Search results

The purpose of this paper is to investigate how, and the extent to which, massive open online courses (MOOCs) might be used in the accreditation of students’ prior learning, in programme delivery at international branch campuses, and for lecturers’ professional development (PD) in transnational higher education.

The data were obtained from two international branch campuses in the United Arab Emirates. The research adopted a qualitative methodology that involved 20 lecturers participating in semi-structured interviews and ten lecturers participating in a focus group. A rigorous process of content analysis was used to analyse and interpret the data.

Lecturers in transnational higher education perceived that MOOCs were not suitable for accredited prior learning but that they might be useful as a supplementary resource for student learning and for personal PD. There was a strong belief that as international branch campuses offered a commodified product, MOOCs were unlikely to be adopted as a replacement for traditional programme delivery methods, as students strongly prefer face-to-face teaching and support.

The research has identified a number of recommendations for higher education institutions operating in transnational settings, which might improve both institutional and individual performance. Institutions that intend to use MOOCs in programme delivery should consider how their students and staff would react to such a move, and how this might impact upon institutional image and reputation.

Surprisingly, there has been little academic research published on the use of MOOCs in higher education, and to the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study conducted in a transnational education setting. The uniqueness of the environment in which international branch campuses operate, as well as their different objectives and student profiles, provide the rationale for this research.

Given that there exists in the literature relatively little research into student experiences in transnational higher education, the purpose of this paper is to identify the determinants of student satisfaction at international branch campuses in the United Arab Emirates (UAE).

This quantitative study involved 247 undergraduate and postgraduate students at branch campuses in the UAE who completed a questionnaire using either hard copies or an online version.

It was found that levels of student satisfaction at UAE branch campuses were generally high. The factors that were most influential in determining whether or not a student at a UAE branch campus was satisfied overall with their institution were quality of lecturers, quality and availability of resources, and effective use of technology.

Given that cultures, customs, traditions and social contexts vary considerably in different locations, the findings of this study are not generalisable across all international branch campuses globally.

The findings indicate that there remains scope for UAE branch campuses to further increase levels of student satisfaction. Managers might use the findings to review their own institution's performance, so that areas for improvement can be identified.

Given that the logit model developed had an 87.4 per cent success rate in predicting whether or not a student at a UAE branch campus was satisfied overall with their institution, this research has demonstrated the potential usefulness of logistic regression as a predictive and explanatory tool in education management.

This study examines the perspectives of adjunct (short-term contract) faculty teaching at offshore branch campuses in Dubai, United Arab Emirates. The rise of the global adjunct labor class and the expansion of universities to overseas markets in the form of branch campuses are just two examples of the extension of neoliberal and consumerist ideology to higher education. While the problems of implementing corporate-style practice and policy in higher education is much critiqued in the literature, this research centers on the intersection of the two issues just mentioned. The primary motivations for undertaking this study were to explore a) branch campus adjuncts’ perceptions of being connected to their university community, and b) the possible impact of their labor conditions on pedagogical conditions. Five adjuncts from four separate branch campuses were interviewed, and the semi-structured interviews analyzed using a critical discourse analysis approach. The findings revealed that the adjuncts often felt isolated from their branch campus and considered themselves to be carrying out the educational mission of the home campus despite having no contractual relationship with the home campus. I argue that the working conditions of the adjuncts have a negative impact on teaching experience and, to a degree, on pedagogy. A more formalized employment relationship between branch campus adjuncts and the home campus is recommended, as well as the provision of professional development and research engagement opportunities for adjuncts.

ﺗﺑﺣ ث ھذه اﻟ د ر ا ﺳ ﺔ ﻓ ﻲ وﺟ ﮭﺎ ت ﻧ ظ ر اﻟ ﻣد ر ﺳ ﯾ ن اﻟ ﻣﻠ ﺣ ﻘﯾ ن ﻓ ﻲ ﻓ ر وع اﻟ ﺟ ﺎ ﻣﻌﺎ ت ﻓ ﻲ دﺑﻲ ، اﻹﻣﺎ را ت اﻟ ﻌرﺑﯾﺔ اﻟ ﻣﺗ ﺣدة. إ ن ﺻ ﻌود اﻟ طﺑﻘﺔ اﻟﻌﺎ ﻣﻠ ﺔ اﻟﻌﺎﻟ ﻣﯾ ﺔ اﻟﻣﻠ ﺣ ﻘﺔ و ﺗ و ﺳ ﻊ اﻟﺟ ﺎ ﻣﻌﺎ ت إﻟﻰ ا ﻷ ﺳ و ا ق اﻟﺧ ﺎ ر ﺟ ﯾ ﺔ ﻓ ﻲ ﺷ ﻛ ل ﻓ ر و ع ﺟ ﺎ ﻣﻌﯾ ﺔ ﻟﯾ ﺳ ت ﺳ و ى ﻣﺛﺎﻟﯾ ن ﻋ ﻠ ﻰ ا ﻣﺗدا د ا ﻹ ﯾدﯾ و ﻟ و ﺟ ﯾ ﺔ اﻟ ﻧﯾ و ﻟﯾﺑ ر اﻟﯾ ﺔ و ا ﻻ ﺳ ﺗ ﮭ ﻼ ﻛﯾ ﺔ إﻟ ﻰ اﻟﺗ ﻌﻠﯾم اﻟ ﻌﺎﻟ ﻲ. ﻋﻠ ﻰ اﻟ رﻏم ﻣ ن أ ن ﻣ ﺷﻛﻠ ﺔ ﺗ طﺑﯾ ق ﻣﻣﺎ رﺳﺎ ت وﺳﯾﺎ ﺳﺎ ت اﻟﻧ ﻣ ط اﻟﺗ ﺟﺎ ر ي ﻓ ﻲ اﻟﺗ ﻌﻠﯾم اﻟ ﻌﺎﻟ ﻲ ﻗد ﺗ ﻌر ﺿ ت ﻟﻧﻘد ﻛﺑﯾ ر ﻓ ﻲ اﻷدﺑﯾﺎ ت، ﻓﺈن ھذا اﻟﺑ ﺣ ث ﯾ رﻛز ﻋ ﻠ ﻰ ﺗﻘﺎط ﻊ اﻟ ﻣﺛﺎﻟﯾ ن اﻟ ﻣو ﺻ وﻓﯾ ن . ﻛﺎﻧ ت اﻟ دواﻓ ﻊ اﻟ رﺋﯾ ﺳ ﯾ ﺔ ﻹ ﺟ را ء ھذه اﻟد ر ا ﺳ ﺔ ھ ﻲ ا ﺳ ﺗ ﻛ ﺷ ﺎ ف 1 ( ﻣﻔﺎ ھﯾم ﻣﻠ ﺣﻘ ﻲ ﻓ روع اﻟﺟ ﺎ ﻣﻌﺎ ت ﻟ ﻛوﻧﮭم ﻣرﺗ ﺑ طﯾ ن ﺑ ﻣ ﺟﺗ ﻣﻊ اﻟﺟ ﺎ ﻣﻌﺔ؛ 2 ( ﻣﺎ ﺗﺄﺛﯾ ر ظرو ف ﻋﻣﻠ ﮭم ﻋﻠ ﻰ اﻟظ ر و ف اﻟ ﺗ ر ﺑ و ﯾ ﺔ. ﻟ ﺟ ﻣﻊ اﻟ ﺑﯾﺎﻧﺎ ت ، أﺟرﯾ ت ﻣﻘﺎﺑ ﻼت ﻣﻊ ﺧﻣ ﺳﺔ ﻣدرﺳﯾ ن ﻣﻠ ﺣﻘﯾ ن ﻣ ن أ رﺑ ﻌﺔ ﻓ روع ﺟﺎ ﻣﻌﯾ ﺔ ﻣﻧﻔ ﺻ ﻠ ﺔ. ﺗم ﺗ ﺣﻠﯾ ل اﻟ ﻣﻘﺎﺑ ﻼ ت ﺷﺑ ﮫ اﻟ ﻣﻧ ظﻣﺔ ﺑﺎﺳﺗ ﺧدام ﻣﻧﮭ ﺞ ﺗ ﺣﻠﯾ ل اﻟ ﺧطﺎ ب اﻟﻧﻘد ي. وﻛ ﺷﻔ ت اﻟﻧﺗﺎﺋ ﺞ أ ن اﻟ ﻣﻠ ﺣﻘﯾ ن ﻏﺎ ﻟ ﺑًﺎ ﻣ ﺎ ﺷ ﻌ ر و ا ﺑ ﺎ ﻟ ﻌ ز ﻟ ﺔ ﻋ ن ﺣ ر ﻣ ﮭ م ا ﻟ ﺟ ﺎ ﻣ ﻌ ﻲ وا ﻋﺗﺑ روا أﻧﻔ ﺳﮭم ﯾﻧﻔذون اﻟ ﻣﮭﻣﺔ اﻟﺗ ﻌﻠﯾ ﻣﯾ ﺔ ﻟﻠ ﺣرم اﻟ ﺟﺎ ﻣﻌ ﻲ اﻟ ﻣ ﺣﻠ ﻲ رﻏم ﻋدم وﺟود ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺗ ﻌﺎﻗدﯾ ﺔ ﻟ ﮭم دا ﺧل اﻟ ﺣرم اﻟ ﺟﺎ ﻣﻌ ﻲ. أﻧﺎ أ زﻋم أن ظرو ف ﻋﻣ ل اﻟ ﻣﻠ ﺣﻘﯾ ن ﻟ ﮭﺎ ﺗﺄﺛﯾ ر ﺳﻠﺑ ﻲ ﻋﻠ ﻰ ﻣﻣﺎ رﺳﺔ اﻟﺗد رﯾ س . ﺗ و ﺻ ﻲ اﻟ د را ﺳﺔ ﺑ ﺧﻠ ق ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺗ و ظﯾ ف أ ﻛﺛ ر رﺳﻣﯾﺔ ﺑﯾ ن اﻟ ﻣﻠ ﺣﻘﯾ ن ﻓ ﻲ اﻟﺣ ر م اﻟﺟ ﺎ ﻣﻌ ﻲ اﻟﻔ ر ﻋ ﻲ و اﻟﺣ ر م اﻟ ﺟ ﺎ ﻣﻌ ﻲ اﻟدا ﺧ ﻠ ﻲ ، ﺑﺎﻹ ﺿ ﺎﻓﺔ إﻟ ﻰ ﺗ وﻓﯾ ر ﻓ ر ص اﻟﺗ ط وﯾ ر اﻟ ﻣﮭﻧ ﻲ واﻟﺑ ﺣ ث ﻟﻠ ﻣ ﺷ ﺎ ر ﻛﺔ ﻟﻠ ﻣد ر ﺳ ﯾ ن اﻟ ﻣﻠ ﺣ ﻘﯾ ن .

The quality and market viability of international branch campuses (IBCs) depend upon their integration with university headquarters. Recent trends toward localizing branch-campus hiring have raised questions about the extent to which non-parent-campus lecturers will support global integration pursuits. This paper aims to examine IBC lecturers’ orientations towards global integration, exploring how they identify themselves and their campuses as part of their wider universities.

Employing constructivist grounded theory methodology, 37 lecturers and leaders at four Australian branch campuses in Southeast Asia were interviewed, engaging them in semi-structured discussions of their identities and experiences. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and analyzed using NVivo in an iterative process of theory development.

Branch-campus lecturers interviewed generally construct their individual and campus identities as separate from their wider universities. Barriers to branch campuses’ global integration include low organizational identification of lecturers, challenges in their relationships with headquarters colleagues and perceptions of cross-campus disparities in resources and students. Branch campuses’ organizationally separate identities are enacted in practice, fueling a self-reinforcing “Othering Loop” that could undermine these campuses’ quality and viability.

This research is the first emic exploration of locally-hired branch-campus lecturers’ views toward global integration. These findings provide an important corrective to the existing literature on this topic, challenging assumptions that localizing branch-campus hiring is the primary risk to integration. Multiple points of potential managerial intervention were identified, highlighting opportunities for university leaders to address contextual barriers and improve international branch campuses’ global integration while continuing current trends toward localized hiring.

The research aims to assess the achievements and challenges of international branch campuses (IBCs) to date and to consider how IBC development may progress in the future.

The article presents a review of the scholarly and grey literatures on IBCs. The commentary and discussion is structured around the objectives, perspectives and experiences of three key stakeholder groups, namely the institutions that own IBCs, students and host countries.

Some IBCs have failed to achieve their student recruitment and financial targets, while others have been successful, often expanding and moving into new, larger, purpose-built campuses. In the last few years, several countries have announced their intention to become a transnational education hub, or at least to allow the establishment of IBCs. It may be reasonable to assume that when there is demand for a product, supply will eventually follow. IBCs will survive and prosper as long as they provide benefits to each of their main stakeholder groups (i.e. students, institutions and governments), and as long as the local demand for higher education places exceeds the total supply.

The article provides a comprehensive and up-to-date review of IBC developments and research during the period 2000–2020. The findings and conclusions will be of interest to both researchers and practitioners.

International branch campuses (IBCs) are complex entities and while much has been written about their expansion and development, the literature is largely from an external perspective. There have been few longitudinal studies examining the development of an IBC over time. The purpose of this paper is to review the development of one IBC over an eight-year time period, to identify the key learning points for institutional managers of other IBCs or for institutions intending to establish an IBC.

This paper is a culmination of research, conducted during the eight years when the lead author worked at the University of Nottingham Malaysia Campus (UNMC). The author was involved in practical management aspects as well as the research and analysis of IBC development. This paper represents a form of ethnographic research where the author conducted interviews, meetings and discussion groups, observed institutional policies, strategies and operations in action and was in an ideal position to identify and discuss their impacts on institutional performance.

This paper examines key management issues during the early, developing and evolving stages of an IBC and discusses key issues including communication, curriculum, identity and management. Key challenges, procedural issues, managerial responses and strategy will be presented to highlight foundational concerns for IBC development and areas and topics that must be given priority and support.

This paper considers the management of an IBC from the reflective standpoint of an author employed in a senior management position, during a period of significant growth of UNMC. The author provides insights and discussion involving practical experience.

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.

Describes how the second half of the twentieth century saw the development of a global market in international education. Following the Second World War, the flow of international students undertaking courses at all levels grew rapidly as developing countries sought to educate their populations. By the century’s end, there were an estimated 1.5 million students studying internationally at the HE level. Driving this market expansion was a combination of forces that both pushed the students from their countries of origin and simultaneously pulled them toward certain host nations. By the 1990s, the HE systems of many host nations (e.g. Australia, Canada, the USA, the UK and New Zealand) had become more market focused and institutions were adopting professional marketing strategies to recruit students into fee‐paying programs. For many education institutions such fees had become a critical source of financing. Suggests that the international education industry, HE administrators and managers and academic staff face very significant challenges in the next few years.

The aim of this paper is to examine the emergence of multinational universities through the lens of Dunning’s eclectic paradigm.

An analytical framework combining the eclectic paradigm with the three missions of universities is proposed to explore the motives behind the cross-border activity of universities.

Although the analogy between a university and a multinational enterprise is flawed, this paper shows how the eclectic paradigm can still serve the purpose of better understanding why universities locate fully pledged campuses or research departments in foreign locations. A set of implications for universities and host countries are also discussed.

The internationalization of universities has been widely analyzed in the higher education literature, but few attempts have been made to draw connections with international business research. The originality of this paper lies in addressing this cross-disciplinary gap.

What are the current trends that mark out the process of internationalization of higher education? In what directions do these trends influence the direction of research and development in African universities? Does internationalization of higher education have the potential to boost knowledge production relevant to Africa’s development needs or it will further hasten the marginalization of both African universities and African development agendas within the global network of scientific knowledge? Internationalization of education is not new. Historically, students have sought better higher education abroad influenced by the desire to benefit from better opportunities provided by universities in the developed countries. The current phase of higher education internationalization has however emerged more vigorously in the 21st century and is associated with the twin trends of globalization and liberalization. Proponents of globalization have argued that higher education is bound to be more strongly affected by worldwide economic developments. They also point out that higher education institutions in developing countries should embrace aspects of internationalization to boost their efforts to be ranked among the best league of universities globally. At the national level, internationalization of higher education is presented as a process that institutions in developing countries must embrace in order to address the persistent challenges of sustainable development. For universities in Africa, the literature argues that internationalization provides them with opportunities that cut across disciplines, institutions, knowledge-systems, and nation-state boundaries thereby exposing the institutions and academics to the world’s best scientific research and infrastructures. In summary, it is contended that internationalization is a strategy to realize success in human-capability and institutional-capacity development in the universities. This chapter revisits these assertions and their tenacity to developing a culture of research and innovation in African universities, and linking the universities to the continent’s development aspirations.