Is the Academic Profession Becoming More Internationalized? Martin Finkelstein and William Cummings Seton Hall Univ, George Washington Univ, USA 3 rd Intl Conference of the Russian Association of Higher Education Researchers, HSE, Moscow, October 18, 2012

Background Historically, higher education and its academic profession has been the creature of the nation state, frequently literally a branch of government focused on national needs and shaped by national values and traditions Over the past 20 years, globalization and developments in information technology have made national boundaries more permeable and have promised a more “borderless” economy Indeed, higher education as other industries have gone global in their orientation, reflected in the world-class university phenomenon and the growth of multi-national, for profit providers, e.g. the Apollo Group Even among the more traditional universities in the U.S., there is a growing sense of oneself as not bounded by state or nation, e.g. NYU as a truly “global” institution

The Question To what extent is the academic profession moving from its nationally anchored focus into a truly global or international focus reflecting the widely heralded globalization or regionalization of the enterprize? In addressing the question, we will employ at least two kinds of evidence: Evidence of ideological and cultural change Evidence of behavioral change

Ideological and Cultural Change The increasing autonomy of university systems The emergence of research and publication as the universal standard for measuring academic productivity The emergence of English as the lingua franca, reflected in most scholarly journals The focus on “world-class” universities and global rankings The recruitment of international students and the establishment of branch campuses

Behavioral Change Two sources of data 1992 Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching International Academic Profession Survey Changing Academic Profession Survey Ten countries in both: U.S., UK, Australia, Germany, Netherlands, Hong Kong-China, Japan, S. Korea, Brazil, Mexico,

Behavioral Dimensions Recruitment of foreign-born and/or educated nationals Collaborate with foreign partners in research Publish in foreign journals Publish in a foreign language Received funding from foreign source Integrate international perspectives in their courses Taught abroad

Percent Reporting Difference between Country of Birth & Employment in 2007

Table 6. Percent Reporting Difference between Country of Training and Employment

Percent of Academics who Indicate They Collaborate with Foreign Partners in Research

Percent that Publish Internationally

Percent of Academics Who Have Recently Published in a Foreign Language

Percentage of Academics Who Have Recently Received Funding from a Foreign Source

Percent of Academics Beginning Career in Indicated Period who Strongly Agree That They “Emphasize International Content or Perspectives “ in Their Courses

Percent of Academics by Generation Who Indicate They Have Taught Abroad

Some Preliminary Conclusions National systems differ widely, but there has been little change in patterns, /8 of Hiring foreign-born and trained Collaboration with foreign colleagues Publishing in foreign languages or countries No discernable increase in integrating international content into courses or teaching abroad

What do these data mean? Our mental models appear to be moving toward a common ideal type of academic excellence Our behaviors continue to diverge from those mental models Internal national system stratification and mental models