Search results

The recent development of higher education in Africa has been spurred, in part, through a variety of cross-border higher education (CBHE) initiatives. However, this is not a new trend and this chapter traces the development of CBHE activities in Africa from the early 1900s through the current era. While the earliest forms of CBHE were largely fostered through Western nations providing advice and validation to institutions in Africa, the types of CBHE engagements are much more varied, including collaborations among African nations. The chapter also explores the push by some African nations to become educational hubs, the variability of CBHE policies across nations, and the shift of collaboration from the global north to south.

This paper aims to review the higher education system in India and to examine the challenges and opportunities for cross border higher education.

The paper uses a review of published statistics and extant literature on Indian higher education provision, regulatory mechanisms and cross border higher education.

The higher education system in India is long established, has many strengths and has significant potential for growth. Whilst the regulatory system is largely onerous and could be simplified, there is significant scope for growth of cross border higher education.

Within the context of the current developments taking place in the higher education sector in India, this paper addresses issues related to growth and the challenges and opportunities for cross border higher education.

The purpose of this paper is to set out the experience of the Hong Kong Council for Accreditation of Academic and Vocational Qualifications (HKCAAVQ) in carrying out cross-border quality assurance (QA) in Macao.

The paper draws on case studies of two very different QA exercises conducted by HKCAAVQ in Macao in 2015 and 2016. The first was a program accreditation conducted as part of a pilot of the external QA standards and process developed by the Macao Government’s Tertiary Education Services Office (GAES) for potential use by all higher education institutions (HEIs) in Macao. The second was a learning program review (LPR) conducted by HKCAAVQ following a request by a HEI in Macao using QA standards and processes developed by HKCAAVQ.

The key findings from the case studies are that an agency engaging in cross-border QA needs to have a clear rationale for their engagement, ensure that they are “fit-for-purpose” in terms of the context of the employing jurisdiction and the expectations of their HEIs and have a clear understanding of the relevant legal framework.

Cross-border QA is likely to grow in importance and activity in the coming years. The example of Macao provides a useful reference point for governments, HEIs and external quality assurance agency considering engaging in cross-border QA activities.

Differences between UK countries in HE policy and provision concerning the accessibility of HE study for students, and the costs of that study, have implications for cross-border study mobility. Those qualified for and wishing to enter HE are affected both by financial support for students and the provision of the HE service in terms of the number of places and the shape and history of the sector within their home country, and in comparison to other countries of the UK. In addition, funding policies for mobile students do not recognise social diversity and so have an unequal impact on students in relation to their socio-economic resources, a consequence of the territorial frame of reference and unequal devolution arrangements which work against a UK-wide social citizenship. Drawing on a quantitative analysis of student data, this chapter discusses the unequal conditions of access, opportunity and financial support for HE across the UK and how this may have a negative impact on the role of cross-border mobility in widening participation.

The purpose of this paper is to provide evidence on the importance of cross-border cooperation in the quality assurance of transnational education (TNE) by offering a comparative overview of how TNE is quality assured by both sending and receiving countries. Through this comparative analysis, it will be possible to appreciate the diversity of approaches to TNE. The paper also shows that for the foreseeable future, progress towards effective and effiicient quality assurance of TNE cannot rest on the hope of developing an internationally agreed framework, but it must rest on strengthening cooperation between quality assurance agencies operating within different national frameworks.

This paper looks at four key sending countries of TNE, the UK, Australia, the USA and Germany, considering the main drivers for out-going TNE, its main features and how it is quality assured. It then considers the same aspects from the perspective of receiving countries of TNE, looking at four key receiving locations, China, Dubai, Singapore and Hong Kong. It also offers an overview of some recent international initiatives aimed at fostering cross-border cooperation in the quality assurance of TNE.

In the backdrop of this overview of different approaches to TNE, this paper will conclude that for the foreseeable future it is not possible to develop an internationally agreed view and approach to TNE and its quality assurance. This conclusion allows the author to focus on the importance of cross-border cooperation amongst quality assurance agencies in sending and receiving countries for the effective and efficient quality assurance of TNE.

This is the first comparative study of different countries’ approaches to TNE and its quality assurance, taking into account both sending and receiving countries. It allows pointing to the key different features in different countries’ approaches and illustrates how these often relate to the underlining national strategic priorities and drivers for TNE (either in-bound or out-bound). It also allows the international community to realise that in the absence of a viable shared and agreed international framework for the regulation and quality assurance of TNE, it is of paramount importance to focus efforts on inter-agency cross-border cooperation in order to ensure that TNE continues to be of good quality and relevant to the respective communities.

The purpose of this paper is to share insights, research findings and discuss key issues related to graduate experiences with transnational nursing education (TNE).

The authors used a qualitative approach and sampled national and international nurse graduates to identify challenges and best operating practices in cross-border nursing program facilitation.

This research paper has provided a platform for graduates to lend their voices to the promotion of effective cross-border nursing education delivery and suggests that although international collaborations endeavor to maintain high academic standards in TNE, there is still a need to re-engineer, revise and adapt curricular content, learning, teaching and assessment practices to aid the nursing student.

Identified challenges affecting the facilitation and delivery of cross-border nursing education programs can act as levers to improving service quality of present and future cross-border programs to the nursing student. This will assist future nursing students to recognize culture shock and embrace their decision to pursue nursing.

The experience of being involved in TNE for nursing students may not be that much different than students of other disciplines. While not able to be generalized to the entire population, the reports by the nursing students in this sample appear to be valuable and worthwhile to continue supporting and encouraging other TNE opportunities.

This paper explores cross-border nursing education experiences from national and international perspectives. The authors were able to explore inherent TNE challenges from diverse population and cultural backgrounds.

During the past two decades, China has been rapidly rising in nearly every aspect. With the growing prominence of economic prosperity in China, numerous multinational corporations and companies across the globe have entered this vast market in order to benefit from this enlarging economy. This development also creates an emerging market in China to educate senior managers of these transnational firms in the form of cross‐border partnerships among regional universities. The EMBA programme, a more internationally oriented educational product, is thriving in the Greater China Area. This study aims to examine how universities in China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan are partnering with other institutions in order to deliver collaborative EMBA programmes for this educational market.

The article uses case study as research approach by selecting ten famous cross‐border EMBA programs from elite universities in China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan for analysis.

The result shows that distinctive patterns of organisational behaviour are present in terms of how selective universities in Greater China organise their cross‐border EMBA programmes. By combining abundant academic resources with their partners, Chinese institutions aim to enhance their programme reputation and mainly serve the territorial needs of executive managers within China. Hong Kong, serving a bridging role, is inclined to cooperate with leading universities in Western countries and attract all kinds of students across the globe, including Chinese ones. Alternatively, Taiwanese universities cooperate with major universities or institutions in China in order to serve the needs of Taiwanese businessmen in China instead of Chinese nationals or foreign students. These different approaches indicate a labour division among universities in these three societies, with China targeting primarily the domestic market, Hong Kong aiming at the global market, and Taiwan seeking to serve its country's population.

The different approaches employed by universities reveal how neighbouring societies react to the rise of China respectively. The uneven division of universities among these three societies might to some extent reflect the concepts of “centre” and “periphery” developed by Philip G. Altbach.

The 2020 pandemic disrupted traditional student mobility and forced a larger majority of transnational programmes to switch to a virtual or hybrid mode, including joint and double degree programmes. Therefore, this study aims to perceive the linkage between quality assurance (QA) and delivery modes of cross-border higher education (CBHE) in Asia before and during the pandemic.

Through an online survey and semi-structured interviews, the process by which top 200 ranked universities in the 2022 QS global ranking responded to QA and qualification issues of joint/dual degree programs in conjunction with delivery modes was explored.

The study has discovered that most respondents from universities, to some extent, tended to be positive about the effectiveness of hybrid delivery of the joint/dual degree programs, even if they still preferred the physical mode to alternatives. Either “divergence” or “responsiveness” QA modes were not applied appropriately in most joint/dual degree programs of the selected universities during the pandemic. Moreover, a fair, transparent and convergent quality and qualification system should be established to facilitate agility and responsiveness of CBHE.

The findings are of value for policymakers, QA agencies and universities to advocate the new QA model for CBHE as a systematic approach in response to changing higher education landscape in the post-pandemic era.

In response to the emergence of a strong cross-border student flow of postgraduate students from mainland China to the Macau Special Administrative Region (Macau), this study examines the motivations and experience of a special group of doctoral students: college teachers working in Guangdong Province and simultaneously pursuing PhD degrees at private universities in Macau.

Using a qualitative research method, thirteen college teachers were interviewed.

The research findings reveal their motivations for pursuing doctoral studies in Macau, and the difficulties they faced and gains they obtained from this experience.

All the findings indicate a potential expansion of the role of Macau’s higher education system. Once merely a stepping-stone, it is now an acceleration site for brain circulation between Macau and Guangdong as part of a regionalization strategy for China’s Greater Bay Area.

In 2022, the International Network for Quality Assurance (QA) Agencies in Higher Education (INQAAHE) published the new guidelines by adding three QA modules in response to the changing higher education landscape. The paper aims to investigate the transformative focus of quality assurance in higher education globally as well as Asian response to three new QA modules according to the INQAAHE ISGs.

The research conducted a quantitative approach for data collection. An on-line survey was conducted to perceive QA practices, perceptions toward new emerging QA modules and challenges encountered. In total, there were 26 responses from 18 territories with 22 QA agencies. A total of 13 out of them have a national qualifications framework in place.

Three are three major findings in the study. First, national policy and criteria and standards in distance education have been developed in the majority of Asian nations. Second, non-signatories of the Tokyo Convention had a higher proportion of having related policies, regulations and criteria in CBHE and distance education. Third, national policies and regulations; and lack of professional staff are two common challenges implementing QA in new types of providers.

The findings are of value for policymakers, QA agencies and universities to advocate the new QA model as a systematic approach in response to changing higher education landscape in the post pandemic era.