of Australian academics were born in the U.K. and Ireland, with 22% born in Asia and 22% in North America. Baker et al. (1993) suggest that, in more recent periods, Asia and North America have provided more academic migrants to Australia compared to the U.K., Ireland and New Zealand. They observe that overseas migrants have been important sources of academic personnel in Australia for sometime, with one-quarter of the Australian academic profession in 1986 coming from overseas. Birrell et al. (2001, p. 12) note that, for the period 1995–1996 to 1999– 2000, Australia registered a total net gain of 2,570 academics from overseas. This migration was part of what led them to conclude that, over the period, Australia registered a ‘‘brain gain’’, with a net loss of skilled residents more than offset by gains from net inflows of visitors. Conversely, the chief destination for those leaving Australia on a permanent or long-term basis was the U.K., followed by the U.S.A. and Singapore (Birrell et al., 2001, p. 6). Return rates from these places were 70%, 58% and 44%, respectively (Birrell et al., 2001, p. 6). Sheehan et al. (1996, p. 106) noted that those academics with their highest qualifications from overseas tended to work at the older and more prestigious universities, where there were established research cultures and better facilities. Why have migrant academics come to Australia? Eight years ago it was suggested that an important reason was the relative attractiveness of Australian salaries and conditions (Sheehan et al., 1996, p. 106). More recent research suggests that there is no straightforward answer, as we simply do not have the evidence but we can hypothesise on the basis of what evidence is available that lifestyle is a key factor in migration to Australia (Birrell et al., 2001, p. 33). Lifestyle covers a multitude of issues including: political security – a relative crime and pollution free environment; a low cost of living; good quality and low-cost education; good housing and urban amenities; clement weather; and the existence of substantial ethnic communities in Sydney and Melbourne (Birrell et al., 2001, p. 33). On the other hand, there is also speculation that the relative decline of Australian academic salaries over the past 20 years, together with a perceived deterioration in academic working conditions, means that Australia is now less attractive for academic migrants, especially with increased

Academic Migration: The Case of New Australian Universities

165

competition from other higher education systems in the U.S.A. and Hong Kong, where better salary and working conditions are available (Sheehan et al., 1996, p. 106). Sloan, Baker, Blandy, Robertson, and Brummitt (1990, p. 7) observe that, because of the decline in Australian academic salaries over the past 20 years, academic recruitment is increasingly from ‘‘refugee’’ sources such as South Africa, Hong Kong and China. They further suggest that, because the other major English speaking academic labour markets are also experiencing recruitment problems, this means that these countries are not likely to represent major sources of academics for Australian higher education (Sloan et al., 1990, p. 7). Academic areas that will find it especially difficult to attract academic staff will be business studies, nursing, photography and design (Sloan et al., 1990, p. 9). It is also claimed that Australia and New Zealand are not as attractive for academic or indeed other migrants as some would allege (Ashcroft, 2004). Both countries are too isolated from major centres of Europe and America, and have small populations and lack any sort of critical mass (Ashcroft, 2004). Furthermore, both countries are seen as exhibiting persistent bigotry against Indian and Asian immigrants, with Australia being only 30 years removed from an official government policy of White Australia which was designed to exclude non-White migrants (Ashcroft, 2004). In addition, Australia is seen as having few world-class universities (Ashcroft, 2004). Similar sorts of criticisms have been extended to suggest that Australia, with its migration programme, deliberately robs the Third World of its educated people through the weighting of its immigration policy in favour of skilled migrants (Stephen, 2001, p. 1). Many issues that Australia faces with respect to migration and academic migration, and the issue of ‘‘brain drain’’ or ‘‘brain gain’’, are not exclusive to it. Indeed, both Australia’s nearest neighbour and its mother country are also experiencing them. New Zealand has experienced net outflows of citizens for 40 years, and has replaced those leaving with non-New Zealand citizens (Glass & Choy, 2002, p. 1). For example, in the period 1998–2001, New Zealand experienced a net outflow of around 10,000 persons per year (Kerr, 2001). However, New Zealand has experienced more of a ‘‘brain exchange’’ than a ‘‘brain drain’’ (Glass & Choy, 2002, p. 1). New Zealand immigrants appear to be more skilled than its emigrants, while migration flows to Australia are different from those with the rest of the world (Glass & Choy, 2002, p. 1). New Zealand migrants to Australia are not the highest skilled, but are representative of the general New Zealand population. With respect to the U.K., the most recent data show a net gain of academics from overseas, but at the same time also shows that fewer overseas

166

ANTHONY POTTS

professors and senior academics are choosing the U.K., whilst increasing numbers of U.K. academics are leaving for positions overseas (Johnson, 2004, p. 3). In the period 2001–2002 (p. 3), 185 academics came to the U.K., which was a 22% increase on 1995–1996. Factoring in academics leaving the U.K., there was a net gain of 1,750 academics in 2001–2002 (Johnson, 2004, p. 3). Part of the reason for the brain gain is thought to be due to the fact that U.K. academic salaries are still attractive to European academics if less competitive than those in other places (Johnson, 2004, p. 3). It is also believed that part of the attraction of academic life in the U.K. for migrants could be due to its institutions being perceived as less hierarchical and more flexible than some of their European counterparts (Johnson, 2004, p. 3).

THEORY AND METHOD Migration research has often been divided into macro and micro approaches, with the former using measurable characteristics of the social, economic and physical environments to explain migration while the latter focuses on the migrants’ decision-making processes (White, 1980, pp. 6–13). Recent approaches in migration research have stressed the need for a biographical approach. This approach emphasises migration as situated within everyday life. Thus migration is not seen as a discrete act, but is part of the individuals’ life cycle related to their past, present and futures, and an intricate part of their biography (White, 1980, pp. 6–13). Migration is also seen as a vague process, with not all motives for migration being fully formed and encompassing many issues. Viewed from this biographical perspective, migration reveals individual loyalties, values and attachments – in short an individual’s worldview (Fielding, 1992, p. 201; Halfacree & Boyle, 1993, p. 331). Migration can be seen as a cultural construct, which exposes one’s personality – for example, do migrants see migration as ‘‘a stairway to heaven’’ (Fielding, 1992, p. 201; Halfacree & Boyle, 1993, p. 341). Examples of migration research in this genre include that of Sieu (1990), who studied the professional adaptation and integration of Asian-born academics in America. Van Balkom (1991) examined the professional and personal adaptations that returning Indian academics made. Choi (1995) examined the migration reasons and experiences of Asian scientists who settled in the U.S.A. Fischer (1995), in a particularly autobiographical and reflective piece, looked at how her embarkation for the U.S.A. in 1958 was the start of her academic career.

Academic Migration: The Case of New Australian Universities

167

Seeing migration from a biographical perspective means that there is a need to investigate the biographies of migrants so as to understand their reasons for migration (Halfacree & Boyle, 1993, p. 343). Unfortunately, there are few complete data sources for individual migration histories. However, biographical approaches do allow us to see individual migrants as decision-makers and to understand the experience and context of migration (Halfacree & Boyle, 1993, p. 344). While there are problems with biographical studies, including a tendency to exaggerate either positive or negative aspects, and the issues of selective recall, such studies do allow for a satisfying reconstruction of the past by accounting for intangibles, and the hopes and dreams of the people under study (Arnold, 1981, p. 354). The research reported in this chapter is in the manner of the classic work on academic migration by Fleming and Bailyn (1969, p. 4), in that it blends the research on academic migration during a particular period with oral evidence of participants, and thus adds ‘‘immediacy to the overall picture and contribute[s] to the historical documentation by eliciting personal commentaries that would not otherwise have existed’’. The present provides a vantage point for such an analysis, because it is far enough removed from the immediate impact of the migration period to view it in historical perspective, but simultaneously close enough for some personal interpretation by the individuals under study themselves (Fleming & Bailyn, 1969, p. 4). Using a biographical approach to study these individuals necessitated the use of an edited life history approach. There is an important distinction between the life story and the life history. The life story is ‘‘the story we tell about our life’’, while the life history is a collaborative venture and reviews a wider range of evidence (Goodson, 1992, p. 6). The life storyteller and another portray this wider account by interviews, discussions and by scrutiny of texts and contexts. The life history is the life story located within its historical context and embraces contextual or intercontexutal analysis. There are two forms of life history: comprehensive life history and topical life history (Denzin, 1989, p. 217). The latter is concerned with only one phase or aspect of the individual’s life. This may be edited with comments and analysis by the researcher, either interspersed with the narrative or in combination. It can include introductory passages and analytic comment after the narrative, or incorporated in a combined form. All forms contain three central elements: the person’s own story of his or her life; the social and cultural situation to which the subject and others see the subject responding; and the sequence of past experiences and situations in the subject’s life (Denzin, 1989, p. 217). This chapter uses edited life history.

168

ANTHONY POTTS

The distinctive usefulness of the life history approach is the depth of its historical perspective, the internal analytical connections that it reveals and the access it provides to the individual’s own words (Du Boulay & Williams, 1984, p. 257). It allows for examination of the influence of contextual factors such as home life, parents, schoolteachers and wider issues such as social class, religion and social, political and economic climate (Woods, 1992, p. 367). Goodson and Sikes (2001, p. 17) note that life history researchers need to be aware of their ‘‘colonising power’’, as they ‘‘locate’’ the life story because of their power of selection. They argue (Goodson & Sikes, 2001, p. 19) that there is no one ‘‘proper way’’ of approaching life history research, for different projects have their own features and requirements and each researcher has their own personal style and unique emotional engagement with any particular study. The extent to which the life history methodology is individualistic and personal, relying as it does on ‘‘intensely idiosyncratic personal dynamics’’, is a defining characteristic of the approach. In this research there was to some extent a ‘‘data famine’’ (Halfacree & Boyle, 1993, p. 333), and I had to rely on oral evidence with interviewing as the primary research method. However, interviewing was the ‘‘alternative to doing nothing’’ (Moyser, 1988, p. 114), and in any event ‘‘interviews can shed light on elusive problems such as how decisions are reached, how influence is exerted [while documents] sometimes hide the real reasons certain events took place’’ (Hanson, 1972, p. 34). Of course, it has to be admitted that interviews can conceal the real reasons that certain things occurred. The academics in this study were interviewed in 2003. Two types of interviews were used; the non-scheduled standardised interview and the nonstandardised interview. They were interviewed as part of a larger and separate international comparative study of academic life in ‘‘peripheral institutions’’. They were employed at two new multi-campus Australian universities. Interviews were conducted with staff at the main campus of one institution (‘‘Green University’’ – referred to as ‘‘GU’’ in the discussion) and at one of the regional campuses of the other (‘‘Carbon University, Streetsville Campus’’ – referred to as ‘‘CUS’’ in the discussion). Initially for the wider study in question it was planned to interview a total of 50 academic staff members across the two institutions. It was planned to use a stratified random sample, with proportional representation based upon: departmental size; rank of the staff member; disciplinary and departmental affiliation; length of time in the institution; gender and age of the staff member. However, in the larger study despite repeated attempts to enlist the cooperation of academics this proved impossible and only a total of 26 academics agreed to be interviewed. Furthermore, the sample does not reflect

Academic Migration: The Case of New Australian Universities

169

the various dimensions noted above. For instance women academics are over-represented, whereas in the two universities they comprise approximately 33% of academic staff. The current study on academic migration reported here focuses on 16 academics (6 men and 10 women) who migrated to work at the two institutions. It could be argued that this study deals with a relatively large number of life histories but, as Goodson and Sikes (2001, p. 23) note, it is impossible to say precisely how many informants should be involved, but it is a good idea to try and include some negative or discrepant examples. Sikes had 25 informants in one study she undertook (Goodson & Sikes, 2001, p. 23). Bertraux (1981, pp. 29–45) argues that the more life histories taken from the same set of sociocultural relations the stronger the body of evidence (Goodson & Sikes, 2001, p. 23). The conduct of the research reported here raised important ethical issues of confidentiality and anonymity (Goodson & Sikes, 2001, p. 27). These arose in spite of advantages of studying my own occupational group. While unfettered access to individuals in this research was gained, this had to be balanced against my obligations to adequately protect their rights to privacy. Thus, the research data was collected and made available in ways that would not offend or harm these individuals or cause them personal anguish. They were told of the nature of the research and what it entailed. All understood that each non-scheduled standardised interview would be tape recorded, transcribed and would possibly be quoted verbatim. They were informed that it could also be used with other measures such as document analysis in the writing of the final report. These individuals were also informed that while anonymity (and here codes are used for individuals) and confidentiality would be guaranteed, this would not necessarily mean that others would not accurately surmise the real identity of individuals. It was also necessary to ensure that the academics in this study were aware that it is not always possible to predict the sorts of repercussions that they may experience as a consequence of their involvement (Goodson & Sikes, 2001, p. 91).

THE UNIVERSITIES ‘‘Carbon University’’ ‘‘Carbon University’’ was incorporated through an act of the Australian State of Victoria Parliament in December 1964 and commenced teaching in

170

ANTHONY POTTS

1967. It was the third university founded in Victoria, and has grown to include six campuses at different locations across Victoria, including the one at ‘‘Streetsville’’. The Act establishing ‘‘Carbon’’ required it to serve the community, and especially the people of Victoria, through teaching and research. The regional campus at ‘‘Streetsville’’ is 150 km northwest from the main Melbourne city campus, has approximately 4,000 students, and is located 3 km from ‘‘Streetsville’’ city centre on 33 ha of natural bushland. ‘‘Carbon University’s Streetsville’’ campus has a history extending to 1873, when the ‘‘Streetsville’’ School of Mines and Industry was established. Over a long period the technical education it provided broadened, and in 1965 it became the ‘‘Streetsville’’ Institute of Technology. In 1976 this Institute merged with the State College of Victoria, ‘‘Streetsville’’ (previously the ‘‘Streetsville’’ Teacher’s College) to form the ‘‘Streetsville’’ College of Advanced Education. This College affiliated with ‘‘Carbon University’’ in 1991 as ‘‘Streetsville University College’’, and was fully integrated as a Faculty of the University from 1994. ‘‘Carbon University’s’’ objectives centre on teaching and research of an international standard, relevant courses, interaction with industry, community and the professions and a regional focus, which serves its various regional campuses and communities. It offers courses in health sciences, humanities and social sciences, law and management, science, engineering and technology. The ‘‘Streetsville Campus’’ offers courses in arts, science, nature tourism, outdoor education, business, computing, education, engineering, health sciences and nursing, teaching and the visual arts.

‘‘Green University’’ ‘‘Green University’’, one of Australia’s newest and smallest universities, is located in regional Victoria. Drawing on similar precursor institutions and with a similar history to ‘‘Carbon University’’ it was established by the ‘‘Green University’’ Amendment Act (1997) as a new multi-sectoral educational institution through the merger of ‘‘Green University’’ (established in 1994) with two technical and further education institutes: ‘‘Green’’ School of Mines and Industries and ‘‘Womelang’’ Institute of Technical and Further Education. The new university commenced operation in 1998. The University has its main campus and its university division on a site of 110 ha in a natural bushland setting, 10 km from ‘‘Green’’ city centre in regional Victoria.

Academic Migration: The Case of New Australian Universities

171

‘‘Green University’’ positions itself as the only regional and non-metropolitan multi-sectoral university in Australia, ‘‘strongly motivated by a commitment to its region’’ and ‘‘pre-eminently a regional organisation for the communities of the Central Highlands and Wimmera’’ (‘‘Green University’’ Annual Report, 1998, pp. 2–8). The majority of its students who enrol across its five campuses are from its region and the university aims to provide ‘‘a high standard of education and training to the people of the region and y to support regional development by providing graduates with the knowledge and skills essential for the well being of the region’’ (‘‘Green University’’ Annual Report, 1998, p. 2). ‘‘Green University’’, while focused on serving its region also aims for a national and international outlook, and to build partnerships and alliances with other organisations (‘‘Green University’’ Annual Report, 1998, p. 8). ‘‘Green University’’ aims for a seamless pathway between diploma and degree courses and technical and further education and university awards. A total of 4,000 students are enrolled in university courses, with additional technical and further education enrolments equivalent to 4,000 students. It offers university courses in arts and visual arts, behavioural and social sciences, humanities, business, education, engineering, human movement and sport sciences, information technology, nursing and sciences.

‘‘Carbon University’’ and ‘‘Green University’’ Compared The Australian university sector comprises a variety of institutions of varying size and focus (Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs (DETYA), 1998, p. 11). Using a variety of government reports, an overall picture of ‘‘Carbon University’’ and ‘‘Green University’’ can be sketched. For example, ‘‘Green University’’ is in a cluster of the smallest universities, while ‘‘Carbon University’’ is in a cluster of the second biggest group of universities. ‘‘Green University’’ is in cluster of universities least concerned with research, while ‘‘Carbon’’ is in a second cluster of universities that is more concerned with research, and the same applies to research orientation and staff characteristics. ‘‘Green’’ and ‘‘Carbon’’ are both in the same cluster of universities with the least overseas orientation (DETYA, 1998, pp. 25–26). Marginson (1997, p. 11) noted that, on the basis of an assessment by the Federal Government’s Quality Assurance Committee in 1994, which looked at enrolled students, share of research spending, research quantum funding, income per unit, student load, fee-paying overseas students and entrants in the top quartile, and which had rankings from 1 to 6,

172

ANTHONY POTTS

‘‘Carbon’’ was ranked with four institutions in the top third rank, whilst ‘‘Green’’ ranked with eight other universities in the bottom sixth. Marginson (1997, p. 12) puts ‘‘Carbon’’ in a third ranked group of 10 universities he labels the ‘‘Wannabe Sandstones’’ (a group of universities established in the 1960s and 1970s) and ‘‘Green’’ in a group of 13 bottom ranked institutions he calls ‘‘New Universities’’ (post-1987 institutions). Table 1 outlines some overall details on the two universities (DETYA, 1998, pp. 93–142 and Management Information Unit, ‘‘Carbon University’’, 2000). Details are given for ‘‘Green University’’, the greater ‘‘Carbon University’’ and ‘‘Carbon University, Streetsville, Campus’’. In some cases figures for ‘‘Carbon University, Streetsville Campus’’ were unavailable. The preceding discussion has noted the need for studies of academic migration especially to new universities. Some current data on migration and especially academic migration to Australia has been presented. The discussion observed the contribution that biographic and life history approaches could offer to the study of academic migration to new institutions. Material pertaining to two of Australia’s new universities has also outlined. The chapter now moves on to examine the particular details of academic migration to these two Australian universities.

EXTERNAL MIGRATION This group of academics is the smaller, consisting of just 4 individuals from the 26 interviewed. Despite the small number this group is in some ways the most interesting. First, it consists of the most recent group of academic migrants. Second, it comprises the group of academics who held the most senior positions of either full professor, associate professor or principal lecturer. Third, it comprises the individuals who were recruited to foundation chairs at either university. Fourth, it comprises academic migrants who staff disciplines that are difficult to fill (namely nursing, business studies and fine arts). Fifth, it contains one of the few women professors in the study (and in the two institutions). Sixth, this group of individuals represents the traditional academic migration source countries of the U.K. and Europe, that historically have provided the bulk of Australia’s academic migrants. For two of these academics, heads of department in business studies and visual arts respectively, their current academic positions were one of many such positions that they had held during continuous periods of migration to and from their home country of the U.K. and Australia. There was a hint of

173

Academic Migration: The Case of New Australian Universities

Table 1.

‘‘Green University’’ and ‘‘Carbon University’’ Compared.

Enrolments (Eftsu) Full time (%) Part time (%) Postgraduates (%) Overseas students (%) HECS students (%) Fee paying (%) Completed secondary education (%) Median student age (years) Number of fields of study Total staff numbers Research only staff (%) Staff classifications Lecturer (%) Lecturer (%) Lecturer (%) Lecturer (%) Average annual salary Highest staff qualifications Ph.D. (%) Masters (%) Bachelors (%) Staff/student ratio Operating grants as a share of income Federal government grants (%) HECS (%) State government grants (%) Research grants (%) Continuing education fees (%) Overseas fee-paying students (%) Fee-paying postgraduates (%) Other fees (%) Investment income (%) Total income (million) Research income as a share of total income (%) Research income per staff member

Green

Carbon

Streetsville

3,849 73 27 13 7.4 93 6 65 21 6 511 0

17,803 68 32 20 5.3 93 2 67 22 8 2,587 7

3,229 71 29 14.1 3.1 94 2 69 21.5 6 447 0

A 26 B 44 C 21 D–E 10 $64,973

A 28 B 35 C 23 D–E 14 $58,920

A 13 A 57 C 22 D–E 8 NA

22 41 33 17 (Science 11; Engineering 9)

57 24 17 18 (Science 15; Engineering 12)

29 36 1 15

59 15.5 1.1 2 2.1 2.3 1 13.9 3 $50 3 $8,253

58.9 14.8 1.6 2.9 1.7 3.7 0.6 2.5 13.4 $234 9 $19,203

NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

Eftsu: effective full-time student units; HECS: higher education contribution scheme – a graduate tax that students pay on completion of their degree.

174

ANTHONY POTTS

the continual wandering scholar about these two individuals. Both had repeatedly migrated to Australia and held positions in a number of Australian states, then returned to the U.K., and then returned again to Australia. GU4 had first come to Australia in the mid-1970s, had worked in Queensland and New South Wales, had returned to the U.K., and had then come to ‘‘Green University’’. In Queensland and New South Wales he had worked in what were to become the University of Southern Queensland and Charles Sturt University, respectively. GU1 had migrated from the U.K. to accept a foundation chair at ‘‘Green University’’. During previous periods he had held professorships in the U.K. and at the University of Wollongong, the University of New England and Waikato University in New Zealand. His continual migrations caused him to reflect that were ‘‘some aspects of my CV which make people a little concerned with my jumping around’’. Why then did these academic migrants from the U.K. and Europe come to work at these two new Australian universities? Recalling the previous discussion that there are personal and professional barriers and triggers involved in individual migration decisions, and that many migrants come to Australia for lifestyle reasons it is immediately apparent that these reasonings apply to these migrants. These academics noted that their migration to work in Australia was ‘‘for very personal reasons really’’ (GU1); it involved ‘‘absolutely important lifestyle issues’’ (CUS2); ‘‘it was a lifestyle decision’’ (CUS3); and ‘‘when I arrived here with a young family ‘Green City’ was great for me as it had good schools and hospitals and reasonable shopping and all those sorts of things’’ (GU4). What comprised these lifestyle migration issues? There was a demand for a lifestyle that offered: time for family and friends; a safe and relaxed quality of living; a sense of community to develop; an environment which allowed children a quality childhood without the stresses found in larger city environments. These academic migrants especially did not want to live in large capital cities, but at the same time the location of ‘‘Green City’’ and ‘‘Streetsville’’, close to the state capital with its wider array of educational, social and cultural attractions, was important. For while they wanted a peaceful and quality lifestyle, they still desired close proximity to a large population centre with its more varied social and cultural attractions and lifestyles. Migration was relocation, not a complete escape. For all these academic migrants it was not simply migration to work at ‘‘Green University’’ or ‘‘Carbon University, Streetsville’’ but migration to the respective cities that the two universities were located in. None of these academics’ migration decisions were based foremost on professional

Academic Migration: The Case of New Australian Universities

175

decisions. The personal and lifestyle aspects of their migration decisions were described in the following terms: I had and still have no desire to work in a capital city. ‘‘Green City’’ is within easy reach of Melbourne and it was attractive because in my area of the fine, visual and creative arts Melbourne is probably the capital. Certainly in my specialist area of printmaking Melbourne is the capital so to speak. I also appreciate the actual climatic weather conditions here because we get the four seasons (GU4). I did not know ‘‘Streetsville’’ at all. We had as a family been to Australia five years ago and I had spoken at a conference in Melbourne in 1998, so I had at least some knowledge of what Melbourne had to offer. I think part of the attraction for me in coming to ‘‘Streetsville’’ was the suspicion that it would be far easier to integrate into a community like it than to integrate into a suburb of Melbourne. We came as a family and I think that makes a big difference to you, and you have to think much more broadly than just your own academic issues. ‘‘Streetsville’’ is a very nice city to live in. After having spent a very long time each morning in the U.K. trying to get to work, the fact that now I am only five minutes away from work is delightful. So quality of life has been a big factor in the decision to move, and particularly the decision to come to ‘‘Streetsville’’ rather than to suburban Melbourne. Quality of schools is also important. The sense of community is important. I spend some of my working life going to Melbourne on two days a week and I can easily do that by train (CUS2). It was not a matter of going from Europe to ‘‘Streetsville’’, it was a matter of going from Europe to Australia. My wife and I made the decision that we wanted to live in a country which had more lifestyle opportunities rather than career opportunities. That was the main decision. Why ‘‘Streetsville’’? What attracted us at the time, and this was after I had finished my Ph.D. at the Australian National University in Canberra, was the belief that at the ‘‘Streetsville’’ campus there would be a better balance between research and teaching. There would be an opportunity to focus one’s career and to do research, and to keep oneself intellectually stimulated without the pressure of doing research to keep up with the research race. At the time of moving to ‘‘Streetsville’’ we had a young family and we needed to settle down for them (CUS3). There was no particular attraction as such in coming to ‘‘Green University’’. It was just a job at the time. I was employed at [a new university in the U.K.], but we had lived in Australia in the 1980s, and I thought it would be interesting to give the position here ago. I had a year off from my job in the U.K. and I thought if I liked it here I would stay (GU1).

These academic migrants all came to fill foundation positions. Could no suitable Australians be recruited? Or did potential local candidates know enough of the universities not to apply? There is a hint of the latter in the responses that these individuals gave. CUS2 noted that she discovered the vacant post-advertised on the Association of Commonwealth Universities’ website after the closing date. However, her application was accepted, as the university had not filled the position. When she was interviewed, staff on the main campus suggested that theirs was a more congenial and productive place to work, and she should consider working there instead. She noted that was ‘‘an interesting part of the dynamic’’ (CUS2). CUS3 similarly

176

ANTHONY POTTS

observed that he knew little about ‘‘Streetsville’’ campus apart from the fact that it was in a small rural city, which he and his family visited for the interview. Before this he was not knowledgeable about Australia or about its education system. It was a ‘‘jump into the unknown’’ (CUS3). What were the professional triggers, alone or intermeshed with the more personal lifestyle triggers, that explain these academics’ migration decisions? They believed that they possessed the required qualifications, skills, abilities and experience that were demanded by the posts. Accordingly they noted that they had held professorships or senior positions in other institutions that equipped them for these posts. For example, GU4 observed that he had 20 years of experience in higher education in the U.K., and consequently had ‘‘a very reasonable background in my specialist area’’. GU1 noted that he ‘‘had a portfolio of experience across a wide range of different universities in the field, and experience of working in business schools, which is quite unusual for somebody applying for a chair at GU because this is not the most prestigious university in the world’’. He stated that he had been an extremely prolific writer and researcher, and by the time he was 35 years of age, which was 22 years previously, he had authored 10 monographs and 50 refereed papers. Commencing his academic career in a research-driven university he had achieved his first professorship at the age of 35 years. On the other hand, some were aware of the more limited opportunities that awaited them. While CUS3 imagined that the post would be mainly teaching focused (an attractive proposition to him at the time), he observed that ‘‘Streetsville’’ ‘‘was very honest about warning me that it could be difficult to build a research career’’. Others believed that the U.K. university that they had worked at would provide enough similarities to furnish stimulation and fulfilment. CUS2 noted that she had earned her Ph.D. at one of the Russell Group of universities in the U.K., and had most recently worked at a new multi-campus U.K. university similar to ‘‘Streetsville’’. Part of the attraction of working at ‘‘Streetsville’’ was to experience working in a new but somewhat similar academic situation. The fact that it would be a new university ‘‘did not faze [her] at all, it was part of the richness of the challenge’’ (CUS2). She, like the others, realised that there would be different views about the role of research, and an emphasis on pastoral care of students but she ‘‘expected some of the dynamics to be quite similar to those that [she] had experienced in the U.K.’’. However, others were not quite as sanguine and noted that the new institution and its environment were: In some senses limiting because you are a long way from Europe. ‘‘GU’’ was limiting and that was probably the tyranny of distance, but it was also the culture of research or more correctly the lack of such a culture. People say it is a culture of service to students, but I

Academic Migration: The Case of New Australian Universities

177

actually perceive it as a culture of avoidance and as an activity that is undertaken to avoid everything else, a sort of displacement activity (GU1).

These academics also realised, though for some this did not happen till after they were somewhat settled in their new post, that their appointment was a coup for their university. Employing a new professor to head a discipline gave added institutional leverage both to the discipline and the university. Being a new professor and one that the university was keen to impress meant that they had ‘‘rights of access to all sorts of places in the university structure, which people below that level did not have’’ (CUS2). These academics realised sooner or later that ‘‘it was a coup to recruit someone international’’ (CUS2), and they ultimately realised that they were this someone.

INTERNAL MIGRATION The group of internal migrants consisted of four intra-state (three women and one men) and eight interstate (six women and two men) academics. They were recruited to work in the disciplines of science, health science, teacher education, business, human movement and visual arts. This group of internal academic migrants were also motivated to migrate by both personal and professional triggers, with lifestyle issues featuring prominently among both. Personal considerations included: family connections in the city; a desire to spend more time with their children; family health issues (the host city being viewed as a healthy environment for child rearing); a desperate need for employment upon returning form overseas; fortuitousness; the location of the university; a desire to teach and work in a regional as opposed to a metropolitan area; the ability to access specialised schooling for offspring; employment that was congruent with personal changes occasioned by marriage. The following responses highlight some of these features. I had grown up in Geelong, but my father’s family came from Gordon, which is just outside ‘‘Green City’’. He and my mother and sister had retired to Gordon. So there were family connections (GU6). I have to say that the biggest attraction of the job was personal, in that I had a threeyear-old child who I hardly saw. My husband and I put in a joint application to job share an advertised post here. I was not very keen but we came up and we got it. So we relocated to ‘‘Streetsville’’ from Melbourne but we did not actually live in ‘‘Streetsville’’, because one of the attractions of coming up here was also personal and that was there was a Rudolf Steiner School in Castlemaine and we wanted our son to go to a Steiner School (CUS14).

178

ANTHONY POTTS

I had a little boy by then and I did not really want to move around too much. I was looking for stability (CUS8). From a family point of view we very much enjoy being here. This has been a great for my wife and for our children, and it’s a great place to bring up a young family (CUS5). I came here by accident really. I had been overseas to do higher degree studies and I came back when jobs were very few. And I had started applying for jobs, and I had no luck, and this one was advertised. I did not like the sound of it to tell you the truth not because it was ‘‘Green City’’ or anything like that but because of the way it was advertised. But I got the job and I am glad that I did (GU7). The fact that it allowed me to teach at the tertiary level in a rural area. So it was a prefect fit (CUS9). I guess I see myself as being a country person and so a regional university was a positive for me. The regional nature of the university was a big attraction. I could never see myself actually moving to Melbourne for jobs. So it is a lifestyle issue as much as an academic issue (GU11). I was a health educator in the hospital system in Melbourne and I had done that for a number of years. And I wanted to get out of Melbourne. I liked ‘‘Green City’’ and often used to come up here on day trips and I thought I could live here. I also thought it was easy to go back to Melbourne if one wanted to (GU16). I was looking for a change so I guess the time was right for me. I had in mind that it would be a little more flexible than the school system that I worked in and provide a few more challenges in different directions (GU11). It was a combination of getting married to someone who lived in Bendigo plus the position came up at the same time (CUS15).

What were the professional migration triggers in these individuals’ careers? These centred on obtaining any academic post that would enable them to: utilise their qualifications and experience; earn their livelihood by teaching in a university setting; experience professional growth, stimulation and satisfaction from dealing with different students and different situations; have the option to engage, but not the necessity of engaging, in research. For example, GU6 had finished a postdoctoral scholarship in geology at the University of Tasmania. He desired a position that would utilise not only his qualifications but also his prior employment experiences at universities in the U.S.A. ‘‘Green University’’ ultimately recruited him to assist in rebuilding the discipline area. GU16 felt the health sciences post she applied for would be a rewarding and challenging job but was hesitant about lodging her application. CUS15 applied for her position because of her specialisation in children’s literature, and her ability to teach in that area. She also believed that she was not sufficiently qualified to obtain an academic post at the University of Melbourne. Consequently, gaining the post at ‘‘CUS’’ was a means of obtaining a desired for, but elusive, academic post. GU11 believed that the post she obtained would entail a heavy teaching load. However, she envisaged students who were of an age and disposition

Academic Migration: The Case of New Australian Universities

179

that would allow for more challenging and rewarding work than she had experienced in school teaching. She was of the view that the students the university attracted were open, friendly and with a similar background and worldview to her own. GU13 recalled that he had taught school in the state and private school sectors and as a result of some interesting and innovative work he desired to move into a tertiary setting. He noted: I think because I was enthusiastic they were keen to hire me. I loved teaching, was doing things, was head of a department in a school. I saw teacher education as somewhere exciting and interesting to go to. For me it was the right decision then. But in the past ten years the goal posts have changed and there are no career prospects here.

For CUS12 the main reason for coming to work at ‘‘CUS’’ was because of her teaching and research interests in environmental issues. These would be better served by being closer to her field sites, which the position, because of its location, provided. CUS14 observed that she loved teaching and: I feel very passionate about it and it is just wonderful that for years and years people have paid me to do something which I love, which is taking photographs, and now they pay me to inspire other people to take photographs.

For CUS8 the professional attractions included the fact that she enjoyed teaching but did not: Want to go into heavy-duty research because I found that very stressful and I did not even want to apply for ‘‘postdocs’’. So I was happy not to become a full-blown researcher but I was happy to concentrate on the teaching side of things. My hunch is that the university was keen to employ me because I stressed teaching. But I do not know what they were looking for. Somebody else commenced with me and he was very big on research, and I am not sure if they were looking for a mix of people. I absolutely love it here and it has been very good. The lifestyle and the work suit me fine. I think that in a big university you would be much more into doing research and publications and grant applications. And that is not me.

Conversely, CUS9 thought that her professional reasons for coming to ‘‘CUS’’, including the opportunity of being able to teach and research in her area of specialisation, ‘‘had not worked out as I had visualised them’’, in that any sort of research profile proved exceedingly difficult to sustain. Part of the initial attraction of a university career for her was the supposed opportunity to pursue research. A small number within this group of internal academic migrants believed that they were employed as a last resort, due to the difficulties that both respective institutions experienced in hiring suitable staff. For example GU7 recalled that the university when it hired her was ideally seeking to employ someone in a completely different area. This was not an area that she was

180

ANTHONY POTTS

especially competent in nor committed to. On the other hand she did find the institution and its people friendly and welcoming. GU16 stated that: I am not sure why they hired me y I do not think I could have been their first choice as it took them a long while to make me an offer y I reckon they made an offer to someone else and that person turned it down. I must have been second or so on the list.

GU6 noted that there had been a number of attempts by the department to fill the post that was finally offered to him, due to a difficulty matching salaries that industry could offer. GU11 believed that ‘‘GU really just wanted to fill the position’’.

CONCLUSION This study of these academic migrants raises a number of important theoretical and substantive issues. The study illustrates: the appropriateness of a biographical approach to the study of academic migration; how academic migration was constructed within a broader social and economic context, and possessed its own local dynamics; how migration was intertwined with other phases of academics’ life cycles and encompassed both personal and professional issues; how the methodology in this study could be extended to larger national and cross national studies. Furthermore, this study provided: strong evidence for the hypothesis that lifestyle factors figure prominently in migration to Australia; details of migration processes that operate with respect to new or ‘‘peripheral universities’’; data for comparison with elite universities. Finally, the study raises questions about the staffing of new universities in the future. It is worthwhile raising once again the gender imbalance in the sample of this study. Did the fact that the sample was biased towards female academic migrants mean that lifestyle, family and child raising issues were more pronounced than might be the case overall? That issue aside, personal and professional triggers, which encompass lifestyle issues, have been shown to be important determinants in academic migration. This can be read on two levels. On one level, university planners and policy makers may have cause for alarm if they see the main determinant in academic recruitment as being along lifestyle and non-academic dimensions. Indeed, how many leading edge universities rely on such for academic hiring? However, before we are too quick to condemn these new institutions there is some evidence that recruitment to academic life, at least in the past, rested considerably on associated lifestyle benefits (Wilson, 1979, p. 13). Those days perhaps are

Academic Migration: The Case of New Australian Universities

181

long gone, and in any case such factors are not viable for sustaining a fully functioning university in the twenty-first century. On the other hand, the results in this study could be interpreted somewhat differently. This interpretation suggests that, given changes in the global world with increased fear of living in large metropolises and a desire for a quality lifestyle, then new universities such as the ones here have strong attractions, at least on one level, in academic recruitment. In both Australia and the U.K. there is currently academic emigration. In Australia it is to the U.K. and the U.S.A. In the U.K. it is to the U.S.A. and Australia, and to employment outside the university sector. In addition, the majority of Australia’s academics are aged 45 years or older, 86% of the professoriate are middle-aged or older, and nearly 2000 of those are aged in their 60s (Maslen, 2000, p. 7). Australian universities face a serious staffing issue, with a large cohort of academic staff predicted to retire in the next 10 years (Maslen, 2000, p. 7). The current academic staffing situation in Australia and its previous migrant source countries will soon determine if new universities such as those here find lifestyle issues, alone or in combination with professional factors, sufficient for academic recruitment purposes. It may be the case that in future academic migration will be essential for all Australia’s universities. If other source countries are also facing a shortage of academic staff, then new and ‘‘peripheral institutions’’ may have to rely on lifestyle issues as recruitment incentives. Will such lifestyle incentives be enough? If they prove to be so during the initial recruitment process, what will new universities need to do to ensure that these same lifestyle issues are not quickly forgotten once the initial euphoria associated with migration gets lost in the daily academic life cycle?

REFERENCES Arnold, R. (1981). The farthest promised land: English villagers – New Zealander immigrants of the 1870s. Wellington: Victory University Press and Price Milburn. Ashcroft, J. (2004). No real threat of brain drain, from http://asscroft.blogspot.com Baker, M., Robertson, F., & Sloan, J. (1993). The role of immigration in the Australian higher education labour market. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service. Beer, D. (1989). Oral history and the history of universities: The case of New England. History of Education Review, 18(1), 60–73. Beer, D. (1996). Doing a Rip van Winkle? Student activism and attitudes at the University of New England, 1964–1969. History of Education Review, 25(2), 34–52. Beer, D. (1998). New sources for the history of Australian universities. History of Education Review, 27(2), 37–49.

182

ANTHONY POTTS

Bertraux, D. (1981). From the life history approach to the transformation of sociological practice. In: D. Bertraux (Ed.), Biography and society: The life history approach in the social sciences (pp. 29–45). Beverly Hills: Sage. Birrell, B., Dobson, I., Rapson, V., & Smith, F. (2001). Skilled labour: Gains and losses. Monash University, Clayton: Centre for Population and Urban Research and Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs. Caesar, T. (2000). Travelling through the boondocks: In and out of the academic hierarchy. Albany, New York: State University of New York Press. Castells, M. (1996). The information age: Economy, society and culture, Vol. 1. Oxford: Blackwells. Castles, S., & Miller, M. (1998). The age of migration: International population movements in the modern world (2nd ed.). Houndmills: Macmillan. Choi, H. (1995). An international scientific community: Asian scholars in the United States. Westport, CT: Praegar. Denzin, N. (1989). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods. New York: McGraw Hill. Department of Education Training and Youth Affairs (DETYA). (1998). The characteristics and performance of higher education institutions. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service. De Ridder-Symoens, H. (1992). Mobility. In: H. De Ridder-Symoens (Ed.), A history of the university in Europe, (Vol. 1, pp. 280–303). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Du Boulay, J., & Williams, R. (1984). Collecting life histories. In: R. Ellen (Ed.), Ethnographic research: A guide to general conduct (pp. 247–259). San Diego: Academic Press. Fielding, A. (1992). Migration and culture. In: A. Champion & A. Fielding (Eds), Migration process and patterns, (Vol. 1, pp. 225–247). London: Belhaven Press. Fischer, B. (1995). Marginality, migration and metamorphoses. In: A. Goering & S. Fensternmaker (Eds), Individual voices, collective visions: Fifty years of women in sociology (pp. 135–149). Philadelphia: Temple University Press. Fleming, D., & Bailyn, B. (1969). The intellectual migration: Europe and America, 1930–1960. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. Friedman, R. (2000). Integration and visibility: Historiographic challenges to university history, University of Oslo forum for University History. Oslo: Oslo University Department of History. Glass, H., & Choy, W. (2002). Brain drain or brain exchange? New Zealand Treasury Working Papers 01/02. The New Zealand Treasury, Wellington. Goodson, I. (1992). Studying teachers’ lives. London: Routledge. Goodson, I., & Sikes, P. (2001). Life history research in educational settings. Buckingham: Open University Press. Halfacree, K., & Boyle, P. (1993). The challenges facing migration research: The case for a biographical approach. Progress in Human Geography, 17(3), 333–348. Hanson, B. (1972). Oral history and recent political history. Oral History, 1(3), 34–42. Hugo, G. (2000). Brain drain or global market? Emigration from Australia – economic implications, First Report on an Australian Research Council Spirt Grant. University of Adelaide, Adelaide. Johnson, C. (2004). UK enjoys a brain gain in young talent. The Times Higher Education Supplement, July 9, 1–2.

Academic Migration: The Case of New Australian Universities

183

Kerr, R. (2001). The brain drain: Why New Zealanders are voting with their feet. Policy, 17(2), 3–15. Marginson, M. (1997). Competition and contestability in Australian higher education, 1987– 1997. Australian Universities Review, 40(1), 5–14. Maslen, G. (2000). The old, old story. Campus Review, 10(16), 7. Moyser, G. (1988). Non-standardised interviewing in elite research. Studies in Qualitative Methodology, 1, 109–136. Schuster, J. (1994). Emigration, internationalisation, and brain drain: Propensities among British academics. Higher Education, 28, 437–452. Sheehan, B., Welch, A., & Lacy, F. (1996). The academic profession in Australia. Canberra: Department of Employment, Education Training and Youth Affairs. Sieu, M. (1990). Migration and adaptation: A study of Asian-born academics in an American university. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis. The University of California, Los Angeles. Sloan, J., Baker, M., Blandy, R., Robertson, F., & Brummitt, W. (1990). A study of the labour market for academics. Canberra: Department of Employment Education and Training. Stephen, S. (2001). Australia promotes ‘‘brain drain’’. Green Left Weekly, from http://www/ greenleft.org.au/back/2001 Van Balkom, W. (1991). The professional and personal adaptation of returning Indian academics. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis. McGill University, Montreal. Van de Bunt-Kokhuis, S. (1996). Academic pilgrims: Determinants of international faculty mobility. Tilburgh: Tilburgh University Press. Van den Berghe, P. L. (1975). Academic gamesmanship. In: D. S. David & R. Brannon (Eds), The forty-nine percent majority (pp. 124–131). New York: Addison Wesley. White, S. (1980). A philosophical dichotomy in migration research. Professional Geographer, 32, 6–13. Wilson, L. (1979). American academics: Then and now. New York: Oxford University Press. Woods, P. (1992). Symbolic interactionism: Theory and method. In: M. Le Compte, W. Milroy & J. Preissle (Eds), The handbook of qualitative research in education (pp. 337–404). San Diego: Academic Press.

This page intentionally left blank

184

VOICE AND ACADEMIC IDENTITY IN ‘CHANGING PLACES’ Jan Parker ABSTRACT The establishment of academic voice, authority and identity in international fora, this chapter argues, is both a central challenge and a central benefit of international academic relations. For the presentation (of new ideas, papers, paradigms: the lifeblood of academic interchange) entails the mediation not just of a text but also of persona: both must be ‘translated’ for the ‘foreign’ and host audience; both are changed in the process. As always, that which is found, as well as lost, in translation reveals much about the essential qualities of the ‘original’: here the author’s ‘original’ academic voice and identity. This chapter draws on ethnographic and inter-cultural representational models to explore the proper form of recording and reflecting/reflecting on one particular intercultural academic encounter. It uses explanatory models drawn from Academic Literacies, Sociolinguistics and Translation Studies to try to analyse and understand the process, effect and implications of that encounter. In order to establish that which is performative in academic identity, it gives an evaluative account of what it means to lose, and regain, one’s academic voice.

International Relations International Perspectives on Higher Education Research, Volume 3, 185–203 Copyright r 2005 by Elsevier Ltd. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISSN: 1479-3628/doi:10.1016/S1479-3628(05)03008-X

185

186

JAN PARKER

INTRODUCTION: INTERPRETING ‘BEING THERE’ We had the experience but missed the meaning ‘The Dry Salvages’ (T.S. Eliot, Four Quartets)

It was only in writing this chapter that the definitions and ramifications of words such as ‘identity’, ‘voice’, ‘persona’ and ‘authority’, and the scale and implications of my argument, became clear. And that is appropriate. Only on returning to and reflecting on the transformative experience of international exchange: the effect on academic identity, and on performing ‘in translation’, and only on reviewing the possible means of exploring the experience, did the relationship between the two become clear. That is to say, the proposition that academic identity is performed, that it is developed and validated in communication with the alien community, can only be defended in a further performance, in critical and reflective writing. Ethnographers struggle with the double problem of how firstly to derive and how then to properly communicate data from experience. For experience is participatory and transitory: what of that is valid and true? Another ethnographer may have/will have a different experience. Meaning-making therefore is anything but an objective science, producing data that can be reproduced at will: the experience may produce important, valid and enduring data, but it has to be rendered meaningful as it is communicated (Geertz, 1988). Nevertheless, such a ‘meaningful’ account is not subjective, is not a record of a personal experience, but one that draws out and frames the shape and significance of what was encountered. ‘What are we in Ithaca, Martians?’, asked a Cornell Classicist colleague when I told him of this proposed chapter. No, nor cockfighting Balinese, but the problem of discriminating the meaning and value of my international exchange came in writing to seem to be an anthropological one; both the content and style of this chapter are informed by Geertz’s injunction that the ethnographer must first fully experience and then communicate the general, generalisable, significance of ‘being there’. So I offer a double account of the risks and benefits of international academic exchange: of one experience of ‘being there’ (in Cornell), and of the process of understanding what happened. Finding the form in which to express the experience without falling into Eliot’s trap (‘we had the experience but missed the meaning’) was itself part of the process of understanding what happened. And a major part, I propose here, of the benefit of the international exchange. And it was also the subject of the paper that I went to Cornell to give. In so many ways the medium turned out to be the message which turned out to be the medium again y

Voice and Academic Identity in ‘Changing Places’

187

LOST IN TRANSLATION It is at once exciting and threatening to move outside one’s academic home. Even when welcomed into a very similar community, even one which shares a common language, many essentials are ‘lost in translation’. At a superficial but significant level, inflections of identity and of values are lost; signs of recognition and like-mindedness misconstrued. Even disciplinary identity: usually modelled as formed within a potentially global community of discourse, I discovered mine to derive, rather, from a community divided by rather than sharing a common discourse; my academic identity formed along/in defending tribal lines; in fighting over, rather than inhabiting, common ground. But such identity, disciplinary concerns and academic ground all came to seem parochial as a basis for repaying the basic obligation of academic guest to institutional host – to share with generosity who one is and what one came to say. Finding the basis from which to speak, and finding what could be said to meet the demands of a welcoming but alien community: those were the two revelatory processes that were for me the ‘benefit of international exchange’. I had been invited, the keynote and only non-North American, to a Cornell-hosted consortium for Writing in the Disciplines because I shared a common concern – how to help students to develop their own, yet disciplinary, voice. I was working on a performative definition of academic identity, and was using examples of student writing to suggest an alternative model of disciplinary identity formation. Taking as my premise that the process of writing creates rather than merely demonstrates understanding, I had developed a rationale for alternative writing assignments, and in this paper I wanted to discuss the effects (on the students’ ‘voice’ and identity) of allowing a wider range of understandings to be created. The argument in the paper arose out of reflections on my Greek tragedy students’ experimental and transgressive writing; my own voice had developed in presenting/defending their writing to hostile disciplinary audiences and interested but sceptical academic writing circles. ‘Voice’ as a development, not just expression, of identity (my own as well as my students’) was therefore very much at the forefront of my thoughts.

OUTSIDE LOOKING IN I had been invited because I was seen, despite many differences, to be likeminded in my concern for transformational disciplinary writing. But also

188

JAN PARKER

because I am liminal – I work between the disciplines, at the interface of research and teaching, text and reception. My identity, therefore, was also of interest. There was an underlying, almost prurient interest in how I operated, how I performed between communities: that of my research group, the Humanities Higher Education Research Group, and my institutional homes – Cambridge University’s Faculties of Classics and of English – the Open University’s Institute of Educational Technology and University College London’s Centre for Interdisciplinary Studies of Higher Education, and disciplinary homes: Classics, Educational Technology, Translation and Reception, Sociolinguistics and Communication. My role as the final and keynote speaker was to offer the outsider’s view of the issues faced by the host community. But the outsiderdom was to be complex, not simple: the position from which I was to speak was to be that of someone reflecting on ‘foreign’ disciplinary, institutional and professional standpoints. So, it was to be ‘all done with mirrors’. I was to talk about my students’ identity as performed in reflective writing, which reflected on alienation from and sympathy with Greek texts; at the same time performing as a ‘foreigner’ and giving an image of myself with which my audience could identify and/or from which be alienated. My paper had also to be a persona-developing, authority-claiming narrative, a performance in which I showed the planes of the mirror whose reflection I was offering as my contribution to the conference. In constructing that authority-claiming narrative I had to decide the answers to the basic questions: Whom/what do I represent? What right do I have to speak? What voice do I have?

The answers turned out be integrally bound up with that very academic, performed identity; which, together with authority and voice, I found to be all at risk in an ‘alterious’ encounter, a deep if challenging benefit of Changing Places.

FINDING A MODEL It is troublingly problematic to find the appropriate form of writing to investigate and analyse the seemingly ineffable effect of this particular

Voice and Academic Identity in ‘Changing Places’

189

international higher education exchange. Ironically so, as the paper that I was due to give, the non-delivery of which precipitated this chapter, was on deeply structured congruence in writing: congruence to text, addressee and author. It was designed as a Trojan Horse, to work like that artefact and the homonymous computer virus to get beneath my U.S. audience’s defences and work away at undermining them. I was there to comment on my hosts’ long and prestigious tradition of academic writing, with one aspect of which I wanted to take issue. While seeming to offer an innocuous thesis, I intended to present my audience with knowledge of my identity, my philosophy of teaching and my radical position in my discipline which at the end of the paper I would point to as the actual message – overtly on academic writing, the paper was actually to be about multifaceted, multi-voiced academic identity and the message to be the presentation of my multi-voices. But when I came to give it, I had lost my voice. It had become lost in translation – for although my paper was in English to an English-speaking, transatlantic audience, translation is an intercultural as well as an interlingual transaction. I had not anticipated the results of my own thesis – that voice is an expression of identity – nor that my identity would have to be reconstructed as it was re-presented, re-inflected for this seemingly entirely alien audience. But, how, now, should I relate this experience? In what form should I frame the enquiry into the causes and benefits of what happened in my international exchange? What exactly is the focus of the enquiry – what is ‘voice’, what is the academic identity that I lost, and eventually and joyfully found, in translation?

‘WHAT ARE WE, MARTIANS?’ Treating Cornell Faculty as Martians y Yes, one possible form is the traditional ethnographic narrative – a travelogue recording field observations about ‘the natives’. Le´vi-Strauss’ 1955 Tristes Tropiques gave this form of highly literary narrative a bad name, insulated as it was from the people studied. The succeeding generations of ethnographers moved between the extremes of scientistic ‘objectivity’ and nervous pessimism about the possibility of truth telling, other than that of telling the truth about the observer’s experience. Proper fear of appropriating the ‘Other’s’ culture, of being a voyeur, of colonising rather than respecting the alienness of the culture studied produced narratives that were finally not about the Other at all but all about the Self – a finally self-regarding sensibility.

190

JAN PARKER

But the data I am trying to understand in this writing, as in that of my Greek Tragedy students, are neither objective (‘the Cornell discourse communities and their markers’; ‘the ways in which American Faculty construct their identity’) nor subjective (‘my experience at Cornell’), but, rather, the critical conclusions to be deduced from engagement with the selected subject; the understanding to be gleaned from the mutually transformative investment in the data. In this case, in this case study, the effect on academic identity of international exchange.

IDENTITY CHANGE AND RESISTANCE Looking for a model, my mind turned to accounts of modern language students’ experiences on their year abroad. Here is a rich body of data on the effects, beneficial and otherwise, of a year spent with native speakers in their home culture. Of examples of intercultural encounter, of narratives of educative and transformational effects of going outside one’s linguistic culture (Coleman, 2001b). And of resistances – cases of students continuing to project onto the host culture criteria and expectations of ‘home’ even while advancing their linguistic skills (Phipps & Gonzalez, 2003). Fluent speakers though they may become, such students return the same as they left in terms of their identity and worldview. Surprisingly frequent (Coleman, 2001a), such students resist the encounter with the other, which is to refuse to risk the change of identity that happens ‘in translation’. The risks, as well as the benefits, of embracing the other are very real – as testimonies by those whose identities have been ‘Lost in Translation’ witness (Hoffman, 1991). But I was neither submerged by nor resisted my similarly overwhelming experience. And, in reading the year abroad studies looking for a critical framework to adopt, I was struck by the lack, rather than frequency, of parallels. It was, it seemed to me, not my identity in the ‘foreign’ culture that was at issue: I neither played at being ‘alien’ by, for example, inhabiting a Parisian persona, nor resistantly emphasised my ‘difference’ (e.g. speaking the language with a markedly British accent; drinking pints: judging others, so to speak, by their Imperial capacity). As, simply, I am older, my identity is an accumulation, an agglomeration, not an entity. It is less susceptible, less simply stakeable, less available to play and risk. So perhaps the model must be taken from studies of international exchange in mid-life. Of which there is, of course, only one candidate – that most unforgettable and scintillating narrative of academic transformation, David Lodge’s Changing Places – where thrusting ‘key to all literary

Voice and Academic Identity in ‘Changing Places’

191

theories’ West Coast professor Morris Zapp and hesitant rubric expert, Midlands lecturer Philip Swallow, exchange offices, campuses and finally wives. But suffice it to say that my needs were entirely different (Lodge, 1978). All the models I turned to were constructed narratives, real and fictional, of individuals initially submerged by, and then easily or resistantly adopted by, the host culture. I had been invited as an outsider; the result of my having written a long and somewhat critical review article of the book celebrating my hosts’ work (Monroe, 2002; Parker, 2003b). I was there to hold up a mirror to their practices and norms. By being the alien, by being outside the community of practice and discourse community, I would be able to discriminate and distinguish; to offer a critically comparative account. But, when it came to it, this seemed a woefully naı¨ ve model of intercommunal contact. I had to translate into the discourse that I was brought in to be outside! And, for better and worse, in a few days I could not go native. Methodologically, I faced the anthropologist’s liminal status; her duty and necessity to report in her own language, and to her own culture, a translation of the language and culture she observes; a report that might well not seem informative or valid to those so observed. Ethnography faced this ‘crisis of representation’ in the 1980s by retreating into self-reflexivity – writing accounts not of the culture but of the observer-participant’s experience of the culture. I did that, when I came home – wrote up my paper in terms of what I had learned (Parker, forthcoming). But this is to duck the real issues, issues of intercultural academic identity formation, which I wish to face here.

REFLECTIONS ON AND IN THE MIRROR So, what form to adopt to face these issues, if not biographic or participantobserver narrative? I was invited to hold up a mirror to the practices of the host community, and, as I am a classicist, I turn for investigative method and cultural models, in this as in so many other areas, to the ‘Father of History’ [and Ethnography], Herodotus. He prefaced his account of the clash of East and West, the Greeks’ heroic halting of the mighty Persian empire’s bid to dominate the civilised world, with ethnographic accounts of the ‘otherness’ of the cultures with which they had already come into conflict: Egyptians, Babylonians, Ethiopians and Scythians (Cartledge, 2002). Extensive travel,

192

JAN PARKER

eyewitness accounts, and a strong first person narrative and reflective frame, inform the account of the defining conflict; a conflict in which Greek identities were formed in distinction to their enemy which itself had assimilated mirror cultures. His narrative is of the irruption of the foreign which served to identify the home community; by holding up a mirror of alienness one saw sharply one’s own features. He is conscious of holding up that mirror, his narrative signals that it is itself an image which the writer constructs for the reader to reflect in and on. And his images are multifaceted sets of polarised examples drawn into a narrative which offers a reflecting and refracting, multi-plane composite. His data are as valid as he can make them – he was scrupulous in checking – but finally what he offers is a narrative, a ‘logos’ (an analytical qualitative account) made up of discrete and counterpoised images: of Greeks and Persians, and the host of other cultural relationships that informed those two cultural entities. His images resonate through the centuries (I write this the day after the primetime first U.K. terrestrial showing of ‘Thermopylae’). A double process of using the mirror image, to present the multifaceted composite of alterity and to present the viewer with a means to see her own features. But, all importantly, in this latter image one sees one’s own features in reverse. A sharp and informative image, for sure, but one that needs to be consciously considered, reprocessed and inverted in a ‘reflective’ narrative. As someone who works on metaphors and models of the translation process and on interculturality, I cannot claim my logos of my presentation (in all senses) as a keynote at Cornell to be as redolent as that of the cataclysmic east–west wars, but when challenged by this book’s project to account for the transnational aspects of the higher education experience, I came to see that a logos of that process was what I had to offer. A double reflective process, on viewing a complexly constructed alterious society and on considering the effects of presenting myself in the mirror. And so, for form I offer such a logos – at once a reasoned explanation and significance-highlighting narrative – of multifaceted encounters that formed my transnational exchange.

LOSING ONE’S VOICE I lost my voice. My paper was lost in translation. I stood up and delivered instead a reinflection, a transposition of the substance of what I had written.

Voice and Academic Identity in ‘Changing Places’

193

What kind of translation was this, why had I felt the need, what, and on what, was the effect? The paper as written was about writing that challenges disciplinary norms, arguing that alternative forms of expression create new disciplinary and academic identities in students and, my conclusion, in their teachers. So I started with rehearsing the arguments against the essay form, well documented on this, ‘other’, side of the Atlantic, and explaining my course’s texts, contexts and writing tasks. This, I knew, would draw on common interests. The standard university essay, the form that I and my third year students are used to, tends to privilege linear argument, the expression of a finally arrived at position (Mitchell, 1994). Working as I do on texts that problematise closure and that have as a common subject the dangers of foreclosure (Parker, 2001), it seemed proper as well as pedagogically advisable to find other modes of writing (Parker, 2003a). I also want my students to engage with the problematics of the text, with challenges, incongruities, ambiguities, alienating and distressing effects. Essay-type writing, (at least as practised in twenty-first-century England rather than sixteenth-century France!) tends to encourage writing that has distanced itself from such disturbances, from the texts’ affects and effects. So I set tasks that require responsive writing which is simultaneously critical of those responses and aware of the textual mechanisms that trigger them. The resulting writing is out of the student’s experience, though it is to be categorised as ‘disciplinary’ rather than ‘creative’ or ‘reflective’. But the Greek tragedies that I teach also warn that you are what you speak; every development of argument is also a development of understanding and that itself shapes the adolescent’s developing character. So the texts suggest that questions about the relationship of writing to experience, of reflective writing to traumatic or disturbing experiences, were tied up with questions about what could be spoken and who could be addressed (Elbow, 2000). My paper had a double agenda – overtly to discuss examples and definitions of student voice in writing and the essential developmental role such ‘envoicing’ has in higher education, but also to suggest that the same is true for academics. That is to say that our identity also is developed and constructed in speaking and in writing, with every performance sharpening and validating that identity. I should perhaps therefore have anticipated that this particular performance, to a welcoming but ‘alien’ community, would at least provide a test case for my proposition! A test which it failed on two grounds: my material and my authority to deliver it. It seemed that my material, positioned as I had thought it was on

194

JAN PARKER

mutually accessible ground was not at all so accessible. It pre-supposed deep-seated values I attach, I now see, to all the key words of my argument: linearity, fore-closure, distancing ( ¼ bad), problematisation, disturbance, critically engaged response ( ¼ good). And beyond that, deep, challenging and unexplored pre-suppositions about our shared enterprise of liberal education and its role in developing students’ identity. Although I could explain all aspects of my work in language which was perfectly intelligible and interest-laden to my audience, there was an extra process of translation needed – not at all a linguistic one. The text I had intended to deliver was as formed of a web of evaluative positions as the Greek texts I teach. And, like those, understanding the text means not only translating the words but also the linguistic texture: the way values are suggested, declared, set in opposition, ironised, questioned, or appropriated by speakers.

AUTHORITY AND PERSONA Despite being so specially invited, my authority also seemed to have been lost in transit. That composite – the persona composed of what I have written, papers I have given, challenges I have met and acknowledgements wrung from those who disagree – fragmented here. I had to regain it, establish it, in my performance. It had to be authoritative: my performance had to be masterful. Authority, mastery, must be created in performance but cannot merely be performed. A persona, literally, fits over the face and amplifies the voice. I had lost the mask I came prepared to wear and, in order to effectively reach my audience, had to create another fit for purpose. The immediate problem, which I had to deal with on my feet, was to decide who I am, what right I had to speak, and who and what did I represent. The persona created to cover my nakedness had to be a projected answer to those questions. And as anyone who has had to do likewise – perform an identity and authority they do not at that moment feel themselves securely to possess – will tell you, what comes out has a complex and interesting relationship to ‘the real thing’. With hindsight I can see that what I had lost were not the markers of my insiderdom: I teach for the internationally famous Cambridge English Tragedy paper, my research group and journals have a higher profile in the U.S. than in the U.K. I had lost, rather, what I identified later as my self-proclaimed liminality (between disciplines) and, despite my formative training as a Cambridge Classicist, my Classical Studies-, Access- and Newcastle- [football club] supporting outsiderdom. Greek plays explore the

Voice and Academic Identity in ‘Changing Places’

195

nature of the human condition by presenting barbarians, women, Thebans and kings to audiences made up of adult male Athenian democratic citizens: the audiences were shown who and what they were by reacting to ‘others’, mirror images of themselves. Just so we academics can perform ‘against type’, but both type and anti-type were not recognised here. None of these traits meant anything to the audience I was confronting. I was not a traitor, outsider, sparky interdisciplinarian, radical or Northerner. As with the latenight conversations in the bar, I could not position myself against but only for – which suddenly felt a very exposed and unacademic thing to do!

TEACHING IDENTITY The only thing that survived unchanged was the student writing that I had come partly to present. As sure territory, I started with it instead of building up an argument that would be tested in discussion of the two different pieces of writing I had brought to circulate. I started with them because they were solid gold – as writing, as intelligent commentary on texts, as highly innovatory disciplinary forms that challenged disciplinary and literary-critical norms. They needed no translation: they were gold coin that needed no exchange. And because they seemed the only sure answer to the questions that are implicitly asked of the stranger by the hosts: who are you? What do want of us? Who do you represent? What right have you to speak? My paper may have been about congruence between multiple identities but after a week here the only one I could freely present was that of a teacher. It is interesting that my disciplinary, educational and intellectual standing did not stand the test of translatability: they seem to be culturally constructed, such that to lay claim to them I had to translate an ever wider series of cultural referents. This perception, though I had no time to understand it as I stood to speak, was an important lesson and proved to be one more benefit of the experience. My teaching and my identity as a teacher, however, could survive, even though they are carried out in a totally different pedagogic system, notably in one-to-one supervisions where the writing can be exploratory and untrammelled by course or assessment objectives. It is not that teaching is based on a universal relationship which can be described to other teachers anywhere – an interesting product of the many late-night conversations and exchanges was understanding that there are no ‘universal’, that is ‘culture-transcending’, relationships. My mothering,

196

JAN PARKER

marriage, passionate and problematic friendships should surely be as rooted in universals as my teaching, but no: expectations, conventions, evaluative codes and framing paradigms are interestingly, vitalisingly, thoughtprovokingly different. My ‘self’ as formed in such relationships had to be re-presented, outlined in unfamiliar terms, offered for recognition or rejection, for the sudden, bonding, lightning strike of absolute understanding across difference that is the joy of intercultural travel (when else, a classicist whose interest in ritual places ends with the Fall of Rome, would I have accepted an invitation to visit a stone circle built in 1973?!). Conversely and reciprocally, I had to learn, by long exchanging dialogues, where ‘people are coming from’. Literally – immigrant East Village, ex hippy West Coast, Jewish-Italian Brooklyn, white Alabama, poor Midwest, an adobe hut on a writers’ commune – not what formed their world view but in the teeth of what was their world view formed. In what mirror do they see themselves and against what images are they reacting? Only when I understood some of these could I present an image of who I am, am not, and what my relationships mean to and about me. So, I started with my students’ writing because it survived translation. Archaeology concerns itself with the material correlates of cultural practices: the concrete traces of intangible processes. My students’ writing formed such a material correlate of the teaching relationship, one which survived cultural transition for others’ examination. Essentially I was bringing the students’ unmediated voices into the room.

PERFORMATIVE IDENTITY Why then could I not bring in my own voice, unmediated? I had written the paper in advance, I was invited on the basis of criticisms and comparisons I had already made in print, my voice was already known to everyone there. I had faced up to this challenge of presenting on the away ground when writing the paper. I had been invited specifically to comment on the writing produced by my hosts, the Cornell Knight Institute for Writing in the Disciplines: polemical and challenging writing addressed to teachers, writers, faculty and administration across the U.S. – various discourse communities but none of them mine. I had concerns and criticisms to voice, but needed to establish my authority for voicing them and construct a persona and a voice in which to express them. My persona, my performed identity, turned out to be engaging. At the superficial level – my passion for my discipline and texts, my teaching and

Voice and Academic Identity in ‘Changing Places’

197

the transformational possibilities of the humanities all communicated easily and forcefully. The word-play and intertextual references that I habitually use with those for whom I care deeply came to the fore in a now completely unscripted presentation; they held my audience’s attention and made them relax, sit forward and smile back. My persona was engaging in the deeper sense also in that I was engaging with the alterities, concerns, conflicts that I had picked over the week and was addressing rather than projecting over them. My conclusions – about proper and improper affective discourse, the necessary congruence of the writing task with the highest agenda set by the text and discipline, and about ‘envoicing’ being an intellectual not developmental process – all came over. As did the final, dangerous ‘my medium was my message’ twist – that although overtly talking about student writing, my thesis about disciplinary ‘voice’ as an expression of skilled and engaged integrity applies especially to us academics.

NEEDING TO TRANSLATE y HEDGES, DOMAIN AND STANCE So why could I not deliver the paper I had written? Why could I not speak the words? The answer I think is also a technical one. I had not understood until I came to speak that I had written from outside their discipline community and outside their linguistic register, and I would have to perform a double and simultaneous translation on my text to be intelligible. Just like someone working in an only partially possessed foreign language, it was easier to communicate an equivalent than trying to translate word for word from the text in my hand. Academic disciplines are first and foremost discourse communities (Wenger, 1998; Parker, 2002), which agree such delineations as the academic agenda, the divisions of the subject, and the epistemological procedures that produce and communicate valid knowledge. All such communities establish and communicate validity in narrative, although the type of narrative varies by domain (Candlin & Plum, 1999). At an obvious level, what count as valid data vary from evidence-based research (which nevertheless will encode or state external criteria-based references) to propositions tested and proved in the course of the narrative. And the proof will again vary from discipline to discipline; as will, the important point here, the writer’s stance with regard to her narrative. All such narratives are rhetorical – they seek to define, while addressing their target audience, and persuade that discipline community that their

198

JAN PARKER

discourse is valid. So they will use what sociolinguists point to as relational markers to engage and coerce the requisite part of their audience (Hyland, 1999). Understanding their discipline’s current stance (both what it regards as established ground and how it appropriates it), their narrative will seek to build on ‘norm’al discourse while ‘hedging’ (lovely term!) when offering to subvert or challenge it. So claims of validity will seek to combine authoritative manipulation of possessed tenets with tactful and face-saving offers of new. And such new knowledge will be hedged by ‘would’s, ‘could’s, and ‘might’s; it will be offered as ‘possible’, ‘suggested’, ‘assumptions’ (a linguist working on academic literacy would claim that learning such codes is the primary skill that has to be imparted to bring a newcomer into the discipline). Such a sociolinguist could have analysed the paper I had written in terms of epistemological domain and stance, and would from this describe my voice. Epistemological domain is what my discipline counts as valid knowledge construction: what are data, what kind of models are offered as informing constructs; what deductions the paper offers as valid and as worthy additions to the subject base. My paper, like the colloquium, was on disciplinary writing – a hybrid and fast developing area. So I had been careful to adumbrate the epistemological domain: sketch in the paradigms of humanities’ methods and models of writing. So far should have been so good. But stance, well, that was where I think I lost it. Stance is defined as the positioning of the speaker with respect simultaneously to her audience (trying to include, persuade, influence, charm by using inclusive markers (‘we’, ‘our’), persuasives (‘see’), face markers (acknowledgments of the audience’s own likely response) and hedges ‘may, would, possible, suggest’, etc.) and her positioning of herself as an authoritative voice of the discipline community. But I learned the blinding, or rather dumbing, lesson that stance is not just disciplinarily constructed, it is culturally constructed too. For I live in a world where ‘hedging’, in the form of ironic deflection, is both good form and proper academic method. It is polite to distance oneself from one’s claims, to ‘suggest’ rather than state. ‘Could’, ‘perhaps’ and a hundred other ‘hedges’ put up defences behind which it is tactful to stand. As the ‘captatio benevolentiae’ – the mendacious apology for inadequacy that is designed to get the audience on your side and lay them open to the power of your case – it is a device which strengthens, not weakens, your claims. ‘Might I suggest’, ‘could it perhaps be’ and their ilk are in Britain not (pace the sociolinguistic analysis cited above) phrases by which the initiand hopes to gain entry, they are culturally constructed and well understood forms of claiming primacy for one’s statements.

Voice and Academic Identity in ‘Changing Places’

199

But I sensed from the first contact that such ‘hedging’ would be misconstrued: either one had something solid to offer or one had not – univocality was the order of the day. Conversely, I express my deepest beliefs, my most naked and direct emotions, in irony which I use to focus, not distance, my reader on what I am saying. So when I quote Auden or Wilde or Stoppard I do so, as I came to see, as some in my audience would quote from Scripture – turning to perfectly formed and concise and authoritative expression of what I was trying to convey. But my ironic references were taken as jokes, as witty diversions not epitomes. So the sections of argument which were summed up in the written text by such quotes had to be followed in presentation, as the laughter died down, by a powerful, serious, non-ironic restatement.

CONSTRUCTING, OR ENGAGING WITH, THE AUDIENCE? Finally, sociolinguists would point to my loss of voice as the result of my paper’s mistaken construction of audience. Engagement is analysed in written texts in terms of how strongly an academic article signals its location within a tight knit community united by ‘our’ values and procedures. The discipline permits and promulgates registers in which to speak – so, for example, in History analysts can point to the elements indicated in Fig. 1. Such voices allow expression of what can be expressed to the discipline. We envoice students by showing them how to manipulate those registers so they can join the dialogic exchange, converse with the discourse community. So I was naive to think I could ‘just write’ or ‘just read’ what I had written. My paper was predicated on challenging that notion of voice as register, on objecting to a model of disciplinary writing as mimesis, rather than as an Recorder (Reporter– absence of unmediated explicit judgment) ^ ^ ^ Interpreter (of inscribed social esteem, ^ ^ social sanction, ^ ^ social valuation) Appraiser------^ ^ ^ Adjudicator (free occurrence of unmediated social esteem & social sanction)

Fig. 1.

Registers in History. Source: Coffin (2002) Fig. 3.

200

JAN PARKER

expression of identity forged in writing and performance from the vital engagement of self and text. Was I being punished in the most appropriate possible way for my hubris? Had I fallen victim to the very phenomenon my paper was denying? Yes y and no. Yes, in that I had thought I could just offer a contribution to a conversation without realising that the value system implicit in what I had written had to be communicated along with the words. In performing rather than reading my argument, I seem to have found a medium to convey this richer texture. If, however, I had offered my paper verbatim, it would have stayed, unassimilated, outside the discourse community to whom it had been addressed (there are implications here, I think for my fellow journal editors who seek to publish across the English speaking world). My paper had throughout used ‘voice’ and ‘engagement’ and a host of other central terms in a precise but idiosyncratic and value-laden way. Both terms were equally but differently value-laden to my audience; the words, but not the connotations, were intelligible. ‘Voice’ was used in the sense prevalent in creative writing in the U.K. and in Identity Studies in the U.S., to denote full expression of the mature and creative self. My then unacknowledged premise was that a liberal education can and should ‘envoice’ its students, and that such envoicing is the product of a student challenging her academic environment using its own tools (critical analysis) and its primary medium (writing). But research shows that one’s voice is found in communication and in performance: the institution can disempower and silence those whose values it does not share (Lillis, 2001). My audience and my host institution did not ‘share’ my values: they had equivalent but differently formulated ones. In order to contribute, I had to translate my argument into an overtly value-carrying narrative: realise, explain and interpret not what I meant but why I wanted to say it. So an abiding benefit of the experience was bringing to my own critical attention the underlying and hitherto taken-for-granted objectives of my work. But, on the other hand, no, I was not a victim but rather an illustration of my paper’s message, that identity is forged in writing and performance from the vital engagement of self and text. I was, in my audience’s terms, silenced and then envoiced: my identity refound in translation of the texts with which I was indeed vitally engaged (Classical plays, my students’ writing, my own text). My experience of ‘losing my voice’ was tied up with losing and having to reconstruct, in translation, my performed identity. What had happened over numerous encounters, of 18 hour days of listening and interacting with others, of describing and redescribing my work, my field, myself, was that

Voice and Academic Identity in ‘Changing Places’

201

my understanding of what I had to say had imperceptibly changed. Or rather, my understanding of the value to me of, and values in, what I had to say. My home community and my relationship to it had not changed; that was why I could still bring with me my teaching and my students’ voices. But my identity, positioned, as identity is, of a myriad defining resistances and like-mindednesses, had changed. For as in Herodotus, the alterities you perceive in the mirror change the identity of the viewing self. In offering a mirror, I had not anticipated that in seeing myself so multiply and richly reflected, my own self would alter y And also what I had to offer.

THE BENEFIT OF BEING A XENOS When I came to answer the simple questions with which this chapter started (Who am I? What right have I to speak? What is my authority?) I found that the standard markers of my identity had indeed been lost in translation. The paper I teach, the journal I edit, my academic and footballing affiliations all lost meaning. I am neither disciplinary innovator nor traitor, radical nor Northumbrian. What I am is a xenos – a guest/stranger/friend bound to be welcomed by my host, but a blank sheet. In the Odyssey, Odysseus as a xenos is allowed privacy, warmth and anonymity but in due course he has to repay his host by telling his tale. And so with me. This is partly to offer pleasure in gratitude for that already provided by the hosts, who have offered for his pleasure and edification their own and their culture’s defining stories (the miracle of poetic tale being that it transmutes painful experiences and sorrows into delight, Odyssey XV, 398–402). But primarily what he has to offer in return for their generous hospitality is the narrative of his experiences, the narrative of who he is. The story, the Odyssey, of Odysseus, the all experiencing (polutlas), multifaceted, multi-reflecting, shimmering (poikilos – as oil or peacock’s feather, glowing differently in different lights and to different observers). He has experienced every kind of culture on his wanderings – mortal and immortal, fertile and barren, cultivated and cornucopian; goddesses who have made love to him and a Cyclops who tried to eat him. He has seen every kind of monstrous death, and also heard the Sirens’ song. What he has to offer is not just song and delight, it is vicarious experience. In telling his story, he offers his hearers images of alterious experience, cultural othernesses that newly inform their understanding of themselves.

202

JAN PARKER

Odysseus is a hard act to follow, but I am aware that that is, really, what is required. What I have to offer, all I have to offer, is the tale of who I am. That is the mirror that I am here to hold up. But ‘saying who I am’ is not simple, for me any more than for Odysseus. My job titles, my publications, are markers of standing but not of identity (‘blinder of the Cyclops’, ‘Calypso’s Significant Other’ looks good but hardly gets to the heart of the matter). They say where I am coming from but not where I am going. Odysseus weeps when he hears the bard singing of his deeds at Troy, tears that reveal to his host his identity. But perhaps, just perhaps, he weeps not at the reliving of the pain but at the distance he has now travelled from that simple, unified, communally validated identity. So perhaps my medium was my message, after all – despite (because of?) my translationese, my ironic self revelation that was taken as wit, my exotic, incomprehensible boundary markers, my narrative of a self formed at unrecognisable frontiers. The paper had hoped to convey a critically imperative message, that academic writing must have integrity. And that integrity can only come out of engagement not distance; from passionate relationships with text and students, not dispassion; from identity-troubling cruxes and rebarbative experiences, not digested and conforming perceptions. Perhaps the voice I found in performance and the persona I developed on my feet, created in response and in shock from the week’s encounters, somehow translated these? They have invited me back this summer y

NOTE Since writing this, I have talked to several people whose disciplinary identity has been similarly challenged and re-formed. I would especially like to thank Professor Tony Badger, Master of Clare College, Cambridge, a British historian of the U.S., for his chapter ‘Southern History from the Outside’ in Shapers of Southern History: Autobiographical Reflections (Badger, 2004). Many people have suffered and suffered with the writing and rewriting of this chapter. I must thank Jonathan Monroe and Barry Strauss in Cornell for their thoughtfulness and real hospitality, and in Cambridge, Paul Cartledge for both inspiration and resistance and Fred Parker: ‘another and the same’.

REFERENCES Badger, A. J. (2004). Southern history from the outside. In: J. B. Boles (Ed.), Shapers of southern history: Autobiographical reflections. Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press.

Voice and Academic Identity in ‘Changing Places’

203

Candlin, C. N., & Plum, G. A. (1999). Engaging with challenges of interdiscursivity in academic writing: Researchers, students and tutors. In: C. N. Candlin & K. Hyland (Eds), Writing: Texts processes and practices. London: Addison Wesley Longman. Cartledge, P. A. (2002). The Greeks: A portrait of self and others (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Coffin, C. (2002). The voices of history. Text, 22(4), 503–528. Coleman, J. (2001a). What is residence abroad. In: R. Di Napoli, et al. (Eds), Fuzzy boundaries: Reflections on modern languages and the humanities (pp. 121–140). London: Centre for Information on Language Teaching and Research. Coleman, J. (2001b). Preparing for residence abroad: Staff development implications. In: J. Clapper (Ed.), Teaching languages in higher education (pp. 134–162). London: Centre for Information on Language Teaching and Research. Elbow, P. (2000). Everyone can write. New York: Oxford University Press. Geertz, C. (1988). Being there. In: C. Geertz (Ed.), Works and lives: The anthropologist as author (pp. 1–24). Oxford: Blackwell. Hoffman, E. (1991). Lost in translation: A life in a new language. London: Minerva. Hyland, K. (1999). Disciplinary discourses: Writer stance in research articles. In: C. N. Candlin & K. Hyland (Eds), Writing: Texts, processes and practices. London: Addison Wesley Longman. Lillis, T. (2001). Student writing: Access, regulation, desire. London: Routledge. Lodge, D. (1978). Changing places. Harmondsworth: Penguin. Mitchell, S. (1994). The teaching and learning of argument in sixth forms and higher education: Final report. Hull: University of Hull. Monroe, J. (Ed.) (2002). Writing and revising the disciplines. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Parker, J. (2001). Dialogic education and the problematics of translation in Homer and Greek tragedy (pp. 207–236) New York and Lampeter: Edwin Mellen. Parker, J. (2002). A new disciplinarity: Communities of knowledge, learning and practice. Teaching in Higher Education, 7(4), 373–386. Parker, J. E. (2003a). Implications of integrating reflective with academic writing (pp. 227–230); The patchwork text in teaching Greek tragedy (pp. 180–193). In: P. Ovens, J. Parker, & R. Winter (Eds.), Integrating assessment: The ‘patchwork text’, special issue of Innovations in Education and Teaching International. SEDA ISSN 1470-3297. Parker, J. (2003b). Writing, revising and practising the disciplines: Carnegie, Cornell and the scholarship of teaching. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education: An International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice, 2(2), 139–154. Parker, J. (forthcoming). Writing and identity: Reflections on US/UK academic writing. Pedagogy. Phipps, A., & Gonzalez, M. (2003). Modern languages: Teaching and learning in an intercultural field. London: Sage. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice, learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

This page intentionally left blank

204

INTERNATIONALISATION OF AUSTRALIAN HIGHER EDUCATION Grant Harman ABSTRACT Australia has made impressive efforts over the past two decades in the internationalisation of higher education. Particularly impressive has been the expansion of fee-paying international students. Australia today is the third largest exporter of higher education services internationally, with international students comprising well over 20% of total student enrolments in Australian universities. Expansion of international student enrolments has had major impacts on Australian universities and Australia. On balance, the effects have been strongly positive, producing substantial financial benefits and export income, attracting large number of wellqualified undergraduate and postgraduate students, and leading to a more international orientation for Australia’s universities.

INTRODUCTION This chapter reviews Australian efforts over the past two decades to internationalise higher education. It focuses particularly on the export of higher International Relations International Perspectives on Higher Education Research, Volume 3, 205–232 Copyright r 2005 by Elsevier Ltd. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISSN: 1479-3628/doi:10.1016/S1479-3628(05)03009-1

205

206

GRANT HARMAN

education services, study abroad by Australian students, the internationalisation of Australian university curricula, teaching of foreign languages in Australian universities and research studies of various aspects of higher education internationalisation. The chapter draw largely from two unpublished consultancy reports carried out for the Australian Department of Education, Science and Training (Harman & Nolan, 2002a, b). In a little over a decade, Australian universities have made impressive developments towards the goal of internationalisation of higher education. With government encouragement and financial support, universities have put efforts into internationalising curricula and introducing the study of additional Asian languages, in order to facilitate better communications and understanding of other cultures, largely to support expansion of Australia’s trade in the Asia-Pacific region. Australian university research is now more closely linked internationally with research groups and networks in other countries, while scholars from many disciplines are contributing to a growing and impressive literature on internationalisation. However, by far the most dramatic and important developments have been in the expansion of enrolments of fee-paying international students and the export of higher education services. In essence, internationalisation is a process of integrating international or inter-cultural dimensions into the teaching, research and service functions of higher education institutions. It is one important response to globalisation, which Knight usefully defines as the ‘flow of technology, economy, knowledge, people, values and ideas across borders’. She sees the internationalisation of higher education as ‘one of the ways that a country responds to the impact of globalisation yet, at the same time respects the individuality of the nation’ (Knight, 1997, p. 6). Internationalisation often is used in the scholarly literature to refer to one or a combination of the following activities:    

the international movement of students and staff between countries; internationalisation of higher education curricula; international links for research and open learning programmes; bilateral, regional and international recognition of higher education qualifications.

However, many discussions about internationalisation make no reference to the export of education services, which over little more than two decades for a limited number of wealthy western countries has become one of the most important aspects.

Internationalisation of Australian Higher Education

207

Over the past half century, internationalisation of higher education has been facilitated particularly by improvements in transport and communications, the expansion of trade between nations and by the use of modern communications and information technology. Both staff and student movements have expanded dramatically, in many cases with the support of governments, aid agencies and bodies such as the European Union. With government and institutional support, researchers have entered into new forms of international collaboration and networking, while international comparisons of performance and achievement (and benchmarking) have become increasingly common. More recently, new forms of internationalisation of higher education have been facilitated by increased competition between nations in world markets and various kinds of regional trading blocs. Governments have come to see the need for their workforces to be internationally competitive as a prerequisite to economic growth. In turn, this has prompted the internationalisation of university curricula, efforts to prepare students for not only domestic but also international labour markets, and implementation of strategies to achieve greater portability of professional qualifications. Internationalisation of higher education has brought many clear benefits, such as new understandings and perspectives gained by students and staff involved in exchanges, the cultural and social impact of foreign students within local communities and the impetus that international collaboration gives to research efforts. But there have been downsides too, such as possible undermining of quality and standards, the adverse effects of export education on foreign aid programmes and some nations benefitting much more than others from internationalisation, fuelling tensions between richer and poorer countries (Altbach, 2002; Harman, 2004; Meek, 2002). Since the 1980s, with increased demand for quality education, especially from developing countries with expanding economies but unable to provide sufficient student places, export education has developed surprisingly quickly. Increasing globalisation of education markets has given substantial number of students greater choice and flexibility, and provided many universities and countries with important additional sources of income (Knight & de Wit, 1997). Originally, the main emphasis by the leading providers was on attracting foreign students to their university campuses, but more recently universities have begun delivering education services in other countries through their own satellite campuses, operations established with partner organisations from foreign countries, distance education delivery and various forms of franchising. Over the next decade, this trend seems

208

GRANT HARMAN

likely to expand further, especially with increased use of electronic delivery of courses and the Internet (Cunningham et al., 2000). In the past, most countries have protected their local education student markets by restricting access to overseas students and prohibiting foreign universities from establishing local operations. However, many of these restrictions are breaking down, both in highly developed and developing nations. Increased power is moving to supranational organisations, particularly the World Trade Organisation (WTO), a powerful international body with some 144-member countries, established in 1995 to replace the earlier General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) of 1947. The WTO General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) is the first legal trade agreement that focuses exclusively on trade in services, as opposed to products, with the aim of promoting freer trade in services by removing many existing barriers (McBurnie & Ziguras, 2003). According to Knight (2002), the current international debate about GATS with regard to higher education is divided, if not polarised. Critics focus on the threat to the role of national governments, the ‘public good’ aspects of higher education, and the need to safeguard high-quality education and academic standards. Critics also argue that there are considerable dangers in education policy issues being increasingly framed in terms of trade and economic benefits. Supporters of freer trade in education, on the other hand, highlight the benefits that increased trade and competition can bring in terms of innovations through new providers and delivery modes, and greater student choice of courses and specialisations.

THE EXPORT OF HIGHER EDUCATION SERVICES Today Australia is the third largest exporter of higher education services internationally, coming after the U.S.A. and the U.K. In 2003, Australian public higher education institutions enrolled a total of 210,397 international students, comprising 22.6% of total higher education student numbers and over 29.2% of total student load (Department of Education, Science and Training, 2004). In addition, private colleges enrolled about 30,000 international students, while public universities also attract each semester about 8,000 overseas study abroad and exchange students. Total international student enrolments in 2003 in public higher education institutions were 13.7% greater than in 2002. About two-thirds of international students enrolled in degree programmes with public universities study on campuses within Australia, while

Internationalisation of Australian Higher Education

209

the remainder are enrolled ‘offshore’, entirely or largely within their own country. Offshore enrolments include students studying on overseas campuses operated by Australian universities, in joint programmes with overseas partner institutions, in institutions that offer Australian courses on a franchised basis, and students studying independently by distance education. Recruitment of international students has brought substantial financial benefits to Australia and its universities, and has prompted Australian universities to make more deliberate efforts to internationalise curricula and encourage greater exchange of staff and students. At least in the short term, the prospects for future expansion in international student numbers are promising. Australia has developed a special niche within the international export market, focusing particularly on exporting English language higher education to nations in the Asia-Pacific region whose own higher education sectors are unable to meet demand for student places, and to a lesser extent more widely to non-English speaking countries. The majority of international students come from a relatively small number of East Asian countries, although more recently significant numbers are increasingly being recruited from the Indian sub-continent, Europe and North America. Australia’s development as a higher education exporter was facilitated by important shifts in Australian Government policy since the mid-1980s with regard to foreign students, the funding of higher education and economic reform. Particularly important were decisions to actively recruit foreign students on a commercial basis, to actively encourage higher education institutions to raise more of their revenue, and to restructure the economy encouraging a broadening of the formerly narrow export base to include specialised services. For almost a century until the 1980s, Australia had seen the education of overseas students in Australia almost exclusively in terms of foreign aid to nearby developing countries, and as a means of establishing good relations with current and potential trading partners. But concern about the effectiveness of sponsored student programmes led the Government first to impose a substantial visa fee on private overseas students, and then in the mid-1980s to follow the British example and allow Australian universities to recruit international students on a full-fee cost basis. The rapid expansion in the number of international students in Australian higher education has been facilitated by a number of factors, including Australian and State Government financial and marketing support; the enthusiastic response of particular universities to new opportunities; high rates of satisfaction and success by international students studying in Australian universities; the attraction of Australia’s multicultural population resulting

210

GRANT HARMAN

from substantial emigration from a wide range of Northern European, Southern European, Middle East and Asian countries; relative cost advantages in relation to major competitors; and favourable location in relation to major East Asian student markets. High rates of student satisfaction have been particularly important. A recent survey of all international students studying with Australian universities who finished their courses of study in 1999 found high rates of satisfaction with courses, the institution in which they studied, living in Australia, visa rules and health insurance (Australian Education International, 2002a). The majority of international students come to Australia to study at the undergraduate level, mostly for a 3- or 4-year bachelor’s degree. In 2003, however, 35.6% studied for postgraduate qualifications, including 8.8% for doctoral degrees. The proportion of female international students increased from 40.3% in 1990 to 47.5% in 2003. The fields of study in high demand by international students have varied relatively little since 1990, with the two major areas of highest demand being management and commerce, and information technology. There have been significant declines in the proportion of enrolments in agriculture and animal husbandry, engineering and surveying, and law and legal studies, but increases in arts/humanities/social sciences, education and health. The largest enrolments of international students in 2003 were at Monash University (15,996), RMIT University (14,024), Curtin University (13,624), the University of New South Wales (10,179) and Central Queensland University (8,916). The dramatic expansion of export higher education has impacted on Australia and Australian universities in a number of ways. Perhaps the most obvious impact has been in terms of substantial financial benefits. International students clearly are vitally important to the Australian economy and the higher education sector. The export value of international student fees and living expenses across all education sectors in the financial year 2000–2001 was estimated to be AUS$4.0 billion (Nelson, 2002, p. 51). Of this, the higher education sector accounted for over half. In the year 2000, export education was the eighth largest export earner. However, this figure refers only to actual export income and does not include employment in infrastructure necessary to support international students; neither does it include income generated by visits to Australia of the parents, other family members and friends of students. A study by Baker, Robertson, Taylor, Doube, and Rhall (1996) showed that an additional 50,000 jobs are added to the Australian labour market annually by the education export sector. Universities also benefit directly, especially with fees and other payments made by international students. Approximately 18% of total university income is now generated

Internationalisation of Australian Higher Education

211

from tuition fees charged to overseas and domestic students (Nelson, 2002, p. 54). In addition, export education has provided Australian universities with large numbers of able and highly motivated students. This has been particularly important for research and Ph.D. programmes in fields such as engineering and computer science. Apart from these benefits, there are longer-term benefits that are harder to quantify. In particular, the presence of international students has increasingly sensitised both staff and domestic students to the need for universities to prepare students to operate effectively on an international basis. An important element of this has been the increased internationalisation of domestic students and the increased international orientation of curricula, particularly in fields in which substantial number of international students enrol. In the late-1990s, Back, Davis, and Olsen (1997) reported that 30 of 36 Australian universities had in place strategies for internationalisation of the form and content of the teaching curriculum, and 21 universities gave themselves at least a pass mark in assessing their achievements in implementing these strategies. All but one university reported a policy of internationalisation in their mission statements, and all included a policy of internationalisation as part of their corporate plan. Twenty-five universities reported an explicit commitment to quality assurance and international benchmarking for their international activities. More recent documentation shows that a small group of universities have made impressive developments in the internationalisation of curricula, while other institutions appear to be lagging behind. While export education has developed remarkably quickly to become an important component of the higher education sector, there are a number of issues that call for attention or careful monitoring. In the first place, while short-term student enrolment prospects are encouraging, there is concern that a small number of East Asian nations provide the bulk of Australia’s international students and strong competition is coming from major competitors, while currency fluctuations in the future could work against Australia’s current advantage. Much will depend on how successfully Australian universities are able to diversify and build up enrolments from other markets, and how quickly and successfully Asian nations expand and strengthen their own higher educations. Major expansion in higher education provision is currently taking place in most East Asian countries while Singapore, Malaysia and Hong Kong themselves are taking major first steps to become exporters of English language higher education. A second issue relates to the balance between overseas and domestic students on some Australian university campuses, and the uneven distribution

212

GRANT HARMAN

of students between different institutions and fields of study. Of the five leading institutions in terms of the largest total enrolments of international students, four in 2003 had proportions of international students exceeding 35% (Central Queensland University, 41.7%; Curtin University, 38.2%; University of Wollongong, 37.3% and RMIT University, 36.7%). Moreover, in some departments and faculties, well over 50% of enrolments are international students. The issue of balance has prompted some universities to impose upper limits for on-campus international enrolments, both in total and in particular departments. Third, research studies, as well as the experience of international student advisers points to issues in terms of the social integration of overseas and domestic students that need attention. Smart, Volet, and Ang (2000) reported that a review of research literature and their own research work reveals a picture of two parallel streams of students proceeding through university – the Australian and the international – within close proximity but, in the majority of cases, with little or only superficial contact and interaction. A variety of exit and other surveys confirms this fairly common experience and record repeated expressions of disappointed expectations by international students who had hoped to meet and form close friendships with Australian students, visit Australian homes and experience local culture first hand. (p. 9)

Fourth, increasing concern is being expressed by State Governments, which have the legal responsibility for public universities within their borders, about the possible financial risks involved in various forms of offshore delivery, particularly full campuses and major partnerships. Almost all universities have multiple offshore partnerships, with a range of different kinds of organisations, including public universities and colleges, private universities and colleges, hospitals, art galleries, professional associations and companies (Australian Vice-Chancellor’s Committee, 2003). Major international providers have numerous partnerships, each of which needs close supervision and monitoring. RMIT University, for example, in 2002 had 33 different partnerships in 11 different countries (RMIT University, 2002). Separate campuses are operated by a relatively small number of Australian universities. Monash University, for example, has major campuses in Malaysia and South Africa, and smaller campuses in London, Berlin and Prato (Italy). Monash Malaysia was developed in partnership with the SungeiWay Group. It offers undergraduate courses in engineering, science, information technology and arts. Monash South Africa, located in Johannesburg and developed entirely by Monash University without any partner, opened in February 2001 and offers undergraduate degrees in arts,

Internationalisation of Australian Higher Education

213

business and information technology (Monash University, 2002). The most ambitious offshore campus development is RMIT Vietnam International University, which is being developed in Ho Chi Minh City by RMIT University. It is the first private foreign university to be established in Vietnam, and it is being developed with major loans from the International Finance Corporation of the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank (Ketchell, 2002; International Finance Corporation, 2002).

AUSTRALIAN STUDENTS STUDYING ABROAD While Australian universities have been highly successful in attracting international student enrolments, they have been less successful in persuading their own students to spend periods as exchange or study abroad students at overseas universities. Student exchange and study abroad programmes for Australian students have expanded in recent years with both Commonwealth and institutional support. However, it is estimated that still less that 1% of Australian students participate in student exchange programmes, despite the hopes of the Australian Vice-Chancellors’ Committee that a target should be established of 20% of domestic higher education students being involved in study abroad or student exchange programmes (Australian Vice-Chancellors’ Committee, 2002, p. 51). The most important mechanism for Australian students to study abroad are formal exchange agreements between Australian and foreign universities, although small number of Australian students make their own arrangements to take a semester or more of study abroad towards an Australian university degree. Each semester, IDP Education Australia Ltd (2002a) conducts a ‘snapshot’ survey of number of international students in Australian universities including the number of incoming and outgoing study abroad and exchange students. In Semester 1 of 2002, there were a total of 4,883 study abroad students in Australian universities and 2,626 exchange students, while in the same semester 1,333 Australian students participated in study abroad or exchange programmes in overseas universities. Limited number of Australian students are supported for study in Asian countries by the Australian Government subsidised University Mobility in Asia and the Pacific (UMAP) programme, founded in 1993. A number of factors appear to be responsible for the relatively small number of Australian students studying abroad, including different academic years in the northern and southern hemispheres, reluctance by professional faculties in Australian universities to give full credit for study

214

GRANT HARMAN

abroad, limited foreign language competence of many Australian students, unfavourable exchange rates with some countries and a strong preference by many young Australians for travel abroad not related to formal study. Curtin University (2002) specifically warns its students about the high cost of living abroad, especially in such countries as Japan and Sweden. Most student exchange programmes in Australian universities are based on reciprocal arrangements with overseas partner universities, whereby approximately equal number of students move between partner institutions for one or two semesters of study. Participating Australian undergraduate and graduate students are still liable to pay Higher Education Contribution Scheme (HECS) or tuition fees for the periods abroad, but are not required to pay tuition fees to foreign universities. Students are responsible for their travel and living expenses while abroad, but a number of universities have scholarship schemes to assist with these expenses. Two broad categories of exchange programmes are generally available. These are university-wide programmes that are available to all students and are usually administered by international offices, and faculty-specific programmes that are exclusively available to students of a particular faculty or department and administered by the relevant faculty or department. The number of Australian universities involved in student exchange and study abroad programmes is impressive, as is the scope of such programmes. The University of Sydney, for example, offers student exchange programmes with universities throughout the U.S.A., Canada, the U.K., Scandinavia, Eastern and Western Europe, the Middle East and the AsiaPacific region (University of Sydney, 2002) while the University of New South Wales manages a large and active exchange programme encompassing more than 100 partner institutions in 25 different countries from around the world (University of New South Wales, 2004). The limited evaluative literature on exchange and study abroad programmes involving Australian students is strongly positive, indicating high degrees of student satisfaction and significant educational and cultural benefits (e.g. Corbie, McBurnie, & Siribumrungsukha, 1995; Clyne & Rizvi, 1998). In addition, other literature points to success with more limited study and professional visits by students and staff in specialist professional programmes, in such fields as business, agribusiness, engineering, science and teaching. Dethlefs (1998), for example, reports on the success of a University of Wollongong Japanese language course that has a compulsory in-country study period in Japan for 5–6 weeks. In this case, the benefits are seen to extend further than simply language acquisition and cultural sensitivity.

Internationalisation of Australian Higher Education

215

In its submission to the Australian Education Minister’s Discussion Paper, Higher Education at the Crossroads, IDP Education Australia recommended particular strategies to increase the number of Australian students studying abroad, including the following:  A ‘dollar-for-dollar initiative’ whereby the government matches every dollar invested by institutions in scholarships for Australian students to study abroad.  Expansion of HECS to cover tuition and living expenses for international study.  Increased Government support to UMAP and University Mobility in the Indian Ocean Region (UMIOR) Programme to facilitate increases in the two-way flow of students from all developing countries.  Increased support for foreign language and cultural studies in Australian universities.  Promotion of international studies for Australian postgraduate students through a range of tax incentives (IDP Education Australia, 2002b).

INTERNATIONALISATION OF CURRICULA From the literature it is difficult to assess the extent of internationalisation of curricula for Australian students that has taken place across the higher education sector. As already noted, Back et al. (1997) reported that 30 of 36 universities had in place strategies for internationalisation of the form and content of the teaching curriculum, and 21 universities gave themselves at least a pass mark in assessing their achievements in implementing these strategies. However, this study did not attempt to assess internationalisation efforts in curriculum development at departmental and faculty levels. However, evidence indicates that impressive efforts are being made by at least a small number of faculties and universities. Faculty efforts include experiments at Curtin University in the areas of health promotion education, social work, mining, agribusiness, culture, science and pharmacy (e.g. Collins, 1997; Graham & Govindarajalu, 1997; Maynard, Saunders, & Lawrance, 1997), while impressive university-wide efforts have been made by a small number of universities, but particularly the University of South Australia. At the University of South Australia, the Flexible Learning Centre provides impressive support to academic staff and departments in internationalising courses so that graduates will develop an international perspective,

216

GRANT HARMAN

and in devising ways to assist both international and Australian students to work more effectively together (Leask, 2001a, b, 2002). The Flexible Learning Centre has available resource materials to assist staff (University of South Australia, 2002a, 2002b), while the Division of Business and Enterprise has completed an exemplar project on embedding graduate qualities (Page, 2002). In order to set up a strategy for internationalising its curriculum, the University of South Australia focused on developing a Graduate Quality with the aim of ensuring that all graduates ‘demonstrate international perspectives as a professional and as a citizen’ (University of South Australia, 2002c). This required ‘all subjects, specifically in their aims, objectives, content, syllabus, textbooks and references, assessment scheme and teaching and learning arrangement’ to embed international perspectives (University of South Australia, 2002c). The University’s Learning Connection developed various resources to assist staff to plan curriculum and teaching and learning activities to achieve the Graduate Quality. These included nine generic indicators to guide implementation and evaluation of achievement (University of South Australia, 2002b). General characteristics that might be exhibited by graduates who have achieved the quality were outlined for programme and course writers, who were then expected to develop more specific, elaborate or more suitable indicators for their discipline area. Implementation of an internationalised teaching and learning framework has seen the production of a number of reports on outcomes from various schools within the university. For example, the School of International Business assessed the explicit inclusion of Graduate Quality within the Bachelor of Business (Property) degree programme, which recognised that its approach should be broad in scope, outward looking, inclusive of experience from others and accredited both on local and international levels (University of South Australia, 2000). Graduate Quality is being predominantly promoted at the University of South Australia through the content structure of courses. National and international subject material and examples, the forms of assessment, the teaching practices, the presentation of information and the references and reading materials combine to deliver a multi-cultural and international focus. Local staff network internationally by way of conferences, web-based activities, publishing overseas, conducting joint research with overseas institutions, refereeing overseas articles, researching international issues and conducting comparative research, doctorate work, maintaining membership with overseas professional organisations, hosting international conferences, holding overseas qualifications and visiting staff exchange.

Internationalisation of Australian Higher Education

217

Student development is fostered by local and international universitybased student groups and by overseas trips in such subjects as international real estate in the Bachelor of Business (Property) degree. Both local and overseas real estate students are encouraged to attend professional development lectures and seminars organised by the Australian Property Institute. Implementation of Graduate Quality is conducted throughout the 3 years of study for the degree, with later years of study progressively adopting more complex and demanding methodologies and practices to further develop international perspectives in students.

TEACHING OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES With the Australian higher education sector, riding the wave of internationalisation as a means for generating income and growth in student numbers, foreign language competence for Australian students would appear to be highly desirable. While Australian universities are increasingly offering combined degrees with foreign language components in a variety of fields, including business, law, economics, engineering, marketing, education and tourism, unfortunately student enrolments in foreign languages have seen little recent student enrolment growth. Out of 607,812 students enrolled in Australian universities in 2001, only 5,190 were studying languages; 203 of these were international students. Over the 4-year period to 2002, there was a marginal rise in the number of students enrolled in foreign language courses at Australian universities, with the predominance of popularity being the study of Asian languages. Languages are predominantly studied by women, who make up approximately 80% of language study enrolments, and approximately 40% of language students are over 25 years old (Ashenden & Milligan, 2003). Budget pressures within the higher education sector together with lack of strong student demand for language studies, appear to be the key factors in the relatively low enrolments. Whilst most students who enrol in a language course at university have already acquired some level of proficiency in their chosen language, increasing number of universities in Australia are having to accept raw beginners, with students being accepted after completing a special intensive course in their first year or over the long vacation, sometimes including study in another country (Ashenden & Milligan, 2003). Students join mainstream classes once they have acquired a level of proficiency. In other universities where demand for language courses is stronger, courses are offered

218

GRANT HARMAN

in a number of different streams, thus catering for different levels of proficiency. Flexibility to accept and assist beginners, combined with the wide variety of languages on offer, means that options are quite broad but also very scattered. Often language courses have few students in a class. Whilst some assume that this may be considered beneficial in assisting learners through increased one-on-one contact with lecturers, the reality is that face-to-face teaching is limited to only a few campuses. Sometimes inter-university cooperative arrangements for language teaching operate, but such arrangements often require students to travel across cities in order to study the language of their choice. Language study via distance education is supported by considerable number of students and is growing in popularity. Most distance courses language units require attendance at residential schools. The array of languages and language studies being offered in Australian higher education institutions is impressive. According to Ashenden and Milligan (2003, p. 365), language courses on offer in 2002 included Aboriginal languages, Anangu, Ancient Greek, Arabic, Asian languages, Auslan, business Chinese, business Japanese, Cambodian, Catalan, Chilean, Chinese, community languages, Croatian, English, English as a foreign language, European languages, French, Galician, German, Greek, Hebrew, Hindi, indigenous language studies, Indonesian, interpreting, Italian, Japanese, Khmer, Korean, Lao, language studies, Latin, Linguistics, Malay, Mandarin, Mexican, modern languages, Pali, Polish, Portuguese, Prakrit, romance languages, Russian, Sanskrit, Serbian, Slavic languages, Spanish, Swedish, Thai, translating, Turkish, Ukrainian, Urdu and Vietnamese. Whilst opportunities to learn so many different languages and cultures might be regarded as positive, that there are so many languages being learnt in Australia that causes major administrative and resource problems. To date, there has been little emphasis on identifying a relatively small number of national ‘priority’ languages, which is a major strategy adopted by a number of comparable countries. A growing trend is for foreign language departments not only to teach students how to speak and write foreign languages, but also to study the history, culture and economics of the societies in which the languages are used. Adoption of this policy is seen to be desirable in achieving further internationalisation in the higher education sector, and an increased focus on the international environment. One major difficulty for teaching of foreign languages in universities relates to language teaching in Australian secondary school systems, which have encouraged teaching of a multiplicity of foreign languages in order to

Internationalisation of Australian Higher Education

219

cater for the wishes of ethic minorities and a strong commitment to multiculturalism. In 2002, New South Wales secondary schools offered a total of 36 different languages for the Higher School Certificate (New South Wales Board of Studies, 2002). This was despite major efforts to identify priority languages and develop an agreed national language policy for secondary schools. In 1991, the Australian Language and Literacy Policy had nominated 14 priority languages for Australian schools (Aveling, 2002), while in 1997 the Commonwealth Department of Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs had recognised 10 ‘priority’ languages: Aboriginal languages, Arabic, French, German, Italian, Modern Greek, Russian, Spanish, Thai and Vietnamese (Ministerial Council for Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs, 2002). Efforts to identify priority languages and develop a national language policy have been strongly supported by government bodies, academic associations and prominent scholars. An Asian Studies Council report, A National Strategy for the Study of Asia in Australia, for example, argued that Australia was ‘a nation with a European cultural past located in the Asian region’ and that it was in the ‘national interest’ to bring ‘the reality of our education, employment and skills into alignment with the reality of our location in the Asian region’ (Asian Studies Council, 1988). This report noted a decline in all foreign language learning between 1983 and 1986, and that more than 97% of all university and college graduates completed their degrees ‘without a single unit focused on Asia, most of them without even reference to Asia, and most of them also having escaped serious study of Asia in primary and secondary school’ (Asian Studies Council, 1988). In 1994, the Commonwealth and State Governments initiated a National Asian Languages and Studies in Australian Schools (NALSAS) Strategy on a bipartisan basis in response to recommendations in a report of a working group of the Council of Australian Governments entitled, Asian Languages and Australia’s Economic Future (National Asian Languages and Cultures Working Group, 1994). The objective of the NALSAS Strategy was to assist government and non-government schools to improve participation and proficiency levels in language learning in four targeted Asian languages, namely Japanese, Modern Standard Chinese, Indonesian and Korean, and to support the study of Asia across the curriculum. The Strategy aimed to improve Australia’s capacity and preparedness to interact internationally, in particular with key Asian countries, through the provision of Asian languages and studies in all school systems. Four particular languages were chosen according to regional economic forecasts provided by the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. Whilst the NALSAS Strategy is no

220

GRANT HARMAN

longer supported by Federal government funding, its effects on language learning trends in Australian schools remain strong (National Asian Languages and Studies in Australian Schools, 2002). Enrolments in language courses in Australian schools are somewhat higher since the inception of the NALSAS Strategy. However, it is unclear what effect this is having on students’ language proficiency, as implementation of the programme has varied widely. NALSAS was a 3–10-year programme and, as a result, many ‘bottom-up’ strategies to implement the programme over progressive years occurred without effective coordination being achieved, thus reducing the potential to capture the programme’s full benefits. Nevertheless, post-compulsory study of languages has shown modest increases since 1990 and NALSAS-targeted languages have increased at the Year 12 level (i.e. the final year of secondary school). Whilst these increases are laudable, to date they have been marginal, and as yet there is little evidence of major impact on the higher education sector. What is particularly interesting is the changing balance of languages in Year 12 between European and Asian languages. Of Australian students studying languages in year 12 in 1988, 73% studied European languages, while 23% studied Asian languages. By 1998, this balance had changed with only 40% of Year 12 students studying a European language and 60% studying an Asian language. There is some suggestion amongst university language teachers, however, that this trend is once again moving back towards an emphasis on European languages. The NALSAS policy is being supported by Australian universities today, but there are significant problems in giving adequate time for language study in professional and vocationally based degrees. As a result, double degrees have become necessary as opposed to more single degrees incorporating foreign language units. There are also problems in terms of staff expertise, adequate resources and student demand. Despite major national efforts to increase Asian studies and languages through the NALSAS Strategy, experts warn that Australia is still in serious danger of losing its Asian knowledge at a time when it should be building on it as a national asset (De La Harpe, 2002, p. 2). A recent report by the Asian Studies Association of Australia, Maximising Australia’s Asia Knowledge (2002), paints a ‘dismal picture of universities and schools, and presumably their students, turning away from the world’s most populous region whose future is inextricably tied to Australia’ (Maslan, 2002, p. 3). It warns that Australia is losing its bank of Asian knowledge at a time when such knowledge is more vital than ever. Asian Studies Association members generally believe that Australian universities are facing a crisis of renewal in terms of capacity to offer Asian

Internationalisation of Australian Higher Education

221

studies courses. Over 100 language teaching positions were lost in Australian universities from 1996 to 1999, and the Asian Studies Association believes that ‘this trend reflects the difficulty of maintaining staffing levels in times of financial stringency, regardless of levels of demand’ (Asian Studies Association of Australia, 2002, p. 46). South Asian Studies is currently confined only to the Australian National University in Canberra, La Trobe and Monash Universities in Melbourne, Curtin University in Western Australia, and the University of New England in Armidale, while the average age of the remaining scholars teaching about South Asia is well over 50 years of age. However, despite this situation, Japanese is still being taught at 35 of Australia’s 39 universities, Chinese at 29 and Indonesian at 25. Middle- to low-ranking languages are Korean (taught in 10 universities), Vietnamese (7), Thai (5), Arabic (4), Hindi (3), Sanskrit (2) and Cantonese, Burmese, Javanese, Sudanese, and Khmer (1) (Aveling, 2002). Many Asian Studies specialists as well as educators are concerned about the adverse impact of the failure to promote actively Asian languages and Asian studies in the higher education sector. They are strongly of the view that such promotion would facilitate the push towards internationalisation. According to one expert: Despite Asia’s important role in Australia’s trade, security and culture, and despite the large number of Australians interacting with Asia on a regular basis, many Australians know more about countries in Europe or America than about their closest neighbours. Much was achieved during the 1980s y but the decline began in the 1990s. Whatever happens in our universities, Australians are going to be interacting more and more with Asian countries, whether in business, as visitors, peacekeepers, tourists or officials (De La Harpe, 2002, p. 2).

Similarly, a well-known education writer notes the comparative failure of Asian studies in universities: the study of Asian languages and culture in the nation’s universities is in crisis. The alarming figures are way below targets set by a government enquiry 13 years ago which proposed that, by the year 2000, one in five students should be undertaking some study of Asia and one in ten learning an Asian language. The momentum for the study of Asia that had been built up in the late 1980s and early 1990s is collapsing (Maslen, 2002, p. 3).

AUSTRALIAN RESEARCH STUDIES OF HIGHER EDUCATION INTERNATIONALISATION Australia’s dramatic progress in the internationalisation of higher education has prompted a considerable amount of research, leading to the production

222

GRANT HARMAN

of a surprising amount of scholarly and professional publications. Some of this has contributed to the worldwide literature on internationalisation and globalisation, but by far the main concentration has related to international student enrolments and the export of higher education services. To a large extent, Australian work addressing broader global issues has mirrored other contributions to the international literature, covering a wide variety of topics and ranging from work that is highly critical of aspects of internationalisation to being strongly supportive. Recent work has concentrated particularly on the processes of globalisation and internationalisation, the effects of globalisation on university organisation and academics, recent developments with regard to GATS and the possible implications for different forms of higher education, and recent developments with regard to borderless education. The processes of internationalisation and globalisation have been dealt with by a large number of scholars (e.g. McBurnie, 2000a; McBurnie & Pollock, 2000; Meek, 2002; Pratt & Poole, 1999; Welch & Denman, 1997; Yang & Welch, 2001). Combinations of Australian-based and overseas scholars have produced collections of essays dealing with various aspects of the impact of globalisation and globalised economies on university organisation and management, and on the academic profession (Currie & Newson, 1998; Currie, DeAngelis, de Boer, Huisman, & Lacotte, 2002a; Currie, Thiele, & Harris, 2000b). In a number of these works, globalisation is seen as being closely linked to the spread of a more strongly managerial culture within universities, and a loss of traditional autonomy by academics. The global market for education services is discussed in detail from a strategic and services marketing perspective by Mazzoral and Soutar (2002), while global quality assurance issues and their impact on and implications for Australia are dealt with by Woodhouse (2001) and Vidovich (2002). McBurnie (2000b) provides a useful case study of audit reviews organised by GATE (Global Alliance of Transnational Education) of offshore courses operated by Monash University. A number of scholars have emphasised that the costs and benefits of internationalisation should not be seen merely in economic terms. Some of the few Australian scholars to deal with recent developments with regard to GATS are Meek (2002) and McBurnie and Ziguras (2003). While the Australian Government is playing a leading role in promoting trade liberalisation, it is also pursuing a more diversified approach to trade promotion, including building confidence in international quality assurance mechanisms and demonstrating the benefits of trade-driven internationalisation to importing countries (McBurnie & Ziguras, 2003). Other Australian research

Internationalisation of Australian Higher Education

223

has included discussion of the role of OECD (Henry, Lingard, Rizvi, & Taylor, 2000), UNESCO and the World Bank (Jones, 1997, 2001), and the regulation of transnational higher education (McBurnie, 2000b; McBurnie & Ziguras, 2003). Work by the ‘borderless higher education team’ in Queensland has dealt well with the development of for-profit higher education, e-universities, universities on line, and the application of new media, and has been well recognised (Cunningham et al., 1998; Cunningham et al., 2000; Ryan, 2001). This work shows that, while there has been considerable ‘hype’ about the likely involvement of global media networks in higher education, to date such developments are relatively small and the greatest single involvement by corporations is via the corporate university model. Australia’s development as a higher education exporter has been well documented by various scholars, such as Harris and Jarrett (1990), Marshall (1993), Borsheim Stundal (1999) and Smart et al. (2000), while two key government reports (Goldring, 1984; Jackson, 1984) provide important perspectives on factors which drove policy changes. Various reviews and commentaries have attempted to evaluate the results and impact of different policy initiatives. Some of this is historical, going back to the beginning of the Colombo Plan scheme and beyond (Auletta, 2000; Back, 1994). Internationalisation strategies employed by Australian higher education institutions have been well documented by Back, Davis, and Olsen (1996), while Grigg (1996) has provided an in-depth evaluation of the Overseas Postgraduate Scholarship Scheme. Smith and Smith (1999) have considered the internationalisation of Australian vocational education and training, while Baker et al. (1996) have assessed the impact of the presence of overseas students on the demand for and supply of labour and the efficiency of the labour market. A large number of papers have been generated for annual IDP Education Australia conferences, with some being made available in published form (e.g. Davis & Olsen, 1998; Olsen, 2001). A recent review by the Victorian Auditor General points to the clear benefits of export education, and demonstrates that increased international student enrolments have not impacted adversely on access to university by domestic students (Cameron, 2000). Various types of international comparisons between Australia and comparable other countries have been attempted, mainly with government funding for project work. For example, Anderson and Johnston (1998) explored university autonomy, while Bourke and Butler (1995), and Matthews and Johnston (2000) analysed international research links and trends in public support for research and development.

224

GRANT HARMAN

Somewhat surprisingly, apart from an officially commissioned review of the Overseas Postgraduate Research Scholarship Scheme (Grigg, 1996), there has been comparatively little Australian Government commissioned evaluation of sponsored student programmes, and relatively little written about the views and experiences of non-governmental organisations (NGOs), international agencies and home governments that support sponsored students. Neither is there available much in the way of detailed information on the views of particular Asian Governments about Australia’s efforts in export education, or how the poorest nations in the Asia-Pacific region view Australia’s internationalisation thrust or the impact of internationalisation more broadly on their education systems. Comparatively little is available in the way of longer-term follow-up studies of international students education in Australian universities. A surprisingly impressive and detailed literature has developed dealing with various aspects of the export of higher education services, including studies of comparative costs to students, economic benefits derived by institutions and nationally from export of higher education, overseas student markets relevant for Australia, and marketing and marketing strategies. Since the mid-1990s, Australian Education International (a division of the Commonwealth Department of Education, Science and Training), in combination with IDP Education Australia, have sponsored and carried out a series of valuable studies assessing comparative costs to international students of study in Australia, New Zealand, the U.K., Canada and the U.S.A. The first major study by Back et al. (1997) found that total costs, including living expenses, were consistently higher in the U.S.A. and the U.K. than in other countries. It also found that tuition fees in Australia were generally in the middle of the field, and consistently lower than in the U.K. and American public universities. More recent updates of this study have confirmed Australia’s continuing cost advantages for students (Australian Education International, 2002a). Other work has considered additional benefits for both overseas students and the Australian community, including the impact of the presence of international students on the Australian labour market (Baker, 1996). The literature on overseas student markets and marketing deals with particular geographical markets, marketing and student recruitment strategies, how students make choices of the country and institution for study, and student satisfaction studies. For example, Hill, Romm, and Patterson (1992) report on pre-purchase decision-making by overseas students prior to their arrival in Australia, while Lawley (1993) identifies factors affecting

Internationalisation of Australian Higher Education

225

choice of destination by overseas students from Hong Kong, and Mazzarol and Soutar (2002) suggest strategies for higher education institutions to use in order to maintain a competitive edge in a rapidly changing education market. Significantly, the recently released Australian Education International (2002b) study reports a high degree of student satisfaction amongst international students who completed a course of study in 1999 in an Australian higher education institution. While both the Commonwealth Government and higher education institutions have emphasised the importance of internationalisation of the curriculum, and encouraging increased number of Australian students to study abroad, as already noted, achievements have been far less than hoped for. Detailed discussions of the internationalisation of Australian higher education within institutions are surprisingly limited, as are discussions of study abroad and student exchange programmes. Similarly, as already noted, while some universities are making impressive advances in the internationalisation of curriculum, relatively little is available in terms of reviewing the Australian-wide situation or dealing with the professional issues involved. Some of the most impressive material comes from the University of South Australia, whose Flexible Learning Centre has provided substantial support to academic staff and departments, especially in internationalising courses so that graduates will develop an international perspective, and in devising ways to assist both international and Australian students to work more effectively together (Leask, 2001a, b, 2002). The research push that has generated the impressive range of material on internationalisation has come from the influence of different drivers. Students of comparative education quite naturally have been drawn to study the forces of internationalisation and globalisation, and their effects on different societies and education systems. Some Australian scholars in this area have attracted competitive research grants from their own universities or the Australian Research Council, but a substantial amount of work has been achieved with relatively modest resources. A number of studies of overseas student markets, marketing strategies and cost structures have been funded by the Department of Education, Science and Training and its predecessors, by IDP Education Australia, and by NGOs and other international bodies. On the other hand, a considerable amount of work on students and student learning experiences has been the effort of higher degree research students, while most of the work on other aspects of internationalisation, particularly the internationalisation of curricula, has been the effort of individual universities and their staff.

226

GRANT HARMAN

CONCLUSIONS Australia clearly has made impressive efforts over the past two decades towards the goal of internationalisation of its higher education sector. By far the most substantial achievements have been in attracting international students, particularly from nearby East Asian countries, and in building up an extensive body of research and professional literature on the processes, strategies and impact of internationalisation. While particular universities have made substantial efforts in internationalising curricula, achievements overall to date have been limited. More disappointing has been the comparative failure to substantially increase the number of Australian students participating in exchange and study abroad programmes and enrolling in foreign language courses. The next decade will provide significant challenges for both Australian universities and the Australian Government, especially to maintain and hopefully expand international student enrolments in the face of increasing competition from the U.S.A., the U.K. and emerging Asian providers of English language degree courses. In addition, in a number of the current major market countries for international student enrolments, rapid student enrolment growth, following expansion of both public and private higher education sectors, may well reduce demand for overseas study at the bachelors level but this could provide new opportunities for partnership arrangements, especially for postgraduate education. A second major challenge will be to address current imbalances in international student enrolments between institutions and fields of study. Already some of the larger providers have placed caps on total international student enrolments and faculty enrolments, or are considering such action. This will provide opportunities for other universities and for fields of study that to date have not been strongly represented amongst international students. Related to this are the difficulties in international student social integration with domestic students. Unfortunately, as international student enrolments continue to grow so the problem of enhancing social integration becomes more difficult amongst larger institutional student providers, but this could provide special opportunities for smaller providers to experiment with deliberate strategies to enhance social integration. A third challenge is to more effectively capture the benefits of success with international students through increasing internationalisation of curricula, attracting increasing number of Australian students to study abroad and exchange programmes, and substantially increase domestic student enrolments

Internationalisation of Australian Higher Education

227

in foreign languages. In these areas, modest government incentive funding could provide important inducements for both students and for universities. Fourth, while Australia is indeed fortunate that the rapid expansion of international students has prompted research efforts from wide groups of academics, graduate students and professionals, drawn from a surprisingly diverse range of disciplines – including economics, psychology, sociology, management and education – more interaction between different specialists would be helpful, while efforts are needed to ensure that research outputs benefit policy and practice. Not surprisingly, scholars from each of the disciplines who have worked on internationalisation projects have tended to concentrate attention on particular topics and issues of interest. For instance, most of the work on internationalisation of the curricula and particular teaching efforts has come from academics in such fields as accounting and business studies, management and computer science, and from specialists in university teaching and learning centres, while discussions of the globalisation and the overall impact of internationalisation has drawn interest mainly from scholars in comparative education and sociology. Unfortunately, in many cases these various groups of scholars have gone about their research efforts largely in isolation from other scholars. A relatively simple analysis of reference lists in various publications suggests that scholars in particular specialties seldom read literature outside their own topic area. This is unfortunate, since a higher degree of interaction could well be beneficial to scholarship on internationalisation topics. Moreover, an urgent need is to bring together the main findings of this research, so that it will be more readily available to academics and policymakers. Here, possibly, government agencies and bodies such as the Australian Vice-Chancellors’ Committee and IDP Education Australia could play important roles.

REFERENCES Altbach, P. (2002). Knowledge and education as international commodities: The collapse of the common good. International Higher Education, 28, 2–4. Anderson, D., & Johnston, R. (1998). University autonomy in twenty countries. Canberra: Department of Employment, Training and Youth Affairs. Ashenden, D., & Milligan, S. (2003). The good universities guide (2003 ed.). Melbourne: Good Guides, Hobsons Australia. Asian Studies Association of Australia. (2002). Maximising Australia’s Asia knowledge: Repositioning and renewal of a national asset. Canberra: ASAA Inc. (http://www.uws.edu.au/ social/asaa/report.pdf).

228

GRANT HARMAN

Asian Studies Council. (1988). A national strategy for the study of Asia in Australia. Canberra: Asian Studies Council. Auletta, A. (2000). A retrospective view of the Colombo plan: Government policy, departmental administration and overseas students. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 22(1), 47–58. Australian Education International. (2002a). How international students view their Australian experience: A survey of international students who completed a course of study in 1999. Canberra: Australian Education International, Department of Education, Science and Training. Australian Education International. (2002b). Comparative costs of higher education courses for international students in Australia, New Zealand, The United Kingdom, Canada and the United States. Canberra: Australian Education International. Australian Vice-Chancellors’ Committee. (2002). Forward from the crossroads: Pathways to effective and diverse universities. Canberra: Australian Vice-Chancellors’ Committee. Australian Vice-Chancellors’ Committee. (2003). International links of Australian Universities. Canberra: Australian Vice-Chancellors’ Committee. Aveling, H. (2002). Knowing ourselves and others, the humanities in Australia into the 21st century: Asian languages and literatures. Canberra: Australian Academy of the Humanities. Accessed Thursday, August 29, 2002, from http://www.humanities.org.au/review/ b4_aveling.html4 Back, K. (1994). Education in the aid programme: Retrospective on Australian aid. Canberra: Australian Development Studies Network. Back, K., Davis, D., & Olsen, A. (1996). Internationalisation and higher education: Goals and strategies. Canberra: Department of Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs. Back, K., Davis, D., & Olsen, A. (1997). Comparative costs of higher education courses for international students in Australia, New Zealand, The United Kingdom, Canada and the United States. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service. Baker, M. (1996). Financing and the effects of internationalisation in higher education. Canberra: Department of Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs. Baker, M., Robertson, F., Taylor, A., Doube, L., & Rhall, T. (1996). The labour market effects of overseas students. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service. Borsheim Stundal, A. (1999). Internationalisation of higher education in Australia: Development and implementation of policy changes. MEdAdmin thesis. University of New England, Armidale. Bourke, P., & Butler, L. (1995). International links in higher education research. Canberra: National Board of Employment, Education and Training. Cameron, J. W. (2000). International students in Victorian Universities. Melbourne: Victorian Auditor-General. Clyne, F., & Rizvi, F. (1998). Outcomes of student exchange. In: Outcomes of international education: Research findings: A set of commissioned research papers, presented at the 12th Australian international education conference, Canberra, 1998. IDP Education Australia, Canberra. Collins, J. (1997). Internationalisation of the postgraduate diploma in health education promotion. In: A. V. Butorac (Ed.), Quality in practice: Internationalising the curriculum and classroom (pp. 1–4). South Bentley: Curtin University of Technology.

Internationalisation of Australian Higher Education

229

Corbie, B., McBurnie, G., & Siribumrungsukha, B. (1995). Cultural difference in experience of exchange students Thailand/Australia – providing the props: Some preliminary findings. In: The fourth international symposium on the role of universities in developing areas: At the royal Melbourne Institute of Technology. University Office of International Programs, Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology, Melbourne. Cunningham, S., Ryan, Y., Stedman, L., Tapsall, S., Bagdon, K., Flew, T., & Coaldrake, P. (2000). The business of borderless education. Canberra: Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs. Cunningham, S., Tapsall, S., Ryan, Y., Stedman, L., Bagdon, K., & Flew, T. (1998). New media and borderless education: A review of the convergence between global media networks and higher education provision. Canberra: Department of Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs. Currie, J., DeAngelis, R., de Boer, H., Huisman, J., & Lacotte, C. (Eds) (2002a). Globalising practices and university reponses. Westport: Greenwood Press. Currie, J., & Newson, J. (Eds) (1998). Universities and globalisation: Critical perspectives. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Currie, J., Thiele, B., & Harris, P. (Eds) (2002b). Gendered universities in globalised economies. Lantham: Lexington Books. Curtin University. (2002). Curtin university study abroad step by step guide. South Bentley: Curtin University Accessed Wednesday, September 4, 2002, from http://www.studyabroad.curtain.edu.au/. Davis, D., & Olsen, A. (1998). Outcomes of international education: Research findings. Canberra: IDP Education Australia. De La Harpe, M. (2002). Australia is losing its Asian knowledge. Campus Review, 12(25), 2. Department of Education, Science and Training. (2004). Students 2003: Selected higher education statistics. Canberra: Department of Education, Science and Training. Dethlefs, N. (1998). The effectiveness of short term in-country study/work programs. Overview, 5(1), 1–3. Goldring, J. (Chair) (1984). Mutual advantage: Report of the committee of review of private overseas student policy. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service. Graham, A., & Govindarajalu, S. (1997). Internationalising mining and society 202. In: Quality in practice: Internationalising the curriculum and classroom (pp. 11–18). South Bentley: Curtin University of Technology. Grigg, L. (1996). The internationalization of Australian higher education: An evaluation of the contribution of the overseas postgraduate research scholarships scheme. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service. Harman, G. (2004). New directions in internationalizing higher education. Higher Education Policy, 17(1), 101–120. Harman, G., & Nolan, P. (2002a). Internationalisation of the higher education sector: Annotated bibliography and report on literature review. Armidale: Centre for Higher Education Management and Policy, University of New England. Harman, G., & Nolan, P. (2002b). Internationalisation of the higher education sector: Draft synthesis report and draft report on best practice description. Armidale: Centre for Higher Education Management and Policy, University of New England. Harris, G. T., & Jarrett, F. G. (1990). Educating overseas students in Australia: Who benefits? Sydney: Allen and Unwin.

230

GRANT HARMAN

Henry, M., Lingard, B., Rizvi, F., & Taylor, S. (2000). The OECD, globalisation and education policy. Amsterdam: Pergamon. Hill, C., Romm, T., & Patterson, P. (1992). The pre-purchase decision-making process: A qualitative, retrospective longitudinal study of overseas students in Australia. Wollongong: University of Wollongong, Department of Management. IDP Education Australia Ltd. (2002a). International students in Australian universities semester 1, 2003. Canberra: IDP Education Australia Ltd. IDP Education Australia Ltd. (2002b). Submission in response to the ministerial discussion paper ‘higher education at the crossroads’. Canberra: Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs, IDP Education Australia Ltd Submission. International Finance Corporation. (2002). Summary of project information: 10286 RMIT international university, Washington (http:www.worldbank.org/IFCExt/spiwebsite1.nsf/). Jackson, R. (Chair) (1984). Report of the committee to review the Australian overseas aid program. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service. Jones, P. (1997). The World Bank and the literacy question: Orthodoxy, heresy and ideology. International Review of Education, 43(4), 367–375. Jones, P. (2001). Education multilateral cooperation and globalisation. International Education Electronic Journal, (IE-ej), 5(2). Ketchell, M. (2002). Uni to move graves to make way for future Vietnam venture. The Age, 24 May. Knight, J. (1997). Internationalisation of higher education: A conceptual framework. In: J. Knight & H. de Wit (Eds), Internationalisation of higher education in Asia Pacific countries. Utrecht: European Association for International Education. Knight, J. (2002). Trade creep: Implications of GATS for higher education policy. International Higher Education, 28, 5–7. Knight, J., & de Wit, H. (Eds) (1997). Internationalisation of higher education in Asia Pacific countries. Utrecht: European Association for International Education. Lawley, M. (1993). Factors influencing the choice of destination in international education: The case of Hong Kong. Mbus thesis. University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba. Leask, B. (2001a). Bridging the gap – internationalising university curricula. Journal of Studies in International Education, 5(2), 100–115. Leask, B. (2001b). Internationalisation: Changing contexts and their implications for teaching learning and assessment. In: L. Richardson & J. Lidstone (Eds), Flexible learning for a flexible society: Proceedings of the ASET/HERDSA 2000 joint international conference 2–5 July 2000, Toowoomba. Toowoomba: Australian Society for Educational Technology and Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australasia. Leask, B. (2002). Crossing the bridge from both sides-strategies to assist international and Australian students to meet each other half way. Paper presented at the 17th National Liaison Committee for International Students in Australia conference, 8 July, Launceston. Marshall, A. C. (1993). Aid to trade to internationalisation: The development of an export industry in Australian higher education, 1984–1992. MEd (Hons) thesis. Murdoch University, Perth. Maslen, G. (2002). Unis must now report commercial ventures. Campus Review, 12(30), 3. Matthews, M., & Johnston, R. (2000). International trends in public sector support for research and development: A preliminary analysis. Canberra: Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs.

Internationalisation of Australian Higher Education

231

Maynard, C., Saunders, N., & Lawrance, B. (1997). Asian language and culture for engineers. In: A. V. Butroc (Ed.), Quality in practice: Internationalising the curriculum and classroom (pp. 31–37). South Bentley: Curtin University of Technology. Mazzoral, T., & Soutar, G. (2002). The global market for higher education: Sustainable competitive strategies for the new millennium. London: Edward Elgar Publishing. McBurnie, G. (2000a). Pursuing internationalisation as a means to advance the academic mission of the University: An Australian case study. Higher Education in Europe, 25(1), 63–73. McBurnie, G. (2000b). Quality matters in transnational education: Undergoing the GATE review process: An Australian-Asian case study. Journal of Studies in International Education, 4(1), 23–38. McBurnie, G., & Pollock, A. (2000). Opportunity and risk in transnational education – issues in planning for international campus development: An Australian perspective. Higher Education in Europe, 25(3), 333–343. McBurnie, G., & Ziguras, C. (2003). Remaking the world in our own image: Australia’s efforts to liberalised trade in educational services. Australian Journal of Education, 47(3), 217–234. Meek, V. L. (2002). International higher education and the role of government in educational exports. Armidale: Centre for Higher Education Management and Policy, University of New England. Ministerial Council for Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs. (2002). National report on schooling in Australia 2000, statistical annex, Table 17 Year 12 enrolments in tertiary-accredited languages other than English, by language, all schools, Australia, 1994– 2000. Melbourne: MCEETYA Accessed Wednesday, August 28, 2002, from http:// www.online.curriculum.edu.au/anr2000/. Monash University. (2002). Monash campuses and faculties. Clayton: Monash University (http:www.monash.edu.au/campuses). National Asian Languages and Cultures Working Group. (1994). Asian languages and Australia’s economic future: A report prepared for the council of Australian governments on a proposed national Asian languages/studies strategy. Brisbane: Queensland Government Printer. National Asian Languages and Studies in Australian Schools. (2002). National Asian languages and studies in Australian schools strategy, about NALSAS. Accessed Thursday, August 29, 2002, from http://www.curriculum.edu.au/nalsas/about.htm#intro4 Nelson, B. (2002). Higher education at the crossroads: An overview paper. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia. New South Wales Board of Studies. (2002). Student entries in board developed courses by subject, course and gender for the 2002 Higher School Certificate at 9 August 2002. Sydney: NSW Board of Studies. Olsen, A. (2001). Developing regional capacity: Public policy and private links in tertiary education in Asia. IDP Education Australia Ltd Annual Conference, Canberra, Sydney. Page, G. (2002). Embedding graduate quality 7: An international perspective, material produced for Bachelor of Business (Property) Course. Adelaide: University of South Australia. Pratt, G., & Poole, D. (1999). Global corporations ‘R’ Us? The impacts of globalisation on Australian universities. Australian Universities Review, 1, 12–16. RMIT University. (2002). RMIT Offshore Partners. Melbourne: RMIT University (http:www.international.rmit.edu.au/division/partners.htm).

232

GRANT HARMAN

Ryan, Y. (2001). Higher education as a business: Lessons from the corporate world. Minerva, 39, 115–135. Smart, D., Volet, S. E., & Ang, G. (2000). Fostering social cohesion in universities: Bridging the cultural divide. Canberra: Australian Education International. Smith, P. J., & Smith, S. (1999). The internationalisation of vocational education and training. Leabrook: National Centre for Vocational Education Research. University of New South Wales. (2004). Study abroad program. Kensington: University of New South Wales. University of South Australia. (2000). Bachelor of Business (Property), School of International Business, July 2000, Graduate Quality 7. Adelaide: University of South Australia. University of South Australia. (2002a). Teaching non-English speaking background and international students at the University of South Australia. Adelaide: Flexible Learning Centre, University of South Australia. University of South Australia. (2002b). Graduate quality 7: Developing international perspectives: Structural options and pathways for program design. Adelaide: Flexible Learning Centre, University of South Australia (http://www.unisanet.unisa.edu.au/learningconnection/intl/ strat.htm). University of South Australia. (2002c). Learning connection: Staff: Internationalisation: Strategies for internationalisation of the curriculum (http://www.unisanet.unisa.edu.au/ learningconnection/intl/strat.htm). University of Sydney. (2002). Student exchange international university of Sydney students. Sydney: University of Sydney. Accessed Wednesday, September 4, 2002, from http:// www.usyd.edu.au/su/io/exchange/SYDstudents.html4 Vidovich, L. (2002). Quality assurance in Australian higher education: Globalisation and steering at a distance. Higher Education, 43(3), 391–408. Welch, A., & Denman, B. (1997). Internationalisation of higher education: Retrospect and prospect. Forum of Education, 52(1), 14–29. Woodhouse, D. (2001). Globalisation: Implications for education and quality. Paper presented to the Annual conference of the Association for Institutional Research, Rockhampton. Yang, R., & Welch, A. (2001). Internationalising Chinese universities: A study of Guangzhou. World Studies in Education, 2(1), 21–51.

MONITORING THE INTERNATIONALISATION OF HIGHER EDUCATION: ARE THERE USEFUL QUANTITATIVE PERFORMANCE INDICATORS? Kerri-Lee Krause, Hamish Coates and Richard James ABSTRACT Our objective in this chapter is to examine the issues associated with measuring and evaluating the internationalisation of universities. To this end, we propose and critically examine a preliminary framework for categorising potential indicators for monitoring the nature and extent of institutional internationalisation. Our work draws from the Australian situation and the observation that, despite the explicit goal of internationalisation for many universities, there have been few reports of efforts to develop performance indicators in this area.

International Relations International Perspectives on Higher Education Research, Volume 3, 233–253 Copyright r 2005 by Elsevier Ltd. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISSN: 1479-3628/doi:10.1016/S1479-3628(05)03010-8

233

234

KERRI-LEE KRAUSE ET AL.

THE IMPERATIVE TO INTERNATIONALISE The contemporary university operates in an increasingly internationalised environment. The mission statements and operational strategies of many institutions are formulated in ways which are increasingly mindful of global contexts and the need for universities to be international in character. As this internationalisation proceeds, a premium will be placed on judging institutional achievement against international standards of good and best practice. It is important, in this context, to move towards securing conceptual, strategic, and operational clarity about internationalisation in higher education. Universities increasingly measure their performance against their strategic and operational plans, using an array of qualitative and quantitative measures, many developed over the last decade. They also engage in benchmarking to judge the adequacy of their performance, and to develop strategies for enhancing performance. External audit and evaluation is playing a greater role in the life and functioning of institutions, programmes, and faculties. Yet, while increased investment in formal quality assurance mechanisms has paralleled the growth of internationalisation of higher education, these two aspects of higher education remain largely unrelated. In the context of the trend towards evidence-based planning and decision-making, remarkably little has been said about the measurement of the internationalisation of higher education. In Australia, for instance, the federal government collects extensive data from all Australian higher education institutions, and these data are published annually as indicators of both quality and diversity. Given the intensity of interest within Australian universities in internationalisation, and the particular concern for international standing, it is surprising how few of the indicators reflect internationalisation. Aside from certain indicators on the participation of overseas students in Australian universities, there are almost no aggregate indices of the internationalisation of Australian higher education. In the context of widespread interest in quantitative measurement of performance, and in the apparent absence of broad indicators of internationalisation, our interest in this chapter has been to explore the possibilities of a conceptually based framework and indicators which might be used to measure and monitor internationalisation in action. As outlined more fully below, the framework is proposed as a working or operationalisable means for exploring the reality behind the rhetoric of internationalisation. Our

Monitoring the Internationalisation of Higher Education

235

work builds on the earlier work of Knight and de Wit (1999) and Knight (2001) by setting out performance indicators which might be used to monitor institutional internationalisation.

DEFINING INTERNATIONALISATION Although it is problematic to suggest a prescriptive or reductive definition of internationalisation, we use the term in a specific way in this chapter. Knight (2003, p. 2) has defined ‘internationalisation’ as ‘the process of integrating an international, intercultural or global dimension into the purpose, functions or delivery of post-secondary education’. This broad definition embraces the diverse character of internationalisation in contemporary higher education. While internationalisation can be explored at a variety of levels and in different contexts (Knight, 2004; Hanna & Latchem, 2002), our analysis takes a ‘whole-of-institution’ approach (Castle & Kelly, 2004). Given this, our use of the term internationalisation aligns better with Knight’s (1994, p. 7) earlier definition of a ‘process of integrating an international or intercultural dimension into the teaching, research, and service functions of the institution’. In practice, the term internationalisation is used liberally to describe many diverse and significant aspects of institutional life. In contemporary universities, internationalisation is interpreted as both an inexorable force and a strategic objective. The UNESCO International Association of Universities (IAU, 1998) states that: To fulfil its role effectively and maintain excellence, higher education must become far more internationalised; it must integrate an international and intercultural dimension into its teaching, research and service functions.

As this statement suggests, in its broadest conceptualisation, internationalisation is intended to encompass the heart of most institutional operations. While student mobility is surely an important part of this, the IAU statement implies that internationalisation should inform conceptions of quality, staff development, research agendas, institutional culture, strategic development, the student experience, and the core nature of the university as a learning community. For our current purposes, we distinguish between internationalisation and international standing, though the two concepts are related. Internationalisation is the extent to which an institution through its teaching, research, and community service is operating within an international sphere,

236

KERRI-LEE KRAUSE ET AL.

as opposed to a national or regional environment. It is reasonable to talk of the degree of internationalisation as an indicator of the extent to which an institution is detached from or operating beyond a domestic context. On the other hand, international standing is measured relative to other institutions, and is usually depicted in terms of rank or reputation. It is possible, we believe, for an institution to be internationalised in the overall character of its operations, yet not have particularly high international standing. Increasingly it might be expected that institutions of high international standing are strongly internationalised. However, international standing is not entirely dependent on internationalisation, though it appears to be largely subsumed within the broader notion of internationalisation. Internationalisation in higher education is often discussed with such exuberance that the phenomenon has become a ‘default good’. As Knight (2001, p. 233) has argued: There seems to be a myth accompanying the great leap forward in the internationalisation of colleges and universities. There is a perception that the more international a university is, the better it is and the higher quality its programs are.

Internationalisation indeed appears to have many beneficial implications. Even so, in order to understand and manage the internationalisation of universities, it is necessary to develop methods for understanding the phenomenon. Arguably, without adequate measures of performance it might be difficult to move beyond vague conversations about internationalisation. How can institutions be sure they are making progress in the area of internationalisation? How can one tell when an institution is internationalised? How can we make comparisons between institutions, and within institutions between programmes? Concerns such as these provided the impetus for this chapter.

INTERNATIONALISATION FROM THE AUSTRALIAN PERSPECTIVE Australian higher education is an excellent case study for the analysis of international higher education. Australian universities have been eager to forge links with institutions in other countries, to expand their market and physical presence overseas, and to harness overseas resources and talent to develop the scale and quality of their operations in Australia. This activity is captured in the participation of overseas students in Australian higher education. International students have been attracted to

Monitoring the Internationalisation of Higher Education

237

study in Australia because of its close proximity to Asia, relatively inexpensive course costs, high academic standards, and excellent quality of life. Australian universities have developed shared goals for the recruitment of international students, and the system as a whole has co-ordinated marketing and recruitment initiatives. While Australian institutions have only had a very limited capacity to set tuition fees for domestic students, overseas students, by contrast, contribute substantially to the revenue of many Australian institutions. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) figures in 2000 (OECD, 2000) indicated that foreign students accounted for around 17% of all student places in Australian universities, the highest of any country and around three times the OECD average. The proportion has since grown to over 20%, continuing the steady rise in numbers since the early 1990s (Department of Education, Science and Training, 2003). Remarkably for a small nation, in absolute terms Australia receives the fifth greatest number of international students, behind the U.S.A., the U.K., Germany, and France (OECD, 2000). As these figures suggest, at least from the perspective of overseas student recruitment, Australian higher education is highly internationalised. Importantly, the success in recruiting international students has enhanced the standing of Australian higher education in the world. Two international rankings of universities were released in 2004, the first conducted at the Institute of Higher Education at Shanghai Jiao Tong University (Institute of Higher Education, 2004) and the second by the Times Higher Education Supplement (THES, 2004). The Shanghai study included no direct measures of internationalisation, and placed only two (of 38) Australian universities in the top 100, both in the range of 50–100. The Times analysis included two dimensions of institutional internationalisation the percentage of international academic staff and the percentage of international students. Australian institutions scored above average on each of these dimensions, and higher than the listed European Union and North American universities combined. Although each of the international indicators was only weighted at 5%, it is telling that the Times study placed 12 of Australia’s 38 universities in the world’s top 100 universities. One of the clearest expressions of the significant and pervasive nature of university internationalisation is found on the web sites of Australian universities. For the purposes of this chapter, we were not in a position to collect specific data on the ways in which Australian universities are formally evaluating the extent and nature of their internationalisation, for this would be a significant research exercise. However, we were able to conduct a brief but thorough desk audit of the ways in which Australian universities

238

KERRI-LEE KRAUSE ET AL.

are describing their objectives for internationalisation, and the ways they have chosen to depict their international character through their web sites. This exercise was enlightening. Not only did it identify a range of discrete dimensions of internationalisation which are helpful in the development of the framework we later propose, but it also revealed the extraordinary emphasis of Australian universities on particular facets of their international character, and the apparent urgency with which universities seek to communicate this character. For the analysis, we studied the homepages of all 38 Australian universities, examining ways in which institutions choose to depict their commitment to internationalisation. Where there was a link to either the ‘Vice-Chancellor’s Welcome’ (or equivalent) or the university mission statement, we also included these pages in the analysis. In addition to examining the content of these pages for reference to internationalisation within the institution, we also determined the number of universities which had direct links to an ‘international student page’ from the university homepage, and any graphics clearly depicting students from a range of nationalities (predominantly South-East Asian). Of the 38 university homepages analysed, 23 had a link from the homepage titled ‘International students’. Three had a link for international students written in Asian characters on the homepage, and a further one had a link to an online translator. Such attempts to accommodate visitors with language backgrounds other than English are tangible evidence of universities’ attempts to develop an international character. Eighteen of the 38 universities had photos depicting students of South-East Asian descent. Internationalisation was used as an index of quality in certain instances. At the time of analysis, seven universities identified themselves as ‘international universities’ and five as ‘world-class universities’. Two institutions specifically referred to the fact that they maintained ‘international standards of excellence’. A further 13 stated that they were internationally recognised or universal leaders, with 11 specifically referring to the fact that their research was internationally recognised. Internationalisation was identified as an explicit objective by two universities, while nine universities claimed to have an international focus, perspective, or outlook. Two institutions specifically referred to the fact that their policies and practices had an international dimension. Most universities had leadership positions (such as Executive Dean – International Relations, or Pro-Vice-Chancellor – Enterprise and International) devoted to furthering the goal of internationalisation.

Monitoring the Internationalisation of Higher Education

239

Twenty-one of the universities defined internationalisation in terms of the number of international students enrolled in their institution. Many mentioned the pride they take in the number of countries represented in the student body. Cultural diversity, multiculturalism and inclusivity in this regard were cited as key institutional qualities by 15 universities. Three mentioned that inclusivity was illustrated in the teaching methods adopted by the institution, and four linked this to flexible learning and delivery methods. Three institutions specifically mentioned English language support and the pathways to university study provided by their institution to assist international students. Eighteen institutions defined their internationalisation, in part, by the number of graduates who live and work overseas, and enhance international communities. Five mentioned that their graduates are sought after internationally. Students’ opportunities to study abroad or engage in international exchange programmes were a further indicator mentioned by 13 universities. The international nature of university human resources and infrastructure was manifest. Operation of overseas campuses was an indicator of internationalisation for eight Australian universities. But a seemingly more potent indicator was having strategic links and partnerships with international universities and governments, including research partnerships. Twenty universities mentioned such links as evidence of their international character and involvement on their homepages or flagship pages. Staff reputations and opportunities form another indicator of the international character of universities in Australia. Seven institutions said that their staff were of international or world-class standing, with opportunities for international staff exchange and visiting international academics.

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS IN HIGHER EDUCATION Our analysis of the web sites of Australian universities points to the sweeping character of internationalisation and the obvious importance that is attached to it. While, on the one hand, the web sites simply reflect the sloganeering that has accompanied the market orientation of Australian universities during the last decade; on the other hand, they also represent institutional objectives that are quite concrete. We take these overt expressions of internationalisation as a starting point for a critical analysis of the prospects for developing performance indicators of the concept.

240

KERRI-LEE KRAUSE ET AL.

Considerable theoretical work has been done in efforts to develop reliable and useful performance indicators for higher education. There remain wellknown difficulties. Not all that is valued can be easily quantified, and the measurement of ‘value-added’ is still elusive. Even within national systems, the extent of institutional differentiation means that simple indicators are accompanied by considerable qualifications and caveats. Some of the most thorough scholarly analyses of potential higher education indicators have been conducted in the U.K. (Cave, Hanney, & Kogan, 1997; Johnes & Taylor, 1991), and the OECD (Cuenin, 1988; Kells, 1993) has produced cross-national studies on the state of development of performance indicators. The Australian higher education system has been highly active in this area: extensive quantitative data is collected at institutional and national levels, using an indicator framework that owes much to the work of Linke (1991). International interest in quantitative indicators has been driven by the need for both summative and formative evaluation. As higher education systems have expanded towards mass participation, governments have become concerned with accountability and transparency, and have sought objective measures of the performance of institutions and national systems overall (Henkel, 1991). At the same time, the interest in indicators has been aligned with quality assurance and an interest in continuous improvement. Regardless of whether the purposes are accountability or continuous improvement, reliable measurement seems necessary for shaping judgements, policies, and action. Nevertheless, there are well-known limitations: Not all that is valued in higher education is easily measured and reported, and qualitative indicators are necessary for the important aspects of higher education that defy quantification. Even the aspects that can be quantified pose measurement challenges. Due to the extent of system and institutional differentiation, the simplest of indicators are often accompanied by lengthy lists of qualifications and caveats. In addition, the possible quantitative indicators form a vast matrix. Davis (1996), for instance, has cited more than 300 possible indicators. James (2003, p. 221)

Indicators are typically specified at particular levels of analysis. Although indicator information is frequently gathered from individual-level data – from students or staff – indicator information is rarely intended for analysis at the individual level. Rather, indicators are usually intended for analysing programmes, faculties or major discipline groupings within institutions, or for comparison at the institutional level. Education is often modelled in terms of inputs, processes, outputs, and contexts. These four groups have been used often to define, organise,

Monitoring the Internationalisation of Higher Education

241

manage, and interpret indicators (Astin, 1985; Bottani & Tuijnman, 1994; Ewell & Jones, 1996; Jaeger, 1978; Nuttall, 1994): 1. Input factors are reflected in many prominent higher education indicators. Examples include institutional resources and income, student demand, student entry scores and staff qualifications. While popular, such input factors do not provide measures of performance per se. They do play an important role, however, in the calculation of measures of the ‘valueadded’ by educational activities, as leading indicators of performance potentials, and in global interpretations of the functioning of an educational system. 2. Examples of process and throughput factors include student/staff ratios, cost per student, student retention and attrition, student engagement, proportion of budget allocated to libraries or computing, and the number and value of research grants awarded annually. Many process indicators are relatively easy to calculate, since they are ratios produced from basic input data, but the results are difficult to interpret. Process indicators can be further divided into measures of efficiency and measures of quality, but the interrelationship between the two may give rise to ambiguities. 3. Common output measures include research publications, student satisfaction with courses and teaching, course completions, and graduate employment rates. In general, the selection of outcomes is a complex activity which can be highly value laden. Even once specified, outcomes can be very difficult to define both conceptually and operationally. Particularly important educational outcomes may be difficult to measure because of their diffuse, localised, uncertain, transient, or slowly evolving nature: A characteristic of higher education is the lengthy time lag between actions and outcomes in many important areas (which creates difficulties for quantitative measurement if the purposes are continuous improvement). Measurement considerations may be so critical in the analysis of outcomes that they may be the decisive factors underpinning the selection and definition of indicators. In changing organisational environments, the lagging information from outcome indicators may lack relevance by the time it is available for interpretation. Clearly it is important to locate indicator information within its relevant context. Unless inputs or outcomes are adjusted by environmental factors, for instance, attempts to construct measures of the extent to which an educational process has been ‘value-adding’ will be confounded. This, however, raises contentious questions about how to adjust performance measures, and about determining appropriate measures of context. Many

242

KERRI-LEE KRAUSE ET AL.

context measures, such as local economic conditions, institution type, age and location, and national politics, are determined by factors well beyond the control or influence of institutions. Drawing on earlier work (James, 2003), which reviewed what has been learned from over a decade of quantitative reporting of higher education, three desirable features of performance indicators emerge: 1. Simplicity: Indicators which are abstract or based on complex formulae are not easily interpreted by stakeholders. Simplicity is a virtue, and ideally indicators will be transparent and have good face validity. They should be easy to interpret for all constituencies. Optimally, indicators should be based on statistics which are efficient to collect and, preferably, ready to hand. 2. Validity and sensitivity: Notwithstanding the value of simplicity, indicators that have tenuous links to goals, or fail to detect subtle differences and changes over time are of little value. The composition of the indicator must be psychometrically stable over time to allow continuity of measurement. Indicators should be relevant to the purposes to which they are put, flexible enough to reflect the diversity of institutional missions, and sensitive and adaptive to changes in practice. 3. Brevity: For most policy-related purposes, the number of indicators probably should be kept to a minimum, otherwise data collection tends to become an end in itself. The experience of benchmarking activities conducted in the business world is that large numbers of numeric indicators create data collection and management issues that distract from analysis and utilisation of findings (Karlof & Ostblom, 1993). Finally, we note that while there are some ‘simple’ or ‘absolute’ indicators (Cave et al., 1997), rarely are indicators neutral or value-free. The establishment of performance indicators creates a hierarchy of values. Selecting indicators attaches privileges to certain goals and functions, and is very likely to direct resources accordingly; the choice of indicators in effect establishes the ‘right’ direction in which to steer activities. In this regard, it is notable that measures of the quality of teaching and research in higher education are particularly prone to reputational effects. The present performance indicators for teaching quality have alternative conceptual bases and most are highly subjective (Cave et al., 1997, p. 225). McDaniel (1996) found, from a large European opinion survey of interest and expert groups, that of 17 commonly cited process indicators, only seven were deemed relevant indicators of quality in higher education: (1) employers’ evaluation of graduates, (2) academic reputation of staff, (3) peer review of curriculum

Monitoring the Internationalisation of Higher Education

243

content, (4) employment rate of graduates, (5) completion rates, (6) student evaluation of quality, and (7) peer review of teaching process. We note that five of these are subjective measures; ultimately, internationalisation may well have similar qualities that defy objective measurement. To be useful, performance indicators of internationalisation would need to accord with contemporary knowledge about the relevant phenomena, to sustain basic aspects of good institutional practice, and to relate to changing institutional dynamics brought about by the influence of new technologies and increasing commercialisation. On a practical level, workable indicators of internationalisation would need to be consistent with educational, institutional, and systemic contexts. While they would need to be sensitive and relevant to local contexts, it would be desirable that they be generic enough to enable meaningful comparison across institutions, disciplines, and programmes. Striking a balance between these alternative demands challenges the development of any indicator, yet is essential to support appropriate forms of monitoring and improvement.

AN EXPLORATORY FRAMEWORK OF INDICATORS FOR THE INTERNATIONALISATION OF HIGHER EDUCATION With these considerations in mind, we embarked on an exercise to devise a framework for locating potential quantitative indicators of the internationalisation of higher education. As a starting point, we included both qualitative and quantitative indicators and we drew heavily on our analysis of the web sites of Australian universities. Tables 1–5 present the framework we have devised. These tabular depictions endeavour to capture key dimensions of internationalisation, note possible institutional actions and goals for each dimension, and include suggestions as to the indicators that might be used to reflect these elements. Consideration has been given to whether the proposed indicators attempt to measure outcomes, or the existence of actions to produce outcomes. An emphasis on direct measurement of outcomes is not always possible but perhaps highly preferable. There are two reasons for this. First, outcomes are more likely to be quantifiable. Second, the relationship between actions and outcomes can be obscure, and cause–effect relationships may differ across social and cultural contexts. In the end, what is most important perhaps is evidence of development in the preferred direction, where necessary, rather than how the development is achieved.

244

KERRI-LEE KRAUSE ET AL.

Table 1. The Strategic Dimension of Internationalisation. Possible Actions/Goals Clear commitment to membership of a global research and teaching community, and clear commitment to meeting the obligations of international citizenship

Recognition within overarching institutional policy and planning of the institutional commitment to internationalisation

Allocation of specific roles and resources in relation to internationalisation

Attention to an international outlook, including diverse language and culture depicted in university documents

Peer or expert review acknowledgement of international character or international standing

Possible Indicators  Explicit statement in institutional mission statement and strategic objectives  Evidence of a commitment to internationalisation at all institutional levels (leadership, administration, academic, student)  Evidence around the campus of memberships in international organisations  Decision-making and reporting structures in place for internationalisation policy  Unit-level policies and procedures to develop cross-cultural awareness  Evaluation and benchmarking of institutional performance is conducted against international reference points  Senior appointment with designated responsibility for internationalisation  Existence of administration unit dedicated to managing and coordinating international affairs  Proportion of resources explicitly allocated to internationalisation activities  Visual representation of international character on university homepages  Presence of international imagery around the campus  Multilingual on-campus signage  University literature in languages other than the institution’s primary working language  International standing as depicted in rating or ranking by international agencies or by quality assurance agencies  Number of institutional-level memberships in international organisations and consortia  Evidence of sustained offshore marketing presence

245

Monitoring the Internationalisation of Higher Education

Table 2.

The Teaching and Curriculum Dimension of Internationalisation.

Possible Actions/Goals Curricula designed to incorporate international perspectives

Modes of delivery designed to allow student flexibility of time and place

Teaching and learning methods culturally inclusive and sensitive to the pedagogical backgrounds of diverse student cohorts

Programme accreditation allows graduates to practice professionally in a wide range of countries and constituencies

Possible Indicators  Number of explicit references to international perspectives in course, subject or unit aims and objectives  Number of courses and subjects offering language studies  Number of course partnerships set up with institutions in other countries  Evidence of arrangements in place for credit transfer from international study  Percentage of programmes available for off-shore delivery  Percentage of programmes available through online learning modes  Percentage of programmes in which teaching and assessment occur in languages other than the primary language of instruction  Percentage of courses or subjects taught in languages other than that of the home country  Evidence that students from culturally diverse backgrounds work collaboratively  Percentage of students enrolled in courses with an international focus  Professional development available for full-time and sessional academic staff in strategies for teaching in culturally diverse settings  Extent to which institutional professional awards and qualifications are recognised internationally and allow graduates to practise internationally  Extent to which examination and assessment is conducted by overseas scholars  Extent to which curricula have equivalence with overseas universities and permit the granting of credits to students  Extent to which curricula prepare graduates for an international career and workplace

246

KERRI-LEE KRAUSE ET AL.

Table 3.

The Student Dimension of Internationalisation.

Possible Actions/Goals Encouragement and support for two-way flow of domestic and international students

Deliberate efforts to integrate international and domestic educational experiences

Awareness of significance of international alumni groups

Possible Indicators  Percentage of undergraduate students who are international students  Percentage of research students who are international students  Percentage of postgraduate coursework students who are international students  Number of formal inter-institutional exchange agreements  Funds per student available to support international student exchange  Rates of student participation in study abroad and student exchange  Funds per graduate student to support international research experiences  Targets set for the recruitment of international students  Specific orientation activities for international students  Institutional support for programmes that provide students with opportunities to mix  Evidence of programmes promoting international study opportunities within the university community  Designated support services for international students, exchange programmes and study abroad programmes  Policies in place for internationalising the student experience  Percentage of research students whose undergraduate degree was completed in another country  Percentage of domestic students who undertake an international placement during their studies, such as a practicum or study abroad placement  Number of programmes for undergraduate international research experience  Proportion of graduates (domestic and international) employed abroad in year after graduation  Number of graduates moving abroad to work within a year after graduation

247

Monitoring the Internationalisation of Higher Education

Table 4. The Faculty Dimension of Internationalisation. Possible Actions/Goals Strategies for international recruitment of academic staff

Strategies to foster international staff exchange

Commitment to a culturally diverse body of academic staff

Table 5.

Possible Indicators  Percentage of faculty vacancies advertised in international media  Promotions processes include international experience and reputation as a criterion  Percentage of academic staff with highest academic qualification awarded by an institution abroad  Recognition of international research exchange in promotion criteria  Percentage of staff participating in international research projects  Arrangements in place for staff and students to participate in international community service  Percentage of staff proficient in a language other than the primary language of teaching/research  Percentage of staff undertaking international staff exchanges or sabbaticals  Involvement of visiting international staff in teaching activities  Number of inter-institutional agreements for staff exchange  Number of international visiting staff per year

The Research Dimension of Internationalisation.

Possible Actions/Goals Strategies to promote and secure international research projects, funding sources and collaboration

Explicit commitment to development obligations towards developing nations

Possible Indicators  Percentage of research projects involving extranational partnership and collaboration  Collaborative projects or programmes in place to support international research  Documented involvement of the institution in international research  Percentage of research projects wholly funded by sources outside of host nation  Percentage of research projects funded by international agencies such as the World Bank  Philanthropic programmes explicitly designed to support developing nations

248

KERRI-LEE KRAUSE ET AL.

Table 1 focuses on a broad dimension of internationalisation that corresponds with institutional strategy, policies, planning, and evaluation. The potential indicators in Table 1 are based on the assumption that strongly internationalised universities have well-established policy and planning frameworks that recognise the international character of the institutions, and which support and foster a range of international activities. The indicators in this table also reflect the likelihood that there are resources explicitly allocated to internationalisation activities. Finally, we contend that there is an explicit aspect of internationalisation associated with the imagery with which institutions represent themselves, through university literature, campus signage, web sites, and so on. We have endeavoured to take account of the ‘institutional portrayal’ dimension in Table 1. This table highlights many of the qualitative indicators that require subjective judgement in determining the precise nature of internationalisation. Table 2 explores the curriculum, and how the degree to which it is internationalised might be assessed. We have focused on the curriculum content, the modes of delivery, and the styles of teaching as areas in which there might be evidence of international character. In this table we have also included references to the extent to which programme accreditation allows graduates to practise overseas. While Table 2 includes a number of quantifiable aspects of internationalisation, as with Table 1 many of the measures are qualitative and require considerable interpretation. The indicators proposed in Tables 3 and 4 represent the most obvious aspect of internationalisation: the cross-national and cross-border flow of students and staff. Many of the proposed indicators in these tables are selfevident and require little explanation. It is notable that both these tables appear to contain the most readily quantifiable and most commonly reported dimensions of internationalisation. Finally, Table 5 examines the research dimension of internationalisation. The content of this table is highly tentative. There is an argument, with which we have sympathy, that any research-intensive university is by definition strongly internationalised in its research activities. This being the case, there seems little point in trying to develop specific indicators for the internationalisation of research, since the usual research performance indicators probably serve as suitable proxies for the degree of institutional internationalisation. However, in conceptualising this issue we decided that strongly internationalised universities would be likely to exhibit a philanthropic commitment to developing nations that is as evident in their research activities as in their teaching programmes, and have explored potential indicators accordingly.

Monitoring the Internationalisation of Higher Education

249

ANALYSING THE POTENTIAL UTILITY OF THE FRAMEWORK The framework proposed in Tables 1–5 is proposed to seed conversations about the assessment of internationalisation. It has a number of limitations at this point. It needs to be stressed that the indicator suggestions are very tentative. Also, no attempt has been made at this stage to offer operational definitions. Some of the possible indicators are simple proxies for the action or goal in question. Admittedly, some are at a considerable conceptual distance from the outcome they might represent, raising concerns about face validity. Notwithstanding these concerns, the exercise of developing the preceding framework proved to be enlightening, for it provoked serious reflection on the quintessential qualities of the internationalisation of higher education. The process sharpened our intuitions regarding the highly intangible and abstract nature of the concept, and the difficulties in quantifying institutional performance in the area. We note that the potential number of quantitative indicators is limited: Further, many of the potential indicators we have considered would rate poorly on the desirable criteria for indicators previously described. Many of the indicators are of input and process factors. This finding may say much about the nature of internationalisation, and its strong association with institutional sloganeering and marketing activities; in some ways, internationalisation is a means to other ends. The framework, as currently presented, is speculative and would have only modest utility. There are possibilities for developing and applying it, however, though any such framework will be accompanied by extensive reservations and caveats. First, empirical work is required to validate the basic framework. Further conceptual validation is required, to develop the face and content validity of the indicators and framework. In important respects, the capacity of indicators to drive improvement is determined by whether people see them as providing relevant and reasonable information on targeted phenomena. This work should begin with a range of stakeholder reviews, by methodological and internationalisation experts, by students, by academic, administrative and leadership staff, and perhaps even by representatives of business groups and the wider public. Further validation could then proceed to test and develop the construct and criterion validity of the instrument. The fidelity of the indicators to the phenomena they presume to measure should also be tested at this point, to develop understanding of measure errors and hence the reliability of the framework.

250

KERRI-LEE KRAUSE ET AL.

Ideally, the framework should be reliable in different institutions, when used over time, and when reported at different levels of analysis. Composite indicators might be formed at this point, although these tend towards being less transparent and possibly lower the face validity required to drive action. Second, following such validation, attention would need to be given to operationalising the framework. It is likely that many aspects of internationalisation are not (or, perhaps, not yet) amenable to quantification, and a model for peer review evaluation would need to be established for the qualitative indicators. Rubrics for scoring the quantitative indicators would be required. Development of the rubric may involve further stakeholder validation, to establish scoring thresholds or cut-off points, to generate weightings for the indicators, and to test the interpretability of the formulas. The result of such operationalisation might be a multifaceted criterion-referenced framework for analysis of the qualitative and quantitative indicators. Third, processes for monitoring the indicator framework would be required. Performance indicators need to possess the kind of longitudinal stability that enables time-wise analysis, yet maintain ongoing relevance to practice. The internationalisation of higher education proceeds apace and this trend, coupled with factors such as online delivery, international course franchising, and offshore study, will significantly affect many indicators in the future. Indications are these developments will grow for at least the next decade. The new patterns of student enrolment in ‘globalised’ institutions are not yet well understood, but they will seriously confuse interpretation of certain indicators in the future. One of the main potential benefits of the preliminary indicator framework we have proposed, given its further development, would be its use as a focus for benchmarking between institutions. The lynchpins for such an exercise would be institutional commitment, nomination of carefully selected staff, an efficient liaison network, precise terminology, equivalent data sets, and negotiated protocols for the analysis, presentation and dissemination of results.

CONCLUDING REMARKS This chapter has argued for the importance of factoring indicators of the internationalisation of higher education into broad determinations of university performance. Despite the apparent strategic and operational importance of internationalisation to many universities, especially in the

Monitoring the Internationalisation of Higher Education

251

Australian higher education sector, it appears that few measures of the extent of internationalisation – beyond the measurement of the two-way flow of students – are in widespread use. On the basis of the exploratory work done for the preparation of this chapter, there is considerable empirical research needed before robust performance indicators of internationalisation become a routine part of higher education quality assurance. As with other performance indicators, the application of indicators in this area would be likely to have a normative effect, especially if applied within the context of accountability. This effect may be especially significant for the concept of internationalisation, however, for it is an idea that is exceptionally loose and broad. The indicator framework we have proposed may offer some possibilities for advancing understanding of the extent and nature of internationalisation at institutional level. However, we are conscious that the quantitative indicators that currently are available appear crude in the light of the subtleties of culture and diversity. Therefore, the potential international application of the indicator framework has its own implications; internationalisation has distinctive characteristics that are defined within regional, national, institutional, and faculty contexts. Further analysis should examine the relevance of the proposed indicators and framework for different levels of analysis. While the ‘whole-of-institution’ perspective adopted in this chapter might suit institutional leadership, it is possible that many of the indicators may be aggregated or disaggregated to different units of analysis. We have not been concerned with whether the framework might be used for self-review for the purposes of improvement, or external audit for accountability. In our view, the same criteria and indicators are relevant to both processes, though there would be differences in the interpretation of the data. The goal of internationalisation is now prominent in the mission statements and strategic plans of many universities. While the forces, purposes, and nuances of internationalisation may vary between contexts, without basic, yet nontrivial indicators of this dimension of institutional missions, the concept appears shallow and superficial. Rather than ignore the issue of the obvious complexity of assessing the extent of institutional internationalisation, we argue that it is time, it is considered.

REFERENCES Astin, A. W. (1985). Achieving educational excellence: A critical analysis of priorities and practices in higher education. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

252

KERRI-LEE KRAUSE ET AL.

Bottani, N., & Tuijnman, A. (1994). International education indicators: Framework, development and interpretation. In: Making education count: Developing and using international indicators. Paris: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. Castle, R., & Kelly, D. (2004). Internationalisation: A whole-of-institution approach. Proceedings of the Australian universities quality forum. Melbourne: Australian Universities Quality Agency. Cave, M., Hanney, S., & Kogan, M. (1997). The use of performance indicators in higher education: The challenge of the quality movement. London: Jessica Kingsley. Cuenin, S. (1988). Performance indicators in higher education: A study of their development and use in 15 OECD countries. Paris: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. Davis, D. (1996). The real world of performance indicators: A review of their use in selected countries. London: Commonwealth Higher Education Management Service. Department of Education, Science and Training. (2003). The national report on higher education in Australia (2001). Canberra: DEST. Ewell, P. T., & Jones, D. P. (1996). Indicators of ‘good practice’ in undergraduate education: A handbook for development and implementation. Colorado: National Centre for Higher Education Management Systems. Hanna, D. E., & Latchem, C. (2002). Beyond national borders: Transforming higher education institutions. Journal of Studies in International Education, 6(2), 115–133. Henkel, M. (1991). The new ‘evaluative state’. Public Administration, 69(1), 121–136. Institute of Higher Education. (2004). Academic ranking of world universities – 2004. Shanghai: Institute of Higher Education, Shanghai Jiao Tong University. International Association of Universities. (1998). IAU statement on internationalisation (Prepared for the UNESCO World conference in higher education 1998, formally adopted by the 11th IAU general conference as part of the AIU policy 2000). Paris: IAU. Jaeger, R. M. (1978). About educational indicators: Statistics on the conditions and trends in education. Review of Research in Education, 6, 276–315. James, R. (2003). Suggestions relative to the selection of strategic system-level indicators to review the development of higher education. In: A. Yonezawa & F. Kaiser (Eds), System-level and strategic indicators for monitoring higher education in the twenty-first century. Bucharest: UNESCO-CEPES. Johnes, J., & Taylor, J. (1991). Performance indicators in higher education: UK universities. Buckingham: Open University Press. Karlof, B., & Ostblom, S. (1993). Benchmarking: A signpost to excellence in quality and productivity. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons. Kells, H. (Ed.) (1993). The development of performance indicators in higher education: A compendium of twelve countries. Paris: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. Knight, J. (1994). Internationalisation: Elements and checkpoints. Ottawa: Canadian Bureau for International Education. Knight, J. (2001). Monitoring the quality and progress of internationalisation. Journal of Studies in International Education, 5(3), 228–243. Knight, J. (2003). Updated internationalisation definition. International Higher Education, 33, 2–3. Knight, J. (2004). Internationalisation remodeled: Definition, approaches and rationales. Journal of Studies in International Education, 8(1), 5–31.

Monitoring the Internationalisation of Higher Education

253

Knight, J., & de Wit, H. (1999). Quality and internationalisation in higher education. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). Paris: France. Linke, R. (1991). Performance indicators in higher education: Report of a trial evaluation study commissioned by the Commonwealth Department of Employment, Education and Training. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service. McDaniel, O. (1996). The theoretical and practical use of performance indicators. Higher Education Management, 8(3), 125–139. Nuttall, D. L. (1994). Choosing indicators. In: K. A. Riley & &D. L. Nuttall (Eds), Measuring quality: Education indicators, United Kingdom and international perspectives. London: The Falmer Press. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2000). Education at a glance: OECD indicators. Paris: OECD. Times Higher Education Supplement. (2004). World university rankings. London: Times Higher Education Supplement.

This page intentionally left blank

254

THE IMPACT OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF NEO-LIBERAL POLICIES IN TERTIARY EDUCATION IN MEXICO Linda Russell ABSTRACT At the end of the millennium Mexico faced the double challenge of adjusting to an economic policy based on open markets and the protection of a reinvigorated democratic political system through an increased awareness of civil rights and responsibilities among citizens. Nevertheless, tertiary education reforms shifted the onus on education from the formation of social capital to that of human capital. I consider the background of the introduction of the neo-liberal model in the Mexican economy, and the economists’ critique of the adequacy of that model. I contrast the latter to the educationalists’ debate in response to where it becomes apparent that the neoliberal model had come to dominate the conceptual framework in which the impact of the introduction of the reform model could be analyzed. Finally, I consider a recent text in which the neo-liberal tendencies in tertiary education are more clearly outlined, although an alternative option is not forthcoming. By situating my consideration of the challenges International Relations International Perspectives on Higher Education Research, Volume 3, 255–287 Copyright r 2005 by Elsevier Ltd. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISSN: 1479-3628/doi:10.1016/S1479-3628(05)03011-X

255

256

LINDA RUSSELL

of a knowledge society firmly within the historical, social and economic context of Mexico, I indicate factors which such an alternative would need to take into account.

INTRODUCTION Changes in Education Policy In the year 2000, the National Association of Universities and Institutions of Higher Education in Mexico (ANUIES, 2000) published the policy document entitled ‘‘Higher education in the 21st century: strategic lines of development’’. In this document ANUIES set out an extensive and in-depth description of the strategies to be pursued in order to achieve the objective of transforming the tertiary education system and improving its quality. The objective of this program is justified in terms of the challenge to ‘‘confront the demands of a new kind associated with a globalised world in which national societies find themselves immersed’’ (ANUIES, 2000, p. 1). According to this line of argument, Mexico has to either adapt to the rules of that globalized playing ground or be left out of the game. This is not, however, a line of argument particular only to current Mexican tertiary education policy. Clegg and colleagues observe a similar logic to the argument of David Blunkett, the former British Minister of Education. They suggest that his policy initiatives wove together the notions of globalization, knowledge economy and information technology to present an argument of inevitable, rapid and global change that different national governments have no choice but to respond to (Clegg, Hudson, & Steel, 2003). They consider this line of argument a faulty meta-narrative. In Mexico, the adoption of this meta-narrative has signified a marked shift in the focus of education policy, from the social objectives of the postrevolutionary settlement to the skills requirements of global markets. The post-revolutionary settlement included the principle of free and secular basic education. Before the Mexican Revolution in 1910, education services had been under the auspices of the Catholic Church. The challenge the Mexican government faced was to establish free and secular primary education, and make it available to all children, not only in towns but in the rural areas. Primary school attendance grew from nearly 3 million in 1950 to almost 14.5 million in 1990, while secondary education grew from 69,500 in 1950 to just over 4 million in 1990 (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and

The Impact of the Implementation of Neo-liberal Policies in Mexico

257

Development (OECD), 1997, p. 158). However, compulsory and free secondary education was not introduced until 1993. The principle of, if not free, then accessible, tertiary education had been established since the founding of the National University (UNAM) in 1910, with the overall registration in higher education increasing from almost 30,000 : 1 and a quarter million between 1950 and 1990 (OECD, 1997, p. 158). The post-revolutionary settlement prevailed from the 1930s to the end of the 1980s, almost the same period as the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) established and maintained political control (1929–2000). Although, during this period, there had been a transition in economic policy from the exportation of raw materials to national industrialization protected by import controls, this had not affected the principal focus of education policy, until neo-liberal reforms were introduced during the administration of President Carlos Salinas de Gortari (1988–1994). Carlos Salinas, a Ph.D. graduate in politics, economics and government from Harvard University, presided over the signing of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) between the United States of Mexico, the U.S.A. and Canada, the three countries which form the geographic area of North America. These reforms were consolidated by his successor, President Ernesto Zedillo (1994–2000), a Ph.D. graduate in economics from Yale University. Zedillo, however, also introduced electoral reforms, and the PRI lost power for the first time to the National Action Party (PAN) in the elections of 2000. At the end of the millennium, then, Mexico faced the double challenge of adjusting to an economic policy based on open markets and a reinvigorated democratic political system the protection of which required increased awareness of civil rights and responsibilities amongst citizens. Given the changes in economic and political policy in Mexico, a change in education policy was considered pertinent by many. This is the opinion expressed by Loyo (1997) in an edited collection of articles on ‘‘Social actors and education, the meaning of change’’. Loyo concentrates on the neoliberal reforms introduced by the administration headed by the President Carlos Salinas, noting that these reforms included, ‘‘an important push for change in the education system’’. Loyo and her collaborators nevertheless consider that the reforms in education were indeed only a narrow response to the political and economic requirements of Salinas’ neo-liberal agenda: ‘‘Nevertheless, we consider that this dynamic force did not come from a well-defined education project, but from changes of orientation in other areas: the economical and the political’’ (Loyo, 1997, p. 13). Loyo argues that, as a consequence, the post-revolutionary emphasis on education as part of a wide program of social reform and cohesion was replaced by a

258

LINDA RUSSELL

discourse concerning the economic utility of education: ‘‘The centre of gravitation of the education discourse had moved from widening access to quality; and from education as the constitutive element of social justice to education as imperative in market competition’’ (ibid., p. 15). In short, education reforms shifted the onus on education from the formation of social capital to that of human capital, when the challenges that faced Mexico at the end of the millennium were as much social as economic if democratic gains were not to be lost. In tertiary education, the issue of the transition from the social aims of education to the economic utility of education acquired a more public profile. In 1999, a strike by students paralyzed for 9 months at the National University, the largest university in Mexico with approximately 250,000 students. The reasons for this strike and the way it developed are many and complex. Yet one thing that seems characteristic of the debate about this strike is the extent to which the student position, and their questioning of the neo-liberal model of education reform, was disqualified as extremist or irrational. The official response to this and other resistances, by both students and academics, to the introduction of reforms was to dismiss them as ‘‘oppositions to change based on inertia and traditions’’ (ANUIES, 2000, p. 1). In short, the debate over the reasons for the strike was characterized by the absence of a discursive space in which these two positions – the priority of the social aims of education or the economic utility of education – could be engaged in a debate. Instead, the denigration or dismissal of either one or other of these positions was normal procedure. What is surprising, then, is the extent to which the issues of the transition from the social aims of tertiary education to the question of the economic utility of tertiary education did not, despite their historical importance in the context of Mexican history, find a discursive space for constructive public dialog. In this article I attempt to understand why this was so. I will first consider the background of the introduction of the neo-liberal model in the Mexican economy, and the high degree of penetration it had achieved when the strike began. Second, I will consider the academic debate in response to the introduction of these reforms. What becomes apparent is that the disqualification of the questioning of the neo-liberal model was not due to the model being unknown in Mexican society, but rather that it had come to dominate the conceptual framework in which its impact could be analyzed. In outlining the notion of hegemonic discourses, Peet refers to the notion of ‘‘restrictive discursive spaces’’ (Peet, 2003, p. 17), which limit the possibility of questioning the rationality of a certain theory or terms. I intend to

The Impact of the Implementation of Neo-liberal Policies in Mexico

259

use this notion of ‘‘restrictive discursive spaces’’ to understand why a strike in the National University in Mexico still seems to provoke polarized accounts 5 years later. I will document the ‘‘restrictive discursive spaces’’ in which the strike was discussed in the National Press in Mexico, which refused to take seriously the strikers’ attempt to criticize neo-liberal reforms in tertiary education. Finally, I will consider a text written 2 years after the strike, in which the neo-liberal tendencies in tertiary education are clearly spelled out. Nevertheless, I suggest that it is because the congruency of these policies within the Mexican historical, social and economic context are not analyzed, that the basis for an alternative option is not forthcoming. By situating my account firmly within this historical, social and economic context, I hope to have indicated where such an analysis could begin.

THE POLITICAL AND ECONOMICAL CONTEXT OF MEXICAN DEVELOPMENT POLICY Olmedo considers the strike in UNAM, along with the indigenous uprising in Chiapas, as products of the era of information, globalization and neoliberalism: Se ha dicho que el levantamiento armado indı´ gena en Chiapas, iniciado el primer de enero de 1994, fue la primera insurreccio´n antineoliberal del siglo XXI. Podrı´ a decirse, de la misma manera, que la larga huelga de la Universidad Nacional Auto´noma de Me´xico (UNAM) y fue la primera huelga universitaria antineoliberal del siglo XXI. En todo eso, ambos movimientos sociales han sido produccio´n del modelo econo´mico de la era de la informacio´n, de la globalizacio´n y del neoliberlismo. It has been said that the armed indigenous uprising in Chiapas, begun the first of January 1994, was the first anti neo-liberal uprising of the XXI century. It could be said, that in the same way, the long strike at the UNAM was the first anti-liberal student strike of the XXI century. In all this, both social movements have been the production of the economic model of the era of information, of globalisation and of neo-liberalism. Olmedo (2001, p. 169)

Mendoza also suggests that the Chiapas uprising was the result of the lack of governmental response to the demand for more democratic participation following the formation of the large trading blocks of North America, South America and the European Union (Mendoza, 2002, p. 11). Can this argument explain the actions of the principal participants of the strike, or does it, through recourse to a conspiracy theory, wrest all responsibility and therefore possibility of action from the students and staff of the UNAM, and

260

LINDA RUSSELL

make them hostages to global politics? In order to evaluate this argument, it is necessary to consider the historical political context of Mexico, which explains how neo-liberalism was introduced and could have such an immediate impact in Mexican society, an impact which would be sufficient to explain two major social movements in the 1990s.

Economic Policies In an article, Middlebrook and Zepeda (2003) analyze the economic polices pursued in Mexico since the 1980s, and the political context since the beginning of the twentieth century. They note that a policy of ‘‘import substitution industrialization’’ (ISI) had reigned since the 1940s, with the intention of promoting national industrial growth by imposing protectionist measures to stimulate the home market. It was very successful at first, following years of policies based on the export of raw materials and the import of manufactured goods. Nevertheless, this policy came under pressure as a result of the financial crises of the 1980s, which succeeded the high borrowing of ‘‘petro-dollars’’ during the 1970s. The level of petro-dollar lending rose during the 1970s, from 44,000 million dollars in 1974 to 360,000 million dollars in 1982, with approximately 60,000 million dollars going to Mexico (Valle, 2003, p. 117). The Mexican loans constituted 50% of the capital of the nine principal banks of the U.S.A. It was not then, as Valle points out, surprising that the U.S. government lent Mexico 2,000 million dollars to not default on its loans in 1982. Mexico achieved with difficulty a loan package of 5,000 million dollars. Following this crisis, Mexico changed to a policy of an exportbased economy, and was soon considered the leader of economic liberalization in Latin America. Accession to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) in 1986 and the implementation of the NAFTA with Canada and the U.S.A. in 1994, ‘‘permitted Mexico to emerge as Latin America’s largest exporter of manufactured goods and the U.S. second largest trading partner (after Canada)’’ (Middlebrook & Zepeda, 2003, p. 4). Large state conglomerates were sold off which then thrived at an international level at the expense of smaller business. Nevertheless, the export-driven economy did not deliver the rates of economic growth achieved from the 1940s to the 1970s, and it left the economy exposed ‘‘to external shocks, and the volatility of short-term

The Impact of the Implementation of Neo-liberal Policies in Mexico

261

capital flows contributed to another devastating financial crisis in 1994–1995’’ (ibid., p. 9). In this crisis the government of Bill Clinton, to avoid the negative impact on U.S. banks of a default, lent Mexico 18,000 million dollars, and Mexico negotiated an overall package of loans with the banks for 50,000 million dollars (Valle, 2003, p. 118). Various authors have questioned the economic benefits of the neo-liberal economic reform model pursued in Mexico following the 1982 debt crisis. Ortiz points out that, although productivity grew faster in the leading export-based industries during this period than in manufacturing or in the rest of the economy (3.34 as against 2.56 and 0.99% per annum), wages rose the least in this sector (0.83 as against 1.24 and 2.45% per annum). So, while it had the highest rate of growth in employment (2.64 as against 1.79 in manufacturing and 2.3% per annum in the rest of the economy), the almost frozen wages did not reflect increases in productivity (Ortiz, 2003, p. 131). Valle observes the same pattern in the U.S.A., where increased profits during this period were coupled with frozen salaries. This increase in profits at the expense of salaries led to a huge increase in investment in the financial markets (Valle, 2003). In short, the surplus value of labor was recouped by the gains to be made on the financial markets. Marin˜a (2003) draws all these elements together in explaining the structural crisis in the neo-liberal reforms in Mexico. Although in Mexico there was increased economic activity during the 1970s, this was coupled with high interest rates due to the borrowing of ‘‘petro-dollars’’, paid for by the oil exports. The rise in U.S. interest rates, due to their economic crisis, inflated the debt repayments, whilst the drop in oil prices at the beginning of the 1980s severely affected Mexico’s ability to pay the interests on its loans (Marin˜a, 2003, p. 147). The neo-liberal reforms involved the reduction of salaries which increased profits and therefore investment in certain sectors, but also weakened the internal market. As a result, as Ortiz points out, growth is principally in the sector of leading exporters. But the growth in this area is not reflected in the ‘‘general growth rate’’ of the Mexican economy, where, as Marin˜a points out, the current account deficit due to commercial imbalance and the debt repayments maintains high interest rates, and therefore a lack of inversion in the internal market. The ‘‘maquiladores’’ (assembly line factories) section of the economy continues to receive investment, because it is not affected by these interest rates as all its materials are imported, assembled and sold in dollars. Marin˜a concludes that for these reasons the neo-liberal economic model is not viable in economies such as Mexico.

262

LINDA RUSSELL

The Historical and Political Background Middlebrook and Zepeda consider the political background to these economic reforms in order to explain the broad scope and rapidity in which they were implemented. They also comment on some of the inconsistencies in the way they were introduced. The first reason for the rapidity of their introduction can be traced back to the formulation of the post-revolutionary constitution in 1916–1917, which ‘‘placed pre-eminent authority in the presidency and limited the powers of the legislative and judicial branches of government’’ (Middlebrook & Zepeda, 2003, p. 10), as a result of the perceived need at the time for a strong executive to put an end to the rapid succession of governments and to implement the revolution’s social agenda. In 1929 the PRI was formed and, as Middlebrook and Zepeda observe that with the formation of an ‘‘official’’ political party there was a further acceleration of ‘‘the trend toward the centralization of political power’’. Meanwhile, ‘‘The post-revolutionary elite’s control over the state apparatus guaranteed to the ‘official’ party the establishment of its electoral hegemony and the party’s assured electoral triumphs constituted an important basis for both political legitimacy and reliable legislative majorities’’ (Middlebrook & Zepeda, 2003, p. 11). The PRI established a network of state–society alliances ‘‘underpinning Mexico’s distinctive form of authoritarian rule’’ (Middlebrook & Zepeda, 2003, p. 13). Nevertheless, the same authoritarian system accounts ‘‘for important inconsistencies or omissions in the reform agenda’’ (Middlebrook & Zepeda, 2003, p. 14). The first concerned the fact that the sale of banks to the private sector was not combined with financial sector liberalization, with the banks remaining in the hands of a Mexican social and economic elite until the turn of the century. The second concerned the deflation of the real value of wages, which, although it can be considered as ‘‘a basis of international comparative advantage’’ meant that ‘‘government policy decisively tilted the industrial restructuring process in favor of business interests’’ (Middlebrook & Zepeda, 2003, p. 15). These, and other, omissions were perhaps the reason why the argument of President Salinas that economic liberalization should precede democratization could be considered a failure. His position did achieve the rapid implementation of reforms, but quite possibly also contributed to the PRI’s loss of power to the PAN in the 2000 Presidential elections. Consequently, it can be suggested that, although it was the economic crisis which brought pressure for the implementation of socio-economic reforms, the appropriateness of neo-liberal model of reform has been

The Impact of the Implementation of Neo-liberal Policies in Mexico

263

seriously questioned, yet the history of the development of the authoritarian political system in Mexico during the twentieth century enabled those reforms to be implemented rapidly and with little opposition. In short, the speed with which the model of neo-liberal capitalism was pursued in Mexico was due to a lack of democracy in Mexico, a lack which the World Bank did nothing to alleviate by tying development loans to the implementation of their model of economic reform. The authoritarian way and consequent speed with which reforms were introduced has influenced the discussion of their impact on education policy. Neo-liberalism has not been discussed as one possible model of adaptation to globalization and the knowledge economy, but rather the only model. The options are either to adapt (according to the strategies of the neo-liberal model) or not adapt and face underdevelopment. Sometimes the strategies are identified as neo-liberal, yet considered as unavoidable, and at other times they are identified merely as aspects of ‘‘modernization’’. Indeed, as Touraine suggests, the neo-liberal argument draws an equivalence between globalization and neo-liberal free markets (Touraine, 2001a, b).

THE NEED FOR THE MODERNIZATION OF HIGHER EDUCATION IN MEXICO AND THE ADOPTION OF A NEO-LIBERAL MODEL OF REFORM Two issues have in general been conflated in relation to higher education in Mexico, that of the need for modernization within the context of the high rate of expansion of higher education between the 1940s and the 1990s, and second the introduction of a neo-liberal reform model. Palla´n set the tone of the debate on higher education, and introduced the elision between these two factors, during his period from 1993 to 1997 as Secretary General of ANUIES. This elision has continued during subsequent administrations, and also reflects the position of the actual Ministry of Education. Palla´n describes the general problem facing higher education as that of a ‘‘giddy and uncoordinated growth’’ from the 1970s onward, which was a result of high demand (Palla´n, 1994, p. 263). He considers that this ‘‘giddy and uncoordinated growth’’ was the cause of ‘‘high diversity, heterogeneity, asynchronism, atomization, unequal development, multiple unnecessary repetitions of organizational structures, degrees, programmes and projects. On the other hand, the growth generated: a lack of inter-institutional communication and communication with the general context’’ (ibid., p. 263).

264

LINDA RUSSELL

This description is backed up by what he describes as ‘‘revealing data’’, which consists of basic statistics showing high growth in the 1970s and 1980s of the student population in higher education, as well as the number of universities and the teaching population: Institutions of higher education 1970 1993 Undergraduate registration 1970 1992 Postgraduate registration 1980s 1993 Teachers at undergraduate level 1980 1994

100 approximately 419 211,826 students 1,126,805 25,503 50,781 69,214 120,183

Source: Palla´n (1994, p. 264).

Palla´n outlines certain ‘‘structural changes’’ which were subsequently promoted, including the creation of a National System for Education Planning (SINAPPES) to re-order and rationalize the system of higher education, strategies of regionalization and decentralization, improvement of institutional normativity and administrative reorganization, the development of an information system based on ‘‘specific indicators’’, institutional evaluation, systematic relations with the private sector and flexible academic programs which can adapt to rapid changes in science and technology. The regionalization and decentralization of responsibilities for management has been combined with the centralization of the planning agency which establishes the indicators to be managed. The rapidity with which these structural reforms were implemented was facilitated by the equivalences drawn between rapid growth in response to demand at a local level, the notion of disorganization (if the sum of universities are considered as a whole), the need for structural change to achieve order and the need to implement a series of strategies which reflect the neoliberal model of reform promoted by the World Bank. Indeed, that rapid growth in response to local demand is judged to be ‘‘giddy and uncoordinated’’ necessarily implies that what is required is rationalized and centrally planned growth. Planning requires the evaluation of results, and evaluation

The Impact of the Implementation of Neo-liberal Policies in Mexico

265

requires indicators based on nationally (and internationally) recognized concepts and standards. I am not here making an evaluative judgment as to whether those strategies were the best option at the particular moment. I am instead trying to point to an attempt to establish a causal link between the definition of a problem and the proposed solution. On the other hand, heterogeneity, diversity and asynchronism are constructed as essentially negative factors, when their negativity can only be considered in comparison to a model of central planning. There is no attempt to distinguish the characteristics of the situation (two decades of intense growth rate in higher education) from possible alternative solutions, and hence open a space for rational debate concerning those possible solutions and democratic processes of decision making concerning the adoption of one or other model. Instead the description of the situation is such that only one solution is possible. Whether this situation was due to a concerted attempt by government to not open up space for democratic discussion, or whether government advisors themselves lacked a discursive space from which to question this model promoted by international agencies, is a question beyond the scope of this chapter to answer satisfactorily. Yet, from my experience of discussion with government advisors and personnel, I would be inclined to favor the latter option. What I do intend to argue is that the effect of this lack of distinction between the characteristics of a situation and a model of reform explains the difficulty of educational researchers to separate these different factors in order to determine the underlying reasons for the tensions generated by those reforms.

The Tensions between Tradition and Modernization Diaz, writing after the UNAM strike, follows the same model of justification of the modernization of higher education set out by Palla´n. He begins his article on the tensions resulting from the modernization of higher education in Mexico with a historical review of the context that lead to the need for education reform (Dı´ az, 2002). He notes that, although the number of students in higher education has increased by 65 times between 1950 and 1999, nevertheless, due to demographic expansion, still only 17% of young people between the ages of 20 and 24 years have access to higher education. In 1950, there were 29,892 students, a proportion of 1.5%, while in 1999 there were 1,837,884. So, although during the 1950s and 1960s there was a close cooperation between government, private sector and higher education in the

266

LINDA RUSSELL

development project centered on economic growth and industrialization, it is clear, from his point of view, that the sheer rate of expansion in higher education challenges the conventional forms of management. The relation of cooperation was broken in the confrontation in 1968 between the student movement and the government. Various policies in the 1970s sought to re-establish this consensus, including the expansion and diversification of higher education. The industrialization policy continued to consider the public universities as responsible for the formation of the human resources for industry, and also for government. It was the financial crisis of the 1980s which marked a change of attitude of government, with the institution of a disqualifying discourse in relation to higher education, reducing the budget and requiring improved efficiency, while the private sector criticized the deficiencies of the graduates of public education. Diaz observes that, at the same time that the government initiated their criticism of the quality of higher education, they also pushed for reforms. A strategy of higher education financing linked to evaluation was implemented to push through this top-down modernization. Evaluation, in Diaz’s opinion, consequently lost its formative meaning and was reduced to a punitive strategy. As a result modernization, instead of resolving problems created by the expansion of higher education, has created a series of tensions at the heart of higher education. These tensions do not permit those institutions to respond to the challenges of the twenty-first century, and must therefore be resolved. Nevertheless, Diaz also suggests that there are conflicts of interests between, on the one hand, the academic and social agenda and, on the other hand, the economic agenda in education reform, as well as between the modernization agenda and conventional practices. These interests form polar extremes, yet no middle ground of consultation can be found because of the lack of democratic discussion in the introduction of the reforms. In what follows I shall offer a more detailed consideration of the analysis by Diaz of the tensions arising from the implementation of the reform program in tertiary education. The Tension between Tradition and Modernization, or in Other Words, between the History of Institutions and the Need to Change Dı´ az suggests that the values, practices and principles that have been developed by the institutions of higher education are ones opposed to change (implied in the project of modernization). On the other hand, he considers the latter project is unavoidable within the framework of globalization. Tradition and modernization constitute two opposed positions, and his purpose is to find a middle ground. This he attempts by first showing that

The Impact of the Implementation of Neo-liberal Policies in Mexico

267

the problem with modernization was more a question of methods than objectives. The situation of the financial crisis was ‘‘the Achilles heel which allowed the government to generate an extensive project which was assumed by the institutions of higher education as a necessity to receive more funds’’ (Dı´ az, 2002, p. 173). However, as this was a top-down process, the reforms were not positively taken up by all actors (students, academics, workers), but instead were implemented only to the extent that was necessary to meet the evaluation indicators. In this way, the Achilles heel of the institutions also became the Achilles heel of the modernization program. With regard to this point, Dı´ az accepts the influence of the World Bank in defining the strategies of modernization, yet believes that these policies leave room for a level of local input, and considers that this local agenda requires an open debate in which all actors are included. Using the argument of the Achilles heel, it might be observed that, although the World Bank encourages a certain degree of questioning and debate about its own policies, nevertheless, those countries which desire to increase their funding from international organizations are under pressure to meet the indicators set by the World Bank. In their 1994 policy outline on tertiary education, the World Bank made it clear that they would use funding for growth in this area in order to apply pressure to comply with the application of their reform program (World Bank, 1994). In this sense, the Mexican government can be considered as being in a similar relation to the World Bank as Dı´ az suggests that the universities were to the government, in terms of the need for more funds. In such a situation, the spaces for local interpretations become reduced. The Tension between Academic Administration and Efficient Administration Dı´ az notes that in Mexico the institutions of higher education have developed their own systems of administration over the years according to their needs. They are often very large institutions, ranging from those with 15,000 students to those with 150,000. They have diverse functions, including investigation, teaching and the diffusion of culture. This requires an efficient administration, yet the application of management models from the commercial sector requires the application of norms to a diversified set of functions. Diaz suggests that ‘‘Both respond to different rationalities, both undertake a function in the interior of the institutions of higher education’’ (Dı´ az, 2002, p. 180). Nevertheless, in his opinion, the academic objectives should remain the priority. Interestingly, when referring to the question of management models, Dı´ az employs the concept of opposing rationalities. It is, therefore, not clear how

268

LINDA RUSSELL

a more democratic process in the introduction of these reforms can resolve their opposing rationalities. Furthermore, although Diaz mentions the problem of the processes and norms implied by total quality management policies being applied to the diversified functions of university administration, he does not mention how the reform program has involved the imposition of such norms in other aspects of higher education – for example, how normative processes affect the outcomes of selection processes and consequently of student access to higher education – or how normative evaluation and accreditation procedures affect the curriculum and consequently the type of knowledge produced and reproduced in higher education. Indeed, the question is the extent to which the opposing rationalities of commercial production and higher education clash only over the details of administration, or whether this tension is the underlying rationale of the neo-liberal model of the reform program. Dı´ az has, however, already precluded a more detailed examination of World Bank policies.

The Tension between an Encyclopaedic Vision of Education and the Need to Use Knowledge in the Resolution of Problems On the question of curriculum, Diaz would seem to be definitely in favor of the modernization argument. He notes that the curriculum of institutions of higher education in Latin America was conceived at the beginning of the twentieth century on the European, particularly French, model, in which the contents of the study programs are based on the division of knowledge according to specialist or disciplinary areas. This organization has not changed since the beginning of the twentieth century. He contrasts this situation with the ‘‘world of work and the real world’’, where what is needed is ‘‘the domination of a group of abilities’’ (Dı´ az, 2002, p. 181). He notes that there have been some moves toward flexibilizing the curriculum and education based on competences, but in his opinion this change has to be based on a more radical vision. He suggests that what is required is a synthesis between basic academic elements and competences and skills of the professional fields. He favors the Spanish model, where 40% of contents are basic at a national level, and the other 60% are decided at a local level. Diaz is clearly in favor of ‘‘modernizing’’ the curriculum to respond more to the requirements of the development of skills needed in the ‘‘real world’’. Yet at this point he does not discuss the problem of who should decide what those professional skills should be. When he does discuss this, he would appear more wary of the neo-liberal focus of the modernization reforms.

The Impact of the Implementation of Neo-liberal Policies in Mexico

269

A Preparation to Resolve the Problems of the Country or the Problems of the Labor Market? In Mexico, in contrast to Anglo-Saxon countries, it is the state and not the professional colleges that provides the determining impulse in higher education, and for this reason professional certification is very recent in Latin America. Concerning this point Diaz is wary of the modernization argument. He asks whether the needs of the labor market and the expectations of employers are the same, given that he has shown in previous investigations that the latter often include certain ideological requirements, such as subordination to the values of the company, leadership or ‘‘knowing how to sell oneself’’, which are not necessarily linked to an adequate professional performance. He suggests that neither a solely nationalist vision, nor a market vision, is adequate, rather a new vision which combines both is required. So, although Diaz appears to argue for the need to develop professional and not only academic skills in higher education, he is not sure that the required new skills should be determined by the productive sector. This is an important point, for as Diaz noted in his introduction, a main argument in the 1980s for modernization was the criticism of employers of the pertinence of the academic formation for the realities of the working environment. And for this reason it was recommended that accreditation procedures include professional bodies. Furthermore, it is suggested that the benchmarks for this accreditation should be determined not at a local but at a national and preferably an international level. In conclusion, Dı´ az is demonstratively in favor of the need for reform, yet, by using the judgmentally loaded term ‘‘modernization’’, he is unable to clearly identify the model of reform or ‘‘modernization’’ that is being introduced in Mexico. In criticizing imposition, and suggesting that local discussion can play its part, he does not recognize how the different aspects of this reform model reinforce each other, with the objective of producing a certain type of knowledge with a standardized value in national and international markets. Hence, he welcomes modernization, but is not quite sure about its management objectives; he welcomes curriculum reform, but is not quite sure about professional bodies determining the contents. He suggests that if only the introduction of this process was more democratic a position somewhere in between might be found: It is not easy to discard the tradition, given that is contains valuable and important elements that it is necessary to re-establish; it is not easy to question modernization because it contains a series of values that finally connect the graduate of H.E. with the needs of a professional career. Identifying the poles of these tensions can help to develop a university vision that constructs a synthesis of the most valuable elements of each pole;

270

LINDA RUSSELL

identifying these tensions may help to generate a compromise with change amongst the various actors of the university. Dı´ az (2002, p. 187)

In rejecting the need to consider the extent to which what is at stake in education reform is the implementation of World Bank neo-liberal policies, within the context of the priorities established by the government’s introduction of a neo-liberal economic model in the early 1990s, Diaz’s analysis in favor of the need to accept certain aspects of the reform model, reject others, and be more democratic in the process, would at times seem to introduce more tensions than it solves.

The Management Focus in Tertiary Education Policy during the 1990s Another consequence of the lack of distinction between the need for education reform and the neo-liberal model of education reform adopted is that problematic aspects of that reform model are attributed not to the model but to deficiencies of particular political regimes. In Diaz’s analysis, the tensions are attributed to the top-down way in which reform was introduced. Villa and Rodrı´ guez (2003, p. 12) attribute the problems to the management focus introduced in tertiary education policy. They consider this focus to be evidence of a lack of interest in the presidencies of Carlos Salinas (1988–1994) and Ernesto Zedillo (1994–2000) in education as an important element for Mexico’s development. They observe that, during these presidencies, although there was shift in emphasis from basic education to middle and higher levels, this was not a response ‘‘to changes in the world of work or desired development goals’’, but rather to a question of changes in demand due to demographic factors and consequent social pressures. Secondly, there has been a decline in public subsidies to these levels and this ‘‘has reduced reform to the normative and organizational area’’ (Villa & Rodrı´ guez, 2003, p. 278). Villa and Rodrı´ guez introduce an interesting discussion of the demands on the education system in a knowledge society. In their opinion, the policies of the Salinas and Zedillo governments did not show an appreciation of the changing requirements for education in the knowledge society, and they were consequently not focused on the need to actualize and flexibilize the curriculum, but rather on education management strategies. They do not, however, distinguish the latter as a integral part of a neo-liberal view, not of a knowledge society, but of a knowledge economy. In short, they do not criticize the neo-liberal model of a knowledge economy introduced by the

The Impact of the Implementation of Neo-liberal Policies in Mexico

271

Salinas and Zedillo governments, rather they criticize these governments for not appreciating what is required of education in a knowledge society. Villa and Rodrı´ guez consider middle and higher education to have a key role in the ‘‘knowledge society’’, and they recognize this concept as a guiding idea in: ‘‘Which science and technology inform all areas of life. In this sense, the notions of a knowledge-based economy, a knowledge society, and a learning society describe ideal-type production and cultural systems in which knowledge becomes the driving force behind economic growth and social cohesion’’ (Villa & Rodrı´ guez, 2003, p. 280). This description of a knowledge society is more closely analogous to Delors’ vision of a knowledge society than a neo-liberal vision. The spirit of optimism in the power of enlightened thought was captured in Delors’ report to UNESCO in 1996. Delors, and the team of researchers with which he produced the report, foresaw the essential instrument for tackling the problems facing the world at the end of the twentieth century as belonging to education. The report considered the twentieth century to be characterized by, on the one hand, economic and technical progress, and, on the other, inequality and war. Delors did not perceive this apparently contradictory state of affairs as resulting from the pursuit of a particular political or economic set of objectives. Instead he interpreted these problems as generated by the process of globalization, the ‘‘painful birth of a global society’’. For this reason, according to Delors, the response to the conflicts of the twentieth century did not entail a change of focus in political or economical policies, rather the task belonged to education. The challenge facing education at the end of the twentieth century was that of finding an answer to the question of ‘‘how to learn to live together in the ‘global village’’’ (Delors, 1996, p. 11). Of the four pillars of education that the report outlined, the first concerns taking into account the rapid advances in science, learning to know. This involves learning not a particular specialization which may soon become obsolescent, but rather learning how to learn, to be in a position to acquire, with facility, new specializations. For the Delors team, this implies the need for learning a general culture as a basis on which to build future specializations within a framework of lifelong learning. The second pillar of education concerns learning to do, acquiring the skills that will permit an individual to confront unforeseen situations and to work in groups, acquiring the skills of practical knowledge. The third pillar concerns learning to live together through learning to understand better the other and the world; and fourth, learning to be, is about learning to understand oneself and seeking to develop one’s personal talents.

272

LINDA RUSSELL

Delors, more than a society of knowledge has a vision of ‘‘the necessity to move toward ‘a society of education’’’. Although his report takes into account the role of education in global economic development, it is the social challenges resulting from globalization that Delors sees as education’s principal task to address, for it is ‘‘education which constitutes an indispensable instrument for humanity to progress towards the ideals of peace, liberty and social justice’’ (Delors, 1996, p. 9). The social project of education is at the forefront of Delors’ vision, and similarly, for Villa and Rodrı´ guez, educational policy does not only have an impact in the labor market and economic development but also in social development: ‘‘We must realize that real societies are characterized by their heterogeneity. Globalization has increased societal difference in terms of the distribution of both income and education opportunities. Moreover, these differences occur not only between countries but also within them. This is why, now more than ever, it is necessary to recognize the capacity of education to improve individuals’ income and living conditions’’ (Villa & Rodrı´ guez, 2003, p. 280). Nevertheless, the question is whether the governments of Salinas and Zedillo failed to appreciate this situation, or whether they had a different ideological appreciation of the preferred solution. Villa and Rodrı´ guez begin their analysis of education reform with reference to the context of rapid growth in tertiary education that had continued during the 1990s. Between 1990 and 1999 there was a 48% expansion of the student body, the number of professors rose by 49% and the number of institutions by 64.5%. There was an increase in coverage of the population between 20 and 24 from 13.8% to 19%. In the public sector, this expansion was due almost exclusively to growth of the technical education segment. The participation of private education increased by 10.2% during this period. By the end of the 1990s the number of women in higher education was practically equal to the number of men, with their enrollment in the careers related to the tertiary sector of the economy being higher than that of men. Villa and Rodrı´ guez then proceed to describe how the administration of Carlos Salinas established a culture of evaluation in institutions of education during the 1990s. The National Centre for the Evaluation of Higher Education (CENEVAL) was approved by ANUIES in 1993, and was set up in the form of a non-government, non-profit association. ANUIES approved two procedures for the accreditation of studies: ‘‘A national indicative exam before entering undergraduate studies (licenciatura) and a general exam of professional qualifications’’ (Villa & Rodrı´ guez, 2003, p. 310). The government has defended these evaluation procedures against

The Impact of the Implementation of Neo-liberal Policies in Mexico

273

criticisms for establishing highly normative selection procedures in a highly heterogeneous society (Martı´ nez, 2001). In 1994 Mexico entered the OECD, and the government contracted the organization to make an evaluation of the middle and higher education systems in Mexico, which recommended five critical areas of reform: flexibility, relevance, quality, academic personnel and financial resources. New State Commissions and the Federation of Private Universities (FIMPES) came to have more of a role in higher education policy, but Zedillo administration ‘‘concentrated on the development of selected projects, on managing complementary resource funds and on the design of administrative reform programs’’ (Villa & Rodrı´ guez, 2003, p. 314). Villa and Rodrı´ guez conclude with the observation that, although the 1990s were characterized by expansion of higher education, what is still required is academic reform, in terms of curriculum flexibility, pedagogical models and pertinence of programs in the face of globalization. It would appear that, of the five critical areas, only financial resources were given priority in the form of more efficient management structures. The hypothesis of Villa and Rodrı´ guez is that the reason for this situation was that education was not considered as essential to economic development by the administrations of the 1990s, and this was reflected in the decline of public subsidies and their limited focus of application in organizational areas. However, in the World Bank neo-liberal model of education reform, the normative and organizational areas are the backbone of their reform model. Similarly, the World Bank 1994 model included a change in emphasis from state funding of tertiary education to the diversification of funding sources, although this recommendation was made with more precaution in the 2002 proposals (World Bank, 1994, 2002). I suggest that, in both Diaz’s and Villa and Rodrı´ guez’s articles, what is clear is that aspects of the neo-liberal model are criticized but the model itself is not criticized. The latter article does takes up the issue of the need in a knowledge society for education to continue to be a pillar of social mobility, but neither address the issue Loyo raises concerning the change in gravitation of education policy in Mexico from a project of social justice and cohesion to an instrument of economic policy. This is because neither concretely define a neo-liberal model of the knowledge economy and the role education is required to play in it, and the adoption of this model by Mexico within the context of the introduction of neo-liberal economic reforms. This, however, is not due, I suggest, to an oversight on their part. Instead, it is a result of the hegemony that had been established by the neo-liberal discourse in Mexico. Part of the success of constructing that hegemony was by

274

LINDA RUSSELL

establishing equivalences between the notion of ‘‘modernization’’ and the neo-liberal model of reform.

RESTRICTIVE DISCURSIVE SPACES: POLARIZED ACCOUNTS OF THE STRIKE AT THE NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF MEXICO The degree of the hegemony of the neo-liberal discourse is perhaps most apparent in the debates surrounding the strike which took place in the National University in 1999. In the debate on the strike, equivalences are constructed between modernization, neo-liberalism, globalization and the knowledge economy. Consequently, to question neo-liberalism is to irrationally question modernization and express the absurd desire to avoid globalization. I do not intend to evaluate the arguments involved, but rather to draw attention to the restrictive discursive space in which the discussion of the issues involved took place.

The Context of the Strike The strike was begun on April 20, 1999, by students and staff of the National University, and lasted over 9 months. The initial motive of the strike was a rejection of an increase in fees. Part of the difficulty in discerning the coherency or not of the position of the strikers, and their rejection of the increase in fees as part of a neo-liberal model of education reform, is because the proposal to increase fees seemed eminently reasonable to the majority, and consequently its rejection completely unfounded. Hence, the linking of the fees issue to neo-liberal politics seemed like an attempt to justify an unjustifiable position. Nevertheless, it is precisely the apparent relatively benign nature of the proposals, and yet the failure of all attempts at dialog, and the ultimate use of police force to break the strike, which suggests that it is not possible to explain this strike without reference to the wider context in which these reforms were proposed. What is more, the failure to do so has meant that the question of fees continues to be an unresolved issue. The proposal, put forward by the Rector, Dr. Francisco Barne´s, on February 11, 1999, was to increase fees from 20 cents per semester (approximately 0.02 cents of a U.S. dollar, or 0.04 pennies of a pound sterling), a

The Impact of the Implementation of Neo-liberal Policies in Mexico

275

sum which had remained the same for 51 years, to the equivalent of 20 minimum daily salaries per semester (approximately 90 U.S. dollars or 45 pounds sterling). The proposals were accompanied by provisions for grants or exemption from payments. The situation is clearly described in the posthumous debates the UNAM organized to resolve the issue, by Dr. Victor Mun˜oz, a lecturer in Political Science at the UNAM, when he points out that in 1948, the tuition fee of 200 pesos was the equivalent of 60 days of the minimum salary, and the failure to adjust this amount according to inflation and devaluations meant that the amount paid to study in the UNAM was currently a mere 20 cents (Mun˜oz, 2003, p. 23). Mun˜oz also points out that the state is only committed by law to provide free education at the pre-primary, primary and secondary level, and that the National University has an autonomous legislation which permits it to ‘‘organize itself as it deems best’’ (ibid., p. 23). He argues that the state budget is susceptible to the price of oil and hence the university budget becomes hostage to the fluctuations in oil prices. Mun˜oz suggests that, given the social and economic conditions of the country, a system of grants which assures equity in the possibility of pursuing a university career is of paramount importance, but that studies show that the majority of students are in a position to contribute to the cost of their education. While the government should continue funding the substantial part of those costs, a contribution on behalf of the students would help provide better services.

The Debate Concurrent to the Strike Trejo, a researcher and lecturer at the UNAM, writing a daily column on the events as they transpired, considered the introduction of fee increases without consultation within the university as quite acceptable, given that the issue had been exhaustively debated when Dr. Sarukha´n, as Rector of the UNAM, had included, in his 1992 program of 10 points for changing the university, the increase in fees together with a system of grants. The government’s initial support for the move had later been retracted in the face of a position and the suggestion by Camacho, the Governor of Mexico City, that a student strike would open the doors to political opposition parties, possibly bringing down the government. The fees issue had been shelved. Writing on the February 1999, Trejo strongly criticized Camacho for having expounded that position, yet it was a position which would, nevertheless, come to be justified by the events that followed. But, at the time, the University authorities, the Ministry of Education, the Government and Trejo,

276

LINDA RUSSELL

among others, considered that the issue had been sufficiently discussed. It was implementation that was required: A diferencia del proceso de construccio´n de consensos que emprendio´ en 1992 la Rectorı´ a de la UNAM, ahora las autoridades de esa institucio´n presentaron su proyecto para incrementar cuotas sin consultar a los universitarios. Quiza´ no hace falta. Ese aumento ha sido discutido tanto y tantas veces, que difı´ cilmente se conocerı´ an nuevos argumentos capaces de enriquecer tal debate. Different from the construction of a consensus that was undertaken in 1992 by the Rector of the UNAM, now the authorities of this institution presented their project to increase fees without consulting the university population. Perhaps it is not necessary. This increase has been discussed so many times, that it would be difficult to find new arguments to enrich the debate. Trejo (2000, p. 23)

After 7 months of strike action, government and ministry support was withdrawn, the Rector was asked to resign and a new Rector reopened the dialog. Trejo gave voice to the criticism that was common at the time, that the strike had become manipulated by a variety of groups: en este huelga se puso de manifiesto el entremetimiento de toda clase de fuerzas que pululan para medrar en el amasijo universitario y hay una amplia gama de intereses, incluso paragubernamentales y in this strike it became manifest all the classes of forces that swarmed to prosper in the university mix y There is an ample range of interests, including para-governmental. Trejo (2000, p. 267)

Nevertheless, he argued that it was not possible to attribute the prolongation of the strike solely to the intervention of external groups, given that the principal participants in the strike were students and even some academic personal. Yet since his position from the beginning had been that the actualization of tuition costs was a perfectly reasonable action, and that most of the students, university personal and the society in general supported this measure, he had no way of explaining the failure of the dialog, except by recourse to the notion that the university had failed in adequately forming this rebellious group as responsible citizens: Mientras no se reconozca ese papel activo de universitarios con matricula y credencial en la agresio´n que ha padecido la Universidad, no se podra´n atender las causas de la intolerancia rampante, la paupe´rrima y maniquea cultura polı´ tica y la actitud de resentimiento social y polı´ tico que muchos, o alguno de ellos, manifestaron durante el conflicto. La conducta y las convicciones de esos universitarios, la mayorı´ a de ellos muy jo´venes, son consecuencia de ineficacias y pobrezas en la formacio´n que les ha dado la Universidad y la sociedad mexicanas y

The Impact of the Implementation of Neo-liberal Policies in Mexico

277

Whilst the active role of students matriculated and with credential is not recognized in the aggression that has taken place in the university, the causes of the rampant intolerance cannot be attended to, the pauperism and the mannequin political culture and the attitude of social and political resentment that many, or some of them, manifested during the conflict. The conduct and the convictions of these students, for the most part young, are the consequence of the inefficiencies and poverty of the formation that the university and the Mexican society has given them y Trejo (2000, p. 268)

Due to his insistence on considering the fees issue as an isolated, and hence quite justifiable, reform policy, and rejecting the strikers connection of this issue to the imposition of a neo-liberal model on education policy, Trejo had no other recourse than that of presenting the strikers as irrational delinquents. In short, by reducing the issue of the strike to the question of fees, he fails to provide an adequate explanation of the actions of the principal participants. The question as to whether the strike was partly a calculated rebuttal of the perceived attempt to impose a neo-liberal model in education reform in Mexico is a sharply debated issue. It was a position rejected by a number of eminent researchers in the University. Blanco, previous General Secretary of the UNAM, wrote in the respected left wing daily newspaper, La Jornada, on May 18, 1999: Se quiere un debate a partir de fundamentos. Algunos escritores han dicho que las cuotas hacen de la educacio´n una mercancı´ a, siendo que se trata de un derecho: en la UNAM se estarı´ a buscando ‘‘introducir como cun˜a el principio del mercado (la educacio´n como servicio) contra el principio del bien pu´blico (la educacio´n como derecho)’’. Estas formulaciones son ideologı´ a, en el sentido de falsa conciencia. La educacio´n no es nunca mercancı´ a. ‘‘las mercancı´ as – escribe Marx en El Capital – tienen primero que realizarse como valores antes que pueden realizarse como valores de uso. Por otra parte, tienen que acreditarse como valores de uso antes de poder realizarse como valores’’. Agrega: ‘‘Son mercancı´ as debido a su dualidad, a que son objetos de uso y, simulta´neamente, portadores de valor’’. No es el caso de la educacio´n. What is required is a debate which begins from fundamentals. Some writers have said that charging fees makes education a merchandise, given that it is a question of rights: in the UNAM it would be introducing the principle of the market (education as a service) as against the principle of a public good (education as a right). These formulations are ideologies, in the sense of false consciousness. Education is never a merchandise. ‘‘Merchandise’’, writes Marx in Das Capital ‘‘have to first be realized as values before they can be realized as use values. On the other hand, they have to be accredited as values before being able to be values’’. He adds: ‘‘They are merchandise due to their duality, that they are objects of use and simultaneously carriers of value. This is not the case with education’’. Blanco (2000, p. 41)

278

LINDA RUSSELL

Blanco would seem not to consider the importance, given in the World Bank reform model, to the accreditation of programs, together with the evaluation of student and academic personal by accredited national and international organisms, as a step on the way to the accreditation of values that he refers to as necessary to establish education as a merchandise. Silva-Herzog, another well-known academic, a graduate in law and postgraduate in political science, writing in the daily newspaper Reforma, on May 3, 1999, also expressed his opinion that the strikers’ rejection of a model of neo-liberal reforms in education in Mexico was merely a search for a conspiracy theory as a result of the history of the lack of confidence in the professional classes in Mexico: Las razones de los huelguistas son bien flacas. Debe ser, en efecto muy difı´ cil pintar como atropello el que los que puedan pagar, paguen y los que no, no. Lo que procede para fundamentar la empresa es instalar el debate in el universo de la conspiracio´n. Ahı´ todo cobra sentido y color. Es muy simple: hay que escoger entre neoliberalismo o nacio´n. Detra´s del cambio al reglamento universitario hay una estrategia oculta de privatizar la educacio´n y, de plano, de vender el paı´ s. ‘‘No, no son las cuotas’’, reconoce Adolfo Gilly, el cercano asesor del jefe de gobierno del Distrito Federal. ‘‘Quieren cambiarle a Me´xico la UNAM. Quieren convertir a Me´xico en un espacio de la nueva dominacio´n de las finanzas y organizarnos la vida segu´n sus sinrazones’’. Pensar en la exencio´n del pago de quienes no tienen los recursos para hacerlo es, segu´n el bio´grafo de la familia Ca´rdenas, una medida hitleriana que pretende humillar pu´blicamente a los excluidos, tatuarlos como judı´ os bajo el nazismo. La lucha de los estudiantes es una defensa de la razo´n y de la libertad. Nada menos. Las cuotas anuncian la ofensiva del capital financiero internacional en contra de la inteligencia. Eso dice don Adolfo Gilly. Es divertido explorar estos universos conspiratorios pero quiza´ es ma´s u´til preguntarse por las razones de e´xito de este discurso. No cabe duda que miles de personas sintonizan con estas fantası´ as de la mano negra que juega con la historia, con la narracio´n segura que anuda todos los hechos de nuestra historia reciente en la complicidad sata´nica del neoliberalismo. No es una casualidad que esta disertaciones florezcan en este tiempo alborotado. Las condiciones de eficacia de este discurso esta´n sembradas en an˜os de contrariedades y estafas, en la hondura de nuestras desconfianzas, en la ausencia de medios profesionales que sirvan como mecanismos ordenadores. Con una memoria rica en desengan˜os, con una prensa facciosa, el paı´ s se agita entre desmesuras. The reasons of the strikers are very weak. It must, in effect, be very difficult to paint as an obstacle that those that can, pay, and those that can’t, don’t. The procedure to establish the enterprise is to install the debate in the universe of conspiracy. There, everything achieves meaning and colour. It’s very simple: one has to choose between neo-liberalism and the nation. Behind the change in the university regulations there is a hidden strategy to privatise education and sell the country. ‘‘It is not the fees’’, recognized Adolfo Gilly, the close advisor of the government of the Federal District. ‘‘They want to change Mexico and the UNAM. They want to convert Mexico into a space of the new financial domination and organize our life according to their lack of reason’’. To think of the exemption from payment of those who do not have resources is, according to the biographer of the Cardenas family, a hitlerian measure that pretends to publicly

The Impact of the Implementation of Neo-liberal Policies in Mexico

279

humiliate the excluded, tatoo them like Jews under nazism. The struggles of the students is a defence of reason and liberty. Nothing less. The fees announce the offensive of international financial capital against intelligence. That is what Adolfo Gilly says. It’s fun exploring this conspiracy universe, but perhaps it is more useful to ask why this discourse is successful. There is no doubt that thousands of people symphonise with these fantasies of the black hand that plays history, with the secure narration that ties all the events of our recent history to the satanic complicity of neo-liberalism. It is not by chance that these dissertations flourish in these disturbed times. The conditions of success of this discourse were sown during years of disappointment and fraud, in the depth of our lack of our mistrust, in the absence of a professional class that serves as an organizing force. With a rich memory of trickery, with a press divided in factions, the country is torn between extreme positions. Silva-Herzog (2000, p. 498)

Apart from treating the whole argument concerning neo-liberalism as a conspiracy theory, Silva-Herzog, in his references to the relation between Gilly, a fellow academic of the UNAM, and Cuahtemoc Cardenas, the Head of the Government of Mexico City, also insinuates that Gilly is supporting the striking students for political reasons other than those relevant to the UNAM situation. Cordova, another Eminent Lecturer in Political Science at the UNAM, wrote on March 28, 1999 in La Jornada that he simply did not see why he had to pay with his taxes for the higher education of students of well-off parents: Mi cuestionamiento esencial sigue siendo el mismo: +por que´ yo debo pagar su educacio´n superior con mis impuestos (que son altı´ simos) a decenas de miles de hijos de papa´ que llegan a nuestros campus en coche propio? No sirve de nada sen˜alar, una y otra vez, que el nuevo reglamento exime de muchas maneras a los estudiantes pobres y sin recursos del pago de cuotas. Vamos, ni siquiera se discute el reglamento en sus te´rminos. +Quie´nes son los ‘‘violentos’’ y los intolerantes? My essential question continues to be the same: why should I pay for the higher education with my taxes (which are very high), of tens of thousand of sons of fathers who arrive to our campus in their own car. It is of no use to point out, again and again, that the new regulation exempts in many ways the poor students without resources to pay fees. Lets face it, the new regulations are not even discussed in their own terms. Who are the ‘‘violent’’ and who are the ‘‘intolerant’’. Co´rdova (2000, p. 116)

Trejo strongly criticized any justification of the strike in terms of the rejection of a neo-liberal model of education reform: Entre los motivos por los que esta´n en contra del aumento en las cuotas de la Universidad, los huelguistas aseguran: ‘‘Se trata de una iniciativo proveniente de organismos internacionales como la OCDE o el Banco Mundial, quienes tienen como principal intere´s disminuir el gasto social de los paı´ ses subdesarrollados’’. Esa afirmacio´n, que tan reiterada y escasamente aclarada se ha extendido, es una de las mayores

280

LINDA RUSSELL

mentiras de la huelga. Los organismos internacionales ası´ aludidos, suelen proponer ajustes en la polı´ tica macroecono´mica. Pero es imposible imaginar a sus funcionarios preocupados por una colegiatura equivalente a 60 dolares. Si acaso se han enterado de ese diagno´stico sobre las cuotas, los funcionarios de tales organismos, en Parı´ s y en Washington, deben estar atacados de la risa. Amongst the motives which are held against the increase in university fees, the strikers assure us that: ‘‘It is a question of an initiative which comes from international organizations such as the OECD and the World Bank, whose principal interest is to decrease the social expenditure in underdeveloped countries’’. This affirmation, so often repeated and so unclear, has been propagated and is one of the main lies of the strike. The international organizations alluded to normally propose adjustments to the macroeconomic policies. But it is impossible to imagine their officials preoccupied with a fee worth 60 dollars. If indeed they are informed of this diagnosis of the fees, the officials of these organizations, in Paris and Washington, must be shaking with laughter. Trejo (2000, p. 70)

Clearly, Trejo had not read the World Bank’s 1994 report on education; which explicitly recommends ‘‘Providing incentives for public institutions to diversify sources of funding, including cost sharing with students, and linking government funding closely to performance’’ (World Bank, 1994, p. 4). Neither does it seem that the World Bank was so amused either by the strike or by the strikers’ criticisms of neo-liberal policy, given that their report on tertiary education policy in 2002 recognizes that the guidelines set out in the 1994 report met with opposition from various interest groups, and the need in future for building a consensus. Concerning funding strategies for the future, their 2002 report recommends ‘‘establishing sustainable financing systems to encourage responsiveness and flexibility’’ (World Bank, 2002, p. xv).

THE UNAM STRIKE AND THE CRITIQUE OF THE NEO-LIBERAL MODEL OF EDUCATION REFORM Olmedo, graduate and lecturer at the UNAM, writing 2 years after the strike, is one of the few who argues that the strike must be considered within the wider context of the impact of neo-liberal policies in the Mexican economy and education policies. He considers the immediate context of the strike as one marked by the transition of Mexican society from one political system to another. The former which had survived for 70 years was characterized by rigidity and corruption, while the latter ‘‘confirmed the hegemony of corporative neoliberalism’’ (Olmedo, 2001, p. 170).

The Impact of the Implementation of Neo-liberal Policies in Mexico

281

This context of political transition was marked, Olmedo suggests, by a triple crisis at the time of the strike. First, there was the federal government’s financial crisis not resolved since the devaluation in 1994, which was made worse by the Zedillo’s government decision to transform the private debt of certain banks caused largely by that devaluation, into public debt. At the same time, university budgets were reduced, and it was suggested to the university authorities that they raise their fees. To this situation was added a credibility crisis of a governing party which had been in power for 70 years, and thirdly there was a political crisis as this traditional system was being swept away by the neo-liberalism which that same political party had introduced. Olmeda also suggests that the fundamental demand of the strikers was the democratization of the UNAM, as the initial attempt to impose the new fee structure had revealed the centralization of power in the institution. Although the strike was broken finally by force, the authorities had agreed to the formation of a democratic University Congress, and to not introduce neo-liberal reforms. Olmedo comments that the former promise has not yet been realized, while the neo-liberal reforms, although diluted, have not been eliminated.

Neo-liberal Policy and Democratic Reform Olmedo’s explanation of the UNAM strike does not reduce the argument to the validity or not of increasing fees, and, therefore, the strikers’ position to one of an incomprehensible irrationality. Instead, he explains the strike as a resistance to the neo-liberal model of education reform, in all its aspects. By taking into account Middlebrook and Zepeda’s review (2003) of the political and economical context of the rapid introduction of neo-liberal reforms in Mexico, it can be seen that the historical emergence of the space of resistance had been limited, as well as the basis for the criticism of their imposition, and consequently the call for any process of reform to be accompanied by democratic reform. This issue of the way the reforms are introduced is one that is taken up by other academics. Mendoza suggests that, although in the notion of the state as evaluator, the state supposedly takes a position of less intervention, and one of control at a distance, with more participation of civil society in evaluation and accreditation, in fact, in Mexico, there is an increase in government capacity not only in general control but also in the taking of decisions and redirection (Mendoza, 2002, p. 14). Meanwhile, the academic

282

LINDA RUSSELL

communities are not involved in the design and application of the reforms, this role is restricted to the Rectors and their teams (Mendoza, Latapı´ , & Rodrı´ guez, 2001, pp. 220–221). Despite the insistence of the World Bank that, in supporting tertiary education, it is supporting the basis of democratic reform, neverthless its strategies of linking funding to the implementation of its reform model, and its suggestion to governments to pursue this same strategy, undermine their stated objective. Is this just an unfortunate use of strategies which could be overcome, or does it have to do with the nature of knowledge capitalism? If the latter involves the production of homogenous products in order to establish their exchange value in international markets, and this in turn requires central planning, then it is not clear how this incongruency between the World Bank’s stated objectives and actual strategies can be overcome. While the objectives of a knowledge society scenario may be democratic, is this true of the economic policy of knowledge capitalism adopted as the means to that end? In short, can knowledge capitalism be democratic?

The Possibility for Establishing a Discursive Space of Effective Democratic Debate Nevertheless, until the characteristics of the neo-liberal model of reform in education are clearly outlined and understood, attempts to open a dialog on the benefits or not of this model are prone to failure as events during the 1999 strike in the UNAM demonstrated. And it does not seem that the space for an effective dialog has yet been established. In a work published in 2001 on the UNAM situation, which attempts to present the opposing sides of the debate and analyze their correspondences and differences, the conclusion arrived at in most cases is that the differences are greater than the convergences. So we find Martinez, previous Rector of the University of Colima and advisor of the current Ministry of Education, of the opinion that, if the UNAM were to set up its own evaluation procedures, instead of applying those of the national system of the CENEVAL, it would sacrifice statistical homogeneity; while Pe´rez, a previous coordinator of the Interinstitutional Committees for the evaluation of higher education, responding to the same set of questions, considers the idea of a single external evaluator horrific (Mendoza et al., 2001, p. 75). Blanco continues to consider that public universities have the right to charge fees, and that this has nothing to do with privatization, while Bolan˜os, lawyer and member of the National University elected Board,

The Impact of the Implementation of Neo-liberal Policies in Mexico

283

argues that the increase in fees has to be considered in the context of the introduction of the neo-liberal model of reform in tertiary education in Mexico (Mendoza et al., 2001, pp. 21–22).

TENDENCIES IN THE TRANSITION IN TERTIARY EDUCATION IN MEXICO Those academics in Mexico who attempt to understand the changes taking place in higher education in relation to the neo-liberal reform model proposed by the World Bank, perceive that what is taking place is a process of transition in the University, and that this transition must be understood in terms of global developments: ‘‘It is necessary to know what are the national and global tendencies which determine the evolution of higher education in the so-called era of globalisation, the predominance of knowledge and information, and of neo-liberalism’’ (Olmedo, 2001, p. 175). The first group of 10 tendencies which Olmedo seeks to outline characterize the model of the world economy, and concern the reduction in the growth rate, the fall in the real value of salaries and the increase in global competition. The second group concerns the impact of information technologies and the changing role of knowledge. He suggests that there is a ‘‘tendency to eliminate the difference between work and capital’’, as knowledge replaces work and also becomes capital. ‘‘The individual unifies, then, in herself, work, capital and merchandise (merchandise, to the extent that she sells her work, valuing herself as capital and realizing herself as intellectual work)’’ (Olmedo, 2001, p. 184). Olmedo refers to the French sociologist Gorz, who suggests that capitalism in these conditions only offers two alternatives: Either that the individual becomes an individual firm, or that the large firms take possession of the ‘‘human capital’’ establishing relations of ownership which are almost feudal. These tendencies, Olmedo observes, have an impact in education. He proceeds to elaborate 30 tendencies in the introduction of neo-liberal goals in education. The first group refer to the role of distance education and lifelong education, which he considers will lead to academic grades loosing their value. Nevertheless, he also notes that there is a tendency to homogenize knowledge and to make it ‘‘rentable’’ (Olmedo, 2001, p. 197). This has accentuated what he perceives to be six tendencies in higher education: 1. The tendency to standardize knowledge according to standards determined in the centers of international power.

284

LINDA RUSSELL

2. The tendency to seek the interchangeability of knowledge between countries through evaluation according to international standards. 3. The tendency to determine productivity and competition by attempting to determine costs of production relative to international standards. 4. The tendency to privatize and commodify higher education. 5. The tendency to eliminate education that does not have a market value. 6. The tendency for education with a market value to privatize under the form of ‘‘continuing education’’ (Olmedo, 2001, pp. 196–198). The last section of tendencies Olmedo refers to are hierarchical relations in the world of knowledge, and here he includes the suggestions that there is a tendency to privilege norms over creativity, and, due to the impact of technology, the tendency to privilege linear thought. Olmedo says that movements in the universities can no longer take place within the framework of the ideological references characterized by the dichotomy between capitalism and socialism, and that today the dichotomies are much more numerous. Clearly, traditional models of state socialism were, just as much as neo-liberalism, dependent on systems of central planning to determine homogenous products. Nevertheless, if, as Olmedo suggests, the UNAM strike was a conflict between those who believe that the university should adapt to these tendencies so as not to be left behind, and those who believe that alternatives should be sought, he does not give any direction in terms of where those alternatives are to be found.

CONCLUDING REMARKS Neo-liberal reforms have clearly had a significant impact in Mexico, in the economic, political and social arenas as well as in education. Furthermore, the discourse of neo-liberal reform in education has established a hegemonic position that restricts the discursive space in which those reforms can be discussed. Consequently, there is, so far, no consensus concerning the nature of these reforms and their impact. Nevertheless, the conflict in the UNAM precipitated the opening of a space to debate this issue, while the organization, by the Special Commission of the University Congress in 2003, of a diagnosis of the issues involved, is evidence of an attempt to engage with this issue, even if so far the positions remain polarized. This polarization needs to be understood within the context of Loyo’s observation that education policy in Mexico has dramatically shifted its aims from a post-revolutionary settlement in favor of social justice, to an

The Impact of the Implementation of Neo-liberal Policies in Mexico

285

end of millennium neo-liberal discourse in terms of education as a key instrument of economic competitiveness. Official discourse has papered over the repercussions of this shift, referring to ‘‘modernization’’ of processes rather than a shift in policy aims, justifying ‘‘modernization’’ by reference both to the previous decades of rapid and ‘‘disorganized’’ expansion of tertiary education, and the pressure to join the new global order or remain an outsider. The hegemony of the official discourse is evident in academic discussions. Dı´ az is sympathetic to this shift, arguing that tertiary education should ‘‘modernize’’ and prepare students for the ‘‘real world’’, but suggests, nevertheless, that limits need to be established in terms of the values of that ‘‘market environment’’, where everything is for sale, even one’s self-image. Villa and Rodrı´ guez, on the other hand, ascribe the management focus in education to a particular lack of political foresight, which can only be addressed by education policy taking into account not only the economic but the social challenges of ‘‘globalization’’. And in response to these repeated concerns, ANUIES, setting out the reform program in their strategic lines of development, includes issues of social equity. There has been an attempt to seek that which Dı´ az’s describes as a middle ground, yet to do so by balancing the books. In order to atone for some of the consequences of radical neo-liberal policies, social compensations are introduced: More grants for the poor, courses on the importance of social values. There is an attempt to construct a balancing act between two poles. Nevertheless, Olmedo has touched upon the question of whether human capital and financial capital become intertwined in a knowledge economy. There is also a growing interest amongst sociologists in the role of social capital in economics in a knowledge economy (Cimoli & Della, 2003; Luna & Velasco, 2003). On this view, social capital and economic competitiveness are not two polar extremes to be successfully balanced, but instead a mutually reinforcing dynamic. From this perspective, what is required is not a balancing act between two independent sets of goals, but instead a rethinking of a new dynamic partnership between social capital and economic competitiveness. Such a rethinking would need to take into account the particular history of Mexican social and economic development. If this is the case, perhaps the shift in education policy during the 1980s away from social justice and in favor of economic demands, might, with hindsight, come to be considered a little too precipitated.

REFERENCES ANUIES (2000). La Educacio´n Superior en el Siglo XX1. Lin˜eas Estrate´gicas de Desarrollo (Higher Education in the 21st Century. Strategic Lines of Development).

286

LINDA RUSSELL

Blanco, J. (2000). Educacio´n, Mercado y Derecho. In: N. E. Tello Peo´n, J. A. de la Pen˜a Mena & C. Garza Falla (Eds), La UNAM a debate. Mexico City: Cal y arena. Cimoli, M., & Della, M. (2003). The nature of technological change and its main implications on national systems of innovation. In: J. Katz (Ed.), Innovacio´n, aprendizaje y cracion de capacidades tecnolo´gicas. Mexico City: Universiada Autonoma Metropolitana. Clegg, S., Hudson, A., & Steel, J. (2003). The emperor’s new clothers: Globalisation and e-learning in higher education. British Journal of Sociology of Education (BSE), 24(1), 39–53. Co´rdova, A. (2000). El destino de la UNAM. In: N. E. Tello Peo´n, J. A. de la Pen˜a Mena & C. Garza Falla (Eds), La UNAM a debat. Mexico City: Cal y arena. Delors, J. (1996). Learning: The treasure within (Correo de la UNESCO 1997 ed.). UNESCO. Dı´ az, A. (2002). El futuro de la educacio´n superior en Me´xico. Las tensiones entre tradicio´n y modernizacio´n. (The future of higher education in Mexico. The tensions between tradition and modernization.) In: H. Mun˜oz Garcia (Ed.), Universidad: Polı´tica y cambio institucional (primera, mayo, 2002 ed., pp. 167–171). Mexico City: Cetro de Estudios sobre la Universidad y Miguel A´ngel Porru´a. Loyo, A. (Ed.) (1997). Los actores sociales y la educacio´n: Los sentidos del cambio (1988–1994). Mexico City: UNAM, Plaza y Valdez Editores. Luna, M., & Velasco, J. L. (2003). El vı´ nclo entre las empresas y las institiuciones acade´micas: La funcio´n de traduccio´n y el perfil de los traductores. In: M. Luna (Ed.), Itinerarios del conocimiento: Formas dina´micas y contenido. Un efoque de redes (1st ed., pp. 229–258). Mexico City: Universidad Nacional Auto´noma de Me´xico, Anthropos Editorial. Marin˜a, A. (2003). Crisis estructural capitalista y globalizacio´n neoliberal: Una perspectiva desde Me´xico. In: E. Ortiz Cruz (Ed.), Estado versus mercado. Mexico City: UAM-X. Martı´ nez, F. (2001). Evaluacio´n educativa y pruebas estandarizadas Elementos para enriquecer el debate. Revista de la Educacio´n Superior, XXX (4)(120), 71–85. Mendoza, J. (2002). Transicio´n de la educacio´n contempora´nea en Me´xico: De la planeacio´n al estado evaluador. Mexico City: UNAM. Mendoza, J., Latapı´ Sarre, P., & Rodrı´ guez, R. (2001). La UNAM. El debate pendiente. Mexico City: UNAM. Middlebrook, K., & Zepeda, E. (2003). On the political economy of Mexican development policy. In: K. Middlebrook & E. Zepeda (Eds), Confronting development. Assessing Mexico’s economic and social policy challenges (pp. 3–54). Stanford: Stanford University Press. Mun˜oz, V. M. (2003). En defensa de la equidad y la justicia social, Comisio´n Especial para el Congresos Universitario (Seminarios de Diagnostico ed., pp. 22–24). Mexico City: UNAM. Olmedo, R. (2001). La Universidad en la era de la globalizacio´n. Mexico City: Comuna. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. (1997). Reviews of national policies for education. Mexico, Paris: OECD. Ortiz, E. (2003). Convergencia y polarizacio´n en la economı´ a mexicana. In: E. Ortiz Cruz (Ed.), Estado versus mercado. Mexico City: UAM-X. Palla´n, C. (1994, 1999). Politicas educativas; Hacia la educacio´n superior en el escenario de los an˜os noventa. Cambios estructurales en las universidades pu´blicas. Paper presented at the La Universidad de Hoy, Centro de Estudios Sobre el UNAM/UNAM. Peet, R. (2003). Unholy trinity. The IMF, World Bank and WTO. London: Zed Books.

The Impact of the Implementation of Neo-liberal Policies in Mexico

287

Silva-Herzog, J. (2000). La Universidad en el exilio. In: N. E. Tello Peo´n, J. A. de la Pen˜a Mena & C. Garza Falla (Eds), La UNAM a debate. Mexico City: Cal y arena. Touraine, A. (2001a). In: D. Macey (Trans.), Beyond Neoliberalism. Cambridge: Polity. Touraine, A. (2001b). El fin de la ola liberal. In: F. Mallimaci (Ed.), Desigualdad y globalizacio´n. Buenos Aires: Ediciones Manantial SRL. Trejo, R. (2000). El secuestro de la UNAM. Mexico, DF: Cal y arena. Valle, A. (2003). Dos crisis de inicio de siglo: Estados Unidos y Me´xico. In: E. Soto Reyes Garmendia, J. Aboites Aguilar & E. Ortiz Cruz (Eds), Estado versus mercado. Mexico City: Universidad Auto´noma Metropolitana. Villa, L., & Rodrı´ guez, R. (2003). Education and development in Mexico: Middle and higher education policies in the 1990s. In: K. Middlebrook & E. Zepeda (Eds), Confronting development. Assessing Mexicos economic and social policy challenges (pp. 277–319). Stanford: Stanford University Press. World Bank. (1994). Higher education: The lessons of experience. Washington: The World Bank. World Bank. (2002). Constructing knowledge societies: New challenges for tertiary education. Washington: The World Bank.

This page intentionally left blank

288

RE-WRITING HISTORY: THE UNIVERSITY OF LONDON AS A GLOBAL INSTITUTION IN THE NINETEENTH, TWENTIETH AND TWENTY-FIRST CENTURIES Malcolm Tight ABSTRACT For nearly two centuries, the University of London has operated in a variety of ways as a national, imperial and international university. It has provided syllabuses and examinations in a wide range of disciplines and subjects for institutions in Britain and overseas to teach to. It has allowed individual students to register for its qualifications, and put together their own programmes of study, using whatever means they could. As well as enabling the development of distance study, the University has also offered an increasing amount and range of provision of this kind itself. This chapter provides a summary and analysis of the University of London’s role as an archetypal global institution.

International Relations International Perspectives on Higher Education Research, Volume 3, 289–306 Copyright r 2005 by Elsevier Ltd. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISSN: 1479-3628/doi:10.1016/S1479-3628(05)03012-1

289

290

MALCOLM TIGHT

HISTORY OR MYTH? Institutional histories, particularly but not exclusively university histories, tend to share a number of characteristics in common. They typically focus on the steady, chronological expansion and successes of the university in question, presenting their history as an inevitable progress towards the glorious present (almost as if other outcomes were not possible). They tend to stress the university’s uniqueness, while ignoring or downplaying the achievements of other institutions. The tone of writing is usually one of measured, factual and quietly enthusiastic reportage. While many aspects of university life may be discussed, the dominant perspective tends to be that of senior management; we are, after all, talking about institutional histories. Such histories also tend to lack a critical perspective, particularly when they come to deal with more recent periods; that is, the period of time in which the sponsors of the history work (Tight, 2003, pp. 141–142). To take just one example, Aldrich’s (2002) recent history of the London Institute of Education contains 11 chronological chapters, with evocative titles such as ‘a clash of cultures’, ‘war and reconstruction’, ‘expansion and stalemate’ and ‘into a new century’. It is full of photographs of buildings the Institute has occupied, generations of senior staff and groups of students doing most of the more respectable things that students do. Successive tables chart the growth in numbers of staff and students over the years. It ends with a modest, balanced, even bland, conclusion: in the future, as in the past, the Institute’s ability successfully to respond to change and to continue to provide academic and professional leadership in education will depend principally upon the quality and commitment of its staff and students. Aldrich (2002, p. 259)

For their part, and perhaps in part because of the deficiencies I have identified, those who work in academe, at least in my experience as a colleague and editor, rarely read such histories. They tend to have a rather restricted view of the history of higher education, and of the institutions they work in, but one that is, nonetheless, capable of incorporating some rather contradictory views. Thus, many seem to believe in the existence of some kind of ‘golden age’, when academic life was relatively easy and opportunities almost limitless, usually conveniently located some years before those concerned began working in higher education (see, e.g. Halsey, 1992; Martin, 1999). Most appear to think that things have changed a great deal, and usually for the worst, in recent years (e.g. Harman, 2000; McInnis; 2000). Yet, at the same time, there are many who argue that we need to develop

Re-writing History: The University of London as a Global Institution

291

new or innovative ways of doing things, notably teaching and learning, which are both different from and better than the ‘traditional’ ways. Here ‘tradition’ is being invoked in a limited and creative fashion (Hobsbawm & Ranger, 1983), not to refer to some ancient and long-hallowed behaviour, but merely to current, conventional, ‘mainstream’ or received wisdom. These perceived inadequacies, both in much university history and in many academics’ understandings of this history, were part of the motivation that led Robert Bell and me to decide to undertake the research that was eventually published as Open universities: A British tradition? (Bell & Tight, 1993). Our experience of working for the Open University had led us to wish to put its achievements into a broader historical context. This would, we hoped, both challenge the standard, if early, congratulatory histories of the Open University (e.g. Perry, 1976; Rumble, 1982; Tunstall, 1974), and enable the re-conception of largely forgotten or ignored aspects of the history of some older universities. They included, most notably, the University of London, the former Royal University of Ireland, and the University of St Andrews. The purpose of this chapter, then, is to re-visit and update that research – in particular as it concerns the University of London – and re-contextualize it in the light of contemporary debates around globalization. It has already been argued that certain aspects of the University of London’s work made it, in effect, a nineteenth and twentieth century Open University (Bell & Tight, 1995). Here, my aim is to present the University of London as an interesting example of a global institution in what have been termed the ‘modern’ (ca. 1800–1950) and ‘post-colonial’ (post-1950) periods (Hopkins, 2002a). These aspects of the University may get brief mentions in existing histories – such as those published around the time of its 150th anniversary (Harte, 1986; Thompson, 1990) – but are not, at least in my view, given anything like the attention they deserve. The reasons for this lack of attention are probably many and complex. They relate in part to the Open University’s dramatic development over the last three decades. The low regard in which forms of higher education not involving residence at elite institutions are commonly held is probably also a factor, as is the contemporary rejection of everything with imperial connections. Doubtless, however, other factors are involved as well. The remainder of this chapter is organized in five main sections. First, the contemporary debate on globalization, within which I intend to place my discussion, will be outlined. A conventional structure for the history of the University of London will then be presented. Its roles, from the

292

MALCOLM TIGHT

mid-nineteenth century onwards, as first an examining body, and second a provider of external study opportunities, will then be examined. Some reflections on the changes that have taken place during the last three or four decades, and the contemporary position of the University of London’s external programme, will then be offered. Finally, these discussions will then be drawn together in the concluding section.

GLOBALIZATION AND ITS CRITICS The idea, notion or theory of globalization has been defined by its proponents in varying terms. For example: the processes through which sovereign national states are crisscrossed and undermined by transnational actors with varying prospects of power, orientations, identities and networks. Beck (2000, p. 11) an historical process which engenders a shift in the spatial reach of networks and systems of social relations to transcontinental (or interregional) patterns of human organization, activity and the exercise of social power. Perraton (2000, p. 128)

Both of these definitions portray globalization as a process involving the development of networks across nations (see also Castells, 1996). While the latter explicitly identifies this as a historical process, and stresses social networks, the former is less historic and more generic. Somewhat surprisingly, given the contexts to which globalization has been most commonly applied, neither definition specifically mentions either political or economic networks. Globalization has become the subject of fervent debate during the last two decades or so. In part, this may be seen as related to, or as a development from, debates around cognate terms such as internationalization, modernization and, more recently, postmodernity (see, e.g. Dicken, 2003; Hirst & Thompson, 1999; Robertson, 1992; Stiglitz, 2002). There are a whole series of themes associated with, or bound up within, the idea of globalization, and part of the debate concerns the extent to which these are perceptual or actual. The themes include:    

the the the the

compression of the world (the ‘global village’); increasing adoption of a worldwide perspective on many issues; dominance of multinational companies and organizations; rise of English as the global language;

Re-writing History: The University of London as a Global Institution

293

 the worldwide spread of American culture (‘McDonaldization’);  the increasing flexibility and mobility of both capital and labour;  the impact of new information and communication technologies, notably the Internet;  the recent acceleration of these processes. The issues raised by globalization have been addressed from a variety of disciplinary perspectives, particularly within the social sciences, including most obviously those of economics, geography, management, philosophy and sociology. Not surprisingly, as in any debate, there have been disagreements over the nature and impact of globalization, and critiques of many of the arguments put forward. At one extreme we can see a somewhat naı¨ ve adoption of the ‘globalization myth’: Globalization has become a fashionable concept in the social sciences, a core dictum in the prescription of management gurus, and a catchphrase for journalists and politicians of every stripe. It is widely asserted that we live in an era in which the greater part of social life is determined by global processes, in which national cultures, national economies and national borders are dissolving. Central to this perception is the notion of a rapid and recent process of economic globalization. Hirst & Thompson (1999, p. 1)

Against this may be set a number of reservations, including:  the continued importance of national, and indeed sub-national and local, dimensions to social, cultural and economic life;  the dominance, within the globalized world, of North America, Western Europe and East Asia, and the virtual exclusion or withdrawal of many other societies;  the lack of any one accepted model of globalization;  the a-historical perspective adopted by many of the proponents of globalization. Not surprisingly, again, it is the last of these criticisms that particularly engages me here. As Hirst and Thompson (op. cit., p. 2) have put it: ‘In some respects, the current international economy is less open and integrated than the regime that prevailed from 1870 to 1914’. That argument may be extended both beyond the economy and to other historical periods, and is being so as historians have, rather belatedly, begun to turn their attention to globalization (Bardo, Taylor, & Williamson, 2003; Bayly, 2004; Hopkins, 2002b). However, at least to my knowledge, they have yet to look at the history of higher education in the context of globalization.

294

MALCOLM TIGHT

The contemporary relationship between higher education and globalization, by contrast, has been the subject of considerable discussion. This has, for example, charted the recent trend for higher education institutions to operate in countries around the world (e.g. McBurnie & Ziguras, 2001), and explored the idea of a global learning economy (e.g. Conceicao & Heitor, 2001). But these trends are, arguably, nothing new. It is in this context that the historical examining and external roles of the University of London merit re-assessment.

A STRUCTURE FOR THE HISTORY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF LONDON It may seem somewhat surprising, given its size, age and influence, that the University of London has not been the subject of more extensive historical study. In part, this is doubtless due to its very complexity, but it probably also has to do with the much closer allegiance felt by most of its students and staff to their College, rather than to the University, which can appear to be a somewhat amorphous entity. A useful outline structure for the University’s history has been suggested by Harte (1986). He identifies three main stages, and another three substages, in the development of the University: 1. What is now University College London was originally founded in 1826, as a limited liability company, taking the name ‘University of London’. 2. After a decade of dispute over the use of this title, the government chartered a new and official University of London in 1836. This was not a university in the common, modern conception of the term, but would not have seemed so out of place at the time. In short, it was an examining body. Its role was to examine and award qualifications to students from University College and the rival establishment of King’s College, the established medical schools, and such other institutions as might be recognized in London and beyond. Then (stage 2b), in 1858, and against considerable opposition, a new charter was introduced. While the University remained as an examining body, the requirement for all of its students to attend a recognized institution was done away with (though this requirement was retained for medical students). 3. After continuing an extensive debate over the relative importance of the roles of examining and teaching (as well as a growing concern with research), the University was re-organized in 1900 as a federal body. From

Re-writing History: The University of London as a Global Institution

295

then on, the University could be described as having two separate, though related, roles. What is conventionally seen as the major, or ‘internal’, role of teaching and research was based on the University’s constituent colleges in the London area. But a secondary, examining or ‘external’ role was retained, in which the University continued to offer a service to students wherever and however they were studying. In 1929 (stage 3b), constitutional changes were introduced to strengthen the powers and workings of the central University. Then, in 1981 (stage 3c), further reorganisation of the central University took place, along with some devolution of powers to the constituent colleges (which has continued). This historical structure places particular emphasis on the relative positions of the University and the Colleges that were members of it. While it does, of necessity, recognize the importance of the University’s examining and external roles, these are not, for present purposes, given sufficient prominence. By focusing chiefly, as most others have done, on the University of London as the sum of its component colleges, the distinctive roles played by the University as a university are in danger of being overlooked. To be fair, Harte did note that: The nineteenth-century University of London was, in modern terms, an amalgam of an Open University and a Council for National Academic Awards. It had neither the technology of the one, nor the system of inspection of the other, but its functions were perceived as a sort of cross between the two. ibid. (p. 25)

And he goes on to point out that: Many features of the University of London became the model for the provincial universities as they developed in the late nineteenth century, and for universities overseas in the Empire tooyThe University’s modernizing influence was immeasurable, but pervasive, in the United Kingdom and in many other parts of the world. ibid. (pp. 25–26)

A historical analysis of the University of London that laid particular emphasis on its examining and external roles, the main roles which it exercised as a university other than its role in bringing together a broad and disparate grouping of colleges, would draw attention to different dates and events. The key date would probably be seen as 1858, the overall significance of which is rather lost in Harte’s categorization by being identified as stage 2b: the adoption of the 1858 Charter by the University of London was a key moment in the expansion and democratisation of higher education in this countryy[It] sanctioned and greatly stimulated higher level study outside formal educational institutionsythis development also enabled and encouraged the establishment and growth of institutions of

296

MALCOLM TIGHT

higher education both in Britain and throughout the British Empirey[It] acted as a catalyst for the creation and rapid expansion of correspondence colleges to serve the needs of the private or distant studenty[And it] had a major influenceyin establishing more clearly the distinction between secondary and higher education. Bell and Tight (1993, pp. 51–52)

In this alternative analysis, the year 1900 would also, of course, have significance. However, the changes that took place around this date could be seen as merely recasting the examining role as the external function, without diminishing it (while also giving more emphasis to the colleges and their development). And, in addition to 1858 and 1900, other dates – as will be seen – would also be stressed. Let us examine the University’s historical development from this perspective in a little more detail.

THE UNIVERSITY OF LONDON’S EXAMINING AND EXTERNAL ROLES Taking this perspective, I would like to explore four main aspects of the University of London’s historical role as an examining body and provider of external degrees:  its role as an examining body for other institutions in the British Isles, and, latterly, within England;  its role as an examining body for other institutions throughout the British Empire, and, latterly, the Commonwealth and the world as a whole;  its role as an examining body for students studying privately or independently, often with the support of correspondence colleges;  its role in directly providing support services for students studying for its external degrees. Each of these aspects will now be considered in turn.

An Examining Body for Other British Institutions Between 1836, when the first federal University of London was chartered, and 1858, when a new charter was issued removing the need for students to study at recognized institutions, the University was in the business of recognizing institutions to prepare students for its degree and other examinations. By 1858, almost 50 institutions in the British Isles had been ‘empowered to issue certificates for degrees in arts and laws’ (the B.Sc.

Re-writing History: The University of London as a Global Institution

297

was not introduced until 1860), with an additional 80 ‘recognized medical institutions, schools and teachers’. These institutions were spread throughout the British Isles, with the former including all existing universities and a broad spread of other colleges. They included, for example, Stonyhurst College, the Royal Belfast Academical Institution, St Patrick’s College, Carlow and the Presbyterian College at Caermarthen (the distinction between school and higher education was nothing like as clear cut then as it is today). The recognized medical institutions were perhaps a more reputable group, including, for example, the Bristol Medical School, the Glasgow Royal Infirmary, the City of Dublin Hospital and the Royal Naval Hospital at Haslar (Bell & Tight, 1993, pp. 37–39). In short, it was possible for students to study for University of London qualifications throughout the country, though they would have to travel to London to sit the associated examinations. Of course, not all of the institutions recognized, particularly the non-medical institutions, would offer tuition for all of the subjects and qualifications the University examined. Most would, however, cover the initial matriculation examination (for which no previous qualification was required for entry), and the first stages of some of the degree syllabuses. Hence the argument that, by the middle of the nineteenth century, the University was operating within the British Isles as a kind of prototype Open University (Bell & Tight, 1995). From 1858, the recognition of institutions for non-medical instruction became irrelevant. Nevertheless, it continued for a while, though no new institutions were added, before the University stopped it altogether. Presumably such recognition was seen as useful by the institutions concerned. Recognition of medical institutions, on the other hand, continued to grow, with over 100 such institutions recognized in the British Isles by 1900. Instead of recognizing non-medical institutions, the post-1858 University of London began to allow its examinations to be taken at approved provincial centres. The first of these was organized as early as 1859, but the numbers of such centres initially remained small. They did, however, include Owens College, which later developed into the University of Manchester. By 1891, there were 22 provincial centres in Britain at which University of London degree examinations could be taken. About half of these only offered the matriculation examination, and only six hosted final examinations for the B.A. degree (to complete the B.Sc. degree, examination in London was still required). Unlike the pre-1858 recognized institutions, the provincial centres were mostly actual or aspirant institutions of higher education. Thus, in 1891, university colleges in Aberystwyth, Bangor, Bristol, Cardiff,

298

MALCOLM TIGHT

Leeds, Liverpool, Manchester, Nottingham and Sheffield were all listed as centres (the relationship with the Welsh colleges ended with the foundation of the University of Wales, another federal university following the London model, in 1893). By then, therefore, the University of London’s role in providing an apprenticeship for aspiring English universities was already well established. Alongside these university colleges, however, some institutions which, subsequently, were to operate solely as schools also functioned as provincial centres for the University of London’s examinations. They included, most notably, Cheltenham Ladies College, which at that time ‘was fully accepted as a University College for women’ (Clarke, 1953, p. 78), and at which the entire B.A. degree could be studied. Indeed, Cheltenham Ladies College only ceased preparing young women for the London degree in 1924 (Bell & Tight, 1993, pp. 39–42, 118). From modest beginnings, the University’s examining function had become a major operation by the beginning of the twentieth century. In 1901, there were a total of 7,335 candidates for all of the examinations offered, of whom 3,880 (53%) passed. While the majority of candidates, 4,198 or 57%, were taking the matriculation examination, 904 (12%) had progressed to taking the final examinations for the B.A., B.Sc., M.B. or LL.B. degrees. The University’s records list hundreds of institutions as being involved in preparing these students. While many schools are listed alongside colleges as preparing students for the matriculation examinations, the colleges (London and other) were beginning to dominate the lists for the degree examinations (ibid., pp. 44–48). In the twentieth century, the numbers of candidates for the University’s examinations continued to grow. Thus, while there were only 3,137 candidates for post-matriculation examinations in 1901, by 1911 this had risen to 5,583, and to 15,193 in 1938. From the 1930s onwards, the University required external students to register, so we get a fuller picture of the scale of the enterprise. The first such statistics, for 1933, show 11,296 registered external students. After the Second World War, numbers rose again, from 19,257 registrations in 1946 to a peak of 35,198 in 1969/1970. Indeed, it was not until the 1960s that internal student numbers began consistently to overtake external registrations. Statistics are also available from the mid-1920s on the kinds of institutions which external candidates were studying with. Thus, in 1926, of 6,539 external candidates, 3,969 (61%) are recorded as studying at British educational institutions, split fairly evenly between colleges in London and the provinces, though 364 (6%) were studying for London degrees at other

Re-writing History: The University of London as a Global Institution

299

British universities. Many of the London polytechnics, technical and teacher training colleges enjoyed a close relationship with the University of London, having the status, following the 1900 re-organization, of ‘institutions having recognized teachers’. The overall proportions of students studying at different kinds of institutions remained similar, while the numbers of external candidates increased, up until the mid-1960s. Thus, in 1966, of 20,934 external candidates, 11,740 (56%) were recorded as preparing at British institutions, though these were now mostly technical colleges (soon to be polytechnics). The last English university college to serve its apprenticeship as a provincial examination centre for the University of London external degree, Leicester, had gained independent university status in 1957. Even as late as 1976, however, when the Council for National Academic Awards (CNAA) had been in operation for more than a decade, 6,230 (24%) external candidates were still studying with polytechnics or colleges of higher education (ibid., pp. 104–107, 117, 119).

An Examining Body for Overseas Institutions The pre-1858 University of London did not confine itself to recognizing institutions within the British Isles. This function was also extended overseas by the provisions of a secondary Charter awarded in 1850, though on nothing like the same scale as in Britain. Thus, by 1858, only two overseas institutions had been ‘empowered to issue certificates for degrees in arts and laws’, with six (including the University of Malta, Ceylon Military Hospital, Bengal Medical College and the University of M’Gill College, Montreal) recognized as medical institutions. These provisions expanded in the latter part of the nineteenth century. In 1865, examinations were held for the first time in an overseas colony, Mauritius, and, between then and the end of the century, University of London examinations were held in a total of 18 colonies spread right across the globe (Namie, 1989, pp. 428, 434). The 1882 University Calendar, for example, mentions no less than 17 colonial centres at which the matriculation examinations could be taken. These included Bombay, Calcutta and Madras in India; Barbados, Demerara, Jamaica and Trinidad in the West Indies; Fredericton, Halifax, Kingston, Montreal, Ottawa, Quebec, St John’s and Toronto in Canada; plus New Zealand and Tasmania. In total, between 1865 and 1899, some 1,682 candidates sat the University of London examinations in the colonies, just over half of them in one small

300

MALCOLM TIGHT

colony, Mauritius (ibid., p. 434). In most cases, the students concerned would then have to come to Britain if they wanted to complete a degree. These facilities were cut back at the end of the century, as universities were established in the major colonies, but were then expanded in colonies that still did not have universities (Bell & Tight, 1993, pp. 37, 39, 43, 49). By that time, the University of London had become a global as well as a national university, serving the higher education needs of the Empire as well as the British Isles. At the beginning of the twentieth century, however, the University considered curtailing its overseas examinations, but the government had other ideas. The University of London continued to be regarded, in Namie’s words, as ‘the mother university of the British Empire’ (1989, p. 390). Between 1900 and 1939, the University’s examinations were held in 43 colonies and 14 other countries, as well as on board one of the Navy’s ships and, during the First World War, in a number of German prisoner-of-war camps. Over this period, a total of 42,601 overseas candidates were examined, of whom 13,859 (33%) passed, with 68% of the latter coming from just one colony, Ceylon. Nearly all of the University’s examinations could be taken overseas, subject to demand and available supervision, and the University showed itself increasingly willing to adapt its procedures and syllabuses as requested (Bell & Tight, 1993, pp. 123–124). During the latter part of the Second World War, a series of government commissions were set up to review the development of higher education in the British colonies in Africa and the West Indies. They recommended that existing or new university colleges should be built up to university status, in anticipation of the coming independence of the countries concerned. The University of London’s external degree system was given the major role in enabling this (a number of other universities were also involved to a more limited extent: Maxwell, 1980; Pattison, 1984). Special partnership relationships were entered into with eight institutions in Africa and the Caribbean, which started in 1947 and only finally ended in 1970, when the last of the university colleges involved attained independent status (Bell & Tight, 1993, pp. 94–95, 124–125).

An Examining Body for Private Students One of the most interesting aspects of the University of London’s examination system in the nineteenth century is the stimulus it provided to private study, private tuition and correspondence study. Thus, in 1891, 16% of those passing the matriculation examination stated that they had prepared

Re-writing History: The University of London as a Global Institution

301

themselves by private study alone, with a further 10% stating they had relied solely on private tuition. For the B.A. Pass examinations, the proportions were even more impressive: 40% and 7%, respectively. At this time, then, private study and tuition were common methods of preparation. Numerous advertisements for private tutors appeared in the journals of the day, and some were included in the University’s Calendar (Bell & Tight, 1993, pp. 45, 50). Most of those preparing for their examinations by private study probably made at least some use of correspondence courses, which first rose to prominence – following the development of an efficient postal service – in the second half of the nineteenth century. Indeed, the main correspondence colleges played a far greater role in the preparation of candidates for the University’s examinations at this time than any of the colleges or schools: in the year 1890 nearly 40% of successful Arts graduates had received their tuition, in whole or in part, from University Correspondence College. By the year 1899 the percentage figure was just over 60. Elliott (1973, p. 80)

The University Correspondence College was so successful that it was able to take out a 30-page advertisement in the 1889–1890 edition of the University of London’s Calendar, following which such advertisements were banned. Its advertisement detailed the comprehensive range of textbooks, model answers, tutorial classes, revision classes, tutors, library facilities and correspondence courses available (Bell & Tight, 1993, pp. 50–51). Correspondence study continued to assist a great number of students in preparing for the University’s external examinations throughout the twentieth century. Typically, in any one year, between 15% and 30% of all external candidates stated that correspondence study was their main or only method of preparation. In the first half of the century, the three main providers were the University Correspondence College, Wolsey Hall and the Metropolitan Correspondence College. The first of these was eventually taken over by the National Extension College, which continued to provide support for London external students (de Salvo, 2002). Wolsey Hall continued its work, and a number of other specialist providers entered the field (Bell & Tight, 1993, pp. 120–122).

A Provider of Support Services for External Students It was only during the twentieth century – partly as a consequence of the split between the internal and external sides of the University, and partly

302

MALCOLM TIGHT

because of increasing concerns over quality – that the University of London began to pay closer attention to the support given to external students. First, in the aftermath of the First World War, and funded by City of London businesses with the intention of better training their workforces to compete in increasingly international markets (a clear precursor of contemporary arguments about globalization there), the Commerce Degree Bureau was established in 1920. For the first time, the University was directly involved in the provision of correspondence study courses. The numbers of students registered with the Bureau grew steadily, to peak in 1970 at 940. In that year, the Bureau employed 60 part-time tutors, who corrected 5,605 scripts, and 2,597 books were borrowed from its library. Courses of study were provided for all of the compulsory, and many of the optional, papers for what had then become the B.Sc. (Econ.) degree. Second, in 1924, a more general Advisory Service for external students was established. It offered a more limited range of services than the Commerce Degree Bureau, and had two main functions. One was, literally, to advise students on the availability of libraries, instruction and correspondence courses; while the other was the provision of written study schemes (of up to 20 pages for an honours degree) for each examination. The work of the Advisory Service peaked after the Second World War; thus, in 1945, 5,755 students were advised, with 2,670 receiving more focused, specialist advice from academics (Bell & Tight, 1993, pp. 109–115).

DECLINE AND RE-BIRTH? After more than a century of service to institutions and individuals at home and overseas, it seemed that the University of London’s external role would come to the end in the 1970s. The expansion of the higher education system associated with the Robbins Report (Committee on Higher Education, 1963) meant that many students who might otherwise have registered for external degrees could now study at their local universities. The establishment of the CNAA in 1964 to validate degree courses in polytechnics and colleges in time removed the University of London’s remaining English institutional links. The chartering of the Open University in 1969 made a much more comprehensive support system available for students studying at a distance. The end of the British Empire made the continuance of the University of London’s overseas role questionable. A succession of cutbacks in the external operation took place. In 1972 it was resolved to cease the registration of full-time (but not part-time)

Re-writing History: The University of London as a Global Institution

303

external students in British polytechnics and colleges by 1977. In 1974 it was decided to cease the general availability of overseas registrations by the same date. Registration for science degrees was discontinued in 1981. Almost as soon as these decisions were taken, however, the University authorities began to have second thoughts, and to reconsider whether there was still demand for the external degree, both at home and overseas. From the 1980s onwards, therefore, a series of initiatives were taken to re-build the external programme (Bell & Tight, 1993, pp. 94–99, 101, 115–116). The key initiative here, a development from the University’s earlier efforts at providing support services for its students, was the launch of the Independent Guided Study scheme in 1987. While nothing like as comprehensive as the Open University’s provision, this enabled students to subscribe to a coordinated programme of correspondence and audiovisual materials, study courses and informal tutorial assessment. Nowadays, the University of London external programme appears to be again in good health. Student numbers are rising, and exceeded their previous peak in 2003/04, when 36,759 were registered (personal communication from Richard Arnold). In the academic year 2002/03, there were a total of 30,424 enrolled external students. Four out of five, 80%, were studying on 40 undergraduate programmes. The most popular qualifications were in law, which accounted for 43% of all undergraduate enrolments. Students enrolled for degrees or diplomas in computing, economics, information systems and management together accounted for a further 28% of the total. A further 16% of enrolled students were following 61 postgraduate qualifications. While the locations of these students betray the imperial history of the external programme – the degrees are, after all, examined in English – a different geography has now been overlain upon this. Less than 12% of students are now based in the U.K. with the majority, 57%, located in the Asia-Pacific region. Three Commonwealth countries, Singapore, Hong Kong and Malaysia, dominate the registrations, with Trinidad and Tobago also a potent source for recruitment (www.londonexternal.ac.uk). Clearly, though, there is considerable volatility in registrations, with the importance of particular national and subject markets fluctuating year by year in the light of economic and other factors. Organizationally, the external programme has also moved on. Each qualification offered is now the responsibility of a ‘lead college’ from within the University of London, representing an interesting over-turning of the long-lasting external/internal divide. External undergraduates now receive a student handbook and study guides for each unit, together with advice on

304

MALCOLM TIGHT

the support they could purchase from other institutions (with some of which, notably in the Asia-Pacific region, the University has entered into formal agreements). For most of the postgraduate qualifications, more extensive support is available. Students receive a complete set of study materials, access to online journals and tutorial support. In the future, though this has obvious implications for costs, a ‘virtual campus’ is a possibility (Arnold, 2004).

AN ARCHETYPAL GLOBAL INSTITUTION? For nearly two centuries, therefore, the University of London – initially through its examining function, and latterly through its external role – has operated in a variety of ways as a national, imperial and now global university. It has provided syllabuses and examinations in the full range of disciplines for institutions in Britain and overseas to teach to. It has allowed individual students to register for its qualifications, and put together their own programmes of study, using private study, private tuition, distance study and face-to-face tuition as they saw fit. As well as enabling the development of distance study, the University has offered an increasing amount and range of provision of this kind itself, and is now looking forward to a possible virtual future. This history deserves a wider understanding and appreciation. Indeed, it should be celebrated. And, as more and more universities get involved in distance provision and/or teaching in other countries, it offers many lessons about how things might be done and what can be achieved.

REFERENCES Aldrich, R. (2002). The Institute of Education 1902–2002: A centenary history. London: Institute of Education. Arnold, R. (2004). Models of student support within the University of London external programme: Historical development and future evolution. Unpublished paper, University of London external programme. Bardo, M., Taylor, A., & Williamson, J. (Eds) (2003). Globalization in historical perspective. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Bayly, C. (2004). The birth of the modern world 1780–1914. Oxford: Blackwell. Beck, U. (2000). What is globalization? Cambridge: Polity. Bell, R., & Tight, M. (1993). Open universities: A British tradition? Buckingham: Open University Press.

Re-writing History: The University of London as a Global Institution

305

Bell, R., & Tight, M. (1995). Open universities in nineteenth century Britain. Open Learning, 10(2), 3–11. Castells, M. (1996). The rise of the network society. Oxford: Blackwell. Clarke, A. (1953). A history of Cheltenham Ladies’ College, 1853–1953. London: Faber. Committee on Higher Education. (1963). Report. London, HMSO, Cmnd 2154. Conceicao, P., & Heitor, M. (2001). Universities in the learning economy: Balancing institutional integrity with organizational diversity. In: D. Archibugi & B.-A. Lundvall (Eds), The globalizing learning economy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Dicken, P. (2003). Global shift: Reshaping the global economic map in the 21st century (4th ed.). London: Sage. Elliott, S. (1973). Tuition by correspondence: A study of growth in Britain, principally during the period 1870 to 1914. MEd thesis. University of Leicester. Halsey, A. (1992). The decline of donnish dominion: The British academic professions in the twentieth century. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Harman, G. (2000). Academic work and values in Australian higher education, 1977 to 1997. In: M. Tight (Ed.), Academic work and life: What it is to be an academic, and how this is changing. Oxford: Elsevier Science/JAI. Harte, N. (1986). The University of London 1836–1986: An illustrated history. London: Athlone Press. Hirst, P., & Thompson, G. (1999). Globalization in question: The international economy and the possibilities of governance. Malden, MS: Polity Press. Hobsbawm, E., & Ranger, T. (Eds) (1983). The invention of tradition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hopkins, A. (2002a). Introduction: Globalization – An agenda for historians. In: A. Hopkins (Ed.), Globalization in world history. London: Pimlico. Hopkins, A. (Ed.) (2002b). Globalization in world history. London: Pimlico. Martin, E. (1999). Changing academic work: Developing the learning university. Buckingham: Open University Press. Maxwell, I. (1980). Universities in partnership: The inter-university council and the growth of higher education in developing countries, 1946–1970. Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press. McBurnie, G., & Ziguras, C. (2001). The regulation of transnational higher education in southeast Asia: Case studies of Hong Kong, Malaysia and Australasia. Higher Education, 42, 85–105. McInnis, C. (2000). Towards new balance or new divides? The changing work roles of academics in Australia. In: M. Tight (Ed.), Academic work and life: What it is to be an academic, and how this is changing. Oxford: Elsevier Science/JAI. Namie, Y. (1989). The role of the University of London Colonial Examinations between 1900 and 1939, with special reference to Mauritius, the Gold Coast and Ceylon. Ph.D. thesis. University of London, London. Pattison, B. (1984). Special relations: The University of London and new universities overseas, 1947–1970. London: University of London. Perraton, J. (2000). The consequences of globalization and corporate structures for projects of social inclusion. In: P. Askonas & A. Stewart (Eds), Social inclusion: Possibilities and tensions. Basingstoke: Macmillan. Perry, W. (1976). Open University: A personal account by the first vice-chancellor. Milton Keynes: Open University Press. Robertson, R. (1992). Globalization: Social theory and global culture. London: Sage.

306

MALCOLM TIGHT

Rumble, G. (1982). The Open University of the United Kingdom: An evaluation of an innovative experience in the democratisation of higher education. Milton Keynes: Open University Distance Education Research Group. de Salvo, A. (2002). The rise and fall of the university correspondence college. Cambridge: National Extension College Trust. Stiglitz, J. (2002). Globalization and its discontents. London: Allen Lane. Thompson, F. (Ed.) (1990). The University of London and the world of learning, 1836–1986. London: Hambledon Press. Tight, M. (2003). Researching higher education. Maidenhead: Open University Press. Tunstall, J. (Ed.) (1974). The Open University opens. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

ABOUT THE AUTHORS Christine Asmar works in the Institute for Teaching and Learning at the University of Sydney, Australia. Her current research considers questions of difference, internationalisation and globalisation in higher education, with particular reference to Muslim and Indigenous issues. Hamish Coates is a higher education researcher in the Centre for the Study of Higher Education, University of Melbourne, Australia, specialising in the student experience of assessment and evaluation. Grant Harman is Emeritus Professor of Educational Management at the University of New England, Armidale, Australia. His current research focuses on internationalisation of higher education, higher education management, technology transfer and research commercialisation. Jeroen Huisman is Professor of Higher Education Management and Director of the International Centre for Higher Education Management at the University of Bath, UK. His main research interests are organisational change higher education, and the impact of governmental policies. Steve Issitt directs the 20-week English for Academic Purposes (EAP) presessional course in the English for International Students Unit at the University of Birmingham, UK. His research interests include academic literacy in EAP. Richard James is a higher education researcher in the Centre for the Study of Higher Education, University of Melbourne, Australia, specialising in the student experience, access and equity, and quality assurance. John Klapper is the Director of the Centre for Modern Languages at the University of Birmingham, UK. His research interests include the development of foreign language proficiency, language teacher education and language teaching methodology. 307

308

ABOUT THE AUTHORS

Kerri-Lee Krause is a higher education researcher in the Centre for the Study of Higher Education, University of Melbourne, Australia, specialising in the transition to university and the first year experience. Judith Lamie is the director of the English for International Students Unit at the University of Birmingham, UK. Her main research interests include the management of change and innovation in English language teaching, and international student profiling. Anneke Luijten-Lub is a research associate at the Center for Higher Education Policy Studies, University of Twente, The Netherlands. Her main research interest is in organisational change in higher education, particularly as it relates to internationalisation and globalisation. Vassiliki Papatsiba is a Senior Research Fellow at the Centre for Higher Education Research and Information; at the Open University, UK. Her most recent research relates to the comparison of changes and reforms in higher education in Europe. Jan Parker is a Senior Research Fellow in Humanities Higher Education at the Open University, UK and a Cambridge classicist. She is founder editor of the journal, Arts and Humanities in Higher Education and an executive editor of Teaching in Higher Education. Anthony Potts works at La Trobe University, Bendigo, Australia. Currently he is working on a study of academic life in new universities and on politicians’ perspectives on universities. Jonathan Rees is the Director of intensive English for Academic Purposes courses at the English for International Students Unit, University of Birmingham, UK. His research interests include foreign language proficiency assessment, language test design and international educational policy. Linda Russell is a Professor/Researcher at the Autonomous University of Campeche, Mexico. Her current research considers how questions of social capital and organizational culture affect the impact of the importation of global tertiary education policy on local academic communities. Her field of research has concentrated so far on Mexican Universities.

About the Authors

309

Malcolm Tight is Professor of Higher Education at Lancaster University, UK. His current research focuses on the characteristics of higher education research and the development of higher education in the UK since 1945. Marijk van der Wende is a professor at the Center for Higher Education Studies, University of Twente, The Netherlands. She holds a chair in comparative higher education studies, with special reference to the impact of globalisation and network technologies.

This page intentionally left blank

310