Comparative Higher Education: Knowledge, the University, and Development
Altbach, Philip. (1998). Greenwich, CT: Ablex Publishing.
The university has been always a global institution since the medieval period (all the modern universities stem from the European model in the medieval epoch and the universities in the medieval were more international and taught in Latin students all around Europe until nationalism swept around the continent in the 19th century. p. xviii), and now with the global economy and communication technology advance, increasing internationalism among universities has become a main operating engine of knowledge based society and created an international knowledge system. (However, access to knowledge is limited by the availability of resources, such as books and the Internet.) Market forces--ideas are as important as products--of the institutions of industrialized nations and local demands--academic degrees from the 'center' is useful at the 'periphery'-- of developing nations have pushed greater internationalism in higher education in the 20th century (pp. xvii-xxvi).
An international knowledge network, which includes research institution, dissemination and circulation of personnel, shows great inequality. Most scientific journals are published in English and information is shared in English. Massive circulation of scholars and students worldwide is carried on largely one-way direction and impacts on transfer of knowledge. Under the reforms of higher education, curricular vocationalism and student consumerism are tied to the worldwide trend of the increase of close relationship between universities and industry. (In Sweden, industry representatives are part of university governing councils and in the U.S., corporations and universities make formal contracts in regard to research result. In many countries, corporations provide higher education opportunities to their employees.) With introduction of new technology means, rapid knowledge dissemination is made possible, while questions regarding control, ownership, maintenance, etc. remain to be explored. Even in the new technology era, the major Western knowledge producers still remain as a 'cartel of information' (p.16), dominating both knowledge production and distribution channels (p.3-18). [journals, distribution pattern need to be explored.]
Influence from colonialism-colonial powers did not or partially built higher education system in colonized nations except that the U.S. promoted higher ed system in Philippines- and continuing neocolonialism--perpetuating dominance over the Third World--has not changed much of the unequal structure of international higher ed system. The author analyzes the structure by borrowing the concept of center-periphery from colonialism such that intellectual centers produce knowledge at the frontier while peripherals 'copy' the development. The peripheral institutions in the TW are mediators between the two worlds and distributors of knowledge. Thus, although they are peripheral in the international system, they play a key role in their nations by providing training, producing applied knowledge dissemination, and promoting social mobility while getting little state support for internationalization. (Compare with German's state support to build strong higher education.) Main factors to resist changes in the inequlity are lack of funds/resources--even in the U.S. 80% federal government funds go to the top one hunders universities (p.21) and as knowledge gets more sophisticated, the gaps increase--and language barrier. Most academic discussions and publications are done in English and some French. In addition, the infrastructure/means of communication of knowledge, such as journals, publishers, libraries, are in the Western countries. There are few outlets of the TW scholars' contribution and for international exposure they prefer those Western publications. Thus, the control of communication means maintain the orientation of the international knowledge system. Some assert independence of the TW on the industrialized nations thanks to technology advance, but because of limited control/access to infrastructure such as Internet and computer networks--most of them are controlled by the industrialized nations--this expectations cannot be met easily.[What about Korea? In spite of fairly solid infrastructure of computer network, the depenence on the U.S. knowledge system is ever increasing. The infrastructure may even enlarge the dependecy.](pp. 19-36) [To measure the transfer of knowledge, two things need to measured to begin with: control of communication/distribution of knowledge--significant journals, comparison of journal distribution rates, publishers' locations--the number of foreign students--scholarship/fellowhship recepients/kinds--inter-institutional financial aids, and branch operations and so forth.]
After the colonial period, currently Asian universities have tried to adopt their indigenous languages in their higher education system and negotiate the values and the structure to localize the education system. However, American academic system is still a de facto world model toward which most Asia nations voluntarily 'gravitate' because most Asian intellectuals and researchers have been trained in the U.S. and the American system is more democratic than the other systems and has regarded as successfully grown toward both a strong research orientation and a mass higher education system. Even though many institutions in Asia has shifted the language from European to indigeneous, English is pervasive and controls the academic culture. More than half of the scholarly journals are published in English and most databases are maintained in English. A majority of foreign students study in English-speaking country. [This language tie contribute to the complexity of independent/localized higher education development in Asia. Especially in the age of globalization, the language shift has become reverse. English is promoted in many curriculum, as seen in global MBA.] (pp.37-54)
*Statistic sources: UNESCO Statistic yearbook, Todd Davis (NY: Institute of International Education)
Knowledge transfer is traced through students/scholars international migration. Doctoral dissertations are tailored by the hosting universities, knowledge gained abroad is retained in research agenda and curriculum in their native nations, and knowledge transfer continues subtly through journal publications and working relationship with the foreign universities. Foreign scholars, whose activities are not yet much explored, also show distinctive patterns in terms of transfer of knowledge. While scholars from the TW are likely influenced by the hosting academic institution, scholars from the industrialized nations are not in general. Also half of forein scholars are in the U.S. [Fullbright fellowship research shows that scholars from industrialized nations spend shorter period time in the TW mainly for teaching and conducting research on their own, scholars from the TW spend longer in the U.S. for heling curriculum development--more likely to be in the form of a direct appointment from the hosting institutions.] Policies of sending nations need to be explored, as seen in China which began to stop support foreign study recently some years after their support, which has been caused by brain drain problem. Statistics also show that one-third of foreign students in the U.S. are from industrialized nations and less than 1% of undergrad students study abroad and fewer than 10% of U.S. overseas students stuied in the TW. [Find more recent statistics! Probably there might be more U.S. overseas students in the context of globalization to obtain local knowledge. But the locations might be still very limited. ]
The university has been always a global institution since the medieval period (all the modern universities stem from the European model in the medieval epoch and the universities in the medieval were more international and taught in Latin students all around Europe until nationalism swept around the continent in the 19th century. p. xviii), and now with the global economy and communication technology advance, increasing internationalism among universities has become a main operating engine of knowledge based society and created an international knowledge system. (However, access to knowledge is limited by the availability of resources, such as books and the Internet.) Market forces--ideas are as important as products--of the institutions of industrialized nations and local demands--academic degrees from the 'center' is useful at the 'periphery'-- of developing nations have pushed greater internationalism in higher education in the 20th century (pp. xvii-xxvi).
An international knowledge network, which includes research institution, dissemination and circulation of personnel, shows great inequality. Most scientific journals are published in English and information is shared in English. Massive circulation of scholars and students worldwide is carried on largely one-way direction and impacts on transfer of knowledge. Under the reforms of higher education, curricular vocationalism and student consumerism are tied to the worldwide trend of the increase of close relationship between universities and industry. (In Sweden, industry representatives are part of university governing councils and in the U.S., corporations and universities make formal contracts in regard to research result. In many countries, corporations provide higher education opportunities to their employees.) With introduction of new technology means, rapid knowledge dissemination is made possible, while questions regarding control, ownership, maintenance, etc. remain to be explored. Even in the new technology era, the major Western knowledge producers still remain as a 'cartel of information' (p.16), dominating both knowledge production and distribution channels (p.3-18). [journals, distribution pattern need to be explored.]
Influence from colonialism-colonial powers did not or partially built higher education system in colonized nations except that the U.S. promoted higher ed system in Philippines- and continuing neocolonialism--perpetuating dominance over the Third World--has not changed much of the unequal structure of international higher ed system. The author analyzes the structure by borrowing the concept of center-periphery from colonialism such that intellectual centers produce knowledge at the frontier while peripherals 'copy' the development. The peripheral institutions in the TW are mediators between the two worlds and distributors of knowledge. Thus, although they are peripheral in the international system, they play a key role in their nations by providing training, producing applied knowledge dissemination, and promoting social mobility while getting little state support for internationalization. (Compare with German's state support to build strong higher education.) Main factors to resist changes in the inequlity are lack of funds/resources--even in the U.S. 80% federal government funds go to the top one hunders universities (p.21) and as knowledge gets more sophisticated, the gaps increase--and language barrier. Most academic discussions and publications are done in English and some French. In addition, the infrastructure/means of communication of knowledge, such as journals, publishers, libraries, are in the Western countries. There are few outlets of the TW scholars' contribution and for international exposure they prefer those Western publications. Thus, the control of communication means maintain the orientation of the international knowledge system. Some assert independence of the TW on the industrialized nations thanks to technology advance, but because of limited control/access to infrastructure such as Internet and computer networks--most of them are controlled by the industrialized nations--this expectations cannot be met easily.[What about Korea? In spite of fairly solid infrastructure of computer network, the depenence on the U.S. knowledge system is ever increasing. The infrastructure may even enlarge the dependecy.](pp. 19-36) [To measure the transfer of knowledge, two things need to measured to begin with: control of communication/distribution of knowledge--significant journals, comparison of journal distribution rates, publishers' locations--the number of foreign students--scholarship/fellowhship recepients/kinds--inter-institutional financial aids, and branch operations and so forth.]
After the colonial period, currently Asian universities have tried to adopt their indigenous languages in their higher education system and negotiate the values and the structure to localize the education system. However, American academic system is still a de facto world model toward which most Asia nations voluntarily 'gravitate' because most Asian intellectuals and researchers have been trained in the U.S. and the American system is more democratic than the other systems and has regarded as successfully grown toward both a strong research orientation and a mass higher education system. Even though many institutions in Asia has shifted the language from European to indigeneous, English is pervasive and controls the academic culture. More than half of the scholarly journals are published in English and most databases are maintained in English. A majority of foreign students study in English-speaking country. [This language tie contribute to the complexity of independent/localized higher education development in Asia. Especially in the age of globalization, the language shift has become reverse. English is promoted in many curriculum, as seen in global MBA.] (pp.37-54)
*Statistic sources: UNESCO Statistic yearbook, Todd Davis (NY: Institute of International Education)
Knowledge transfer is traced through students/scholars international migration. Doctoral dissertations are tailored by the hosting universities, knowledge gained abroad is retained in research agenda and curriculum in their native nations, and knowledge transfer continues subtly through journal publications and working relationship with the foreign universities. Foreign scholars, whose activities are not yet much explored, also show distinctive patterns in terms of transfer of knowledge. While scholars from the TW are likely influenced by the hosting academic institution, scholars from the industrialized nations are not in general. Also half of forein scholars are in the U.S. [Fullbright fellowship research shows that scholars from industrialized nations spend shorter period time in the TW mainly for teaching and conducting research on their own, scholars from the TW spend longer in the U.S. for heling curriculum development--more likely to be in the form of a direct appointment from the hosting institutions.] Policies of sending nations need to be explored, as seen in China which began to stop support foreign study recently some years after their support, which has been caused by brain drain problem. Statistics also show that one-third of foreign students in the U.S. are from industrialized nations and less than 1% of undergrad students study abroad and fewer than 10% of U.S. overseas students stuied in the TW. [Find more recent statistics! Probably there might be more U.S. overseas students in the context of globalization to obtain local knowledge. But the locations might be still very limited. ]
Comments