CIHE Perspectives No.12

Hans de Wit, Laura E. Rumbley, Daniela Craciun,

Georgiana Mihut and Ayenachew Woldegiyorgis

International Mapping of National

Tertiary Education Internationalization

Strategies and Plans (NTEISPs)

CIHE

Perspectives

No.12

Center for International Higher Education

Boston College

Chestnut Hill, MA ~ USA

International Mapping of National Tertiary Education

Internationalization Strategies and Plans (NTEISPs)

Hans de Wit, Laura E. Rumbley, Daniela Craciun,

Georgiana Mihut and Ayenachew Woldegiyorgis

Analytical Report

1 May 2019

Contract 7188268

CIHE Perspectives No.12

International Mapping of National Tertiary Education

Internationalization Strategies and Plans (NTEISPs)

Hans de Wit, Laura E. Rumbley, Daniela Craciun,

Georgiana Mihut and Ayenachew Woldegiyorgis

Analytical Report

1 May 2019

Contract 7188268

CIHE Perspectives No.12

CIHE Perspectives

This series of studies focuses on aspects of

research and analysis undertaken at the Boston

College Center for International Higher Education.

The Center brings an international consciousness

to the analysis of higher education. We believe that

an international perspective will contribute to

enlightened policy and practice. To serve this

goal, the Center produces International Higher

Education (a quarterly publication), books, and

other publications; sponsors conferences; and

welcomes visiting scholars. We have a special

concern for academic institutions in the Jesuit

tradition worldwide and, more broadly, with

Catholic universities.

The Center promotes dialogue and cooperation

among academic institutions throughout the

world. We believe that the future depends on

eective collaboration and the creation of an

international community focused on the

improvement of higher education in the

public interest.

Center for International Higher Education

Campion Hall

Boston College

Chestnut Hill, MA 02467 USA

www.bc.edu/cihe

foreword ............................................... ............................................................ 1

introduction ..................................................................................... 2

review of relevant literature ........................................ ................ 5

pointers for action .......................................................................... 9

mapping national internationalization strategies .................. 12

estonia: an example of good practice ........................................15

country case studies ...................................................................... 17

brazil ......................................................................................... 17

colombia ............................................... .................................. 19

ecuador ..................................................................................... 21

egypt ........ ................................................................................... 23

ethiopia ..................................................................................... 26

india ....................................................... .................................. 29

kazakhstan ................................................................................ 31

malaysia ........ ............................................................................. 33

singapore ........ ......................................................................... 35

south africa ............................................................................ 37

united arab emirates .......................................................... 40

references ........................................................................................... 42

international mapping of nteisps

t is our great pleasure to present the 12th issue of

CIHE Perspectives, a series of studies focusing on as-

pects of research and analysis undertaken by the

Center for International Higher Education (CIHE).

This issue is the second report commissioned by

the World Bank. The rst one, CIHE Perspectives 1

(2016), sought to map the landscape of International

Advisory Councils (IACs) at tertiary education institu-

tions around the world. With this second report,

CIHE Perspectives 12, the World Bank and CIHE envi-

sioned another mapping opportunity, in this case to

gauge the scope of National Tertiary Education Inter-

nationalization Strategies and Plans (NTEISPs) in sev-

eral countries.

Internationalization of tertiary education is one

of the key change agents in the global knowledge

society and is high on the strategic agendas of insti-

tutional, national and international entities world-

wide. While the main focus in internationalization

policies has been at the level of colleges and univer-

sities, there is an increasing number of governments

worldwide, including in low and middle income

countries, that are developing national international-

ization strategies and plans, which can serve as cata-

lyzers for higher education change and development

in the national, regional and global knowledge

societies.

This report provides analysis based on qualita-

tive desk research of NTEIPs and includes some gen-

eral recommendations for maximizing the potential

of such initiatives. It includes eleven case study coun-

tries from Africa, Asia, Central Asia, Central Europe,

Middle East and Latin America.

While noting that low- and middle-income

countries are becoming more active in dening na-

tional policies for internationalization, and on South-

South cooperation, the report also recommends

countries approach these internationalization trends

with caution. In copying a traditional, high-income

paradigm in focusing strongly on mobility of stu-

dents and sta, on reputation and branding, and on

South-North relations, countries may lose sight of

what is specic and appropriate for their own

contexts.

The report suggests that more attention be paid

to regional cooperation, as is emerging for instance

among ASEAN countries, more South-South net-

working and partnerships, and a stronger focus on

internationalization of the curriculum at home. Such

focused interventions are vital to break the high-in-

come paradigm in internationalization and to devel-

op policies and actions that build on the own local,

national and regional context and culture.

The purpose this mapping exercise is to serve as

a resource for policymakers and researchers, but we

hope it will also stimulate debate and interaction on

key issues among all interested stakeholders in inter-

national and comparative higher education. The

ndings and recommendations in this report can be

a source of input and orientation for national govern-

ments as well as international organizations, includ-

ing the World Bank, in developing their strategies

and plans to internationalize tertiary education.

We thank Laura E. Rumbley, Daniela Craciun,

Georgiana Mihut and Ayenachew Woldegiyorgis, for

their contribution to the research and analysis, and

the experts consulted in the dierent case study

countries for their input and expertise.

Francisco Marmolejo, Lead Tertiary Education

Specialist, The World Bank

Roberta Malee Bassett, Global Lead for Tertiary

Education, The World Bank

Hans de Wit, Director, Boston College Center for

International Higher Education

August 2019

FOREWORD

center for international higher education | perspectives no. 12

ver the past 30 years, internationalization in

tertiary education has become a key point of

strategy for international entities such as the Organ-

isation for Economic Co-operation and Develop-

ment (OECD), the United Nations Educational,

Scientic and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), the

World Bank, and the European Commission, as well

as for national governments, and for institutions of

tertiary education and their associations.

Some of the main institutional and national trends

in internationalization in tertiary education in the

past 30 years include:

• A greater focus on internationalization abroad

than on internationalization at home, with in-

ternationalization at home dened by Beelen

and Jones as “the purposeful integration of in-

ternational and intercultural dimensions into

the formal and informal curriculum for all stu-

dents within domestic learning environments”

(2015, p. 76)

• Approaches that are more ad hoc, fragmented

and marginal than strategic, comprehensive

and central in policies, with comprehensive in-

ternationalization described by Hudzik as “a

commitment, conrmed through action, to in-

fuse international, global and comparative per-

spectives throughout the teaching, research and

service missions of higher education. It shapes

institutional ethos and values and touches the

entire higher education enterprise” (2011, p. 6)

• A greater interest in a small, elite subset of stu-

dents and faculty than focused on global and

intercultural outcomes for all

• Being directed by a constantly shifting range of

political, economic, social/cultural, and educa-

tional rationales, with increasing focus on eco-

nomic motivations

• An increasing tendency to be driven by national,

regional, and global rankings

• Little alignment between the international di-

mensions of the three core functions of tertiary

education: education, research, and service to

society

• Being primarily a strategic choice and focus of

institutions of tertiary education, and less a pri-

ority of national governments

• Being less important in emerging and develop-

ing economies, and more of a particular strate-

gic concern among developed economies.

In the past decade, however, one can observe a

reaction to these trends. While mobility is still the

most dominant factor in tertiary education interna-

tionalization policies worldwide, increasing atten-

tion is being paid to internationalization of the

curriculum at home. There is also a stronger call for

comprehensive internationalization, which address-

es all institutional aspects in an integrated way. Al-

though economic rationales and rankings still drive

the agenda of internationalization, there is more

emphasis now being placed on other motivations for

tertiary education internationalization. For example,

attention is being paid to integrating international

dimensions into tertiary education quality assurance

mechanisms, institutional policies related to student

learning outcomes, and the work of national and dis-

cipline-specic accreditation agencies. This is re-

ected in the updated denition of

internationalization of tertiary education that was

put forward in a study for the European

Parliament:

The intentional process of integrating an

international, intercultural or global dimen-

sion into the purpose, functions and deliv-

ery of post-secondary education, in order to

enhance the quality of education and re-

search for all students and sta and to make

a meaningful contribution to society (de

Introduction and rationale

international mapping of nteisps

Wit et al., 2015, p. 29).

This denition purposefully builds on a 2003

denition for the phenomenon articulated by Jane

Knight, by adding the word ‘intentional’ to highlight

the deliberate nature of the process and by adding

the words ‘in order to….’ to highlight the fact that

tertiary education internationalization is a means to

an end and not an end in itself. Whereas Knight

(2014) correctly states that the strength of her widely

acknowledged denition is that it is “not prescriptive

and focuses on education objectives and functions”,

the updated denition addresses the weakness of

her denition, “that traditional values associated

with internationalization such as partnerships, col-

laboration, mutual benet, and exchange are not ar-

ticulated – only assumed” (2014, p. 2). In that

respect, the updated denition can be perceived as

normative and prescriptive, but at the same time it

reorients the process of internationalization to ter-

tiary education’s academic and social values.

Meanwhile, where the focus in international-

ization has been predominantly on institutional pol-

icies and practices, one can currently observe more

attention to internationalization in the agendas of

national governments, such as Australia, Canada,

France, Germany, the Netherlands, and New Zea-

land. Last but not least, internationalization in tertia-

ry education, as described by Jones and de Wit

(2014), has become more globalized, with regional,

national and institutional initiatives increasingly ev-

ident in the emerging and developing world:

In the current global-knowledge society, the

concept of internationalization of higher

education has itself become globalized, de-

manding further consideration of its im-

pact on policy and practice as more

countries and types of institution around

the world engage in the process. Interna-

tionalization should no longer be consid-

ered in terms of a westernized, largely

Anglo-Saxon, and predominantly En-

glish-speaking paradigm (Jones and de Wit,

2014, p. 28).

Recent publications have given more attention

to these emerging voices and perspectives (de Wit et

al., 2017) and next generation insights (Proctor and

Rumbley, 2018). As Fanta Aw, in her foreword to the

book of de Wit et al. (2017) states, “It is important for

internationalization eorts to remain contextualized

and rooted in culture, place, time and manner” (p.

xxii). That is why it is important to study the way not

only institutions, but also national governments, in

low- and middle-income countries are responding to

the need for internationalization in tertiary educa-

tion. This report thus aims to respond to this need to

better understand national tertiary education inter-

nationalization strategies and plans in low- and mid-

dle-income countries.

The project maps the most recent developments

of national tertiary education internationalization

strategies and plans (NTEISPs) using desk research

and qualitative feedback from country experts. This

exercise focuses specically on Brazil, Colombia, Ec-

uador, Egypt, Estonia, Ethiopia, India, Kazakhstan,

Malaysia, Singapore, South Africa, and the United

Arab Emirates (UAE).

Each country case study in the report provides a

brief description of the country’s tertiary education

sector, including its size and a discussion of the na-

tional plans, policies, and strategies put forward to

internationalize the tertiary education sector. To co-

herently and consistently describe the tertiary educa-

tion sector in each country, World Bank (2019) data

on the gross enrollment ratio (GER) and distribution

of students in the public and private sector were

used. In the discussion of NTEISPs, existing re-

search on each country was synthesized paying at-

tention to the following areas:

• History of the plan

• Key priorities and objectives and their timeline

• Resource allocations

• Flagship initiatives or projects

• Evaluations of the plans, where available

In order to best complement the available data

on NTEISPs, feedback was solicited from multiple

key experts in each of the case countries, to gain bet-

ter understanding about the scope and eectiveness

center for international higher education | perspectives no. 12

of national internationalization strategies and plans

in tertiary education, as well as to solicit recommen-

dations for examples of good practice.

For some countries, it was easier to nd relevant

documentation and have access to stakeholders and

experts on this topic. This is the case for those coun-

tries that have more explicit NTEISPs, such as Ma-

laysia, South Africa, Colombia, Brazil and, more

recently, India. Other countries, such as Ethiopia

and Egypt, do not have clear NTEISPs and so they

required additional research for information to iden-

tify implicit strategies and policies. While challeng-

ing, this has helped to identify the complexities of

national policies and practices.

The study was designed to meet four distinct

objectives:

1. Describe the current state and prevalence of na-

tional internationalization strategies and plans

in tertiary education in low- and middle-income

countries

2. Create a comprehensive and exhaustive typolo-

gy of national internationalization strategies and

plans in tertiary education

3. Advance understanding of the eectiveness of

national internationalization strategies and

plans in tertiary education

4. Identify examples of good practice among na-

tional internationalization strategies and plans

in tertiary education

@BC_CIHE

@BC_HECM

@BC_INHEA

Center for International Higher Education

Follow our posts collected from sources worldwide:

Keep up with international trends in higher education.

international mapping of nteisps

Review of relevant literature

n extensive literature review was conducted for

this project, focused on exploring what is cur-

rently known about national internationalization

strategies and plans. The literature review addressed

the following areas:

• Geographic coverage of prior research

• The time-frame of prior research

• Existing typologies, and a consideration of areas

of convergence and divergence among them

• Evidence of the eectiveness of national inter-

nationalization strategies and plans in tertiary

education

• Recommendations for good practice in drafting

and implementing national internationalization

policies and plans in tertiary education

Over the past ve years, several studies by the

British Council (2016, 2017), the DAAD and the British

Council (2014), Helms et al. (2015), the European Par-

liament (2015), Craciun (2018a), and Perna et al.

(2014) have looked into NTEISPs, and have generated

a series of analyses, overviews, rankings, and recom-

mendations on them. So far, no comprehensive anal-

ysis and typology has been provided, and less

attention has been given to low- and middle-income

countries with respect to NTEISPs.

In recent years, internationalization has shaped

education at all levels across the world at an acceler-

ated pace. In light of increased student and sta mo-

bility, the expanding presence of branch campuses

and international providers, and growing competi-

tion for international talent, tertiary education insti-

tutions and national governments are mobilizing to

both leverage and steer internationalization. Nation-

al tertiary education internationalization strategies

and plans represent the most tangible and direct at-

tempts by governments to play an active and deci-

sive role in relation to internationalization, but there

are substantive dierences in their approaches, ratio-

nales, and priorities.

Meanwhile, new denitions and understand-

ings of internationalization in tertiary education

have given way to a new research agenda. Since the

denition of tertiary education internationalization

has been reworked to include the specication that

internationalization is a planned activity, and not

something that ‘just happens’ to tertiary education

systems or institutions, there has been a trend to-

wards examining national involvement in steering

the process (Craciun, 2018c). A survey of NTEISPs

provides important lessons about the system-level

arrangements meant to advance internationalization

and go beyond seeing the process as a by-product of

globalization. These lessons become crucial in a poli-

cy-making environment striving to learn from best

practices and develop evidence-based policies

(Craciun, 2018c).

A worldwide census of explicit NTEISPs carried

out by Craciun (2018a) reveals that only 11% of coun-

tries have an ocial strategy for internationalization

of tertiary education, most having been adopted in

the last decade. Such strategies have been devel-

oped predominantly by wealthier countries – 3 in 4

NTEISPs are found among members of the Organisa-

tion for Economic Co-operation and Development

(OECD). European countries have taken the lead in

promoting strategic thinking about internationaliza-

tion at the national level – 2 in 3 NTEISPs come from

this world region (Craciun, 2018a), and programs

such as Erasmus+ and Horizon 2020 have led to fur-

ther regional harmonization of tertiary education

systems (British Council, 2017).

This is not to say that other countries have not

taken measures to promote internationalization. In

fact, to support internationalization processes, many

countries have taken both direct measures (e.g.,

re-evaluating their visa policies to give preferential

treatment to international students and scholars, es-

tablishing bi-lateral or multi-lateral agreements

through memoranda of understanding, and promot-

ing transnational education through free-trade

center for international higher education | perspectives no. 12

deals) and indirect measures (e.g., supporting inter-

nationalization in political discourses and giving

universities autonomy to pursue internationaliza-

tion activities). Nevertheless, explicit NTEISPs en-

sure consistency between direct and indirect policy

measures and provide a clear signaling of govern-

ment commitment to internationalization. In other

words, NTEISPs move tertiary education interna-

tionalization “from the periphery to center stage”

(Craciun, 2018b, p. 8). More in-depth, large-scale re-

search on the focus – in terms of rationales and prior-

ities – of NTEISPs is needed to gain a better

understanding of what is actually done to promote

tertiary education internationalization and the eec-

tiveness of the measures taken (Craciun, 2018c).

As evidenced by a systematic literature review of

rigorous research from the last 25 years on transna-

tional cooperation in tertiary education, there are

signicant economic and non-economic benets for

societies, institutions, and individuals arising from in-

ternationalization (Craciun & Orosz, 2018). Benets

for which there is solid evidence include more and

better research publications and patents, better for-

eign language prociency and employment pros-

pects for internationally mobile students, positive

attitudes towards open borders and democracy,

strengthened research and teaching capacity, and

increased attractiveness of collaborating universities

to foreign academics (Craciun & Orosz, 2018). How-

ever, it is unclear how eective explicit NTEISPs are

in bringing about these benets. Because many of

these national strategies have come about recently,

little research has been carried out to gauge their re-

sults. Nevertheless, research on policy texts of

NTEISPs has consistently singled out international

student mobility as a priority for a majority of gov-

ernments (British Council 2017; Craciun, 2018c; Per-

na et al., 2014), and data show that almost half of

international students worldwide in 2013 were host-

ed by countries that have explicit NTEISPs (Craciun,

2018a).

Literature, as well as surveys, make clear that

the main focus in tertiary education international-

ization strategies and plans is still at the institutional

level. Indeed, institutions operate in many cases

without a national plan in place. Where national

plans do exist, institutions may operate in conict or

in alignment with the national agenda. An NTEISP

can serve as a catalyst or a drag on internationaliza-

tion processes, but is mostly seen as a highly posi-

tive element for the advancement of

internationalization. Specically, NTEISPs set inter-

nationalization priorities, allocate important re-

sources to meet internationalization goals, and can

ensure continuity of eorts between successive gov-

ernments (Craciun, 2018b). They align tertiary educa-

tion internationalization with other key national

priorities, such as economic growth, national securi-

ty, or foreign policy. They incentivize institutions

and individuals to assist in meeting national strate-

gic goals through internationalization. In short, na-

tional tertiary education internationalization

strategies and plans oer not only a good overview

of the manifestations of internationalization in spe-

cic contexts, but also shape the actions of key actors

in the process.

However, it would be a misconception to as-

sume that NTEISPs have common rationales and

approaches to internationalization across countries.

Dierences exist between and among high-income,

low-income, and middle-income countries with re-

spect to their policies and practices.

Also, there are dierences in explicit and implicit

policies and practices, with some countries having

well documented plans and others having no explicit

plans but well-dened activities. In addition, dier-

ent stakeholders can be identied in the operational-

ization of NTEISPs. A typology of NTEISPs can improve

transparency between and within tertiary education

systems (Craciun, 2015), promote synergies through

coordination, and ultimately increase the impact of

these eorts (Helms et al., 2015). Developing a typol-

ogy of NTEISPs requires identifying rationales, stake-

holders, and organizational, programmatic, and

geographic priorities. The case studies in this report

provide input for the development of such a typolo-

gy, with emphasis on low- and middle-income coun-

tries that have become active actors in the eld of

tertiary education internationalization in recent

years (European Parliament, 2015).

international mapping of nteisps

In this context, the 2018 British Council-funded

study (Atherton, Norbaya Binti Azizan, Shuib, & Cros-

ling, 2018) is relevant, as it focuses on the tertiary ed-

ucation internationalization policies in the low- and

middle- income countries of Brunei, Cambodia, Indo-

nesia, Lao PDR, Malaysia, Myanmar, The Philippines,

Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam. This study recog-

nized tertiary education’s powerful role in interna-

tional relations and diplomacy and in supporting an

integrated and aligned ASEAN (i.e., Association of

Southeast Asian Nations) community. One key nd-

ing is the ASEAN emphasis on openness and mobili-

ty, at varying levels according to each country’s

developmental stage. Here, ‘openness’ refers to the

government-level commitment to internationaliza-

tion via international mobility for students, research-

ers, academic programs and university research,

assisting in the development of a ‘we-feeling’ (Ather-

ton, Crosling, Shuib, & Norbaya Azizan, 2019).

Overall, the Atherton et al. (2018) study indicat-

ed strong government support and commitment to

internationalizing tertiary education. International-

ization was not found to be a separate strategy in any

country but was rather integrated in the broader ter-

tiary education planning framework. Both regional

and international mobility were seen to be emerging

as a signicant or a key component in most countries’

strategies. Most countries scored high in terms of

high level policy commitment and proactive ap-

proaches to establishing or developing international

research collaborations and partnerships. In most

countries, several approaches have fostered regional

and international research collaborations. Mean-

while, despite these positive indications of eorts to

train and retain talent, ‘brain drain’ appeared as a

challenge for most countries. This is compounded

by the lack of a comprehensive and integrated sys-

tem to facilitate mutually-benecial academic ex-

change throughout this region. Regulations are in

place in most countries for cross-border programs

by foreign providers. However, in terms of institu-

tional and program mobility, wide dierences across

countries were in evidence. Several countries scored

very high and as global leaders in operating transna-

tionally. However, several countries are at very early

stages of development, with little evidence of domes-

tic institutions operating internationally. One key

implication from the study is the need for regional

harmonization of systems, but with consideration

for the diversity and the commonalities that charac-

terize the existing national internationalization

strategies. This underscores the importance of de-

veloping an ASEAN-centric framework (Atherton et

al., 2018; Atherton et al., 2019).

Overall, the literature reviewed for this report

points to several key indicators that can be used to

guide more systematic thinking about national in-

ternationalization policies in tertiary education:

• Involvement: Government involvement can be

direct (i.e., through explicit policy documents to

advance or regulate internationalization and by

earmarking funds to be invested in pursuing

this objective) or indirect (i.e., by supporting in-

ternationalization at a discursive level and allow-

ing universities to pursue internationalization,

but at their own expense).

• Stakeholders: Stakeholders may come from a

wide ecosystem of actors related to tertiary edu-

cation, including ministries (such as education

or foreign aairs), other national agencies, the

private sector, international organizations, re-

gional bodies and institutions, etc.

• History: While there is a long tradition of indirect

government support for tertiary education in-

ternationalization, more direct and strategic ac-

tions, policies, and plans have only appeared

more recently (Crăciun, 2018a).

• Geographic focus: In general, there is an evolving

regionalization of tertiary education internation-

alization in which European policies are taken as

best practice examples (de Wit et al., 2015). Sig-

nicantly, when looking at the global picture,

explicit national internationalization strategies

for tertiary education are prevalent in Europe,

but not so much in other world regions (Crăciun,

2018a).

• Tactical focus: Some strategies are rather generic,

expressing a general vision for tertiary educa-

tion internationalization while others have

center for international higher education | perspectives no. 12

specic focal points or action lines that frame

the scope of activities of interest (for instance,

inbound or outbound mobility).

• Effectiveness: In terms of the eectiveness of na-

tional policies for tertiary education internation-

alization, little is known. This can be explained

by the fact that the most policies are quite re-

cent so there are few, if any, studies assessing the

eectiveness of such policy instruments. Thus,

the evidence is usually anecdotal or reliant on

quantitative measures related to international-

ization abroad (i.e., international student

mobility).

For this report we have studied a number of

low- and middle-income countries from dierent

continents to provide insights into NTEISPs for

these types of countries. These country cases are pre-

sented separately in this report. Each includes a brief

overview of the tertiary education system, as well as

a discussion of national strategies, policies, and plans

intended to internationalize tertiary education in the

country. The next sections provide the main conclu-

sions drawn from the analysis, followed by recom-

mendations for governments and tertiary education

institutions to be used in the design, implementa-

tion, and evaluation of NTEISPs. Estonia is oered as

a good practice example to highlight the positive

impact that NTEISPs can have on internationalizing

tertiary education.

international mapping of nteisps

• In some countries there is a lack of clear national

plans and institutions are left to provide direction

(as in Ethiopia and Egypt); in others, it is primarily

the Ministry of Education, or other ministries, or a

combination of ministries, that are involved. These

actions may also be characterized by a combination

of initiatives of national and institutional stake-

holders (as in Colombia, for instance)

• Most countries specify explicit geographic focal

points for their tertiary education internationaliza-

tion activities and, in most cases, these are high-in-

come countries in the developed world, i.e., they

are South-North oriented. Nonetheless, one can

also observe a South-South trend, from low-income

to middle-income countries (for instance in the

cases of India, Malaysia, and South Africa) and a

focus on neighboring countries (for instance, in

Africa).

• There is a divide between countries focusing on in-

coming mobility (India, for instance), on outgoing

mobility (Brazil, for example), and two-way mobili-

ty. Most strategies focus on student mobility, and to

a lesser extent on scholar mobility and transnation-

al education. Estonia is the only country with a

more comprehensive approach, supported by Eu-

ropean programs.

• Research and publications collaboration; partner-

ships, networks and consortia; and enhancing

quality and aspiring to international quality stan-

dards, are quite common in national policies.

• Internationalization at home and of the curricu-

lum, as well as national and foreign language poli-

cy, are rather marginal focal points in national

policies.

• There is very little evidence that NTEISPs are de-

signed with the goal of advancing social justice,

Some key ﬁndings from the mapping exercise can be

identiﬁed as follows:

• There is a divide between countries with explicit

and implicit NTEISPs but, with the exception of

Ethiopia and the UAE, all the countries have some

form of explicit policy on internationalization in

tertiary education. At the same time, in all of the

countries, one can also ﬁnd implicit references to

tertiary education internationalization in their edu-

cation and/or foreign relations policies.

• There is a divide between countries with policies

directly focused on tertiary education international-

ization and those in which internationalization is

just one element of a broader policy or plan. Never-

theless, seven out of the twelve countries have a

speciﬁc stand-alone policy for tertiary education

internationalization, and ﬁve out of these seven

even have a strong policy orientation. All of the

countries studied have embedded internationaliza-

tion in their overall national education and/or for-

eign relations policies, although in many cases in

rather generic terms with little in the way of specif-

ic articulation of actions. An exception is Colombia,

where the Ministry of Education directly, and

through the national accreditation agency, sets tar-

gets and indicators for tertiary education

internationalization.

• National governments are the leading actors in the

internationalization of tertiary education in all of

the case countries, and in four cases (Brazil, Ecua-

dor, India, and Malaysia) national governments are

quite strong actors. South Africa offers an example

of a national policy that is deﬁned by the national

government but with institutions of tertiary educa-

tion explicitly named as the key actors.

• Overall, one can describe the process of operation-

alizing NTEISPs as rather top-down.

Mapping national internationalization strategies

and plans

center for international higher education | perspectives no. 12

inclusion, and equity objectives. Leveraging ter-

tiary education internationalization to meet the

needs of historically marginalized and/or un-

derrepresented populations does not appear to

be a priority in any of the cases examined for

this study.

What can we conclude from these ﬁndings? We

can observe that low- and middle-income countries

are becoming more active in deﬁning national poli-

cies for internationalization and in fostering South-

South cooperation, breaking with the “westernized,

largely Anglo-Saxon, and predominantly En-

glish-speaking paradigm” of internationalization, as

mentioned by Jones and de Wit (2012). But, serious

caution must be expressed with respect to this trend.

The analysis revealed a degree of policy mimicry, in

that the low- and middle-income countries consid-

ered in this study appear to have adopted many as-

pects of the western paradigm of tertiary education

internationalization by focusing heavily on mobility,

on reputation and branding, and on South-North re-

lations. There is also little continuity in their nation-

al policies, due to political and economic factors.

Brazil provides a vivid case of this kind of dynamic.

The NTEISPs of low- and middle-income coun-

tries appear to sustain the dominance of high-in-

come countries through the structure and terms of

their scholarship schemes, their geographic priori-

ties, and their choices with respect to partnerships

in research and education. More attention to region-

al cooperation, as is emerging, for instance, among

ASEAN countries; more South-South networking

and partnerships; and a stronger focus on interna-

tionalization of the curriculum at home, is needed to

break the high-income paradigm in tertiary educa-

tion internationalization and to develop policies and

actions that build on the local, national and regional

contexts and cultures of low- and middle-income

countries.

Ultimately, it was not possible to construct a ty-

pology of national strategies, based on the work of

this review. However, it was possible to create a sum-

mary table, outlining the key characteristics of the

reviewed plans, which could be used to organize and

classify other national internationalization plans.

This summary table appears as Table 2, on the fol-

lowing pages.

international mapping of nteisps

TABLE 2. Characteristics of NTEISPs

Policy characteristics

Case countries

Brazil

Colombia

Ecuador

Egypt

Estonia

Ethiopia

India

Kazakhstan

Malaysia

Singapore

South Africa

United Arab Emirates

Approaches to policy articulation

• Implicit focus on internationalization x x

• Explicit focus on internationalization xx xx x xx xx x xx xx xx

Approaches to policy formulation

• Stand-alone policy for

internationalization

xx x xx xx xx x xx

• Internationalization policy

embedded in a broader policy

x xx x x x x x x x x xx x

Key actors

• National governments/ministries xx x xx x x x xx x xx x x x

• Non- or quasi-governmental actors x x x x x

• Tertiary education institutions x x x x x x x x x xx x

• Foreign governments x x x

• International organizations x x

Geographic priorities

• Explicit geographic focal points x x x x x x x

Note: An “xx” designation denotes that this speciﬁc policy characteristic is especially “strong” or evident in the particular NTEISP

or national context.

Note: At the time this report was being prepared, South Africa’s internationalization policy was currently under review.

center for international higher education | perspectives no. 12

TABLE 2. Characteristics of NTEISPs (continued)

Policy characteristics

Case countries

Brazil

Colombia

Ecuador

Egypt

Estonia

Ethiopia

India

Kazakhstan

Malaysia

Singapore

South Africa

United Arab Emirates

Priority action lines

• Incoming student mobility x x x x x x xx x xx x xx x

• Outgoing student mobility xx x x x x x xx x x x

• Incoming academic staff/faculty mobility x x x x x x x x x

• Outgoing academic staff/faculty mobility x x x x x x

• Visa and immigration processes x x x

• International student/faculty services x x

• Program and/or institutional mobility

(includes cross-border and transnational

education, educational hubs,

international branch campuses, joint

and dual degrees, online delivery)

x x x x x xx xx x x

• Research and publications collaboration x x x x x x x x

• Joint doctoral supervision x x x x

• Partnerships, networks, and consortia x x x x x x x

• Internationalization of the curriculum

(includes approaches to teaching and

learning)

x x x x

• Internationalization at home x x x x x

• Requiring or encouraging teaching in

non-local languages

x x x x x

• Requiring or encouraging foreign

language study or proﬁciency

x x

• Leveraging diaspora and/or

internationally educated returnees

x x x x x

• Facilitating employment for international

students and international graduates

• Enhancing quality and/or aspiring to

international quality standards

x x x x x x x x x

• Aiming to develop world-class

universities

x x x x x

Note: An “xx” designation denotes that this speciﬁc policy characteristic is especially “strong” or evident in the particular NTEISP

or national context.

Note: At the time this report was being prepared, South Africa’s internationalization policy was currently under review.

international mapping of nteisps

Pointers for action on national tertiary education

internationalization strategies and plans

By analyzing the dierent features of NTEISPs, some

pointers for action can be considered by govern-

ments and tertiary education institutions, as they

work on the design, implementation and/or evalua-

tion of NTEISPs;

• NTEISPs should not be developed and imple-

mented in isolation from broader strategies for

tertiary education and socio-economic develop-

ment; rather, their rationales should be driven

by, and rmly embedded in, the socio-economic

and tertiary education context of the country.

• NTEISPs, ideally, should not be single-issue fo-

cused (such as recruitment of international stu-

dents, outbound mobility of students, or

increasing performance in rankings); rather, they

should have a broader comprehensive ap-

proach, with integrated action lines that address

aspects of internationalization abroad and inter-

nationalization at home, as well as the interac-

tion between these two dimensions.

• NTEISPs should develop indicators to evaluate

the attainment of the strategic objectives set by

the plans, going beyond quantitative indicators

of international mobility. In this way, the impor-

tance and achievements of NTEISPs can be objec-

tively evaluated and policy learning can occur.

• NTEISPs should take into account the internation-

al dimensions of all three core functions of tertia-

ry education—research, education, and service to

society—and consider how each of these dimen-

sions can contribute to strengthening the other

two and create synergies between them.

• NTEISPs should address not only the potential

benets of internationalization, but also poten-

tial obstacles and risks associated with this pro-

cess, and incorporate actions aimed at

minimizing obstacles and mitigating risks.

• NTEISPs should clearly address the matter of how

to strengthen the professional, academic, and

‘soft’ skills of students. Attention should be paid

to enhancing both intercultural and international

competences to support students’ employability

and citizenship development.

• NTEISPs should pay careful attention to national

policies related to language and culture associat-

ed with tertiary education. These are important

concerns in a globalized knowledge society and

economy, where English is the dominant lan-

guage of communication in research, but also

increasingly in the delivery of education.

• NTEISPs should attend thoughtfully to matters of

social justice and equity. For example, when fram-

ing geographic priorities, national policies and

plans should not only focus on South-North rela-

tions and partnerships, but also strengthen South-

South collaboration. The needs of historically

marginalized and underrepresented domestic

populations should also be carefully considered in

the design and implementation of NTEISPs.

• NTEISPs should look at the regional context of

their internationalization policies, as regional

policies for harmonization of tertiary structures

and related support mechanisms oer important

ways to enhance the quality of tertiary education

in the national context (the European Higher Ed-

ucation Area and ASEAN provide important ex-

amples here).

• NTEISPs need to be based, both in their creation

and implementation, on the active involvement

of a wide range of stakeholders: ideally, a range

of national ministries, tertiary education institu-

tions and their associations, student and sta or-

ganizations, non-governmental organizations

(NGOs), and the private sector.

center for international higher education | perspectives no. 12

Tertiary education system in brief

n the last decade, Estonia’s national tertiary education system has been shrinking, both in terms

of student numbers and in number of post-secondary institutions. While, in 2007, there were

68,200 students enrolled at the tertiary level of education, in 2017, there were only 46,200

(Statistics Estonia, 2018a). That represents a 32% decrease in student enrollments in just one decade.

This change has been mirrored in the overall number of tertiary education institutions. In 2007,

the tertiary education system consisted of 35 institutions; in 2017, however, only 20 universities and

professional tertiary education institutions were still operating (Statistics Estonia, 2018c). According

to World Bank data, 85.7% of students were enrolled in private tertiary education institutions in 2016.

As in the rest of Europe, these developments are in part explained by demographic changes

happening in Estonia. Moreover, the number of admitted students that self-nance their studies has

consistently decreased, especially at the bachelor level and in private universities (Ministry of Edu-

cation and Research, 2017). It is safe to say that the decrease in enrollment would be even more

pronounced if it were not for the increasing number of international students pursuing tertiary ed-

ucation in Estonia. In 2017, there were 4,603 foreign students enrolled in post-secondary education

(Statistics Estonia, 2018b). This represents a 15% increase in foreign students from the previous year.

These numbers mean that foreign students represent 10% of all the students enrolled in tertiary

education in Estonia.

Internationalization strategy, policies, and plans

In Estonia, internationalization became an important strategic theme from the mid-1990s onwards

(Tamtik & Kirss, 2016). Since then, a number of steps have been taken by the government to support

internationalization in the tertiary education sector, presenting internationalization as “an inevita-

ble and inescapable reality of today’s academia” (Kibbermann, 2017, p. 104).

The main strategic document steering tertiary education internationalization is the Strategy for

the Internationalisation of Estonian Higher Education over the Years 2006-2015 (Ministry of Education

and Research, 2007). While this sub-document of the Estonian national strategy for tertiary educa-

tion gives special attention to internationalization, the policy is designed in sync with the wider vi-

sion for tertiary education in the country. The main objectives are to “improve the competitiveness

of Estonian higher education in the region” and make the tertiary education system “more open and

visible” by creating “a legal and institutional environment that supports internationalization in all its

aspects” (2007, p. 2). The policy focuses on three main strategic areas of development in order to

achieve these goals:

1. Creating a legal environment that is supportive of internationalization by following interna-

tional developments in quality assurance, streamlining recognition of foreign credentials, de-

veloping joint international curricula, enabling portability of student loans, supporting

transnational tertiary education, and simplifying immigration policies;

Estonia: Example of Good Practice

international mapping of nteisps

2. Internationalizing teaching by enabling student mobility, increasing the international know-

how of faculty, and internationalizing study programs;

3. Developing a support system for internationalization by creating an institutional environment

that is open, inclusive, and integrated, and implementing an information system that promotes

Estonia as a study destination, shares opportunities for studying and working in the country,

and enables the exchange of good practices in the eld.

Beyond the direct support from the Ministry of Education and Research, internationalization has re-

ceived strong, sustained, and coordinated support from a variety of governmental and institutional

actors. The Archimedes Foundation—which is an intermediary organization with “government sup-

port but benets from the operational exibility of an NGO” (Matei & Iwinska, 2015, p. 218)—has

developed the “Study in Estonia” platform to raise awareness of the opportunities that the country

oers to international students. Moreover, the rectors of both public and private universities, as well

as professional tertiary education institutions, have put together their vision of what needs to be

achieved in the areas of student and faculty mobility in the strategic document Agreement on Good

Practice in the Internationalisation of Estonia’s Higher Education Institutions (Estonian Rectors’ Confer-

ence, 2007). This coalition has given institutional leaders a unied voice and the bargaining power to

push for legislative change and build a supportive institutional environment for internationalization

(Matei & Iwinska, 2015).

Finally, the National Reform Programme “Estonia 2020” (Government Oce, 2011)—a national

action plan in line with the Europe 2020 strategic objectives—explicitly supports tertiary education

internationalization both abroad and at home. Specically, by 2020, Estonia aims to increase the

share of international students in formal tertiary education to 10% and retain 30% of master’s and

doctoral international students in the Estonian workforce (European Commission, 2018).

The Estonian policy landscape exemplies signicant depth and breadth of government sup-

port for the internationalization of the country’s tertiary education system. Beyond a supportive leg-

islative and policy environment, the government has also sustained internationalization through

funding. The eorts have already shown signs of success. For instance, the target of having interna-

tional students represent 10% of the overall student body by 2020 has already been achieved.

Good practice example

The Strategy for the Internationalisation of Estonian Higher Education over the Years 2006-2015 has

been considered by experts consulted informally for this report as “a classroom example of how

things should be done and was indeed very effective (while it lasted)”. While not necessarily adopt-

ing a comprehensive approach to tertiary education internationalization, the case of Estonia is a

good practice example of setting ambitious performance targets to measure progress with regard

to internationalization goals.

To achieve these performance targets, the Estonian government set up a supportive legal frame-

work and nancially backed the development of the process beginning in 2007. A mid-term evalua-

tion of the national internationalization strategy (Tamtik, Kirss, Beerkens, & Kaarma, 2011), looking at

the performance targets proposed by the strategic document, found that progress was made on all

indicators. Table 1 summarizes the overarching goals, the performance targets that were to be met

center for international higher education | perspectives no. 12

by 2015, and the progress made by Estonia in the time frame when the strategy was active.

As indicated by Table 1, Estonia has either met or made considerable progress on all the per-

formance targets (for which data are available) set by the national internationalization strategy. The

national strategy has been considered a “roadmap to success,” taking Estonia “from zero to hero”

(Kiisler, 2018) in tertiary education internationalization.

International student and scholar mobility have received continued support through the

“Study in Estonia” and “Research in Estonia” initiatives and programs such as the Kristjan Jaak Schol-

arships and DORA+ funding. These are seen by experts consulted for this analysis as clear examples

of good practice in promoting national strategic objectives of talent attraction and retention. Nev-

ertheless, no new national strategy has been put forward by the Estonian government since this

one ended in 2015, which seems to indicate, as expressed by one expert consulted for this study,

that internationalization in Estonia “has lost some of its luster”. Furthermore, country experts con-

sulted for this study cite an emergence of tensions between policies promoting the Estonian lan-

guage and those promoting the use of English. The penetration of English as a strategic decision

for, or unintended consequence of, internationalization is not unique to Estonia and is currently a

source of concern and debate in dierent countries.

TABLE 1. Goals and achievements of the Estonian tertiary education internationalization strategy

Goal

Performance target

by 2015 2006/2007 2014/2015

Increase outbound student

mobility

At least 4-5% of Estonian students, or

around 2,000 students, should take part

in international exchanges

1.2%

(796 students)

3.1%

(2,132 students)

(2010/2011)

Increase inbound student mobility

2,000 international students should be

enrolled in full-time study at Estonian

higher education institutions

901 students

3,476 students

(2015/2016)

Increase number of state-funded

doctoral students

Increase the annual number of state-

funded doctoral students to 300

153 graduates 208 graduates

Increase international student

graduate numbers at doctoral level

10% of annual doctoral graduates should

be foreign nationals

3.9% 12%

Increase international experience

of doctoral students

All Estonian doctoral graduates should

have spent at least one semester abroad

N/A N/A

Increase proportion of

international academic staff

At least 3% of full-time academic staff

should be of foreign origin

3.7% (71 academic

staff)

5.1% (309 academic

staff) (2010/2011)

Develop foreign language study

programs and curricula

Develop 5 to 7 state-supported foreign

language study programs

N/A 7 (2010/2011)

Source: Compiled by the authors from Ministry of Education and Research, 2016; Tamtik et al., 2011; Ministry of Education and

Research, 2007.

international mapping of nteisps

tegic theme of Brazilian tertiary education only in the

last decade but attempts to internationalize tertiary

education date from the 1960s. While there is no na-

tional policy for tertiary education internationaliza-

tion, the National Education Plan (2014) does

mention three objectives related to internationaliza-

tion: (1) increase outbound student and faculty mo-

bility; (2) consolidate programs that encourage

international networking and strengthen research

collaboration in order to internationalize Brazilian re-

search and postgraduate studies; and (3) promote

international scientic and technological exchange

between tertiary education institutions. Over the

years, the development of tertiary education interna-

tionalization in the country has been based on tar-

geted programs with specic objectives, such as

increasing inbound mobility from developing coun-

tries, increasing outbound mobility to top ranked

universities, and promoting international research

collaboration.

The Graduate and Post-Graduate Student Agree-

ment Programs are federal government projects initi-

ated in the 1960s and renewed in the 2000s that oer

full scholarships every year to hundreds of students

from more than 50 developing countries in Africa,

South America, and Asia to obtain a degree in Brazil

(Ministry of External Relations, 2018). The program is

managed by the Ministry of External Relations to-

gether with the Ministry of Education, as a diplomac-

tic tool aimed to increase Brazil’s soft power and

improve its image abroad.

The Brazil Scientiﬁc Mobility Program (2011)—an

extension of the more widely known program Sci-

ence without Borders—provided scholarships for in-

ternational mobility to Brazilian students pursuing an

undergraduate or postgraduate degree in the STEM

elds (i.e., science, technology, engineering and

mathematics) at national public universities (Helms

Country Case Studies

Brazil

Tertiary education system in brief

Tertiary education in Brazil is mostly seen as a public

good—the public expenditure on education is 5.6%

of the gross domestic product, or GDP (British Coun-

cil & DAAD, 2014)—and as a means to foster social

mobility (de Mello Costa, 2014). The tertiary educa-

tion system is comprised of public and private tertia-

ry education institutions, with the former being fully

funded by the government, free of charge, and hav-

ing a better reputation for quality education than

the latter (Arruda, 2017). As such, the competition

for publicly funded seats in federal and state univer-

sities has been erce. A major concern for tertiary

education development has been to improve tertia-

ry education attainment rates and increase the per-

centage of students from disadvantaged

backgrounds in public universities through arma-

tive action (Stanek, 2013). According to World Bank

gures, the gross enrollment ratio in tertiary educa-

tion was 50.5% in 2016. In fact, the number of under-

graduate students has almost doubled in just a

decade, from 4.6 million in 2005 to 8 million in 2016

(Statista, 2018). Public universities service only a

quarter of tertiary education students (Knobel & Ver-

hine, 2017).

In this context, tertiary education international-

ization has not been a strategic priority for the coun-

try until recently. In fact, if international student

mobility is considered as an indicator for how inter-

nationalized a tertiary education system is, it can be

noted that only 0.5% of Brazilian students study

abroad, well below the 6% OECD average but “still

double the number of foreign students enrolled in

tertiary education in Brazil” (OECD, 2017a, p. 6).

Internationalization strategy, policies, and

plans

Internationalization has become an important stra-

center for international higher education | perspectives no. 12

et al., 2015). To receive a scholarship, students had to

pursue their studies at one of the top 250 universities

worldwide, as determined by international rankings

(British Council, 2014). Upon completion, the schol-

arship recipients were required to return to Brazil and

stay in the country for a period of time at least equiv-

alent to the time spent studying abroad. The pro-

gram ran between 2011 and 2017, was well-funded

by the Brazilian government and through private

funds (Perna et al., 2014), and aimed to award 101,000

scholarships (British Council, 2014)—a goal that was

achieved (Arruda, 2017).

The Institutional Program for the International-

ization of Brazilian Higher Education and Research

Institutes (Capes-PrInt), set to begin in 2018 and last

for a duration of four years, aims to increase the sci-

entic impact of postgraduate research by incentiv-

izing tertiary education institutions and research

institutes to develop institutional internationaliza-

tion strategies (CAPES, 2017). Impetus for the poli-

cy came from the fact that, while Brazil ranks 13th in

the world in terms of research output, the citation

impact of the publications has been historically low

compared to the world average (Clarivate Analytics,

2017). This initiative seems appropriate for address-

ing the stated aims, as international research collab-

oration has consistently been shown to increase

both research output (as measured by publications

and patents) and quality (as measured by citations)

(Fabrizi, Guarini, & Meliciani, 2016; Frenken,

Ponds, & van Oort, 2010; Hird & Pfotenhauer,

2017).

In terms of eectiveness, the Brazil Scientiﬁc

Mobility Program has been considered a success by

hitting its intended goal of promoting outbound mo-

bility and reaching its stated targets. Countries such

as the United States and United Kingdom have seen

an increase in international students from Brazil,

coinciding with the years of operation of this initia-

tive (Helms et al., 2015). However, a major concern

has been the lack of evaluation of the achievements

of the program beyond reaching the target numbers

for outbound student mobility. Experts on interna-

tionalization have argued that the failure to monitor

and evaluate the learning outcomes of participating

students and the broader impacts (societal, sectoral,

institutional, etc.) of this signicant public invest-

ment beyond individual benets casts doubts on the

actual eectiveness of the program in achieving its

broader goals (Knobel, 2015; Stallivieri, 2015). In

fact, “high costs and uncertain benets” (ICEF Mon-

itor, 2017) were cited by the government as the o-

cial rationales for ending the program in 2017.

The Capes-PrInt program is wider in scope than

the Brazil Scientiﬁc Mobility Program, as it aims to

build international research networks and collabora-

tive partnerships between institutions that go be-

yond international student mobility and focus on a

broader set of areas than the STEM elds (Arruda,

2017). While the program is more ambitious, it of-

fers less nancial support (Arruda, 2017). In fact,

only 25 universities – which represent around 1% of

the total number of Brazilian tertiary education in-

stitutions – were selected to benet from the nan-

cial resources oered by the program (CAPES,

2018). Only time will tell if this limited number of

institutions can deliver the intended results.

international mapping of nteisps

international educational cooperation (Government

of Colombia, 2017).

Internationalization strategy, policies, and

plans

Activities of an international nature have long been

undertaken in Colombian tertiary education. Jaramil-

lo, Zuñiga, and Blom (2002) have documented how

globalization has aected Colombian tertiary educa-

tion, which has resulted in responses via dierent ini-

tiatives, particularly student mobility and

internationalization in the curriculum. However, ef-

forts have remained limited to activities by institu-

tions and networks of institutions, without a national

strategy in place.

In a 2009 online publication, the National Minis-

try of Education (MNE) articulated the various bene-

ts of internationalization for Colombian tertiary

education, and identied major actors, which largely

focused on institutions and their networks. The min-

istry identied its role, among other things, as one of

the major participants in the Interinstitutional Com-

mittee for the Internationalization of Higher Educa-

tion - a body that seeks to create synergy across the

initiatives of a range of bodies. The ministry also out-

lined various facets of internationalization that it en-

couraged institutions to pursue (MNE, 2009). These

include the management of internationalization, in-

ternational academic mobility, participation in insti-

tutional networks, and the internationalization of the

curriculum and of research. Nonetheless, the ocial

discourse regarding internationalization did not take

root in the mainstream national education develop-

ment plan, and institutions, particularly public ones,

are constrained by resource limitations (Berry & Tay-

lor, 2014). Currently, there is still no national policy or

strategy (Vélez, 2018), although the MNE has identi-

ed internationalization as one area of focus, includ-

ing measures such as capacity building for

internationalization of institutions, promoting Co-

lombia as a destination for quality education, and

promoting conditions for internationalization by in-

Colombia

Tertiary education system in brief

Student enrollment in Colombian tertiary education

has been consistently increasing in the past few

years from 1.67 million in 2010 to over 2.44 million in

2017. This has translated into a considerable 21 per-

centage-point increase in the gross enrollment ratio

from 39.4 in 2010 to 60.4 in 2017. Colombia’s ambi-

tion of positioning itself as the best educated coun-

try in Latin America by 2025 is the driving force

behind this expansion, as well as other reforms. Pub-

lic tertiary education in Colombia accounts for a

slightly higher proportion of the student population

than the private sector, although there are many

more private institutions in number. Of the 289 ter-

tiary education institutions, as of 2017, private insti-

tutions accounted for 72% (208) while public

institutions were about 21% (62). The other 19 insti-

tutions were under special rule linked to public insti-

tutions. In terms of type, 84 of the institutions were

universities – 31 public and 52 private (Vélez, 2018).

Other types of institutions include instituciones profe-

sionales técnicas (oering 2-3 year technician de-

grees), instituciones tecnológicas (oering 3-4 year

technologist degrees), and instituciones universitar-

ias–escuelas tecnológicas (oering professional titles

and licensure degrees). Universities oer all of the

aforementioned degrees, as well as graduate de-

grees (Immerstein, 2015)

The Vice-ministry of Higher Education, which is

part of the Ministry of National Education, is respon-

sible for supporting the ministry in the develop-

ment, adoption, and implementation of policies,

strategies, and projects related to tertiary education

(Government of Colombia, 2017). All tertiary educa-

tion institutions and programs are required to be

registered with the Ministry. Once determined to

have met the minimum quality requirements and

granted permission to oer study programs, institu-

tions are added to the list of registered institutions

(Immerstein, 2015). Meanwhile, ICETEX, the Colom-

bian Institute for Student Loans and Technical Stud-

ies Abroad, is in charge of student loans and

center for international higher education | perspectives no. 12

stitutions (Henao & Vélez, 2015).

According to Vélez (2018), a signicant majority

of Colombian tertiary education institutions report

some form of engagement with internationalization,

some more so than others. One common example of

this is the establishment of an international oce.

However, institutions often lack the commitment

that is necessary for eective internationalization.

Limited resources, lack of coordination of activities,

and decits in the use of information management

systems are some of the constraining factors that

challenge internationalization.

One of the common areas of internationalization

for Colombian institutions is the mobility of students

and faculty. According to Henao & Vélez (2015), while

both public and private institutions engage in stu-

dent mobility, public institutions tend to absorb

more of the country’s inbound international stu-

dents, while the private institutions are responsible

for more of the outgoing mobile students. Mobility

of faculty can also be found in both private and pub-

lic institutions, where the latter account for a larger

number of incoming faculty. The United States,

Spain, and Argentina are the most common source

and destination countries for faculty mobility.

Although the research capacity of Colombian in-

stitutions is not very strong, there is consensus

around the need for international competitiveness in

research (Henao & Vélez, 2015). Colombia Cientiﬁca, a

program launched in 2016, can be seen as a typical

example of the emphasis on internationalization of

research in Colombia. According to Vélez (2018), the

program allocates resources in key areas of national

priority for research collaboration led by high quality

accredited institutions involving international and

less developed Colombian institutions, local compa-

nies, and government agencies. Co-supervising doc-

toral dissertations with international academics and

participating in international scientic networks and

associations are other aspects of the international-

ization of research in Colombia (Henao & Vélez, 2015).

Community engagement in the form of services to

local, national, and regional communities is also per-

ceived as one of the areas of internationalization

(Vélez, 2018).

While about half of all institutions are reported

to have no policy related to the internationalization

of their curriculum, a signicant majority of those

that do report having such policies are in the private

sector (Vélez, 2018). Foreign language, particularly

English, has assumed an important role as a require-

ment at dierent levels, while other languages are

often considered optional. Some institutions require

prociency in English as a requirement for degree

completion; others put it as a requirement for admis-

sion into graduate programs.

Double degree programs in partnership with

foreign (mainly European) institutions, international

accreditation of academic programs, and partnering

with foreign institutions to develop and deliver on-

line courses constitute other aspects of internation-

alization at home, according to Henao and Vélez

(2015).

Despite not having a clearly stipulated national

internationalization strategy, various supports for

the internationalization eorts of tertiary education

institutions in Colombia have produced visible posi-

tive outcomes. For instance, the number of institu-

tions with an internationalization policy or strategy

has increased, investment in international activities

has risen, and the extent and eectiveness of institu-

tions’ participation in regional and international net-

works has improved. Similarly, a greater degree of

success is evident in relation to the participation of

Colombian institutions in various international coop-

eration programs, including Erasmus+, Horizon 2020,

and the Alianza Pacíﬁco, among others. The eective

coordination between public and private institutions

is also worth a mention.

In the absence of a clear programmatic approach

in a national strategy, long-term sustainability of

some of the programs can be compromised as gov-

ernments change. Furthermore, government at-

tempts to convert Colombia into a learning

destination are aected by limited funding. Similarly,

the development of international joint degree pro-

grams and enhancement of student mobility can be

limited by unclear policies for the recognition of aca-

demic credits earned outside the country.

international mapping of nteisps

alone, 3,751 US students studied abroad in Ecuador

and 494 students conducted non-credit work, intern-

ships, or volunteered in the country (Institute of In-

ternational Education, 2017). In the 2016/2017

academic year, about 3,032 Ecuadorian students

studied in the United States (Institute of Internation-

al Education, n.d.). In part, the insucient opportuni-

ties for PhD degrees in the country, coupled with

public funding allocated towards PhDs completed

abroad, fuels the push of domestic students towards

graduate programs abroad (Johnson, 2017; Van Hoof,

2015). In recent years, Ecuador has created multiple

internationalization policies and initiatives, although

the extent to which these policies are currently im-

plemented is uncertain.

Enacted in 2010, the Prometeo initiative allocated

USD $7 million to attract international faculty to pub-

lic universities in Ecuador (Johnson, 2017) in order to

conduct research and increase the country’s research

output. The program supports short-term visits be-

tween 3 months and 1 year in length (Van Hoof,

2015). Recent national gures suggest that the pro-

gram has had a broad reach. According to ocial

government gures, 354,764 Ecuadorian citizens

have beneted from the teaching provided by for-

eign experts and 1,005 peer reviewed articles and

books have been published (Secretaría de Educación

Superior, Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación, 2016).

The success of Prometeo was echoed by one country

expert interviewed for this study, who suggested

that the program has contributed towards “strength-

ening of Ecuadorian human talent and promoting

productive, technological, social, and cultural

development”.

In 2013, Ecuador announced plans to create a

science and technology hub, the Yachay City of

Knowledge (Government of the Republic of Ecuador,

n.d.). This ambitious plan signaled a shift from the

traditional teaching model of universities in Ecuador

towards a teaching and research model. However,

due to economic scarcity, the plans for nalizing the

city have not come to fruition, and several faculty at-

Tertiary education system in brief

Tertiary education in Ecuador has undergone multi-

ple transformations in recent years. The system has

dealt with abrupt massication, coupled with an in-

crease in the number of private providers (Holm-Niel-

sen et al., 2002). Between 2013 and 2015, the student

enrollment in tertiary education increased by 12%,

from 586,105 to 669,437 students. This increase

placed the gross enrollment ratio in the country at

45.5% in 2015. In the same year, 45.1% of students

were enrolled in private tertiary education institu-

tions. Concerns for equity and access—in part due to

population increases—have prompted Ecuador to

suspend fees for public universities (Bernasconi & Ce-

lis, 2017; Van Hoof et al., 2013) and to decrease insti-

tutional autonomy (Saavedra, 2012; Van Hoof, 2015)

through the 2008 Constitution and the 2010 Higher

Education Law. A similar push for quality assurance

has led to the closure of multiple institutions in the

country that did not meet accreditation standards

(Johnson, 2017).

Between 2007 and 2016, Ecuador invested 1.8%

of its gross domestic product (GDP) in tertiary educa-

tion, making it one of the leading countries in the

region in terms of public funding allocated to the

system (República de Ecuador, Consejo Nacional de

Planicación, 2017). At the same time, the system has

been impacted by political and economic shifts. Af-

fected by both an economic downturn and an earth-

quake in 2016, fewer resources have been allocated

to the education sector in Ecuador since that time,

(World Bank, 2017) thus undermining some of the

ambitious policies of the government in the area of

internationalization.

Internationalization strategy, policies, and

plans

Ecuador is both a source and destination country for

student mobility. Due to its proximity to the United

States, Ecuador has become a recurrent destination

for service and volunteering programs involving US

college students. In the academic year 2015/2016

Ecuador

center for international higher education | perspectives no. 12

tracted to Ecuador because of Yachay have left their

positions in the country (Rodríguez Mega, 2017).

The internationalization policy eorts in Ecua-

dor are seeing a revival through the Ecuadorian stra-

tegic policy plans for 2035, known as Agenda 2035

(Directorio de la Asamblea del Sistema de Educación

Superior & SENESCYT, 2016). The tertiary education

component of the plan refers extensively to interna-

tionalization as one of the key issues to be addressed

by the country. The document highlights the impor-

tance of creating world class universities, attracting

international students and faculty, and ensuring

quality exchanges. The document does not currently

include prescribed programs and policies, but illus-

trates the commitment of the government to inter-

nationalization issues. In addition, a new Higher

Education Law was adopted in Ecuador in 2018. The

new law rearms the commitment of the country to

increase the quality of the tertiary education system,

in alignment with global standards, as well as to in-

crease the international competitiveness of the sys-

tem and to facilitate international cooperation.

However, there are no specic references to interna-

tionalization eorts (Government of the Republic of

Ecuador, 2018).

international mapping of nteisps

forts to enhance the country’s academic programs

and institutions, and its research activity, by sending

Egyptians to dierent countries to obtain qualica-

tions and to facilitate knowledge transfer (Samy &

Elshayeb, 2017). Later in the 20th century, the gov-

ernment of Egypt sponsored large numbers of stu-

dents from African, Arabic, and Islamic countries to

study in Egypt.

Internationalization initiatives in Egypt are un-

dertaken on three distinct levels. First, the govern-

ment of Egypt develops and nances its own

initiatives that aim at improving tertiary education.

Sometimes, these initiatives—though owned and

managed by the government—might be co--

nanced with partners. Second, Egypt is a signatory of

a number of bilateral and multilateral development

cooperation agreements that include aspects of ter-

tiary education, research, and/or skills development.

Initiatives through such cooperation may be direct-

ed at system, institutional, or individual levels. And

third, institutional initiatives are formed either

through partnerships between Egyptian universities

and their counterparts in other countries around the

world, or as a result of membership of Egyptian uni-

versities in dierent associations and networks.

The Sustainable Development Strategy: Egypt Vi-

sion 2030 is the overarching long-term development

plan that envisions the economic, environmental,

and social transformations Egypt will ideally have ac-

complished by the year 2030. One of the four pillars

of Vision 2030 is Knowledge, Innovation and Scientif-

ic Research, where issues relevant to tertiary educa-

tion and research are addressed. In line with the

strategic frameworks of Vision 2030, the tertiary edu-

cation and scientic research strategy was devel-

oped with an overall focus on improving Egypt’s

global competitiveness, improving the employabili-

ty of graduates, and enhancing the regional and in-

ternational visibility of Egyptian universities

(Sawahel, 2016). This is further translated into specif-

ic strategic goals related to internationalization, in-

cluding expanding partnerships with distinguished

Tertiary education system in brief

The total enrollment in the Egyptian tertiary educa-

tion was close to 2.8 million in 2016, with a gross en-

rollment ratio of 34.4%. Under the broad categories

of public and private sectors, Egyptian tertiary edu-

cation is composed of diverse types of institutions.

The public tertiary education sector is comprised of

government universities, technical faculties (which

are further classied into technical institutes and

health institutes) and Al-Azhar University. The private

sector, for its part, includes private universities, pri-

vate higher institutes, and intermediate private insti-

tutes or private middle institutes. As of 2016, the

private sector accounted for the 20.6% of the total

student enrollment.

The Supreme Council of Universities (SCU) is the

highest governing body of public tertiary education,

with mandates to set policies and supervise imple-

mentation. The SCU is composed of presidents of

public universities, as well as up to ve members

from civil society, and is headed by the Minister of

Higher Education (Radwan, 2016). A similar structure

is also applicable for both the private and technical

institutes, both headed by the Minister. Al-Ahzar Uni-

versity has its own Central Administration. For its

part, the National Authority for Quality Assurance

and Accreditation (NAQAA) is responsible for quality

related matters, accrediting both specic study pro-

grams and institutions as a whole (Schomaker, 2015).

Internationalization strategy, policies, and

plans

The notion of internationalization has been embed-

ded in Egyptian tertiary education for hundreds of

years. This is particularly evident in the history of Al-

Azhar University as a global center for Islamic intel-

lectualism. Since its establishment over one thousand

years ago, it has attracted students and religious in-

tellectuals from Asia and Africa and its academics

traveled around the world to teach Islamic principles

and culture (Radwan, 2016). Meanwhile, since the

beginning of the 20th century, Egypt has pursued ef-

Egypt

center for international higher education | perspectives no. 12

2. Joint supervision missions: Foreign and

Egyptian professors jointly supervise an

Egyptian student who studies abroad or in

local universities. The program supports the

foreign professor to come to Egypt or the

Egyptian to travel to the foreign country

where the student is studying, for a limited

number of days.

3. Scholarships: These opportunities are of-

fered to Egyptian faculty in universities, re-

search centers, and other scientic

institutions, and specically target those

who completed their PhD locally (Ministry

of Higher Education, n.d.).

Branch campuses constitute another important

aspect of internationalization in Egyptian tertiary ed-

ucation. Radwan (2016) reported that Cairo Universi-

ty has had a branch in Khartoum, Sudan since 1955,

while Alexandria University has branches in Leba-

non, South Sudan, and Chad. The global inventory of

branch campuses maintained by the Cross-Border

Education Research Team (C-BERT) shows that, as of

January 2017, Al-Azhar University was developing

branches in Malaysia and in Abu Dhabi, United Arab

Emirates. On the other hand, the Technical University

of Berlin has a campus in El Gouna, Egypt (C-BERT,

2017).

The most visible manifestation of international-

ization at home in Egyptian tertiary education is the

presence of various institutes, departments, and pro-

grams that focus on the study of international and

regional aairs. Examples include: the Cairo Universi-

ty Center for Languages and Arabic Culture, as well

as its African Studies and Research Institute, and Afri-

can Urban Studies Center; the Institute for Research

and Strategic Studies of Nile Basin Countries at Fay-

oum University; and the Center of Israeli Studies, the

Institute of Near East Civilization, and the Institute of

Asian Studies and Research at Zagazig University.

Such institutes and centers serve not only as an at-

traction for foreign students, but they also foster in-

ternational content in their curricula. However, on its

own, this does not necessarily reect widespread in-

ternationalization of the curricula or teaching pro-

cesses in Egyptian tertiary education.

international universities, international mobility of

sta and students, expanding internationally funded

projects, increasing regional activities of Egyptian

universities, and maximizing the return of foreign ed-

ucated Egyptians (Japan International Cooperation

Agency [JICA], 2017).

Mobility of both students and sta has a promi-

nent position in the internationalization of Egyptian

tertiary education. In the past several years, Egypt

has moved from a cap of no more than 10% of seats

being available for foreign students in its public uni-

versities, to placing recruitment of international stu-

dents as one of the major goals of its

internationalization eorts. In 2015, the government

unveiled its plan to increase international student

numbers almost fourfold in three years—from 53,000

to 200,000 (Sawahel, 2015). Egypt has the advantage

of low living costs, which promotes its attractiveness

to international students, who mainly come from Af-

rica, the Middle East, and Central Asian countries

(Radwan, 2016). Moreover, the presence of special-

ized centers and programs, such as Islamic studies at

Al-Azhar University and Arabic language studies for

non-native speakers at dierent institutions, are ad-

ditional attractions.

Sta mobility is another major dimension of in-

ternationalization in the country. While most Egyp-

tian universities have expatriate faculty members,

outward mobility of sta is given considerable em-

phasis. Generally, tertiary education institutions pro-

mote the mobility of their sta by oering exible

terms that accommodate leaves for study and re-

search (Samy & Elshayeb, 2017). The unit of the Min-

istry of Higher Education that is responsible for

general administration for missions and academic

supervision lists on its website the various schemes

on oer for sta mobility. While programs might be

nanced by dierent bodies, typical examples of

state sponsored programs include the following:

1. Foreign missions: These foster PhD studies

in foreign countries for sta who are 35

years of age or younger. The number of op-

portunities is distributed to universities, re-

search centers, and ministries according to

budget.

international mapping of nteisps

Both public and private universities host joint

degree programs (Radwan, 2016). Egyptian universi-

ties also frequently foster international conferences

and seminars on various topics. A quick glance at the

tertiary education news reports aggregated by the

International Network for Higher Education in Africa

(INHEA) demonstrates this point. Internationally col-

laborative research and publications are also among

the areas of the strategic emphasis in the future of

Egyptian tertiary education (Sawahel, 2016).

Meanwhile, the internationalization of tertiary

education in Egypt, particularly the inbound mobili-

ty of students and sta, is challenged by security

concerns.

center for international higher education | perspectives no. 12

nent to internationalization. The 1994 Education and

Training Policy remains the foundation of all policies,

strategies, and programs relevant to all levels of edu-

cation. The policy provides the general direction for

education, among which is the need to emphasize

international perspectives in educational content

and the production of citizens with an international

outlook. Similar notions are reected in the Higher

Education Proclamation of 2009. The proclamation is

a broad legal foundation that frames the operation

of tertiary education by identifying roles and duties

of major actors, both in the private and public do-

mains (Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia,

2009). It makes reference to international good prac-

tices and institutional cooperation, as well as com-

petitiveness of graduates at the international level,

as objectives for tertiary education. These two docu-

ments, although making reference to relevant ideas,

do not clearly articulate internationalization as a stra-

tegic issue.

The fth edition of the Education Sector Develop-

ment Program (ESDP-V) of the government of Ethio-

pia, published in 2015, is the rst of its kind to

explicitly refer to internationalization of tertiary edu-

cation as an area of strategic focus. Not only does it

acknowledge the strategic importance of interna-

tionalization, it also species priorities in certain area,

such as recruitment of international students. More

importantly, the document stipulates that during the

ve year period of its implementation (from

2015/2016 to 2019/2020) a national taskforce will be

established to organize consultation sessions and

conferences, and to develop a national international-

ization policy and strategy. The policy and strategy

are yet to come.

Promoting student exchange programs and

overseas exposure visits for sta are among the main

forms of mobility targeted in the ve-year plan.

These activities are mandated to the institutions, and

no specic target is established at the national level.

As part of the capacity development endeavor, aca-

demic sta are sponsored (by the government of

Ethiopia

Tertiary education system in brief

A dening characteristic of the Ethiopian tertiary ed-

ucation system is its expansion in the past two de-

cades. At the turn of the 21st century, the system had

only two public universities and a handful of private

institutions, with fewer than 40,000 students. As of

the 2016/2017 academic year, the student popula-

tion had reached over 780,000 within 45 public and

four private universities, and more than 100 other

junior institutions in the private sector (Ministry of

Education [MoE], 2000, 2018). As of 2014, the gross

enrollment ratio has also increased to 8.1% from just

about 1% twenty years ago. Despite a large number

of institutions, the private sector accounts for less

than 15% of the total enrollment.

As a result of growing emphasis on science and

technology elds as drivers of economic develop-

ment, there are now two public universities of sci-

ence and technology and an increasing number of

centers of excellence focused on these areas housed

in other public institutions.

The Ministry of Science and Higher Education,

which very recently spun o from the Ministry of Ed-

ucation, is responsible for the overall governance of

tertiary education, while each public institution has

its own board. Under the ministry, there are two

semi-autonomous agencies with dierent responsi-

bilities. The Higher Education Relevance and Quality

Agency (HERQA) ensures that every institution and

study program meets the required quality standards

and maintains a list of accredited programs and insti-

tutions. The Higher Education Strategy Center

(HESC), for its part, is mainly responsible for under-

taking studies and providing policy recommenda-

tions to the ministry.

Internationalization strategy, policies, and

plans

Ethiopia does not have a comprehensive national

tertiary education internationalization strategy.

However, three documents contain policies perti-

international mapping of nteisps

ed in the tertiary education proclamation, with a

view to improving the international competitiveness

of the country. This has direct implications for the in-

ternationalization of the curriculum and the incorpo-

ration of insights designed to foster global citizenship

in the content and processes of education. However,

no further specics are given for the implementation

or monitoring of the policy recommendation.

International collaboration is a key aspect of in-

ternationalization. ESDP-V has specied that univer-

sities shall plan and execute institutional

collaborations in the areas of both academic pro-

grams and research. The plan aims for 10% of aca-

demic programs and 20% of research to be jointly

performed with non-Ethiopian universities by 2020.

While this should be overseen by the semi-autono-

mous government agency known as the Education

Strategy Center, each institution is required to estab-

lish an international liaison oce to facilitate collab-

oration. Indeed, institutional collaboration is one of

the strong areas of longstanding international en-

gagement by Ethiopian institutions. Nonetheless, as

Tamrat and Teferra (2018) noted, such collaborations

are undermined by the imbalance between Ethiopi-

an institutions and their northern partners, in terms

of nancial strength and institutional capacity.

Another area of the international dimension in

Ethiopian tertiary education is the participation of

expatriate academic sta. According to ESDP-V, the

target for the 2019/2020 academic year is to increase

the share of foreign academic sta from 8% to 10%.

Although this is another international feature in the

education process, there are two caveats to note.

First, this is a temporary solution to address the do-

mestic supply limitations of the system. Consider-

able expansion in graduate programs is underway to

increase the number of local academic sta with

master’s and doctoral degrees, which should eventu-

ally replace the expatriates. Second, the hiring of ex-

patriate sta is driven by capacity gaps rather than

internationalization goals. There is no evidence that

the nature of the education process or research pro-

ductivity is any dierent with expatriates than local

sta.

Despite the absence of a national policy or strat-

egy specically focused on internationalization, in

Ethiopia and its development partners) for graduate

studies in dierent countries. Other initiatives, such

as the Betre-Science Scholarship Program of the Minis-

try of Science and Technology, are emerging on the na-

tional scene. Meanwhile, a number of doctoral

programs are being undertaken in collaboration

with foreign universities, mostly from Europe. Sta

mobility commonly takes place within the frame-

work of institutional collaborations.

While degree-seeking outbound student mobil-

ity and short-term (credit seeking) inbound student

mobility have been common for a long time, the re-

cruitment of degree-seeking foreign students is

gaining momentum as a strategic direction. ESDP-V

encourages universities—particularly those in areas

bordering Ethiopia’s neighboring countries—to tar-

get the recruitment of foreign students, presumably

from those neighboring countries. The number of

foreign students in the country has shown consider-

able increase in the past few years. This can be mainly

attributed to refugee education programs undertak-

en by the government of Ethiopia and the United

Nations High Commission on Refugees (UNHCR); ac-

cording to a 2017 UNHCR report, these programs

reached 2,300 refugee students, mainly from Eritrea,

Somalia, and South Sudan. There are also self-spon-

sored refugee students (often sponsored by family

and relatives in the diaspora) who attend various

public and private institutions. ESDP-V also encour-

ages universities to open branch campuses in neigh-

boring countries.

Additionally, Ethiopia has established a regula-

tory regime for cross border education. The Higher

Education Relevance and Quality Agency (HERQA) is

mandated to grant accreditation to, and oversee the

quality of, cross border delivery of tertiary education,

as it does for local institutions.

Pertinent to internationalization at home, edu-

cation in Ethiopia is expected to inculcate an interna-

tional outlook among students. This is stipulated as

one of the objectives of Ethiopian education and

training: “To provide education that can produce cit-

izens who possess national and international out-

look on the environment, protect natural resources

and historical heritages of the country” (Transitional

Government of Ethiopia, 1994, p. 11). This is reiterat-

center for international higher education | perspectives no. 12

practice, dierent aspects of internationalization are

observable at institutional and national levels. How-

ever, these initiatives seem to be fragmented, not

well planned or organized with clear objectives. As a

result, their eciency and sustainability are ques-

tionable. On the other hand, there is a promising de-

velopment at the national level, which recognizes

internationalization of tertiary education as a key

strategic area. This new direction is in its early stages,

such that its details are yet to be outlined and inte-

grated with the broader tertiary education strategy.

international mapping of nteisps

limited unied policy guidance from the govern-

ment (Mathews, 2014; Yeravdekar & Tiwari, 2014).

The Indian government started to pay attention

to matters of internationalization and their potential

as early as 2002. Various bills, programs, and commit-

tees have established goals and steered internation-

alization in the country since that time. The Tenth

Five Year Plan 2002-2007 (Planning Commission,

2002) discussed the imperative to leverage interna-

tionalization. The plan coincided with the creation of

the Committee on Promotion of Indian Education

Abroad, which was mandated to address not only the

promotion of Indian education abroad, but also the

regulation of operations by foreign providers in In-

dia. In 2005, the Indian government initiated the Na-

tional Knowledge Commission. The Twelfth Five Year

Plan (2012-2017) (Planning Commission, 2013) in-

cludes an increased number of internationalization

provisions, such as the creation of additional scholar-

ships for overseas students, in an attempt to attract

and retain international talent in India and to retain

local talent.

The strategic eorts to enhance internationaliza-

tion have at times been aected by slow bureaucrat-

ic and legislative processes. For example, the Indian

government has been attempting to pass the Foreign

Education Provider (Regulation) Bill since 2010

(Singh, 2010), without success. Similarly, the propos-

al to create 20 world class universities was deferred in

2017, although it was approved a year later. While

those obstacles have slowed internationalization

processes in India, the country has signicant poten-

tial to become a model for internationalization in a

complex and growing tertiary education system.

This potential is manifested in the Study in India

Plan (SII), presented in April 2018. The government

of India aims to attract international students in or-

der to bring diversity to Indian classrooms and to

leverage the soft power potential of education

through the program (SII). This initiative is led by the

Ministry of Human Resource Development and is

supported by Ministry of Commerce and Industries,

India

Tertiary education system in brief

India has the second largest tertiary education sys-

tem in the world, enrolling an estimated 34.6 million

students (Ministry of Human Resource Development

Department of Higher Education, 2016). Yet, accord-

ing to World Bank gures, the gross enrollment ratio

in tertiary education has only reached 26.9% in 2016.

In the same year, 57.3% of students were enrolled in

private tertiary education institutions. The system is

highly diversied and includes central universities,

state universities, deemed-to-be universities, institu-

tions of national importance, and institutions under

state legislature acts. Dierent institutional types fol-

low central, provincial, or state jurisdictions, under

the supervision of the University Grants Commission

(Ministry of Human Resource Development Depart-

ment of Higher Education, n.d.). For its part, the All

India Council for Technical Education (AICT) under-

takes similar regulatory work with technical colleges.

Both the size and diversication of the system pose

complications for centralized internationalization

policies. However, India is slowly progressing toward

establishing a national internationalization policy.

Internationalization strategy, policies, and

plans

India is most clearly perceived as a source country for

internationally mobile students. In the academic

year 2016/2017, Indian students accounted for 17.3%

of all international students worldwide (IIE, 2017). At

the same time, India is becoming an attractive coun-

try for students in the region. In 2012, the country

hosted 33,156 foreign students, with Nepal as the

leading sending country (UNESCO & Government of

India, 2014). An increasing number of international

providers are setting up campuses in India (Mitra,

2010). In addition to student mobility, international-

ization at home is becoming a more signicant fea-

ture of the Indian tertiary education system. However,

this is still mostly a grassroots endeavor, driven inde-

pendently by a small number of institutions, with

center for international higher education | perspectives no. 12

the Ministry of External Aairs, and the Ministry of

Home Aairs. The implementation body of SII is Edu-

cational Consultants India Limited (EdCIL), a public

sector entity under the Ministry of Human Resource

Development and the Federation of Indian Cham-

bers of Commerce & Industries’ (FICCI) Higher Educa-

tion Division.

The SII initiative intends to attract students for

full-time degree programs, as well as for short-term

programs, from 30 primarily neighboring and African

countries, including Nepal, Vietnam, Kazakhstan,

Saudi Arabia, Nigeria, Thailand, Malaysia, Egypt, Ku-

wait, Iran, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Bhutan, and Rwan-

da. Based on their academic scores, students will be

oered full or partial scholarships. Students from de-

veloped countries and regions, like the United States

and Europe, will be targeted for short-term and stu-

dent exchange programs. The government hopes to

attract 200,000 international students to Indian uni-

versity campuses by 2023. Sixty tertiary education

institutions with ratings in the top 100 of the Nation-

al Institutional Ranking Framework and National As-

sessment and Accreditation Council have been

identied as institutions where these foreign stu-

dents will be placed. A pilot program was launched

for 2018/2019 to test these opportunities (Yera-

vdekar & de Wit, 2018).

As Yeravdekar and de Wit (2018) observe, “this

initiative will require a lot of strategy, planning and

good will from the government. It also requires that

participating universities develop an eective eco-

system to accept and support foreign students. The

cities where these foreign students are placed will

also play a major role in integrating foreign students

and insuring against discrimination. Quality of edu-

cation, services, infrastructure and human resources

to recruit, support and train these students are chal-

lenges that need to be addressed to make this eort

to become a global player in the international stu-

dent market a success.”

international mapping of nteisps

2014). The program oers scholarships to domestic

students who have secured seats at top universities

abroad, with the condition that they return to Ka-

zakhstan after their graduation. Altogether, over

11,000 students have studied abroad under the Bo-

lashak scholarship scheme since its inception (Center

for International Programs, n.d.). An evaluation of the

Bolashak program (Perna, Orosz, & Jumakulov, 2015)

suggested that recipients are easily integrated into

the Kazakh labor market and that the program, while

imperfect, is viewed as a positive initiative that sup-

ports human capital consolidation in the country.

The creation of Nazarbayev University in 2010 is

also viewed as a major step in the direction of inter-

nationalization for the country (OECD, 2017b). The

university attracts international faculty and interna-

tional students and represents a pipeline to elite uni-

versities worldwide (Ministry of Education and

Science of the Republic of Kazakhstan, 2015).

Currently, three main documents govern the in-

ternationalization of tertiary education in Kazakh-

stan. The State Program of Education Development in

the Republic of Kazakhstan for 2011–2020 includes lim-

ited provisions on internationalization, but it oers

provisions for the enhancement of internationaliza-

tion at home. The program includes an extension of

the Bolashak International Scholarship Program that

facilitates sta mobility. Secondary education teach-

ers are able to conduct mobility periods abroad

aimed at improving their English speaking ability.

This provision follows the view that, in order to facili-

tate internationalization, Kazakhstan needs to in-

crease the English language prociency of its faculty

(OECD, 2017b). At the same time, loans are made

available to faculty at tertiary education institutions

to facilitate multi-language teaching. While no spe-

cic programs are outlined, the document references

student mobility and the creation of the Center for

the Bologna Process and Academic Mobility (The

Ministry of Education and Science of the Republic of

Kazakhstan, 2010). The program was revised in 2016

as part of the State Program of Education Development

in the Republic of Kazakhstan for 2016-2019.

Tertiary education system in brief

Tertiary education in Kazakhstan has undergone sig-

nicant changes in recent years. Between 2010 and

2016, the number of students enrolled in tertiary ed-

ucation institutions in the country decreased by 21%,

from 756,706 in 2010 to 623,534 in 2016. However,

the gross enrollment ratio increased slightly during

the same time period, from 45.7% in 2010 to 46.1% in

2016. Starting in 2014, more than 50% of students

were enrolled in private tertiary education institu-

tions. The country has placed emphasis on education

as a tool for economic growth by promoting quality

and investing in education at all levels, in light of its

goal of becoming one of the top 30 most competi-

tive economies by 2050. A key component of this ef-

fort is the aim to consolidate a highly educated labor

force. This is apparent in the national vision for edu-

cation, which is focused on “increasing competitive-

ness of education and development of human capital

through ensuring access to quality education for sus-

tainable economic growth” (The Ministry of Educa-

tion and Science of the Republic of Kazakhstan,

2010). A growing number of reforms attempt to in-

crease the global relevance of the tertiary education

system (OECD, 2017b). In 2010, Kazakhstan joined

the Bologna process. In addition, the country has ini-

tiated a number of initiatives and policies aimed at

increasing employability, quality, access, and the

professionalization of the academic labor force (Min-

istry of Education and Science of the Republic of Ka-

zakhstan, 2015).

Internationalization strategy, policies, and

plans

Internationalization of tertiary education is embed-

ded in broader national education strategies and

plans and is aligned with domestic educational goals.

However, the internationalization strategy of Ka-

zakhstan has a main focus on student and sta

mobility.

Established in 1994, the agship international-

ization initiative of Kazakhstan is the Bolashak Inter-

national Scholarship Program (British Council & DAAD,

Kazakhstan

egy, given that many of its provisions have been im-

plemented recently and some provisions have not

been implemented at all to date. Experts point to-

wards the limited success of the internationalization

policies in attracting and retaining international fac-

ulty at Kazakh universities, as well as the limited im-

pact of mobility periods among Kazakh PhD students.

Experts also suggest that rigidity of the Bolashak

scholarship scheme has limited greater possibility for

international cooperation. Still, while its implemen-

tation could benet from improvements, some ex-

perts believe that the Bolashak scholarship scheme

has increased the international prole of the tertiary

education system in Kazakhstan.

As a system, Kazakhstan has embraced interna-

tionalization. The country has made important prog-

ress by considering, adopting, and allocating

resources towards implementing internationaliza-

tion policies. In addition, researchers in Kazakhstan

have published signicant scholarship that evaluates

the internationalization strategies of the country,

both at a national and institutional level. Their voices

may contribute towards the consolidation and im-

provement of national internationalization policies

in Kazakhstan.

The Academic Mobility Strategy in Kazakhstan for

2012-2020 is a more targeted internationalization pol-

icy document. While brief, the document highlights

goals and objectives aimed at enhancing the quality

assurance of external and incoming mobility; the

promotion of multi-language teaching; and the ex-

pansion of partnerships with overseas universities

and international organizations. This plan aims to

better align the Kazakh tertiary education system

with the Bologna Process and the European Higher

Education Area. This plan is congruent with The Na-

tional Plan 100 Concrete Steps, proposed by President

Nursultan Nazarbayev in 2015, which includes a pro-

vision to transition to English as the main language

of instruction in high schools and universities, with

the purpose of increasing the competitiveness of the

tertiary education sector.

In their evaluation of the tertiary education sys-

tem in Kazakhstan, the OECD (2017b) observes “lim-

ited inclusion of international examples and

contents” in the curriculum, thus suggesting that the

internationalization of the curriculum is at inception

stages in the country. At the same time, the report

comments on the extensive eorts to increase inter-

nationalization in the country and to use internation-

alization as a tool to address broader domestic needs.

As the current internationalization strategies are due

to expire in the next several years, there is an oppor-

tunity in the coming period for Kazakhstan to better

integrate both internationalization at home and in-

ternationalization abroad in its national internation-

alization strategies.

One of the complications of evaluating Kazakh-

stan’s national policy for internationalization is due

to the fragmentation of internationalization provi-

sions across multiple strategies and policy docu-

ments. In addition, multiple divergent criteria may

be used to gauge eectiveness. For the purpose of

this report, we use the opinion of experts to hint at

the eectiveness of the national internationalization

policy in Kazakhstan. Consultation with four country

experts suggests a mixed degree of eectiveness for

national internationalization policies. The experts

consulted concur that it may be too early to evaluate

the impact of the national internationalization strat-

center for international higher education | perspectives no. 12

international mapping of nteisps

er Education Malaysia, 2011). Given this goal, the

strategy is generally regarded as an example of a mo-

bility-driven internationalization initiative (Trahar,

2014). However, the document covers multiple key

aspects of the internationalization process, including

inbound and outbound mobility for students in or-

der to build and attract talent, faculty mobility to en-

hance research and development activities,

internationalization relevant trainings for faculty and

sta at home and abroad, community integration,

and institutional governance. The strategy applies to

both public and private tertiary education institu-

tions. As such, in their typology of internationaliza-

tion strategies, Helms et al. (2015) categorize Malaysia

as an example of a country with a comprehensive

internationalization strategy, as well as a student mo-

bility strategy, with an inbound mobility focus.

Malaysia Education Blueprint 2015-2025 (Higher

Education) sets directions for changes across all as-

pects of the tertiary education system, with a focus

on the following: access, quality, equity, unity, and

eciency. While not the primary focus of the docu-

ment, the internationalization of tertiary education is

embedded either explicitly or implicitly in multiple

“shifts” advanced by the strategic plan. The blueprint

document includes key aspects such as: plans to in-

crease the attraction of international talent and to

promote national talent internationally; aims to con-

solidate Malaysia as an internationally recognized

education hub and to enhance global partnerships;

an interest in streamlining and easing immigration

procedures; the hope to increase the proportion of

international postgraduate students; a vision to

transform online learning into an integral part of ter-

tiary education and making it available globally; and

a desire to increase the eciency of the provision of

services for international students (Ministry of Edu-

cation Malaysia, 2015).

In addition, the Ministry of Education operates

Education Malaysia Global Services, an online plat-

form that operates as a one stop center for interna-

tional student services. The website is used to

Tertiary education system in brief

In Malaysia, the number of students enrolled in ter-

tiary education increased by 20% between 2020 and

2016, from 1,061,421 in 2010 to 1,336,550 in 2016.

The gross enrollment ratio in tertiary education re-

ects this jump in enrollment, having increased from

37.3% in 2010 to 44.1% in 2016. In 2016, 48.1% of stu-

dents were enrolled in private tertiary education in-

stitutions, an increase from 43.1% in 2010. In recent

years, Malaysia has strengthened its eorts to in-

crease the quality and the capacity of its tertiary ed-

ucation system, in part due to the increased outow

of domestic students abroad (Morshidi, Razak, & Koo,

2011). While the number of government scholarships

for domestic students to study abroad has decreased,

incentives have been created for domestic and inter-

national private universities to provide market rele-

vant programs (Sohail & Saeed, 2003). In 2007,

Malaysia created an excellence initiative aimed at

propelling national universities toward global recog-

nition (Chan, 2013).

Internationalization strategy, policies, and

plans

National policies and strategies that promote the in-

ternationalization of tertiary education in Malaysia

are connected to the broader national goal to see

Malaysia make the transition from a developing

country to a developed country by 2020 (Ahmad,

2015; Azman, Sirat, & Ahmad, 2014). The expansion

and international branding of tertiary education are

viewed as key elements in creating a “well-educated

and well-trained population” that may contribute to-

wards the “country’s growth” (Ministry of Higher Edu-

cation Malaysia, 2011, p. 18). Two main strategic

documents steer the internationalization of tertiary

education in the country.

The Internationalization Policy for Higher Educa-

tion 2011 is designed as an operational strategy aimed

at achieving the goal of attracting 150,000 interna-

tional students to Malaysia by 2020 (Ministry of High-

Malaysia

center for international higher education | perspectives no. 12

manage and process the applications and renewal of

international student visas and the provision of med-

ical insurance.

Malaysia demonstrates a strong commitment to-

wards comprehensive internationalization, a wide-

reach approach to implementation, and meaningful

alignment between national goals and tertiary edu-

cation internationalization. As such, Malaysia is an

important example of a concerted approach to a na-

tional internationalization policy that should be ob-

served carefully over time. As its eorts in this area

evolve and mature, useful lessons for other countries

and context may be discerned.

international mapping of nteisps

tional attention. The description of these policies is

based on secondary literature, as the original policy

documents are not publicly available at the

moment.

The World Class University Programme, enacted

in 1997, aimed to attract 10 top universities from

around the world to set up centers of excellence in

Singapore and thus establish Singapore as a regional

and global education hub. These campuses were

meant to attract global talent to Singapore as well as

to increase the quality and diversity of education

available in Singapore (Ng & Tan, 2010). As a response

to this policy, multiple reputable universities estab-

lished campuses in Singapore, including the Univer-

sity of Chicago, the Massachusetts Institute of

Technology, Columbia University, and the London

School of Economics. The establishment of a few of

these centers of excellence has not been successful.

For example, only two months after it started its op-

erations, the University of New South Wales an-

nounced its closure and departure from Singapore

(Chan & Ng, 2008). Similar closures followed, includ-

ing the New York University Tisch School of the Arts

in 2012 and the University of Chicago Booth School

of Business in 2013. However, the program managed

to diversify the tertiary education landscape and to

transform the city-state into a transnational educa-

tion hub that provides both international distance

education programs and access to foreign campuses

in Singapore (Ho Mok, 2008).

Enacted in 2002, the Global Schoolhouse Pro-

gramme initially aimed to attract 150,000 internation-

al students to Singapore and to increase the tertiary

education contribution to the economy by 5% by

2015. The rationale behind the plan was to tap into

the global market for tertiary education and primari-

ly attract self-paying students, but also to attract in-

ternational talent and produce long-term economic

benets (Waring, 2014). A less discussed aspect of

this policy is the attempt to attract foreign faculty to

the country, a policy that also registered mixed re-

sults, with faculty retention being curbed by bureau-

Tertiary education system in brief

Since the creation of Singapore as an independent

city-state in 1965, education has played an essential

role in the development and the transformation of

the country. The country has progressed from having

only two universities to hosting some of the most

prestigious universities in Asia. Singapore is one of

the countries in the world with the highest gross en-

rollment ratio, having reached 83.9% in 2016. Yet Sin-

gapore has also registered a 21% decrease in

enrollment in tertiary education between 2010 and

2016, from 236,891 students in 2010 to 195,125 stu-

dents in 2016. In 2016, 35.5% of students were en-

rolled in private tertiary education institutions. In

Singapore, tertiary education policy is an extension

of deliberate multi-year policy planning, which is

embedded in a broader vision for the country. As

such, any tertiary education policy initiative benets

from sustained government support. Tertiary educa-

tion in Singapore has received substantial interna-

tional attention due to its continuous innovations,

more recently in the arena of internationalization.

Internationalization strategy, policies, and

plans

While Singapore does not have one single national

internationalization policy, the country has devel-

oped several initiatives and adopted policies that

would typically be included in such a document.

Mention of internationalization in education policy

documents dates back to 1959, prompted by a desire

to promote cohesion among a very multicultural and

multiethnic population (Daquila, 2013). English is the

medium of instruction in schools, the government

runs a scholarship scheme for Singaporeans who

have been admitted at top universities abroad, and

internationalization at home initiatives start in early

education (Vidovich, 2004). In 2015 alone, Singapore

attracted 75,000 international students (Alfaro & Ke-

tels, 2016). However, two distinct tertiary education

internationalization policies have gathered interna-

Singapore

center for international higher education | perspectives no. 12

cratic burdens. The goals of the initial policy have

softened over time as the policy has attracted local

backlash from domestic students who felt crowded

out from university seats by international students

(Ng, 2013). As such the government recalibrated its

policy goals to increase domestic participation rates

in tertiary education (Waring, 2014).

Despite the setbacks of the Global Schoolhouse

Programme and the World Class University Pro-

gramme, universities in Singapore are examples of

good practice in the arena of internationalization. In

part, it is the very ambitious goals of the national pol-

icies that make the state of internationalization in

the country seem less than successful. Indeed, these

policies have made signicant impacts in promoting

international cooperation and increasing the quality

of the Singaporean tertiary education system.

international mapping of nteisps

create a common direction for internationalization.

The policy framework asserts that international-

ization activities need to be done in a manner that

prioritizes the national interests of South Africa.

However, South Africa has also made commitments

at the regional level to the Southern African Devel-

opment Community (SADC), and in relation to conti-

nental-level collective development plans (such as

the African Union’s Agenda 2063). The country is also

a signatory to regional tertiary education specic

conventions, such as the Arusha/Addis Convention.

According to the draft policy framework, the ma-

jor rationales that guide internationalization eorts

in the country include: opportunities for institutional

collaborations, both in academic programs and re-

search; the need to create a common framework at

the national level to take advantage, and to avert the

risks, of partnerships; an interest in increasing the

global competitiveness of South African tertiary edu-

cation; a desire to improve quality and intellectual

diversity in all functions of tertiary education; and an

aspiration to enhance the public good provided by

tertiary education to the benet of society.

On the other hand, internationalization is seen

to have broader strategic benets to South African

tertiary education, including: enhancing reputation,

quality and relevance; strengthening international

research collaboration towards improving knowl-

edge production and innovation; equipping stu-

dents and sta with intercultural skills and

competencies; attracting and retaining talent; open-

ing up South African tertiary education to academics

and researchers of novice and senior expertise; con-

tributing to the overall development of tertiary edu-

cation institutions; and improving opportunities for

strategic alliances in terms of bilateral, multilateral

and regional collaborations. Within the context of

comprehensive internationalization, the policy

framework also outlines various elements of interna-

tionalization abroad and at home.

The Department of Home Aairs and the South

African Qualications Authority (SAQA) are the two

Tertiary education system in brief

South Africa has 26 public universities and over 100

private institutions, which oer training focused on

specic academic elds. The tertiary education sys-

tem also consists of technical and vocational educa-

tion and training (TVET) colleges. While none of the

private institutions can be considered fully-edged

universities, the public institutions are dierentiated

into three categories: 11 traditional universities, 6

universities of technology, and 8 comprehensive uni-

versities (Bosho, Jooste, & Pillay, 2018). As of 2016,

the South African tertiary education system had a

total enrollment of a little over one million students,

hitting a gross enrollment ratio of 20.5%. Only 7.4%

of students were enrolled in private institutions, as of

2016.

The overall responsibility for system-level gover-

nance of tertiary education rests with the Depart-

ment of Higher Education and Training (DHET). The

Council on Higher Education (CHE) is an indepen-

dent statutory body responsible for the quality of

tertiary education, which, among other things, per-

forms program accreditation and institutional audits

(CHE, 2019). The DHET website maintains the list of

accredited institutions, along with the specic quali-

cations for which they are accredited.

Internationalization strategy, policies, and

plans

South Africa recently crafted the Policy Framework for

Internationalization of Higher Education in South Af-

rica, which is under discussion as of the writing of

this report, and is expected to be promulgated soon.

The policy framework not only acknowledges the

practice of internationalization without the presence

of a national policy or strategy, it also underlines the

potential benets and risks associated with interna-

tionalization activities. Therefore, it provides an over-

all framework within which government bodies,

tertiary education institutions, non- statutory mem-

bership organizations, and other stakeholders can

South Africa

center for international higher education | perspectives no. 12

search collaboration in terms of innovation and

knowledge transfer substantiates South Africa’s com-

mitment to encouraging international engagements

in research. Partnerships are encouraged with gov-

ernments, foundations, and agencies of various sorts

in order to maximize opportunities for research fund-

ing and access to facilities for South African research-

ers and institutions. In addition to the co-authorship

of publications with foreign scientists, a number of

dierent dimensions of international research collab-

oration are outlined, which the Department of High-

er Education and Training is expected to encourage

through incentives.

Another major aspect of internationalization ad-

dressed in the policy framework is the cross-border

delivery of education, where collaborative arrange-

ments are specically emphasized. The policy frame-

work elaborates on cross-border collaborative

delivery, outlining the rationales, conditions, accred-

itation issues, types of qualications, as well as risks,

limitations, and policy concerns.

The purposeful integration of international and

intercultural dimensions into formal and informal

curricula and the learning environment is meant to

bring the benets of international education to all

students, and not just those who are mobile. Cost ef-

fectiveness is another reason South African institu-

tions are encouraged to pursue internationalization

at home. Increased international sta mobility and

sucient emphasis on informal curriculum are high-

lighted as a way to maximize internationalization at

home. International and intercultural elements are

said to go beyond the formal learning environment

into the learning opportunities within local

communities.

Institutions are reminded, however, to make

sure that the internationalization of their curricula

does not negate their obligations with regard to cur-

riculum transformation imperatives, which include,

among other things, responsiveness to the local con-

text and promotion of social justice. Quality assur-

ance and accreditation mechanisms in place are

meant to ensure that tertiary education programs,

especially those oered with international partners,

are relevant to the educational needs of South Africa.

This also applies to programs delivered online.

agencies that facilitate the enrollment and atten-

dance of inbound international students at South

African institutions. The former enables smooth im-

migration processes for international students and

their immediate families, while the latter undertakes

assessment and verication of the qualications in-

ternational students present. In line with the harmo-

nization initiatives in place on the African continent,

institutions are required to develop credit accumula-

tion and transfer systems, as well as to provide de-

tailed study records and degree supplements for

international students. Financial subsidies available

at public institutions in South Africa do not make dis-

tinctions between international and domestic stu-

dents. However, institutions can apply dierentiated

tuition fees for international and domestic students.

The exception to this is that students from SADC

countries are charged the same as domestic South

African students.

Outbound student mobility takes dierent

forms: through government agreements with other

countries; as part of a program oered with a foreign

university; through exchange programs; and through

independent decisions of individual students to en-

roll at foreign universities. South African institutions

are required to create mechanisms to protect the ac-

ademic and other interests of their outbound stu-

dents who enroll at foreign institution through

collaborative arrangements. The policy framework

provides details with regard to the good practices

expected in the management of student mobility.

In recognition of the positive impact of the free

circulation of people and ideas, the mobility of sta is

highly encouraged. Institutions are required to cre-

ate academic and research opportunities abroad for

their sta, as well as to appoint the best minds from

elsewhere, while observing race and gender diversi-

ty initiatives. International initiatives that promote

the mobility of scholars and scientists, such as the

Diaspora Fellowship Program, are welcomed and

highly encouraged. As in the case of student mobili-

ty, concerned government agencies are required to

coordinate and streamline their services and eorts

to facilitate immigration processes for international

sta.

The immense contribution of international re-

international mapping of nteisps

Overall, the internationalization of South African

tertiary education has been steadily developing,

even in the absence of a national policy framework.

Experts assert that the inclusive and participatory

nature of the development of the national policy

framework gives hope for its anticipated success.

They also highlight two points that may allow inter-

nationalization in South Africa to serve as an exam-

ple of good practice for others. First is the overall

emphasis of the policy on comprehensive interna-

tionalization. In addition to the major dimensions of

internationalization abroad– particularly mobility—

the policy encourages the curriculum and the gener-

al tertiary education environment to have

international characteristics. Second, due to South

Africa’s expressed commitment to regional develop-

ment, students from member countries of SADC

have been enabled to access South African tertiary

education with considerable ease.

center for international higher education | perspectives no. 12

Internationalization strategy, policies, and

plans

In 2017, the Ministry of Education of the UAE

launched the National Strategy for Higher Education

2030. This overarching strategy—set in alignment

with the socioeconomic development vision of the

country—has four broad areas of emphasis: quality,

eciency, innovation, and harmonization. The strat-

egy aims to improve tertiary education and to devel-

op the UAE labor market in order to enable sustained

growth in key areas of knowledge, the economy, and

entrepreneurship (Government of UAE, n.d.). Due to

the unavailability of the document, exploring further

details relevant to internationalization was not possi-

ble. Nonetheless, in an analysis of the approach to

the internationalization of tertiary education in the

UAE, Alsharari (2018, p. 372) noted that the “vague

denition of internationalization strategy” is one of

its weaknesses. David (2017) also observed that,

overall, internationalization in the UAE is understood

as a business model as much as it is perceived as an

educational opportunity. Internationalization is,

however, one of the most dominant forces in the dy-

namics that shape tertiary education in the UAE and

is given high emphasis.

Student mobility is one of the dening features

of internationalization in the country. The UAE has a

high outbound student mobility ratio, in relation to

its total student population; in 2016, there were

11,249 degree seeking Emirati students studying in

universities abroad. This number has shown an in-

crease of about one-third as compared to gures

from 2011. The United Kingdom and the United

States are the most popular destinations for out-

bound Emirati students, accounting for 30% and

27.5%, respectively, while India ranks third in popu-

larity, receiving 13% of outbound Emirati students

(Kamal & Trines, 2018).

In recent years, the UAE has been pursuing the

goal to become a tertiary education hub in the re-

gion, attracting students primarily from the Middle

Tertiary education system in brief

Since the 1990s, the tertiary education system of

the United Arab Emirates (UAE) has rapidly ex-

panded. Today there are more than 70 tertiary ed-

ucation institutions in the UAE, while the exact

number uctuates due to the frequent opening,

closure, and merging of institutions. Tertiary edu-

cation institutions can generally be categorized

into three groups: public institutions, private insti-

tutions, and global partnerships. There are three

federal public institutions under the purview of

the Ministry of Education – the UAE University,

Zayed University, and the Higher Colleges of Tech-

nology (HCT). The HCT system is the largest in

terms of student population, oering four levels of

credentials – diploma, higher diploma, bachelor’s,

and master’s – in its 17 colleges across the

country.

In 2016, the student population in UAE tertia-

ry education was 159,553, doubling from 2007. An

overwhelming majority of students (70.9%) are

enrolled in private institutions. A large majority of

students are enrolled in undergraduate programs,

with only 13.6% and less than 1%, respectively, in

master’s and doctoral level programs (Kamal &

Trines, 2018). It is also worth noting that, reective

of the overall population distribution, out of the

seven emirates, two (Dubai and Abu Dhabi) .ac-

count for almost 60% of the student population

and more than 70% of the private institutions.

Overall, the Ministry of Education is responsi-

ble for matters related to tertiary education and

scientic research. Under the purview of the Minis-

try, the Commission for Academic Accreditation

(CAA) conducts the accreditation and registration

of all tertiary education institutions and their re-

spective academic programs in the UAE (Govern-

ment of the UAE, 2018).

United Arab Emirates

international mapping of nteisps

Overall, tertiary education in the UAE can be

considered diverse in two aspects: the diversity of

providers and the diversity of the student and sta

population. The student body in tertiary education is

highly diverse in the UEA due to the fact that the

country attracts students from numerous countries,

but also because of the diversity of the UAE’s own

population. David (2017) noted that (using 2014

data) there were foreign students in the UAE tertiary

education from 160 countries, while 94.8% of aca-

demic sta were expatriates. This provides a very di-

verse and multicultural learning environment.

Meanwhile, a number of institutions adopt partially

or fully foreign or international curricula, in collabo-

ration with foreign universities.

In general, it is important to underline that the

various internationalization initiatives, such as TNE,

are dependent on directions from each emirate.

Dubai, for instance, has a robust system under its Ac-

ademic City initiative, which has attracted several

foreign institutions. This is followed by other emir-

ates, as well. However, the recently announced over-

arching national strategy for tertiary education can

usher in a degree of similarity and comparable ef-

forts across all of the emirates.

East, North Africa, and South Asia (Alsharari, 2018). In

a 2017 study by the British Council, the UAE was rat-

ed as a country with a very favorable policy for stu-

dent mobility and international tertiary education

broadly, standing on par with countries such as Aus-

tralia, France, and the United Kingdom (Ilieva, Killing-

ley, Tsiligiris, & Peak, 2017). With about a 60% increase

as compared to 2011, in 2016 there were 77,463 in-

bound degree seeking students in the UAE, of whom

the largest portion (17%) were from India. This is

mainly reective of labor migration trends into the

UAE (Kamal & Trines, 2018). Sta mobility is also a

strong aspect of tertiary education in the country.

Most foreign providers and UAE institutions rely

heavily on expatriate sta (David, 2017). Enduring

and prevalent partnerships (Alsharari, 2018) between

UAE institutions and foreign counterparts, as well as

the relative abundance of funding for research col-

laborations, creates considerable opportunities for

sta mobility.

Transnational education (TNE) is another

strength of the UAE. TNE in the UAE takes two prima-

ry forms: branch campuses and distance/online de-

livery by foreign universities. The UAE is one of the

countries in the world with the highest number of

branch campuses of foreign universities, perhaps

only second to China. According to data from 2017,

with 34 branch campuses actively operational or un-

der development, the UAE hosts institutions from 12

diverse tertiary education systems, including the

United Kingdom, the United States, and India

(Cross-Border Education Research Team, 2017). For-

eign universities use both franchising and direct in-

vestment modes of in-person delivery in the UAE.

TNE is also facilitated through online education. As of

2016, there were 105 foreign universities accredited

to oer online education in the UAE. About three

quarters of them were from the United Kingdom and

the United States (David, 2017). Overall, the UAE was

ranked third among 38 dierent countries by the

British Council study for the convenience it oers for

TNE. The general score was based on three criteria:

international mobility of educational programs and

providers, quality assurance mechanisms for in-

bound and outbound TNE, and recognition of TNE

qualications (Ilieva et al., 2017).

center for international higher education | perspectives no. 12

Ahmad, A. R. ( 2015). Malaysia. In de Wit, H., Hunter, F., Howard, L., & Egron-Polak, E. (Eds.) Internationalisation

of higher education (pp. 241-251). Brussels: European Parliament. Retrieved from http://www.europarl.eu-

ropa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2015/540370/IPOL_STU(2015)540370_EN.pdf

Alfaro, L., & Ketels, C. (2016). Singapore’s higher education cluster. Harvard Business School. Retrieved from:

https://www.isc.hbs.edu/resources/courses/moc-course-at-harvard/Documents/pdf/student-projects/

Singapore%20Higher%20Education%202016.pdf

Alsharari, N. M. (2018). Internationalization of the higher education system: an interpretive analysis. Interna-

tional Journal of Educational Management, 32(3), 359-381.

Arruda, R. (2017). Brazil’s Newest Attempt at Internationalization. Inside Higher Education. Retrieved from

https://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/world-view/brazilʼs-newest-attempt-internationalization

Atherton, G., Norbaya Binti Azizan, S., Shuib, M., & Crosling, G., (2018). The Shape of Global Higher Education:

Understanding the ASEAN Region (Vol.3). British Council. Retrieved from: https://www.britishcouncil.org/

sites/default/les/h233_the_shape_of_asean_higher_education_report_nal_v2_web_1.pdf

Atherton, G. Crosling, G., Shuib, M. & Norbaya Azizan, S. (2019). ASEAN countries move forward on interna-

tionalisation. University World News. Retrieved from https://www.universityworldnews.com/post.

php?story=2019042915353256.

Aw, F. Foreword. (2017) In de Wit, H, Gacel-Ávila, J, Jones E., & Jooste, N., The Globalization of internationaliza-

tion, emerging voices and perspectives. pp. xxi-xxiii. London and New York: Routledge.

Azman, N., Sirat, M., & Ahmad, A. R. (2014). Higher education, learning regions and the Malaysian transforma-

tion policies. Higher Education Policy, 27(3), 301-321.

Beelen, J., & Jones, E. (2015). Redening Internationalization at Home. In Curaj, A., Matei, L., Pricopie, R., Salmi,

J., & Scott, P. (Eds.), The European Higher Education Area: Between Critical Reﬂections and Future Policies (pp.

59-72). Cham: Springer International Publishing.

Bernasconi, A., & Celis, S. (2017). Higher education reforms: Latin America in comparative perspective. Educa-

tion Policy Analysis Archives, 25(67), 1-15.

Berry, C., & Taylor, J. (2014). Internationalisation in higher education in Latin America: policies and practice in

Colombia and Mexico. Higher Education, 67(5), 585-601.

Bosho, H., Jooste, N., & Pillay, D. (2018). South African higher education overview. In Quinlan, O. (Ed.), Study

South Africa: the guide to South African Higher Education (pp. 23-32). Pretoria: International Education

Association of South Africa [IEASA].

British Coucil (2016). The Shape of Global Higher Education: National Policies Framework for International

Engagement. Retrieved from www.britishcouncil.org/education/ihe

British Coucil (2017). The Shape of Global Higher Education: International Mobility of Students, Research and

References

Education Provision. Retrieved from www.britishcouncil.org/education/ihe

British Council, & DAAD (2014). The rationale for sponsoring students to undertake international study. An

assessment of national student mobility scholarship programs. Retrieved from https://www.britishcoun-

cil.org/sites/default/les/e002_outward_mobility_study_nal_v2_web.pdf

CAPES. (2017). Programa Institucional de Internationalizacao - CAPES- PrInt. Retrieved June 20, 2018, from

www.capes.gov.br

CAPES. (2018). Seleção projetos institucionais de internacionalização. Retrieved August 30, 2018, from http://

www.capes.gov.br/images/20082018_Edital_41_2017_PrInt_resultado_parcial_-_análise_de_mérito.pdf

Center for International Programs (n.d.). History of the Program. Retrieved from https://www.bolashak.gov.

kz/en/o-stipendii/istoriya-razvitiya.html

Chan, D., & Ng, P. T. (2008). Similar agendas, diverse strategies: The quest for a regional hub of higher educa-

tion in Hong Kong and Singapore. Higher Education Policy, 21(4), 487-503.

Chan, S. J. (2013). Internationalising higher education sectors: explaining the approaches in four Asian coun-

tries. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 35(3), 316-329.

Council on Higher Education [South Africa]. (2019). Council on Higher Education: Overview and Mandate.

Retrieved from https://www.che.ac.za/about/overview_and_mandate/mandate

Craciun, D. (2015). Systematizing internationalization policy in higher education: Towards a typology. Perspec-

tives of Innovations, Economics and Business, 15(1), 49–56.

Craciun, D. (2018a). National policies for higher education internationalization: A Global Comparative Per-

spective. In A. Curaj, L. Deca, & M. Pricopie (Eds.), European Higher Education Area: The Impact of Past and

Future Policies (pp. 95–106). Cham: Springer International Publishing.

Craciun, D. (2018b). Navigating national internationalisation policies: Moving internationalisation from the

periphery to centre stage. Forum. Amsterdam: European Association for International Education.

Craciun, D. (2018c). Topic modeling: A novel method for the systematic study of higher educaiton internation-

alization policy. In L. Rumbley & D. Proctor (Eds.), The Future Agenda for Internaitonalization in Higher Ed-

ucation (pp. 102–113). Abingdon-on-Thames: Routledge.

Craciun, D. & Orosz, K. (2018). Beneﬁts and costs of transnational collaborative partnerships in higher education.

European Expert Network on Economics of Education. Retreived from: http://www.eenee.de/eeneeHome/

EENEE/Analytical-Reports.html

Cross-Border Education Research Team [C-BERT]. (2017, January 20). C-BERT Branch Campus Listing. Retrieved

from http://cbert.org/branchcampuses.php

Daquila, T. C. (2013). Internationalizing higher education in Singapore: Government policies and the NUS ex-

perience. Journal of Studies in International Education, 17(5), 629-647.

David, S.A. (2017). The internationalization of higher education in the UAE and its implications for undergrad-

uate students’ institutional choice for post graduate studies. Transitions: Journal of Transient Migration,

1(2), 235-250.

international mapping of nteisps

de Mello Costa, D. (2014). A new era for higher education in Brazil. University World News. Retrieved from

www.universityworldnews.com

Department of Higher Education and Training, Republic of South Africa (2017 November). Policy Frame-

work for Internationalization of Higher Education in South Africa (revised draft version). Pretoria:

Author.

De Wit, H., Hunter, F., Egron-Polak, E., & Howard, L. (Eds.) (2015). Internationalisation of higher education.

Brussels: A Study for the European Parliament.

de Wit, H, Gacel-Ávila, J, Jones E., & Jooste, N. (2017). The Globalization of internationalization, emerging

voices and perspectives. London and New York: Routledge.

Directorio de la Asamblea del Sistema de Educación Superior & SENESCYT [Ecuador]. (2016). Guia general

para formular la Agenda 2035. Retrieved from http://www.agenda2035.ec/sites/default/les/GUIA%20

DE%20PROCESO_0.pdf

Estonian Rectors’ Conference. (2007). Agreement on Good Practice in the Internationalisation of Estonia’s

Higher Education Institutions. Retrieved June 5, 2018, from http://www.studyinestonia.ee/images/tek-

stid/headetavadelepe.pdf

European Commission. (2018). Estonia 2020 Strategy for Internationalisation. Retrieved June 5, 2018, from

https://ec.europa.eu/education/compendium/estonia-2020-strategy-internationalisation_en

Fabrizi, A., Guarini, G., & Meliciani, V. (2016). Public Knowledge Partnerships in European Research Projects

and Knowledge Creation across R&D Institutional Sectors. Technology Analysis and Strategic Manage-

ment, 28(9), 1056–1072. https://doi.org/http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ctas20

Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia [FDRE]. (2009). Higher Education Proclamation No.650/2009. Fed-

eral Negarit Gazeta, 15(64), 4976–5044.

Frenken, K., Ponds, R., & van Oort, F. (2010). The Citation Impact of Research Collaboration in Science-Based

Industries: A Spatial-Institutional Analysis. Papers in Regional Science, 89(2), 351–371. https://doi.org/

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/%28ISSN%291435-5957/issues

Government of Colombia. (2017). In higher education and research, the answer is Colombia. Retrieved

from: https://www.colombia.co/en/updates/special-contents

higher-education-research-answer-colombia/

Government of Egypt. (2016). Sustainable Development Strategy: Egypt Vision 2030: Knowledge, Innova-

tion and Scientic Research Pillar. Retrieved from http://sdsegypt2030.com/

economic-dimension/2673-2/?lang=en

Government Oce [Estonia]. (2011). National Reform Programme “Estonia 2020.” Retrieved June 5, 2018,

from https://riigikantselei.ee/en/supporting-government/national-reform-programme-estonia-2020

Government of the Republic of Ecuador. (2018). Higher Education Law. Retrieved from https://www.epn.

edu.ec/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Reformas-LOES.pdf

Government of the Republic of Ecuador. (n.d.). Yachay, city of knowledge. Retrieved from http://www.

yachay.gob.ec/yachay/?lang=en

center for international higher education | perspectives no. 12

international mapping of nteisps

Government of UAE (2018). Regulatory authorities of higher education. Retrieved from https:// government.ae/

en/information-and-services/education/higher-education/regulatory-authorities-of-higher-education

Government of UAE (n.d.). National Strategy for Higher Education 2030. Retrieved from https://government.

ae/en/about-the-uae/strategies-initiatives-and-awards/federal-governments-strategies-and-plans/

national-strategy-for-higher-education-2030

Helms, R., Rumbley, L, Brajkovic, L., & Mihut, G. (2015). Internationalizing higher education worldwide: National

policies and programs. American Council on Education. Retrieved from http://www.acenet.edu/news-

room/Documents/National-Policies-and-Programs-Part-1-Global.pdf

Henao, K. M., & Vélez, J. V. (2015). Colombia. In H. de Wit, F. Hunter, L. Howard, and E. Egron-Polak (Eds.), Inter-

nationalisation of higher education (pp. 217 - 228). Brussels: European Parliament.

Hird, M. D., & Pfotenhauer, S. M. (2017). How Complex International Partnerships Shape Domestic Research

Clusters: Dierence-in-Dierence Network Formation and Research Re-orientation in the MIT Portugal

Program. Research Policy, 46(3), 557–572. https://doi.org/http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/

journal/00487333

Holm-Nielsen, L. B., Thorn, K., Brunner, J. J., & Balán, J. (2005). Regional and international challenges to higher

education in Latin America. H. de Wit, I. Jaramillo, J. Gacel-Ávila & J. Knight.(eds.), Higher education in Latin

America. The international dimension (pp. 39-69). The World Bank: Washington DC.

Ho Mok, K. (2008). Singapore’s global education hub ambitions: University governance change and transna-

tional higher education. International Journal of Educational Management, 22(6), 527-546.

Hudzik, J. (2011). Comprehensive Internationalization: From Concept to Action. Washington: NAFSA.

ICEF Monitor (2017, April 22). Brazil shutting down Science Without Borders. Retrieved from http://monitor.

icef.com/2017/04/brazil-shutting-science-without-borders/

Ilieva, J., & Peak, M. (2016). The Shape of Global Higher Education: National Policies Framework for International

Engagement. Retrieved from www.britishcouncil.org/education/ihe

Ilieva, J., Killingley, P., Tsiligiris, V., & Peak, M. (2017). The shape of global higher education: international mo-

bility of students, research and education provision (Vol.2). British Council. Retrieved from https://www.

britishcouncil.org/sites/default/les/h002_transnational_education_tne_ihe_report_nal_web_2.pdf

Immerstein, S. (2015, December 7). Education in Colombia. World Education News and Reviews (WENR) Avail-

able at: https://wenr.wes.org/2015/12/education-in-colombia

Institute of International Education, (n.d.). International students. Places of origin. Retrieved from https://

www.iie.org/Research-and-Insights/Open-Doors/Data/International-Students/Places-of-Origin/

Academic-Level-and-Place-of-Origin/2014-15

Institute of International Education. (2017). Open doors. Retrieved from https://www.iie.org/en/Re-

search-and-Insights/Open-Doors/Data/International-Students/Places-of-Origin

International Network for Higher Education in Africa [INHEA]. (n.d.). Egypt. Retrieved from http://www.inhea.

org/ahen/egypt/

center for international higher education | perspectives no. 12

Japan International Cooperation Agency [JICA]. (2017). Higher Education Sector Cooperation Planning Sur-

vey in Egypt Scholarship Program. Retrieved from http://open_jicareport.jica.go.jp/pdf/12270849.pdf

Jaramillo, I. C., Zuñiga, P. G., & Blom, A. (2002). Colombian Higher Education in the Global Market. LCSHD Pa-

per Series No. 74. Latin America and the Caribbean Regional Oce, the World Bank. Available at: http://

documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/971811468770447634/pdf/324650CO0Higher0Education01PUB-

LIC1.pdf

Johnson, M. A. (2017). Contemporary higher education reform in Ecuador: Implications for faculty recruit-

ment, hiring, and retention. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 25(68), 1-20.

Jones, E. & de Wit, H. (2014). Globalized internationalization: Implications for policy and practice. IIEnetwork-

er, Spring, 28-29.

Kamal, K., & Trines, S. (2018, August 10). Education in the United Arab Emirates. World Education News and

Reviews (WENR), available at: https://wenr.wes.org/2018/08/

education-in-the-united-arab-emirates?utm_campaign=wenr&utm_source=monthly-newsletter-2018-

08-14&utm_medium=email&mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiTW1VeVpXTTFaamN5WkRZdyIsInQiOiJZWk1kbzNwNmd-

0MTVcL3FHcURRN1wvMExlNE8xR0E0U0ZWWWpqXC9jZGpEN3BEWDNPT2V6YlFMWGFcL0pCQytWND-

JqUWpCSGdlS2txMEZkQjJHcXdTRTNqTGdlOVo2TjlNTTBDeGs1Zys1Wjg2YjlZV0M1MHJBTXgxcGpyNX-

E5bkNrRjBob2UzbWwyQVN2cnlYaGl3Q0NGMXhnPT0ifQ%3D%3D#_ftnref1

Kibbermann, K. (2017). Responses to the Internationalisation of Higher Education in Language Policies of

Estonia and Latvia. ESUKA-JEFUL, 8(1), 97–113.

Kiisler, K. (2018). From zero to hero: Strategy as a roadmap to success. Retrieved from https://prezi.com/k2lx-

zv998h/aca-archimedes/

Knobel, M. (2015, June 22). Further Reections on the Brazilian Mobility Program. Inside Higher Education.

Retrieved from https://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/world-view/

further-reections-brazilian-mobility-program

Knobel, M., & Verhine, R. (2017). Brazil’s for-prot higher education dilemma. International Higher Education

(89), 23–24. https://doi.org/10.6017/ihe.2017.89.9843

Matei, L., & Iwinska, J. (2015). National Strategies and Practices in Internationalisation of HIgher Education:

Lessons from a Cross-Country Comparison. In A. Curaj, L. Deca, E. Egron-Polak, & J. Salmi (Eds.), Higher ed-

ucation reforms in Romania (pp. 205–226). London: Springer.

Mathews, E. (September 25, 2014). Internationalization: Where is India headed? The World View. Retrieved

from https://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/world-view/internationalization-where-india-headed

Ministry of Education (MoE) [Ethiopia]. (2000). Education statistics annual abstract 1999/2000. Addis Ababa:

Author.

Ministry of Education (MoE) [Ethiopia]. (2018). Education statistics annual abstract 2016/2017. Addis Ababa:

Author.

Ministry of Education (MOE) [Ethiopia]. (2015). Education Sector Development Programme V ( ESDP V). Addis

Ababa: Author.

international mapping of nteisps

Ministry of Education and Research [Estonia]. (2016). Annual analysis: Summary. Retrieved from https://

www.hm.ee/en/activities/statistics-and-analysis

Ministry of Education and Research [Estonia]. (2017). Higher Education. Retrieved June 8, 2018, from https://

www.hm.ee/en/activities/higher-education

Ministry of Education and Science of the Republic of Kazakhstan (2010). State Program of Education Devel-

opment in the Republic of Kazakhstan for 2011–2020. Retrieved from https://iqaa.kz/images/Laws/%D

0%93%D0%9F%D0%A0%D0%9E_2011_%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B3%D0%BB.pdf

Ministry of Education and Science of the Republic of Kazakhstan (2015). National Report on the State and

Development of Educational System of the Republic of Kazakhstan. Retrieved from http://iac.kz/sites/

default/les/nr-2016_po_itogam_2015_goda_concise_version_eng._jsc_iac_zashchita.pdf

Ministry of Education Malaysia. (2015). Malaysia education blueprint 2015-2025 (Higher Education). Retrieved

from https://hea.uitm.edu.my/v1/images/stories/downloads/Malaysia%20Education%20Blueprint%20

2015-2025%20(Higher%20Education)/3.%20Malaysia%20Education%20Blueprint%202015-2025%20

(Higher%20Education).pdf

Ministry of External Relations [Brazil]. (2018). Exchange Program for Undergraduate Students - PEC-G. Re-

trieved August 30, 2018, from http://www.dce.mre.gov.br/en/PEC/PECG.php

Ministry of Higher Education [Egypt]. (n. d.). General Administration for Missions and Academic Supervision.

Retrieved from http://mohe-casm.edu.eg/English/Main_menu/missions/Academic_Supervision/Aca-

demic_Supervision.jsp

Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia. (2011). The Internationalization Policy for Higher Education 2011. Re-

trieved from http://repository.um.edu.my/92762/1/Malaysian%20Internationalisation%20Policy%20

2011.pdf

Ministry of Human Resource Development Department of Higher Education [India]. (2016). All India survey

on higher education (2015-2016). Retrieved from http://mhrd.gov.in/sites/upload_les/mhrd/les/sta-

tistics/AISHE2015-16.pdf

Ministry of Human Resource Development Department of Higher Education [India]. (n.d.). University and

higher education. Retrieved from http://mhrd.gov.in/university-and-higher-education

Mitra, S. K. (2010). Internationalization of education in India: Emerging trends and strategies. Asian Social

Science, 6(6), 105-110.

Morshidi, S., Razak, A. A., & Koo, Y. L. (2011). Trade in services and its policy implications: The case of cross-bor-

der/transnational higher education in Malaysia. Journal of Studies in International Education, 15(3),

241-260.

National Ministry of Education (MNE) [Colombia]. (2009, July 20). Internationalization of higher education.

Available at: https://www.mineducacion.gov.co/portal/Educacion-superior/

Informacion-Destacada/196472:Internacionalizacion-de-la-educacion-superior

Ng, P. T., & Tan, C. (2010). The Singapore Global Schoolhouse: An analysis of the development of the tertiary

education landscape in Singapore. International Journal of Educational Management, 24(3), 178-188.

Ng, P. T. (2013). The global war for talent: Responses and challenges in the Singapore higher education sys-

tem. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 35(3), 280-292.

OECD. (2017a). Education at a Glance: OECD Indicators. Retrieved from http://gpseducation.oecd.org/Con-

tent/EAGCountryNotes/BRA.pdf

center for international higher education | perspectives no. 12

OECD (2017b). Higher Education in Kazakhstan 2017. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.

org/10.1787/9789264268531-en

Perna, L. W., Orosz, K., & Jumakulov, Z. (2015). Understanding the human capital benets of a govern-

ment-funded international scholarship program: An exploration of Kazakhstan’s Bolashak program. In-

ternational Journal of Educational Development, 40, 85-97.

Perna, L. W., Orosz, K., Gopaul, B., Jumakulov, Z., Ashirbekov, A., & Kishkentayeva, M. (2014). Promoting Human

Capital Development: A Typology of International Scholarship Programs in Higher Education. Education-

al Researcher, 20(10), 1–11.

Planning Commission. (2002). Tenth ve year plan 2002-2007. Retrieved from http://planningcommission.nic.

in/plans/planrel/veyr/10th/10defaultchap.htm

Planning Commission. (2013). Twelfth ve year plan (2012-2017). Faster, more inclusive and sustainable

growth. Sage Publications. Retrieved from http://planningcommission.gov.in/plans/planrel/12thplan/

pdf/12fyp_vol1.pdf

Proctor, D. & Rumbley L.E. (2018). The future agenda for internationalization in higher education, next gener-

ation insights into research, policy, and practice. London and New York: Routledge.

Radwan, M.M. (2016). Arab Republic of Egypt. In Lai, Y.M., Ahmed, A.R., & Wan, C.D. (Eds.), Higher Education in

the Middle East and North Africa: Exploring regional and country speciﬁc potential. Singapore: Springer.

República de Ecuador. Consejo Nacional de Planicacion. (2017). Toda una vida. Plan nacional de desarrollo.

Retrieved from http://www.planicacion.gob.ec/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2017/10/PNBV-26-

OCT-FINAL_0K.compressed1.pdf

Rodríguez Mega, E. (July 21, 2017). Plans for a research powerhouse in the Andes begin to unravel. Science.

Retrieved from http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/07/

plans-research-powerhouse-andes-begin-unravel

Saavedra, F. M. (2012). Higher education reform in Ecuador and its eect on university governance. In H. G.

Schuetze, W. Bruneau, & G. Grosjean (Eds.) University Governance and Reform (pp. 161-175). New York:

Palgrave Macmillan.

Samy, D., & Elshayeb, Y. (2017). Egypt: Overview of the Higher Education System. Brussels: Education, Audio-

visual and Culture Executive Agency (EACEA) European Union

Sawahel, W. (2015, January 30). Egypt: Regional hub planned to lure African and Ara b students. University

World News, Issue No. 352. Retrieved from http://www.universityworldnews.com/article.

php?story=20150129144945725

Sawahel, W. (2016, November 18). Egypt: Ministry launches higher education and research strategy. Universi-

ty World News, Africa Edition, Issue No. 185. Retrieved from http://www.universityworldnews.com/arti-

cle.php?story=20161117051333618

Secretaría de Educación Superior, Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación [Ecuador]. (2016). Proyecto Prometeo im-

pulsa la transferencia de conocimiento cientíco en Ecuador. Retrieved from http://prometeo.educa-

cionsuperior.gob.ec/

proyecto-prometeo-impulsa-la-transferencia-de-conocimiento-cientico-en-ecuador/

Schomaker, R. (2015). Accreditation and quality assurance in the Egyptian higher education system. Quality

Assurance in Education, 23(2), 149-165.

Singh, P. (2017). Foreign university bill: Overview and analysis. Journal of Mass Communication & Journalism,

international mapping of nteisps

7(1), 328-332.

Sohail, M. S., & Saeed, M. (2003). Private higher education in Malaysia: students’ satisfaction levels and strate-

gic implications. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 25(2), 173-181.

Stallivieri, L. (2015, May 31). Brazil’s Science Without Borders Program. Inside Higher Education. Retrieved from

https://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/world-view/brazils-science-without-borders-program

Stanek, C. (2013). The Educational System of Brazil. IEM Spotlight, 10(1–6).

Statista. (2018). Number of undergraduate students enrolled in universities and other higher education insti-

tutions in Brazil from 2005 to 2016. Retrieved August 30, 2018, from https://www.statista.com/statis-

tics/705795/university-enrollment-brazil/

Statistics Estonia. (2018a). Enrolment in formal education by type and level of education, years. Retrieved

June 8, 2018, from https://www.stat.ee/58103

Statistics Estonia. (2018b). Foreign students in higher education.

Statistics Estonia. (2018c). Higher educational institutions by type of institution, years.

Tamrat, W., & Teferra, D. (2018). Disparities and Parallels in Internationalization: The Ethiopian Experience. In-

ternational Higher Education, 92, 17-19.

Tamtik, M., & Kirss, L. (2016). Building a Norm of Internationalization: The Case of Estonia’s Higher Education

System. Journal of Studies in International Education, 20(2), 164–183.

Tamtik, M., Kirss, L., Beerkens, M., & Kaarma, R. (2011). Evaluation of the internationalisation strategy. Tallinn,

Estonia: Praxis.

Tan, J. (Fall, 2016). Singapore’s “global schoolhouse” aspirations. International Higher Education, (87), 9-10.

Retrieved from https://ejournals.bc.edu/ojs/index.php/ihe/article/view/9501

Trahar, S. (2014). ‘This is Malaysia. You have to follow the custom here’: Narratives of the student and academic

experience in international higher education in Malaysia. Journal of Education for Teaching, 40(3),

217-231.

Transitional Government of Ethiopia. (1994). National Education and Training Policy. Addis Ababa: St George

Press.

UNESCO, & Government of India. (2014). Status of international students in India for higher education. Re-

trieved from http://mhrd.gov.in/sites/upload_les/mhrd/les/statistics/FSI2014_0.pdf

UNHCR Ethiopia (2017, December). UNHCR Ethiopia: Education fact sheet. Available at: https://reliefweb.int/

sites/reliefweb.int/les/resources/UNHCR%20Ethiopia%20Education-December%202017.pdf

Van Hoof, H. B., Estrella, M., Eljuri, M. I., & León, L. T. (2013). Ecuador’s higher education system in times of

change. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 12(4), 345-355.

Van Hoof, H. B. (2015). Ecuador’s eorts to raise its research prole: The Prometeo program case study. Journal

of Hispanic Higher Education, 14(1), 56-68.

Vélez, J. (2018). Internationalization of Higher Education in Colombia: From Fragmentation to a Comprehen-

sive Policy. In R. M. Helms, L. E. Rumbley and L. Brajkovic (Eds.), Mapping Internationalization Globally:

National Proﬁles and Perspectives (pp. 11- 14). International Briefs for Higher Education Leaders No. 7.

American Council on Education & The Boston College Center for International Higher Education.

Vidovich, L. (2004). Towards internationalizing the curriculum in a context of globalization: Comparing policy

processes in two settings. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 34(4),

center for international higher education | perspectives no. 12

443-461.

Waring, P. (2014). Singapore’s global schoolhouse strategy: retreat or recalibration? Studies in Higher Educa-

tion, 39(5), 874-884.

World Bank. (2019). World Bank Open Data: Education Statistics. Retrieved from: https://data.worldbank.org

World Bank. (2017). The World Bank in Ecuador. Retrieved from http://www.worldbank.org/en/country/ecua-

dor/overview

Yeravdekar, V.R., and de wit, H. (2018). Increase international students: India’s initiative. The World View, Inside

higher Education, July 2, 2018. Available at: https://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/world-view/

increase-international-students-india%E2%80%99s-initiative?utm_source=Inside+Higher+Ed&utm_

campaign=5d9e52cd28-DNU_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_1fc-

bc04421-5d9e52cd28-197561345&mc_cid=5d9e52cd28&mc_eid=5f6848e8fc

Yeravdekar, V. R., & Tiwari, G. (2014). China’s lead in higher education: Much to learn for India. Procedia-Social

and Behavioral Sciences, 157, 369-372.

international mapping of nteisps

center for international higher education | perspectives no. 12

international mapping of nteisps

Center for International

Higher Education

Campion Hall, Boston College

Chestnut Hill, MA 02467 USA

Tel: +1 (617) 552-4236

Fax: +1 (617) 552-8422

E-mail: [email protected]

web: www.bc.edu/cihe

CIHE Perspectives