Internationalization is one of the major forces impacting and shaping higher education as it changes to meet the challenges of the 21st century. One aspect of internationalization that is particularly important and controversial is crossborder, often referred to as, transnational, education. Since the early 2000s, the scope and scale of higher education moving across borders to offer academic programs and qualifications in foreign countries has changed dramatically. Academic mobility has evolved from people mobility (students, faculty, scholars) to program mobility (twinning, franchise, joint/double degree, massive open online courses [MOOCs]), to provider mobility (branch campus, internationally codeveloped universities), and now to the development of education hubs. The use of virtual mobility and distance education is another burgeoning area. With this unprecedented growth in crossborder education comes the potential for numerous academic benefits including increased access, diversity in program offerings, development of intercultural skills and understanding, joint research, curriculum innovation, and capacity building as well as economic, sociocultural, and political benefits. At the same time, there are risks and unintended consequences involved. These can include homogenization or standardization of academic programs, low-quality and rogue providers, lack of qualification recognition, brain drain, unequal partnerships, overuse of English, and the profit imperative. Thus a comprehensive review of the literature needs to reflect the multiple actors, modes of delivery, types of partnerships, rationales, impacts, and challenges of crossborder higher education. A critical but underresearched area is developing culturally sensitive and appropriate curriculum and pedagogy for transnational education programs. Important to note is the use of terminology. The most common terms are crossborder, transnational, offshore, and borderless education. For the purposes of this article, crossborder (CBHE) and transnational education (TNE) are used interchangeably. Even though different concepts—borders and nations—form the root of these concepts, they both denote the mobility of academic programs and providers across borders and are often interpreted to mean the same thing. A number of principles guide the selection of resources. (1) All forms of program and provider mobility are covered. Student mobility and distance education are increasing in size and scope but deserve to be treated as separate articles. (2) Given the accelerated pace of change of CBHE, a contemporary, not historical, approach is used, meaning that the majority of references are from the early 2000s onward. (3) As appropriate, the annotations suggest what type of reader may find the references most useful. The main types of readers are scholars (including students, professors, and researchers from diverse disciplines), higher education leaders, policymakers, practitioners, and TNE providers. (4) By definition TNE involves sending and host country institutions/partners, each with their own rationales, policies, and expectations. Thus, priority is given to choosing authors from a diversity of countries, ensuring that CBHE in all regions of the world is addressed.
Breaking Higher Education’s Iron Triangle through Distance Education: The Case of IGNOU in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
