Search results

This article aims to provide a timely examination of and reflection on the impact of COVID-19 on the neo-liberal paradigm that has been prevalent in international higher education (HE) for two decades since the late 1990s.

Methodologically, this paper deploys conceptual mapping as an analytical tool to explore and examine the global news updates that provide timely (i.e. early 2020) record of the fast-moving pandemic.

It unfolds four pairs of contradictions occurring in the Western universities during the pandemic outbreak, i.e. HE as cross-border services vs border control, the state's shrinking public funding vs universities under financial threat, increased reliance on foreign students' tuition fee vs decreased international enrolment and the user-pays philosophy vs the rising force of user says.

It is argued that the pending crises facing Western universities are not merely financial issues; they reveal the shortcomings that are inherent in business model of HE driven by economic globalisation but triggered by coronavirus pandemic to erupt. The pandemic should be temporary, but its spill-over effects may alter the overarching landscape of the international HE relations, which is part and parcel of the changing geopolitical order featured as de-globalisation.

The paper has practical implications for acting on international HE in the time of coronavirus pandemic. They mainly consider four aspects: (1) travel distance as new determinant of study abroad, (2) the renewed significance of a state's role in policymaking and financial undertaking, (3) shortcomings in market mechanism and (4) East Asia as an emerging regional hub of study abroad.

This paper is expected to leverage three lessons learned from the upending situation. First, it is conceptually misleading to define international HE as a form of market-led “transnational service” and cross-border tradeable product undermining a state's control. Second, a state's supervising model needs to be reviewed, to embrace the renewed relationship between a state and universities in the new context of global pandemic. Third, the global landscape of international HE may be altered.

This conceptual paper provides a timely critique of the neo-liberal paradigm in HE and shedding light on the changing global landscape of international HE along with the changing geopolitical relations reshuffled by COVID-19 and its spill-over effects.

This chapter reflects on our recent research into China’s soft power in international education, using Confucius Institutes as a case study. It first reveals how we have framed our research in the related field and the methodological issues concerned. It will then analyze the theories and concepts that have been taken as the lenses through which China’s soft power ideas and strategies were compared and contrasted with the theories and/or practices prevalent in the West, while highlighting their implication for the fear of the “China threat.” Finally, we will conclude with the potential areas of further research in the related area of study in the years to come. It is hoped that this chapter will contribute to the development of research in international and comparative education that helps readers to explore in-depth the causality, implication and complication of the “China threat” in the global arena.

This chapter builds on the authors’ research into the internationalization of China’s higher education (HE) as soft power with “Chinese characteristics” (Lo & Pan, 2020). It rethinks the “Chinese characteristics” in contemporary China’s internationalization of HE as soft power, by contextualizing them in the historico-cultural rootedness that legitimizes the sense of Chinese exceptionalism in the Party-state’s global re-emergence. It also sheds light on the tension and paradox therein through analyzing the conflicts generated by the Party-state’s attempts at re-globalizing the Chinese world order alongside the Westphalian system. In addition to integrating the soft-power concepts coined by Joseph Nye (1990) with the dimensional perspectives on the internationalization of HE framed by Jane Knight (1997), this study also puts in China’s perspectives that stand in contrast to, and yet in confluence with, some of the current norms and values being espoused by the West. In so doing, it demonstrates the potentiality of employing comparative lenses that cut across times, spaces and cultures in the research into internationalization of HE as soft power with national characteristics.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a fast-moving pandemic that has brought about calamities and challenges to the human world. In the field of international higher education (IHE), it problematizes and challenges the operation of neo-liberal mentalities and rationales, while generating disruptions and impediments to the flows of globalization. Drawing upon extant research on IHE across spatial and cultural contexts, this essay aims to: (1) unravel the deficiencies of neo-liberal mentalities and rationales in coping with the challenges of COVID-19 to IHE; (2) assess the impacts of COVID-19 on the developments of globalization and internationalization of higher education with particular focus on the complications therein; and (3) explore the possible spill-over effects on and implications for the re-positioning of IHE in the post-COVID-19 era. Albeit the negative impacts of COVID-19 may not last, its spill-over effects are bound to cast a long shadow over IHE’s future development. This essay explores how IHE can persist in spite of deficiencies in neo-liberalism and fluidity in globalization.

This chapter aims to explore the novelty and utility of political economy discourse, termed “neo-statism,” as an analytical lens for comparative research in higher education. Analysis is framed within the context of Hong Kong’s transition from a British colony to a Special Administrative Region under China’s sovereignty, and its shifting academic paradigms from a more or less spontaneous philosophy rooted in liberal capitalist economy to embracing neo-statism, which involves market-conforming and state-sponsored approaches to economic and social restructuring whereby the state regulates higher education in support of national integration and global power projection. The statist regulation depends heavily on its deployment of discursive legitimacy, strategic distribution of resources, organizational synergy, and elite cohesion articulated through higher education policy, research projects, and cross-border academic exchange and cooperation. The Hong Kong case suggests that comparative research in higher education should advance from the methodological aspects of the comparative approach to exploring wider theoretical spectrum, for understanding emerging politico-economic factors shaping academic paradigm in comparative contexts. Moreover, scholars who engage in the trendy internationalization in higher education should move beyond the logics of neo-liberalism, and pay closer attention to the new geopolitical realities that are changing the normative and interactive dimensions of international higher education at large.