Introduction
There has been, and always will be, a tension between, on the one hand, the concept of international community that recognizes interdependence as a fact and collective governance as a necessity and, on the other, the appeal of a national community that thinks of itself as independent and sovereign (Fegan & Field, 2009). Education, particularly higher education, is sinking toward a across border international focus, away from the traditional national borders.
Changes in Approach to Education
Across many parts of the globe, changing political ideologies have brought about new policy and new legislation. The Sorbonne Declaration, and, subsequently, the Bologna Declaration, which attempts to create Europe higher education into a unified platform of three levels in order to promote intra Europe as well as international student mobility are the most widely known.
However, Japan’s National Universities Corporation Law and the talk by former Prime Minister, Fukuda about promoting an Asian type program, China’s diversification of its controls on higher education, Taiwan’s Programme for Promoting Academic Excellence of Universities, and Germany’s Excellenz-Intiative, are other less well known examples (Fegan & Field, 2009).
Moreover, the influence of non state actors in education, and global societies and initiatives, for example, the Association of Pacific Rim Universities and the International Association of Universities, also highlights the transitions from solely state based delivery to a global base program.
Arguments in the Educational Sector
In any discussion of education there is likely to emerge a number of conflicting or seemingly illogical arguments in any claim put forward. Take, for example, the new emerging mission for many higher education institutions; to be the best in the world in terms of offering world class education. Typically, this is usually associated with hard science and technology based research, often at the expense of the other softer sciences (Rogers, 2009).
Although the promotion of world class research based higher education has a crucial role to play, especially in across border education, the simple reality is that quality teaching and learning methods must precede such research driven goals, and these are often overlooked, or taken for granted. If students can not read and write or analyze and critique, then they are not likely to be the entrepreneurs of knowledge management.
Generally, many of the principles and ideas upon which world class aspiring educational institutions are based are praise worthy. However, there is the danger for the world class aspirants, and those that fund them, of overlooking the many educational processes that need to proceed and be learned before research can drive knowledge creation so as to create a knowledge society (Fegan & Field, 2009). The point is that higher education is not a simple process that can be deconstructed into discrete isolatable variables and manipulated through vacuums to produce reliable results.
Across Borders
The terms internationalization, globalization, across borders, and overseas education all attract serious semantic values, depending upon cultural, academic or political preferences, making any dialogue on faculty, student, and knowledge exchange and mobility complicated.
Overseas education, a term that was often used in parts of Asia, is limiting, as many states are land locked and sojourners do not need to traverse vast oceans or waters to cross borders. Internationalization infers that national and institutional vectors are still the prominent factors. In general, internationalization of higher education involves integrating international, inter cultural and global dimensions into teaching, research, and service delivery of higher education.
Internationalization, therefore, originates with, or at the directive of higher education institutions or national policy makers. Japan’s previous Prime Minister Fukuda’s statement in 2008 about increasing the international student population is an example of the state driving and controlling what it deems to be internationalization and acceptable levels of diversity (Rogers, 2009).
On the other hand, the term globalization is generally used to capture the cross national changes of higher education that lead to a blurring of borders, often with an economic undertone. Some scholars have, however, argued that globalization is beyond institutional control as it involves the flow of technology, economy, people, values and ideas across borders.
Globalization, therefore, tends to de-territorialize economic, social and cultural practices from the traditional state based boundaries. Globalization originates somewhere other than the higher education institutions and national policy makers.
Across border education is not limited to the physical movement of people. With the advent of technology, it is now possible for people to easily cross borders without any physical relocation across state or cultural lines. E-Learning has fundamentally changed the way people understand how education is and how it can be delivered (Mason & Rennie).
This, however, does not mean that technology can replace, or is better than traditional non technology based education, but technology, such as e-learning has provided a wide range of opportunities for both the delivery and the reception of education. Among many other benefits, technology enables two cultural groups to experience learning together across vast distances.
This would have been completely impossible if one of the partners lacked the resources to enable them to cross the physical borders. In the past, the cross border experience was physical, cultural, and knowledge based. The difficulty of crossing borders was a major factor that killed people’s desire to study. E-learning can thus become international because of globalization through the provision of across border educational experience.
Across border education also incorporates the concept of diversity and, this creates a fertile ground for cross cultural interactions and learning from each other. A common theme that emerges is that diversity is a necessary ingredient for any cross border education interaction.
Across borders also incorporates the five most discussed factors at UNESCO’s Forum on Higher Education, Research, and Knowledge. These include international cooperation and mobility, globalization, new management systems, the development of a knowledge based society, and new media technology for communicating and transferring information.
Although some researchers are of the opinion that homogeneity promotes across border education, this is certainly not the case considering that diversity is the key component of across border education. Generally, diversity refers to developing the multifaceted components of academic programs (Mason &Rennie, 2008). These include culture, race, gender, ability, class, and nationality in the institution.
If well managed, diversity in student and faculty members, in academic programs, within higher education systems, and in academic collaboration, and mobility, will benefit the quantity, quality, relevance, and efficiency of higher education in the present competitive world. The single most important dimension of diversity in higher education is research quality. It may, therefore, be in order to claim that across border education increases diversity which leads to enhanced research quality, and possibly quantity.
Another concern in the drive to create research driven higher education institutions is that the roles of higher education are hard to measure. Education, service to society, runs the risk of being underplayed in the debate and competitions. It is a well established fact that educating people improves the economy and health of any society. There are negative implications for sustained future economic growth in a poorly educated work force.
Higher levels of education attainment bring benefits to individuals as well as countries the form of higher employment rates and earnings, and growth and economic development for national economies. In South Korea, where the investment in education is at a higher level than in many other countries in terms of GDP, education has had a tremendously positive impact on the nation’s wealth (Mason &Rennie, 2008).
Conclusion
Sometimes, it is very easy to get lost in the ends and forget about the means. Diversified mass education must be encouraged, rewarded, and funded equally with the world class research driven institutions if countries are to compete equitably in the modern day knowledge based society.
Policy reform at the national level is usually at the whim of political preference or persuasion. The usual result is some legislative adjustment to the structure and systems in higher education. Government and management processes must also take into account the level of complexity associated with higher education.
In the field of education, this could be likened to pedagogical approaches, classroom practices, and learning outcomes. Unless the teacher adjusts his or her approach to the context, the opportunities supposedly being imparted to the students eventually are lost. The same applies to higher education leadership which must be strong and focused. Without a strong leadership, it will be impossible to realize the benefits that are associated with across border education.
References
Fegan, J., & Field, M. H. (2009). Education across Borders: Politics, Policy and Legislative Action. Tokyo, Japan: Springer.
Mason, R., & Rennie, F. (2008). E-Learning and Social Networking Handbook: Resources for Higher Education. New York, NY: Routledge.
Rogers, P. (2009). Encyclopedia of Distance Learning. Hershey, PA: Idea Group Inc (IGI).