Reimagining university internationalisation for a socially just, sustainable world

This presentation explores the reasons that export education has come to dominate internationalisation agendas in Anglophone universities and discusses some of the critiques of this business model in the light of the sustainable development goals. It outlines possible ways that the benefits of internationalisation can be achieved, while mitigating the social bads in terms of climate change, global structural inequality and neocolonialism. It finishes by reviewing one attempt by an Irish university to build an internationalisation, or global engagement, strategy which puts sustainable development more firmly at the heart of policymaking.

1. Reimagining university internationalisation for a socially just, sustainable world 14 August 2024 Professor Nigel Healey Vice President Global and Community Engagement

2. Background Healey, N. (2023). Reinventing international higher education for a socially just, sustainable world. Perspectives: Policy and Practice in Higher Education , DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13603108.2023.2217780

3. Overview The benefits of internationalisation Internationalisation versus export education Export education as a business model Critiques of the export education model from an SDG perspective Reimagining a socially just, sustainable model of internationalisation The University of Limerick as a case study of a more sustainable global engagement strategy

4. The benefits of internationalisation ‘ T he intentional process of integrating an international, intercultural or global dimension into the purpose, functions and delivery of post-secondary education, in order to enhance the quality of education and research for all students and staff, and to make a meaningful contribution to society ’ (de Wit et al., 2015) Key benefits for students: Global citizenship Graduate employability Critical thinking and ‘ontological shock’ (counter to ’echo chambers’) Wider benefits for society: Global research collaboration Soft power Capacity-building in source countries (eg, 1951 Colombo Plan)

5. Internationalisation versus export education ‘ [E] xports of education services can be delivered either offshore (by the internet, correspondence or Australian professionals travelling oversea) or onshore (by foreign students entering Australia for the purpose of study )’ (Hall and Hooper, 2008)

6. Internationalisation as ‘ export education plus ’

7. E xport education as an alternative to internationalisation Motive: global citizenship Motive: financial/commercial

8. Internationalisation in the European Union 14m €26bn 2021-27

9. Estimated average annual domestic/international tuition fee ISCED 6 at public universities (US$ PPP)   % international students Domestic fee (EU/EEA) International fee Australia 28% 5,024 19,602 Canada 16% 5,060 24,561 Ireland 11% 8,304 25,036 New Zealand 21% 4,584 20,836 Austria 18% 952 1,903 Hungary 13% 3,834 4,832 Germany 10% 148 444 Source: Education at a Glance 2021 , OECD  

10. Export education as a business model E xport education exists when two conditions are satisfied: that for the exporting universities, the return on enrolling international students exceeds that of domestic students (either because domestic student numbers are capped and/or domestic tuition fees are controlled) and that students with the means to pay in foreign source markets cannot gain a place in a local university of comparable quality

11. The current business model of export education   % international enrolments % market share of global market   2010 2014 2019 2019* Australia 21% 18% 28% 8% Canada n/a 10% 16% 5% Ireland n/a 7% 11% 0% New Zealand 14% 19% 21% 1% United Kingdom 16% 18% 19% 8% United States 3% 4% 5% 16% Source: Education at a Glance 2021, OECD * last ‘normal’ year for which there is currently data

12. The current business model: the ‘virtuous circle’ WUR Institution % international enrolments 1 Massachusetts Institute of Technology 32.8% 2 University of Cambridge 37.7% 3 Stanford University 22.8% 4 University of Oxford 41.1% 5 Harvard University 24.6% 6= California Institute of Technology 30.5% 6= Imperial College London 61.1% 8 University College London 60.9% 9 ETH Zurich 40.3% 10 University of Chicago 27.2% Source: https://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/world-university-rankings/2023

13. International student recruitment funding research ‘foreign students funded a wave of frenetic campus building and underwrote the outsized salaries of the star academics who helped keep Australian universities riding high in international league tables’ (Ross, 2022) ‘more than half of the A$12bn universities invest in research each year comes from a pool of funds that relies on international student fees’ (Horne, 2020)

14. The current business model: risks exposed by Covid-19 WUR Institution Fixed-term/permanent job losses March 2020-March 2021 % international enrolments 45 UNSW -728 -10.0% 46.8% 57 Monash -628 -7.4% 55.0% 190= RMIT -583 -12.4% 31.3% 137 UTS -489 -12.6% 40.8% 30 ANU -470 -9.8% 35.6% Source: Department of Education

15. Critiques of the current business model of export education

16. Critiques of the current business model of export education : environmental cost (1) Source: Accelerating the UK Tertiary Education Sector towards Net Zero

17. Critiques of the current business model of export education : environmental cost (2) Source: https://www.carbonfootprint.com/calculator.aspx

18. Critiques of the current business model of export education: negative impact on source countries Drain on foreign exchange Inflated cost of educating wealthy elites: “In which moral universe can you…charge [African students] three times the fees that you would charge middle-class students in the UK?” Brain drain – exacerbated by the use of post-study immigration regimes as a tool of national competitive advantage Brain drain is worse the more highly skilled the graduates: eg, 68% international students on US doctoral programmes still working in US five years after graduation

19. Critiques of the current business model of export education: neo-colonialism

20. Reinventing higher education for a socially just, sustainable world (1)

21. Reinventing higher education for a socially just, sustainable world (2)

22. Reinventing higher education for a socially just, sustainable world (3)

23. Building a new Global Engagement Strategy at the University of Limerick Key objectives: To maximise the research and learning benefits from internationalisation To minimise the social bads of achieving these benefits To put social justice and sustainable development at the heart of global engagement

24. Global engagement as a means to an end

25. How can global engagement help us achieve our goals for research?

26. How can global engagement help us achieve our goals for learning, teaching and assessment?

27. How can global engagement help us achieve our goals for equity, diversity and inclusion?

28. ‘Muintir’: Exhibition celebrates diversity in Limerick’s higher education institutions

29. How can global engagement help us achieve our goals for sustainable development? Transnational education

30. New TNE directions for the University of Limerick

31. Operationalising Action Through Partnership

32. Go raibh maith agat (Gur ruh mah a-gut) For more details: [email protected] For more information and research documents on international higher education: https://limerick.academia.edu/NigelHealey