Explore the vast range of titles available.

\"This book explores pedagogical concepts, metaphors and images of non-white, non-western researchers and research students on the inter/nationalization of education. Specifically, this book draws on the intellectual resources of China and India to explore the pedagogical dynamics and dimensions of the localization/globalization of education with non-Western characteristics. It introduces theoretic-linguistic non-Western concepts from the Tamil, Sanskrit and Chinese languages for use in Western, English-only education and redefines the intellectual basis for internationalising education. Debating whether \"international education\" is Western-centric in terms of its privileging and promotion of Euro-American theoretical knowledge, this book contends that the internationalisation of Western-centric education can benefit from the intellectual power and powerfully relevant theorising performed by non-Western international students. It formulates a democratic vision for the internationalisation of education, with the potential to create transnational solidarity and constitute a forum for mobilising debates about global knowledge and power structures. It also provides key tools to use non-Western theoretic-linguistic tools and modes of critique in research undertaken in Anglophone Western universities.\" -- Publisher's website.

A case study is used to understand how Western international branch campuses (IBCs) in China represent themselves through web-based branding materials. Drawing on colonial discourse analysis and the theoretical framework of Whiteness as futurity, this study examined the case of Wenzhou-Kean University, a Sino-US cooperative institution to understand how Western IBCs in China interpret and promote internationalization in higher education. By examining how Whiteness through the discourse of world-class education has been mobilized and reproduced, this study argued that the operation of IBCs perpetuated Western supremacy in the global higher education landscape at the expense of local people and knowledges.

East Asia is a most dynamic region and its fast developing higher education and research systems are gathering great momentum. East Asian higher education has common cultural roots in Chinese civilization, and in indigenous traditions, each country has been shaped in different ways by Western intervention, and all are building global strategies. Shared educational agendas combine with long political tensions and rising national identities. Hope and fear touch each other. What are the prospects for regional harmony-in-diversity? How do internationalization and indigenization interplay in higher education in this remarkable region, where so much of the future of humanity will be decided? Experts from Australia, China mainland, Hong Kong SAR, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, the UK and Vietnam probe these dynamics, with original perspectives, robust evidence and brilliant writing. Changing Higher Education in East Asia deepens our understanding of internationalization and globalization agendas such as world-class universities and international students. It takes readers further, exploring the role of higher education in furthering the global public and common good, world citizenship education, the internationalization of the humanities and social sciences, geopolitics and higher education development, cross-border academic mobility, the effects of the Covid-19 pandemic on regional student mobility, and future regionalization in East Asia.

This article presents a dialogue on the topic of Global Citizenship Education (GCE) in relation to service to society, inclusion, and equity. It features Hans de Wit, professor emeritus, distinguished fellow, and former director of the Center for International Higher Education at Boston College in the United States, and Emiliano Bosio, guest-editor of Prospects and director of the Global Citizenship Education Interview Series . Because of his insights and perspective, Professor de Wit was honored with the A. Noam Chomsky North Star Lifetime Achievement Global Connections Award by Star Scholars (the Society of Transnational Academic Scholars) in 2021. The objective of this discussion is to offer a critical view of GCE, delving into the dynamic interplay among global citizenship, the internationalization of higher education, societal service, inclusiveness, and equity. Professor de Wit sheds light on the intricate origins and historical context of global citizenship and internationalization. This exploration centers on concepts like attaining global learning for all students and the future of internationalization in the post-Covid-19 landscape and offers insights that enrich our understanding of the complex foundations and historical development of GCE.

\"Glocal\" education melds the economic advantages of globalizing higher education with the benefits of incorporating local perspectives. This book explores glocal education's rationale; social, cultural, and economic foundations; key concepts; and implementation.

International students are often engaged not just in education, but in high stakes towards gaining permanent migration status. This book unpacks the consequences of this education-migration nexus, analyzing migration policies and providing a vivid picture of student-migrants' lived experiences.

The global expansion of participation rates in higher education continue more or less unabated. However, while the concept of lifelong learning has figured prominently in national and international educational policy discourse for more than three decades, its implications for the field of higher education has remained relatively underdeveloped. This book focuses on a particular dimension of the lifelong learning: higher education for those who have not progressed directly from school to higher education. Some will embark on undergraduate programmes as mature students, part-time and/or distance students; others wish to return to higher education after having completed (or not completed) a previous academic programme, while increasing numbers participate in postgraduate and continuing studies for a complex mix of professional and personal reasons. Adopting a comparative and international longitudinal perspective which goes beyond a snapshot view by building on the cases of a core group of ten OECD countries, this timely book investigates the ways in which important new developments impacting on higher education crystallise around the lifelong learning agenda: new technology and open source resources; the changing role of the state and market in higher education; the blurring of public and private boundaries; issues of equity and access in a time of global economic turmoil; the increased emphasis on research and international league tables; the changing nature of the education; and, the complex interaction of international, national and regional expectations which governments and other stakeholders have of universities and other public and private institutions of higher education. While focusing on the situation in Canada, USA, Japan, Australia, New Zealand and a wide variety of European countries, the book also assesses the issues from the perspective

As the university transformed itself into a center of innovation, and biotechnology became a billion-dollar industry, commercialization of university inventions became both lucrative and urgent. In the United States, this shift decisively converted the academic scientist into an entrepreneur. From there, legal structures that facilitated university scientists' patenting and commercialization spread across the world, including to Japan, where earlier modes of doing science made such diffusion more difficult-and more interesting. Cosmopolitan Scientists delineates what happens when global policies diffuse to different cultural and institutional contexts. Instead of simply accepting or resisting the change, Japanese university scientists creatively enacted the new rules, making unique local variations of the global policy and thus making it Japanese. Drawing on vivid accounts from bioscientists who experienced and enacted the shift toward commercialization, the book offers an insider's view into the way scientists navigate the complex and shifting landscape of science, innovation, and economic policy. In so doing it also tells a broader story of how the global rules can be successfully naturalized modified, settled down, and made local.

The Engaged University is a comprehensive empirical account of the global civic engagement movement in higher education. In universities around the world, something extraordinary is underway. Mobilizing their human and intellectual resources, institutions of higher education are directly tackling community problems – combating poverty, improving public health, and restoring environmental quality. This book documents and analyzes this exciting trend through studies of civic engagement and social responsibility at twenty institutions worldwide. This timely volume offers three special contributions to the literature on higher education policy and practice: a historical overview of the founding purposes of universities, which almost invariably included a context-specific element of social purpose, together with a survey of how these \"founding\" intentions have fared in different systems of higher education; a contemporary account of the policy and practice of universities – all over the world – seeking to re-engage with this social purpose; and an overview of generic issues which emerge for the \"engaged university.\" David Watson is Principal of Green Templeton College, Oxford. Robert M. Hollister is Dean, and Pierre and Pamela Omidyar Professor of Citizenship and Public Service in the Jonathan M. Tisch College of Citizenship and Public Service at Tufts University. Susan E. Stroud is Executive Director, Innovations in Civic Participation. Elizabeth Babcock is Talloires Network Coordinator, Innovations in Civic Participation. Series Editors' Introduction Preface Talloires Declaration on the Civic Roles and Social Responsibilities of Higher Education Introduction and Acknowledgements I. University-Community Relationships: The long view 1. Historical and Geographical Perspectives 2. Types of Capital and Citizenship 3. Contemporary Drivers II. The Engaged University 4. The project 5. The profiles 5.1 Australia and its Higher Education System 5.1.1 Two-way learning: Profile of Charles Darwin University 5.1.2 Sharing knowledge: Profile of the University of Melbourne 5.1.3 A University without Walls: Profile of the University of Western Sydney 5.2 India and its Higher Education System 5.2.1 An Enlightened Woman is a Source of Infinite Strength: Profile of Shreemati Nathibai Damodar Thackersey (SNDT) Women’s University, Mumbai 5.3 Israel and its Higher Education System 5.3.1 \"Institution-wide commitment to social responsibility\": Profile of the University of Haifa 5.4 The Occupied Palestinian Territories and their Higher Education System 5.4.1 \"Education and Service for Political Change and Development\" Profile of Al-Quds University 5.5 Malaysia and its Higher Education System 5.5.1 Community Partnerships to Address National Priorities: Profile of Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia 5.6 Mexico and its Higher Education System 5.6.1 Cultivating ethics and citizenship: Profile of Tecnológico de Monterrey 5.7 Pakistan and its Higher Education System 5.7.1 A Unique University with a Mandate for Social Development: Profile of Aga Khan University 5.8 Peru and its Higher Education System 5.8.1 A regional leader for human and economic development: Profile of the Universidad Señor de Sipán (USS) 5.9 The Philippines and its Higher Education System 5.9.1 Volunteer Service to the Poor: Profile of Notre Dame of Marbel University 5.10 South Africa and its Higher Education System 5.10.1 Community Partnerships for Development and the Appropriation of New Knowledge: Cape Peninsula University of Technology 5.11 Sudan and its Higher Education System 5.11.1 Empowering Women as Agents of Change through Education: Ahfad University for Women 5.12 Tanzania and its Higher Education System 5.12.1 Knowledge for Development: University of Dar es Salaam 5.13 Ukraine and its Higher Education System 5.13.1 Building Civil Society: Profile of Petro Mohyla Black Sea State University 5.14 The United Kingdom and its Higher Education System 5.14.1 Open access for social justice: Profile of the Open University 5.14.2 Reinventing liberal higher education: Profile of the University of Winchester 5.15 The United States of America and its Higher Education System 5.15.1 Knowledge to Serve the City: Profile of Portland State University 5.15.2 Social justice education and research and service: Profile of Georgetown University 5.16 Venezuela and its Higher Education System 5.16.1 From education for national development to community solidarity: Universidad Metropolitana en Caracas (UNIMET) 6. Findings: Common patterns and influences III. An Engaged University Movement 7. Networks: A unifying force 8. The world upside-side down: university engagement from the South to the North 9. Implications for policy and practice Appendix 1. Institutional questionnaire Appendix 2. Field research questions Acronyms References Notes on Contributors Index

University rankings widely affect the behaviours of prospective students and their families, university executive leaders, academic faculty, governments and investors in higher education. Yet the social science foundations of global rankings receive little scrutiny. Rankings that simply recycle reputation without any necessary connection to real outputs are of no common value. It is necessary that rankings be soundly based in scientific terms if a virtuous relationship between performance and ranking is to be established, the worst potentials of rankings are to be constrained, and rankings are optimised as a source of comparative information. This article evaluates six ranking systems, Shanghai ARWU, Leiden University, QS, Scopus, Times Higher Education and U-Multirank, according to six social science criteria and two behavioural criteria. The social science criteria are materiality (rankings must be grounded in the observable higher education world), objectivity (opinion surveys should not be used), externality (ranked universities should not be a source of data about themselves), comprehensiveness (rankings should cover the broadest possible range of functions), particularity (ranking systems should eschew multi-indicators with weights, or proxy measures) and ordinal proportionality (vertical distinctions between universities should not be exaggerated). The behavioural criteria are the alignment of the ranking with tendencies to improved performance of all institutions and countries, and transparency, meaning accessibility to strategy making designed to maximize institutional position. The pure research rankings rate well overall but lack comprehensiveness. U-Multirank is also strong under most criteria but stymied by its 100 per cent reliance on subjective data collected via survey.