The TNE landscape is a complex one, with multiple stakeholders, each having different perceptions, expectations and motivations. Differing starting points and expectations have spawned a vibrant and diverse range of engagement models. Some have been more successful than others, but all have contributed to the rich fabric of international higher education and in most cases benefitted their stakeholders either directly or indirectly. For institutions looking to enter into or reassess their existing TNE arrangements, understanding stakeholder attitudes and how their context is reshaping perspectives is critical to ensuring a program’s viability. It is now more important than ever to ensure that TNE programs are aligned, not just to the strategic goals of the foreign degree provider, but also the needs of the stakeholders in the hosting country. This presentation explores stakeholder attitudes to TNE utilising the most recent research and market based insights.
The future of transnational education: stakeholder attitudes
1. The future of transnational
education: stakeholder attitudes
Lorne Gibson, Deakin University (Australia)
Nigel Healey, Nottingham Trent University (UK)
Kurt Kirstein, City University of Seattle (USA)
1
PRE-CONFERENCE WORKSHOP
TUESDAY, APRIL 29, 2014 - 12:30 TO 15:00
MIAMI BEACH CONVENTION CENTER B112
2. Workshop Outline
2
Time Activity
1230 – 1240 Welcome and Introduction
1240 – 1300 Overview of TNE environment today and stakeholders
1300 – 1310 Group discussion 1
1310 – 1340
Positioning TNE in global higher education sector and
stakeholder motivations
1340 – 1350 Group discussion 2
1350 – 1400 Afternoon tea
1400 – 1430 Is TNE the future for universities?
1430 – 1440 Group discussion 3
1440 Closing remarks and open questions
1500 Close
3. Key Messages
1. TNE is vast, complex and growing
2. TNE operations have many stakeholders
3. Stakeholder motivations and expectations vary according to
the respective socio-economic status of the respective
countries
4. TNE operations will mature, socio-economic status will
develop and stakeholder requirements will change
5. Traditionally, ‘sending’ institutions overlook many
stakeholder requirements, reflecting institutional biases and
preconceptions
3
5. What is TNE?
• “Any teaching or learning activity in which the
students are in a different country to that in which
the institutional providing the education is based”
(Global Alliance for Transnational Education, 1997)
• “All types of higher education study programmes,
sets of study courses, or educational services
(including those of distance education) in which the
learners are located in a country different from the
one where the awarding institution is based”
(Council of Europe, 2002)
5
6. How big is TNE?
United Kingdom Australia
≈ 90,000 students
Distance
Branch
CampusPartnershipDistance,
Flexible or
Distributed
Collaborative
Provision
Other Partner
Arrangement
Branch
Campus
≈ 599,000 students
Other Countries
200,000 or 300,000+ students
?
6
7. UK’s HESA Data
2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13
Overseas campus 7,120 9,885 11,410 12,305 15,140 17,525
Distance, flexible
and distributed
learning
100,345 112,345 114,985 113,065 116,520 123,635
Other students
registered at HEI
59,895 68,595 74,360 86,630 96,060 103,795
Overseas partner
organisation*
29,240 197,185 207,790 291,575 342,910 353,375
Other students
studying overseas
for HEI's award
70 35 50 125 345 600
Total 196,670 388,045 408,595 503,700 570,925 598,930
* Includes 337,000 Oxford Brookes University/ACCA students
8. General agreement on trade in
services (GATS)
• Cross-border supply corresponds to the common
form of trade in goods; only the service itself crosses
the border.Mode 1
• Consumption abroad refers to a situation in which a
service consumer moves to another country to
obtain the serviceMode 2
• Commercial presence refers to the commercial
establishment of facilities abroad to deliver the
serviceMode 3
• Presence of natural persons refers to people
travelling to another country on a temporary basis
to provide the serviceMode 4
8
9. General agreement on trade in
services (GATS)
9
• Distance education
Mode 1
• Export education, articulation, dual/joint
degreesMode 2
• International branch campuses,
franchising/twinning, validationMode 3
• Flying facultyMode 4
10. GATS Applied to Current TNE Landscape
10
Joint Double
Degree Delivery
Partner
Twinning
13. Limits of existing typologies
08 May 2014 13
…and some TNE partnerships off the radar
14. Further reading on TNE typologies
• Healey, N. and Michael, L. (2014), Towards a new
framework for analysing transnational education,
Higher Education Policy (in press)
• Healey, N. (2014), Towards a risk-based typology for
transnational education, Higher Education, (DOI)
10.1007/s10734-014-9757-6
15. Group Discussion 1
• What TNE models are your experienced with?
• Can you name a successful TNE operation?
• Can you name a failed TNE operation?
• What are the key elements which determine
success or failure in TNE partnerships?
• Why would someone want to engaged in a
TNE program as a student, teacher, partner or
government?
15
16. TNE Environment Positioning
Definitions / Explanations
• Countries above this regression line nominally have a more
efficient/effective higher education sector than forecast based on
their level of per capita income
Position
Efficient
• Countries below this regression line nominally have a less
efficient/effective higher education sector than forecast based on
their level of per capita income
Position
Inefficient
• Demand for higher education significantly exceeds supply via
existing institutions
• The market/government is facilitating entry of new supply purely
to meet growing demand
Demand
Absorbing
• Focus on building institutional capacity across all areas including,
teaching; research; engagement; and, student support
• Demand is increasing at a slower rate and supply is more targeted
Capacity
Building
•Existing high level capabilities and generally no supply constraints
•Seeking to leverage skills internationally in partnership to mutual benefit
Capability
Leveraging
South
Korea
UAE
Pakistan
Malaysia
Japan
16
17. TNE Environment Positioning Map
(GER%)
Per Capita Income
Low Middle High
ParticipationRates
HighMiddleLow
Position
Efficient
Position
Inefficient
Demand
Absorbing
Capacity
Building
Capability
Leveraging
China
India
United States
Russian Federation
Brazil
Indonesia
Iran, Islamic Rep.
Japan
Turkey
Korea, Rep.
Mexico
Germany
Philippines
ArgentinaUkraine
Thailand
United Kingdom
France
Egypt, Arab Rep.
Vietnam
Poland
Bangladesh
Venezuela, RB
Italy
Spain
Colombia
Pakistan
Nigeria
Canada
Australia
Algeria
Chile
Malaysia
Saudi Arabia
Peru
Romania
Netherlands
South Africa
Kazakhstan
Ethiopia
Belarus
Ecuador
Morocco
Greece
Iraq
Sweden
Belgium
Czech Republic
Portugal
Bolivia
Nepal
Hungary
Israel
Tunisia
Austria
Paraguay
Finland
Dominican Republic
Uganda
Ghana
Bulgaria
Uzbekistan
Hong Kong SAR, China
Yemen, Rep.
Sudan
New Zealand
Guatemala
Kyrgyz Republic
Switzerland
Denmark
Jordan
Cameroon
Singapore
Sri Lanka
Norway
Serbia
Slovak Republic
Cambodia
Lebanon
Ireland
Cote d'Ivoire
Costa Rica
Tajikistan
Lithuania
Azerbaijan
Mongolia
Uruguay
Kenya
El Salvador
Honduras
Croatia
Angola
Armenia
Panama
Moldova
Lao PDR
Georgia
Nicaragua
Benin
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Slovenia
Latvia
United Arab Emirates
Guinea
17
18. TNE Environment Positioning Map
(Economic Size)
19
Per Capita Income
Low Middle High
EconomicSize
HighMiddleLow
China
India
United States
Russian Federation
Brazil
Indonesia
Iran, Islamic Rep.
Japan
Turkey
Korea, Rep.Mexico
Germany
Philippines
Argentina
Ukraine
Thailand
United Kingdom
France
Egypt, Arab Rep.
Vietnam
Poland
Bangladesh
Venezuela, RB
Italy
Spain
Colombia
Pakistan
Nigeria
Canada
Australia
Algeria
Chile
Malaysia
Saudi Arabia
Peru
Romania
Netherlands
South Africa
Kazakhstan
Ethiopia
Belarus
Ecuador
Morocco
Greece
Iraq
Sweden
Belgium
Czech Republic
Portugal
Bolivia
Nepal
Hungary
Israel
Tunisia
Austria
Paraguay
Finland
Dominican Republic
Uganda
Ghana
Bulgaria
Uzbekistan
Hong Kong SAR, China
Yemen, Rep.
Sudan
New Zealand
Guatemala
Kyrgyz Republic
Switzerland
Denmark
Jordan
Cameroon
Singapore
Sri Lanka
Norway
Serbia
Slovak Republic
Cambodia
Lebanon
Ireland
Cote d'Ivoire
Costa Rica
Tajikistan
Lithuania
Azerbaijan
Mongolia
Uruguay
Kenya
El Salvador
Honduras
Croatia
Angola
Armenia
Panama
Moldova
Lao PDR
GeorgiaNicaragua
Benin
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Slovenia
Latvia
United Arab Emirates
Guinea
19. TNE Environment Positioning Map
(GINI Index)
20
Per Capita Income
Low Middle High
IncomeInequity
HighMiddleLow
China
India
United States
Russian Federation
Brazil
Indonesia
Iran, Islamic Rep.
Japan
Turkey
Korea, Rep.
Mexico
Germany
Philippines
Argentina
Ukraine
Thailand
United Kingdom
France
Egypt, Arab Rep.
Vietnam
Poland
Bangladesh
Venezuela, RB
Italy
Spain
Colombia
Pakistan
Nigeria
Canada
Australia
Algeria
Chile
Malaysia
Peru
Romania
Netherlands
South Africa
Kazakhstan
Ethiopia
Belarus
Ecuador
Morocco
Greece
Sweden
Belgium
Czech Republic
Portugal
Bolivia
Nepal
Hungary
Israel
Tunisia
Austria
Paraguay
Finland
Dominican Republic
Uganda
Ghana
Bulgaria
Uzbekistan
Hong Kong SAR, China
Yemen, Rep.
New Zealand
Guatemala
Switzerland
Denmark
Jordan
Cameroon
Singapore
Sri Lanka
Norway
Serbia
Slovak Republic
Cambodia
Ireland
Cote d'Ivoire
Costa Rica
Tajikistan
Lithuania
Azerbaijan
Mongolia
Uruguay
Kenya
El Salvador
Honduras
Croatia
Armenia
Panama
Moldova
Georgia
Nicaragua
Benin
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Slovenia
Latvia
Guinea
20. TNE Environment Positioning Map
(GINI Index v GER%)
GER %
Low Middle High
IncomeInequity
HighMiddleLow
China
India
United States
Russian Federation
Brazil
Indonesia
Iran, Islamic Rep.
Japan
Turkey
Korea, Rep.
Mexico
Germany
Philippines
Argentina
Ukraine
Thailand
United Kingdom
France
Egypt, Arab Rep.
Vietnam
Poland
Bangladesh
Venezuela, RB
Italy Spain
Colombia
Pakistan
Nigeria
Canada
Australia
Algeria
Chile
Malaysia
Peru
Romania
Netherlands
South Africa
Kazakhstan
Ethiopia
Belarus
Ecuador
Morocco
Greece
Sweden
Belgium
Czech
Republic
Portugal
Bolivia
Nepal
Hungary
Israel
Tunisia
Austria
Paraguay
Finland
Dominican Republic
Uganda
Ghana
Bulgaria
Uzbekistan
Hong Kong SAR, China
Yemen, Rep.
New Zealand
Guatemala
Switzerland
Denmark
Jordan
Cameroon
Singapore
Sri Lanka
Norway
Serbia
Slovak Republic
Cambodia
Ireland
Cote d'Ivoire
Costa Rica
Tajikistan
Lithuania
Azerbaijan
Mongolia
Uruguay
Kenya
El Salvador
Honduras
Croatia
Armenia
Panama
Moldova
Mozambique Georgia
Nicaragua
Benin Bosnia and Herzegovina
Slovenia
Latvia
Guinea
21
21. Overview of TNE stakeholders
Academic
Partners
Faculty and
Staff
Students
and
Families
Host
Government
Home
Government
Employers
and
Community
Local
Institutions
22
22. Stakeholder Motivations
Host Government
• GER
<30%
• GER
>30%
Per Capita Income
Low Middle High
EconomicSize
HighMiddleLow
• Access Provision
• White Knight
• Economic
Development
• Increase Supply
• Capacity Building
• Economic Alignment
• Private v Public
Supply
• Private v Public Supply
• Middle Class Supply
• Local Elite Enhancing
• Middle Class Supply
• Economic
Development
• Local Elite Enhancing
• Increase Supply
• Capacity Building
• Joint Partnering
• Private v Public Supply
• Has Internal Capacity
to Meet Demand
• Capacity Building
• Local Elite to Global
Elite
• Capability Leveraging
• Niche Provision
• Competition
• Capability Leveraging
• Local Elite Enhancing
• Joint Partnering
• Capability Leveraging
• Private v Public Supply
• Local Elite Enhancing
23
23. Stakeholder Motivations
Students and Families
• Access
• International
• Financial
• Work
• Employability
• PG Access
• Mobility
24
Per Capita Income
Low Middle High
EconomicSize
HighMiddleLow
• Limited Access to
Local Institutions
• Question on Local
Quality
• Award Based Choice
• Working and Studying
• Limited Access to Local
Institutions
• Question on Local
Quality
• Degrees v non-
Degrees
• Mode of Delivery
• Easier Entry?
• Differentiation?
• English Based?
• Easier Entry?
• Differentiation?
• English Based?
• Experiential?
• Limited Access to
Local Institutions
• Working and
Studying
• Niche Programs
ElitetoMiddleClass
24. Stakeholder Motivations
Faculties and Staff
• Sending
(to)
• Hosting
• Shared
25
Per Capita Income
Low Middle High
EconomicSize
HighMiddleLow
• Employment
(primary/secondary)
• Access to international
expertise
• IP transfers
• Methodology transfers
• Training/mentoring
• Status benefits
• International exposure
• Off-shore experience
• Mentoring
• Access to local
Institutions/cases/data
• Career development
• RRR
• (Potentially) more
professional autonomy
• Research collaboration
• Research collaboration
• PhD/Doc. students
• > Direct teaching
Transferring PLUS
• Academic peer
exchanges
• Status benefits
• Reciprocal knowledge
transfers
• Research collaboration
• Access to local
Institutions/cases/data
• Career development
• RRR
Diminishing
symmetry
25. Stakeholder Motivations/Impacts
• Local (Educational)
Institutions
• Competitive effects on
indigenous players
• Tendency towards net-quality
enhancement
• Potential wage determination
effects = ‘salary dispersion’
• Talent switching
• Scope for Vertical linkages
• Scope for Horizontal linkages
Employers/Industry
• Better education at lower
employment cost
• Stopping the ‘Brain Drain’
• Boosting talent supply
• Employment creation
• Economics spill-over effects
26
26. Group Discussion 2
• Choose a country you are familiar with
1. Do these stakeholder categories and respective
motivations reflect reality?
2. Was the situation 5-10 years ago different?
• Pick a TNE engagement model and a country
1. Which stakeholder motivations are most likely to
align or not?
2. What can be done to increase alignment?
27
27. Is TNE the future for universities?
08 May 2014 28
S(domestic) = ƒ(domestic HE
capacity)
D(domestic) = ƒ(population
and GDP growth)
28. All other things equal…
• Demand for transnational education will increase:
– If population (especially 18-22 years) grows
– Per capita income grows
• Demand for transnational education will decrease:
– If capacity/quality of domestic higher education increases
• In many developing countries, population and per
capita income are growing…
• …but governments are investing in major expansion
of domestic higher education
08 May 2014 29
29. Balance will change by country and
over time
08 May 2014 30
Population
growth,
GDP growth
Domestic HE
capacity,
regulatory
regime
Hi
Lo
TNEmarket
30. What about us as stakeholders (the
‘supply-side perspective)?
• Healey, N. (2013). Is UK transnational education “one of
Britain’s great growth industries of the future”? Higher
Education Review, 45(3), pp.6-35
• Qualitative study of the attitudes of senior university decision-
makers to expanding TNE
08 May 2014 31
31. Attitudes to expansion of transnational
education: positive themes
1. Broaden the market for UK higher education
– ‘never will be more than a tiny minority [of students] who can go
overseas… There is going to be an increasing need for TNE because of
the growing numbers going into higher education’.
– ‘TNE is also becoming a core recruitment tool…some big universities
have the majority of their international students coming from TNE
programmes’
2. Build a global brand for UK universities
– ‘any good research university needs to be globally connected… [TNE]
hits the soft power agenda’
3. UK government is driving TNE across all ministries
– ‘*government+ see TNE as a key part of export education, which doesn’t
need international students coming here’
– ‘the British Council, the International Unit of UUK, UKTI, the new BIS
unit, Education UK, they are all trying to get us to do TNE’
08 May 2014 32
32. Attitudes to expansion of transnational
education: negative themes
1. Risk aversion
– ‘There have been lots of issues and there has been a reduction in these
projects [franchising and validation]. They are very one sided’
– ‘too many failed IBCs, like UNSW Asia and George Mason University’
2. Some TNE activities are not scalable
– ‘most [academics] do not understand or care…they want to concentrate on
their research’.
– ‘people see [TNE] as a pain in the arse’
– ‘the QAA i(Quality Assurance Agency) s so overstretched, how can we ensure
that quality is maintained?’
3. Some forms of TNE are not sustainable
– ‘*This+ is not a sustainable model, you’re just plugging the gap until their
own sector fills it’
08 May 2014 33
33. Attitudes to expansion of transnational
education: negative themes (cont’d)
4. No pot of gold
– ‘if it’s about making money, there are more
interesting things to do — you’ll never make money
in the medium term’
– ‘always a mismatch between promise and delivery…
Projections in terms of numbers never materialise’
– ‘the costs of tutors, academic overheads, etc are
not taken into account. If you included
everything, you probably don't make money’
5. Internal resistance
– ‘it is not our core business, we shouldn't be doing
something that takes up resources that could be
used elsewhere’
08 May 2014 34
Oxford undergraduates head
for class
34. Group Discussion 3
• In your own university, what do you think are
the attitude of fellow academics and/or
administrators to:
1. Establishing an international branch
campus?
2. Franchising the university’s degree to a
foreign college?
3. Validating the degrees of a foreign college?
35
35. Closing remarks: Modelling the benefits
of strategic partnering
• Across TNE partnership categories there are some broad
benefits of partnership that can be assessed and examined.
• Examination may be linked to existing or proposed
arrangements, each of which can be modelled (or
visualised) in relation to the 6Rs:
– Reputation (R1)
– Revenue (R2)
– Risk (R3)
– Reach (R4)
– Resource (R5)
– Recognition (R6)
Thanks to: Prof Simon Mercado, Nottingham Trent University
36
36. 6Rs Explained
• Reputation - encouraging measurement of association benefits linked
to brand development, positioning, status and/or ranking.
• Revenue – encouraging measurement of fiscal or monetary
benefits, both direct and indirect.
• Risk – the extent to which a partnership exposes or protects the
institution to/from some combination of political, security, financial
and legal risk.
• Reach – the extent to which a partnership takes the institution and its
stakeholders into new and/or targeted markets or territory.
• Resource – encouraging measurement of resource demands and/or the
extent to which engagement leads to resource enhancements.
• Recognition - encouraging measurement of association benefits linked
to recognition for excellence, specialisation and/or membership (e.g. of
high value projects or networks).
Pre-supposes a preliminary test based on:
• Relevance – the extent to which a partnership and its focus aligns
directly with institutional priorities.
37
37. Using 6Rs to Visualize TNE
38
Small Program
Dual Degree
Highly Reputable Partner
Large Growing Program
Up and Coming Institution
Mid Risk Market
Strong Revenue Program
Higher Risks on Most Categories
38. How Stakeholders Can Influence
the 6Rs
6Rs
Reputation (R1)
Revenue (R2)
Risk (R3)
Reach (R4)
Resource (R5)
Recognition (R6)
Stakeholders
Academic Partners
Faculty and Staff
Students and Families
Government
Employers and Community
Local Institutions
Title Slide to be updated with all the participants
My thoughts are developing on this as follows:2.5 hrsIntro, scene setting, who is who on the panel and in the audience1st section sets the foundation. Builds on the morning session and enables Nige, Kurt and Lorne challenge perceptions and models based on their experience and ideas.2nd section provides a socio economic perspective of view the TNE world. Nige, Kurt and Lorne to highlight how this relates to specific examples from their own experiences and speculate as to how these many apply in new TNE markets.3rd section is an opportunity to link motivations to feasibility, decision making and planning processes for new and existing TNE. This gives Nige the opportunity to share his views as to whether TNE is really the future and open the audience to challenge him.The group discussions are there to get the groups sharing ideas, expanding on areas and providing the presenters with new perspectives to build into the sections.Wrap upWhen Simon and I have down these previously we tag team the speaking which appears to work. As Simon may not be there, it will need to be Nige, Kurt and myself and therefore we need to know what you feel more comfortable with.
This is to get the audience aligned to the messages in the workshop
Probably don’t need this
Coming after the session in the morning, we probably don’t need to dwell on definitions. NB. I am trying to obtain more information as to what the morning session will cover.
I have kept the notes from 2013 below. The new 2012/13 data for the UK is out and the total TNE has increased to 598,000. I haven’t bought the data set this year, but Nige if you have a copy I can update my stats (need tables 20 and 21)Not withstanding this, the data should be similar.There are more students studying for UK degrees abroad than there are at home.The number of international students taking UK qualifications overseas is now 571,000 “compared with around 488,000 international students in this country”, according to the Higher Education Statistics Agency.report, The Shape of Things to Come – The evolution of transnational education: Data, definitions, opportunities and impacts analysis, which examines the development of transnational education and environmental factors conducive to its successful delivery.Transnational education is continuing to expand at a brisk pace; both in terms of scale – programme and student enrolment – and scope – diversity of delivery modes and location of delivery,” said the council in its release.Courses offered abroad are expected to expand under the government’s newinternational education strategy, which was published in July, and with the formation of an International Education Council to champion the strategy.Dr Jo Beall, the British Council’s director of education and society, said the research had shown that transnational education was a “complex and fast changing environment, and therefore it’s even more important that the UK is able to use its world-recognised quality assurance processes to set international standards”.
Depending on what was covered in the morning we can skip this slide
Depending on what was covered in the morning we can skip this slide
This is probably also covered in the morning but I think we need to keep it for our workshop. Kurt do you have any US examples?This can be referred to in one of the workshop activities as am exercise.
Distribution based on historical UK and AUS data onlyBased on what we know of US and other countries engagement models, we are likely to see a reduction in the Validated % with an increase in Fly-In-Fly-Out, Franchise and “schools” with foreign hired staff.
Whilst not referred to in the Shape of Things to Come 2 directly, this is related. I expect that some elements of the morning session will infer elements of this.It might be worthwhile developing some alternative examples based on the US experience and Latin America. These were for the APAIE audience’s benefit.Regression of GER % and per capita income indicates expected GER % at a specific level of per capita income
I have updated this slide with the most recent data from the World Bank Data Bank. I have also moved from a Gross National Indicator (Atlas) to GDP PPP base in the graphs. This is to align the data to the Shape of Things to Come data representation.A few surprises from the last data, notably India has dramatically increased its GER% and student population. 95% of this data is from the World Bank, with alternative sources used to fill in gaps.NB. The TNE population is probably the same size as the Netherlands or South Africa or Hong Kong, Singapore and New Zealand combinedOver 50% of the global student population is in countries with a GDP/Cap below USD 10,000Over 50% of the student population in countries with GER below 40%
I am not suggesting that we us this slide, however I have included it for reference and for the comments belowThe slide shows the est current global student population (BC shape of things to come uses a different source and presents it differently but basically tells the same story), then shows what proportion is in respective GNI/Capita and GER brackets. 52% of the global student population is in countries with a GNI below USD 10,000 and 53% below 40% GER.This slide to emphasize that TNE occurs in:Underdeveloped education systems and economies GER below 10% and GNI per Capita below USD 3,000Developing education systems and economies GER below 50% and GNI per Capita below USD 16,000Developed education systems and economies GER above 50% and and GNI per Capita above USD 16,000The British Council is talking about the significance of a GER of 40% and the USD 10,000 threshold, suggesting that there is a line which can be used to indicate higher educational efficiency. Below this line there is structural inefficiency that TNE can be used to bridge?The Mode of TNE engagement across these 3 areas different and more importantly evolving as TNE partners in these countries mature and the socioeconomic conditions in which they operated change..See next slide
This is a new slide which plots the total economic size of a country, its GDP per capita and its tertiary student population.As the stakeholder motivations are conceptualized on the same axis, this helps visualize the different circumstances for different countries.Some of the riches countries per capita are small, whereas some of the less wealth are economic giants.
This is another new slide which plots the GINI index (inequity of income distribution in a country, the higher the more inequity) v per capital income and student population.I plotted this as there is a view that traditional student mobility comes from the more wealthy classes in developing countries and that TNE is more likely to occur where there is a growing middle class.I wanted to try and get good data to also look at the top 10 and 20% of the population as a percentage of income, but it was too scattered.
GINI index (inequity of income distribution in a country, the higher the more inequity) v GER %If you are in a low GER country, then access to education is for the well to do.NB. The GINI index in the develop nations is increasing (becoming less equitable) where as the lower income should be moving other way!
I have been looking back over my old notes when I first started giving PD on TNE and the stakeholder list hasn’t changed much. That said I am more than happy for someone to tell me we need to add another group!
I am interested in your thoughts know that you can overlay these motivations against specific countries.
Ditto on both the economic and GINI maps
EmploymentThere is a concern that if foreign universities penetrate a market (e.g. India), many of the professors teaching at even the best government institutions (In the Indian case, the IITs and IIMs) might move to these institutions as they might find the reward incentives at these institutions more satisfactory plus more time and space for innovation and research.The flipside here is that the availability of full-time and part-time opportunities for indigenous academics/researchers improves the prospect of them staying ‘home’. In Greece, 85% of academics working in public universities/colleges are estimated to undertake some gainful (secondary) employment with a foreign provider or foreign provider backed private college.
Someone made a comment (in one of our sessions? Simon) about education following Multinational business expansion. The Employer/Industry comments are worth considering against the attractiveness of markets from a business perspective. The BCG, World Bank and ADB have all made comments about local HE not meeting the needs of employers in development markets.
The participants represent a mix of sending and receiving countries, institutions and agencies. The groups should be encouraged to actively look at both sides of the motivation fence.
The participants represent a mix of sending and receiving countries, institutions and agencies. The groups should be encouraged to actively look at both sides of the motivation fence.
Simon and I talked about revisiting his 6 Rs in Seoul and I think it is a good idea.What I think would be interesting is to reassess the 6 Rs from a more broader stakeholder awareness and engagement perspective. I like the 6 Rs but to be honest I think that they are mostly applied from a sending institution’s academic only lens and fail to take into account the broader stakeholder network.I think that we can look at the 6 Rs as a means to plot potential and identify what elements are likely to change as partnerships mature and capabilities increase.
The 6Rs have significantly different positions depending on the socio economic status of the TNE operations. Without understanding the stakeholder motivations and requirements risks and benefits are likely to be under or overstated.
Is the objective of all partnerships to move outwards on all points. If so how do you achieve this without understanding and leveraging off the stakeholders.
How can each R be influenced by each stakeholder category?Where can additional benefits be gained through engagement and risks reduced or mitigated?