The internationalization of higher education scrutinized: international program and provider mobility

During the last two decades, there has been an exponential increase in all forms of international academic mobility - student and scholar, programs and providers, policies and regulations, and the universal exchange of knowledge, ideas, values, and culture. The diversity in the modes and forms of mobility is unprecedented. As with all new developments, there are multiple benefits, as well as potential risks, and usually some unintended consequences. These need to be carefully monitored. This article focuses on changes in internationalization and new developments such as international program and provider mobility (IPPM). There has been a steady increase in the number of international branch campuses around the world, as well as in the establishment of new independent international joint universities by partner institutions from different countries, an increasing number of joint/double degree programs, and revolutionary developments in distance education. In view of these developments, the purpose of this article is to introduce the IPPM classification framework, which provides a new conceptual structure to analyse the meaning, trends, issues, and opportunities of IPPM activities around the world and to identify areas of further research and policy development necessary to harness the benefits of IPPM, especially in Latin America.a

Joint Educational Programs of Russia and China: Status and Problems of Implementation

The article focuses on the current state and the problems concerning implementing joint educational programs by Russia and China. The author dwells on the concept of the joint educational program, proposes a classification of joint educational programs, including joint degree programs (joint diploma), double degree programs (double diplomas), and the program of included training. The analysis of visiting Russian-Chinese and inbound Sino-Russian joint educational programs as at 2018 was carried out. The problems and obstacles of joint educational programs implementation by Russia and China are revealed, among which are: legislation problems, problems of the language of instruction, problems of the cost of education, the necessary information support. The most serious problems relate to the legislation. First of all, it is the uncertainty concerning the meaning of the term “joint educational program” in the legislation framework. The attendant problems are licensing and accreditation of joint programs, award of diplomas, asymmetry between the number of visiting and inbound programs. The author comes to a conclusion that the legislation framework in the sphere of joint educational programs should include the following items: enrolment rules for foreign students in Russian universities; mechanisms of recognition of mobility periods and credits transfer for foreign participants of joint programs, migration rules of short-term courses.

Why Quitting Double-degree Programs: Students’ Perceptions in China

Around the world, colleges have been providing opportunities for students to participate in double-degree programs. In the past 30 years, double-degree education at tertiary level has been developing fast in China. While many studies focused on its positive effects, little attention was paid to its shortcomings. Through a focus group interview of five undergraduates from a Chinese university, this study revealed some underlying deficiencies of China’s double-degree education. The interview comprehensively uncovered participants’ motives, expectations, difficulties and reasons for quitting with regard to their double-degree programs. Colleges’ failure to live up to expectations (i.e., quality of courses, teachers, job prospects) and students’ lack of external support were found to be the main causes that led students to cease their studies. School policies and personal reasons also contributed to their decisions. This research provides advice for future curriculum planning and management of double-degree education from the perspectives of students, teachers and universities.