Author: Santiago Castiello

PhD Student in HigherEd @UofA... Passionate about Internationalization of HigherEd, Innovation, Technology and Art.
Posted on

Indigenous and Tribal Nation scientists and universities

By Elizabeth A. Sumida Huaman and Stephen J. Smith

In 1999, Māori scholar, Linda T. Smith, challenged what she called the “mystical, misty-eyed discourse” surrounding the way that Indigenous relationships with land are often characterized. She argued that while knowledge of land was spiritual, it was also empirical: “I believe that our survival as peoples has come from our knowledge of our contexts, our environment, not from some active beneficence of our Earth Mother. We had to know to survive…We still have to do these things” (pp. 12– 13, our emphasis).

We are a biologist (Smith) and Indigenous Studies researcher (Sumida Huaman) whose environmental work is guided by Tribal Nations and Indigenous communities1 and institutions in North and South America. Our research strives to contribute data to Indigenous self-determination, and alongside community members, we use science and educational research towards protection of our lands. We believe that Indigenous-directed scientific efforts demonstrate the vitality of Indigenous Nations as key environmental leaders and contributors, yet Indigenous peoples are not guaranteed opportunities to contribute meaningfully to environmental studies, even on their own lands. Thus, underlying our work is the need to rectify Tribal peoples’ lack of access to STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics), including learning and training, tools and resources, and leadership, which we see as necessary in Tribal and Indigenous efforts to preserve, protect, and defend land and life today.

Significance of Indigenous Peoples in STEM

Over recent decades, educators have pursued solutions to STEM inequities for Indigenous peoples, and the resulting approaches depend on where interventions are directed. Our approach includes Tribal and Indigenous graduate students, including Tribal College and University students and STEM latecomers who did not have robust learning experiences as children but who seek them as older students. In our experience, Tribal and Indigenous adults are important connectors to past generations and influencers for current ones.

However, in the U.S. alone in 2022, American Indians and Alaska Natives earned 0.17% of STEM master’s degrees and 0.13% of STEM doctoral degrees, while white and international students earned 84% and 89%, respectively, of all STEM graduate degrees. Over the last decade, while other racialized groups in the U.S. show increased STEM graduate degree numbers, the total number American Indian and Alaska Native (and Pacific Islander)—extremely small to begin with—has declined. For example, in 2012, American Indians and Alaska Natives earned 59 STEM doctoral degrees, and in 2022, they earned 39 (see National Center for Education Statistics, 2023).

Behind these numbers are stories of what is lost or gained when Tribal Nation and Indigenous students lead environmental solutions for their own and other communities. As global environmental shift accelerates, the stakes are higher for Tribal Nations and Indigenous communities racing to understand what is happening while developing policy, curbing local impacts, and amassing evidence to effectively participate in environmental debates and advocacy.

Universities are incredible spaces of learning where students gain knowledge and tools to solve environmental, social, health, and other problems. However, they have also been historically very difficult for Tribal and Indigenous students to access, resulting in misses for our lands and peoples, which we feel intimately: While we work in the university, we are from families and communities that safeguard the places we call home but who need support to continue doing so. Ongoing marginalization is a missed opportunity for broader impact: Indigenous scientists with strong connections to their communities see problems differently because they know their lands very well. They strive to care for those places long after university research projects and federal funding end.

Indigenous Scientific Development and Violence by Reduction

We currently collaborate on research planning with the American Indian Higher Education Consortium (AIHEC), which represents the 36 Tribal Colleges in the U.S. While the history of higher education writ large reveals failures to Tribal Nations, from land grabs to ethical research violations, what we do next together is crucial, especially as Indigenous relationships with land are increasingly challenged by contamination, extraction, and development.

We assert that as First Peoples and original rights-holders, Tribal Nations have the educational right to learn about these problems and how to counter them through science. We are also aware that education at all levels stands as an untrustworthy institution: Indigenous peoples across the Americas have experienced the weaponization of schooling by state, secular, and private agencies. However, over the last 50 years, Indigenous-led education as an outcome of Indigenous self-determination has gained traction across the Americas. In other words, alternative ways to do education can lead to building a critical mass of conscientious Indigenous and Tribal Nation scientists, including those who wish to serve our homelands. Yet the road to authentically reaching this goal, together, requires institutional introspection—identifying the ways that institutions and states benefit from Indigenous lands, confronting dominant resistance to Indigenous self-determination, and examining institutional norms that perpetuate structural violence.

Our aim is not to paint universities broadly as structurally violent entities. Universities do many good things with Tribal Nations and Indigenous communities, but we also wish for institutional stakeholders to understand that the scarcity of Tribal Nation scientists is not an Indigenous capabilities or preparation-only concern but an outcome of violence. Salmi’s (2000) typology of violence describes violence as direct and indirect. Although Indigenous communities and Tribal Nations have faced well-documented direct violence (deliberate injury to the integrity of human life), we build our educational argument from indirect violence (indirect violation of the right to survival), including violence by omission (lack of protection against poverty, hunger, disease, accidents, and natural catastrophes) and mediated violence (harmful violations to the environment making conditions for human life extremely difficult). We draw from Salmi’s (2000) definition of repressive violence—deprivation of fundamental rights (i.e., civil, political, and social)—and alienating violence, deprivation of higher rights that produce racism, ostracism, cultural repression, and living in fear. To this typology, we add violence by reduction and diminishment. The reality of Indigenous peoples is the cyclical encounter with direct and indirect violence. Within this cycle, educational access is not a privilege; it is the right to gain the tools to exit it. Thus, denial of the possibility to access the skills that scientific training offers forecloses Indigenous abilities to fully respond to environmental threats, mitigate damage and heal from it, and facilitate the caring and resilience of their own lands and more than human relations. Violence by reduction and diminishment is the denial of the skills and knowledges required by Indigenous peoples to craft healthy ecological futures.

Raiding Together

Of the educational needs identified by Tribal Nation and Indigenous leadership is capacity to lead care of land (stewarding minerals, trees, water, soil, plants, animals, birds, insects, air, etc.) and care of people. Higher education is a powerful way to meet these needs but is seen as a privilege or luxury (as opposed to the right to elementary education). However, when Tribal Nation and Indigenous community members make it into STEM, they do so for reasons that challenge their presence in universities as individual beneficiaries of privilege. Tribal and Indigenous students raised on their lands or closely connected through land-based activities have ongoing commitments to family, community, Nation, and land. Apache scholar Philip Stevens links these commitments to higher education through “academic raiding,” or how Tribal and Indigenous students make sense “of the world around them with the intent of bringing it [knowledge from elsewhere] home” (Anthony-Stevens et al., 2017, p. 26). Effective student advocacy means learning their stories over time, respecting their raiding, and appreciating to whom and why their presence in STEM and university programs matters. Such relationships are not genuine if adopted to diversify university-based research, perform goodwill, or assuage individual or institutional guilt. Allies who sympathize with Tribal and Indigenous long-term goals will instead seek to understand students’ mental models of what it means to go home, to places that are complex but also unique sites of regeneration and restoration. Therefore, we encourage educators to co-develop with their students a shared baseline regarding land and Tribal values that is holistic and inclusive, with the land itself—perhaps an ethic, set of principles, or key commitments.

However, intentions alone will be insufficient. At many universities, thoughtful people work to learn better ways of serving Tribes. But as federal policies and interests shift, and in moments of duress, we ask if the good people will preserve and grow nascent relationships with Tribal Nations and Indigenous communities, even as they seek protection for themselves and their work. Without a shared baseline, answers cannot be dialogic, and university allies and Tribes risk mutual isolation and conditional good intentions rather than rooted ones. From our point of view, Indigenous appeals to the university for visibility, representation, or rights are not effective. Tribal and Indigenous researchers cannot be dependent on others to save or stand by us, so we stay inward with Tribal Nations and Indigenous communities and our students, we seek knowledge-based alternatives that celebrate agency and resourcefulness, and we cautiously open our hearts to allies.

We share our commitment to a unified baseline of valuing Tribal lands and all that they touch as a call to collective learning and building a global community of Tribal Nation and Indigenous advocates in restrictive and abundant times. Education at its best is by nature reflexive and limber. As its processes and structures are tested, Tribal Nation and Indigenous would-be scientists in different learning spaces are envisioning healthy environmental futures for their lands and people, and university STEM faculty and leaders consider the future of science. Both need each other, and both are strongest together.

Note: This article is based on a joint talk that was provided for the “Repurposing Universities for the Climate & Nature Emergency” (February 2025), hosted by the UBC Faculty of Education Professor Climate Complexity and Coloniality. We offer special thanks to Dr. Sharon Stein for the opportunity to share our work, and we are deeply grateful to the American Indian Higher Education Consortium, the Spencer Foundation, and to colleagues in the College of Food, Agricultural and Natural Resource Sciences, College of Science & Engineering, College of Biological Sciences, College of Liberal Arts, and College of Education and Human Development at the University of Minnesota.

1 We keep Tribal Nations and Indigenous communities distinct throughout this article. Tribal Nations and Tribal Nation students refer to U.S. federal government treaty-based relationships with federally-recognized Tribes. Descriptors like “Indigenous communities” and “Indigenous students” constitute a very broad way of speaking about Indigenous and autochthonous peoples worldwide, including Tribal Nations and their members and others who are explicitly recognized by their national governments as Indigenous. However, “Indigenous” in this article is a convenient paraphrasing for discussing non-Tribal Nation Indigenous peoples.

REFERENCES

Anthony-Stevens, V., Stevens, P., & Nicholas, S. (2017). Raiding and alliances: Indigenous educational sovereignty as social justice. Journal of Critical Thought and Praxis, 6(1).

Salmi, J. (2000). Violence, democracy and education: An analytical framework. LCSHD Paper, 56.

Smith, L.T. (2012). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and indigenous peoples, Second Edition. Zed Books.

ABOUT THE AUTHORS

Elizabeth A. Sumida Huaman is Wanka/Quechua from the Mantaro Valley, Peru. She is Professor in the College of Education of Human Development and Chair of the Department of American Indian Studies at the University of Minnesota. She conducts critical and participatory Indigenous land-based studies with Indigenous communities towards environmental learning interventions. Her recent projects include co-developing ethical guidelines for weather systems research with agrarian communities and documenting water stories and networks across the Andes in Peru and Ecuador.

Stephen J. Smith was raised on the Leech Lake Reservation and is an enrolled citizen of the White Earth Tribal Nation. He was a lab scientist for Minnesota Chippewas Tribe, later leading the lab, before teaching STEM courses at the Leech Lake Tribal College. He is currently completing a Ph.D. in Conservation Biology at the University of Minnesota. He conducts ecological studies with Tribal Nations and Indigenous communities and specializes in limnology and aquatic invasive plants. His current fieldwork addresses how the invasive Starry Stonewort (Nitellopsis obtusa) competes with the native grass and sacred food to the Ojibwe or Manoomin (Zizania palustrus) under rapidly changing weather systems.

Posted on

Hive of Cardi A.: Think Bigger, Move Smarter, Stay Spicy During Destructive Distractions

Written by Abu Arif

The world feels like it’s unraveling. And I’m not just referring to the surge of radical-right populism, the progressive left’s fractured credibility, or the power of black sharpie – that a signature can displace people from their land and living. The planet is also burning, melting, flooding, and shaking, all while politicians of every stripe—from right to left, and every direction in between—lock horns in power struggles. None of this is entirely new, but what is new is watching it play out live, right before our eyes.

So, in this grim reality—how does one sustain themselves? How does one nourish themselves without feeling guilty or becoming a narcissist? How does one navigate these pendulum shifts in the absence of relational transformation?

In this essay, I argue that cultivating joy is part of the answer. Enter: Cardi A.

Joy, in many ways, is a radical act of refusal. It is the deliberate choice to center what matters, define your own lane, and think bigger than the systems designed to contain you. Joy is not accepting whatever thrown at you; it is determination to remain whole while the destructive politics try to distract you.

Cardi A is an archetype I created to embody a collective—a hive—that, despite life’s inevitable messiness, continues weaving alternative possibilities. At this moment, my Cardi A is navigating a thorny landscape armed with Sam Altman’s audacity, Cardi B’s unapologetic confidence, Kakali Bhattacharya’s intellectual gravitas with playfulness, Maya Angelou’s poetic resilience, and Muhammad Ali’s strategic brilliance.

Although I highlight five inspirations in this essay, they do not define us. They offer guidance but are not a cure-all for our challenges, and they are human, not divine avatars. In our imaginary hive, no two members are alike. What unites us is a shared refusal to shrink and a steadfast commitment to flourish—each member brings their own source of inspiration, diversifying our collective tapestry of inspiration.

The Ingredients of Joyful Defiance

1. Sam Altman: Think Big, Build Bigger

Yes, I start with a white man—because his recent response to Elon Musk brought me immense joy. Yes, I know all the terrible decisions he is making – but that is part of the point. 

Altman comes to mind when I think about not wasting energy fighting every battle. He represents the kind of mind that focuses on building systems that make old battles irrelevant. When Sam Altman was removed from OpenAI, he didn’t spiral—he stayed calm, let the chaos unfold, and emerged stronger than before. The lesson? When you stay focused on the bigger picture, small distractions lose their power over you.

Cardi A. knows they are not a member of the Justice League—they are a body with a beautiful and brilliant mind, working to make higher education a little more just. They understand their sphere of influence and know they must preserve and nurture their energy for where it truly matters. They don’t let the politics of destruction distract them from the work they are meant to do.

If you’re too busy wondering what that Black Sharpie will sign next, when will you write your own poem? Cardi A. knows they are not responsible for solving every problem in the world. They trust that there are people who will fight and win battles they don’t have to. And when Cardi A. believes they are the solution of a problem – they give their best to solve it.

2. Cardi B: Own Your Power, Be Unapologetic

Joy is in authenticity. Cardi B never wastes time convincing critics of her worth—she lets her success speak for itself. She owns her power without apology, whether people respect it or not. I chose to name our hive “Cardi A” because it’s rooted in our own life stories and reflects what Cardi B stands for: navigating the complicated terrain with joyful defiance, choosing self-expression over self-censorship. I know it’s a stretch—but sometimes we have to walk a long way to make that connection.

EEEEEOOOOOWW!!

Yes, Cardi A. is spicy. They realize they are not for everyone—and that’s okay. Seeking universal acceptance is a recipe for losing yourself. The world will always have opinions about you—your background, your accent, your choices. Cardi A. does not let any of that dictate their path. They speak their truth even when the grammar is imperfect—because impact matters more than polish.

Being unapologetic does not mean being cruel. It does not mean refusing to reflect or listen. It means knowing when feedback builds you up—and when it’s just noise. For example, when someone gives you feedback on your laugh and how it makes a white man uncomfortable (yes, it has happened to the author), while also teaching you the difference between thinking and feeling (yes, she did that too)—it’s up to you what you take in and what you discard.

Ps. Profaning is a research practise and methodology.

3. Kakali Bhattacharya: Joy as Intellectual Gravitas with Playfulness

Joy is in knowing there is no space of purity. The academy is designed to police knowledge—who gets to create it, whose voices are amplified, whose ways of knowing are deemed “legitimate.” Dr. Kakali Bhattacharya (here after referred as Queen B) refuses to play by those rules. She carves out space for de/colonial scholarship. She asks us to be audacious and dream about utopian (im)/possibilities while recognizing there is no place of purity. At best, we can hope not repeating the same mistake. Queen B brings intellectual gravitas with playfulness when she draws on Sukumar Ray’s HaJaBaRaLa to explore the subversive power of nonsense and play in decolonial thought—offering joy amid colonial trauma. The same Queen B theorized the Par/desi de/colonial onto-epistemological framework – challenging Desi people to critically reflect on the ways we have absorbed colonial narratives.

Cardi A. chooses to live by reducing suffering where they can, staying in their lane, influencing their sphere, and creating scholarship that heals.

Inspired by Queen B, I invite you to consider withdrawing yourself from the discourse of purity—without erasing the voices of suffering. The world has always been oppressive, and the world will always find ways to marginalize others. Sounds depressing, right? So, balance that thought with this one—there is no center without the margin. The center exists because there is a margin. Without the margin – centre is only a dot.

4. Still I Rise – Maya Angelou: Joy is the Ultimate Rebellion

“You may write me down in history / With your bitter, twisted lies…”

Maya Angelou’s Still I Rise is a masterclass in joyful defiance. It reminds us that rising isn’t just about survival—it’s about thriving in full color. Laughing, loving, creating in the face of oppression. She also teaches us how to keep your sacred space continue flourishing

Cardi A. does not ignore suffering. They pay close attention to pain with humility and a promise to do better. If we let pain define us, we become our oppressor’s story. And if you become your oppressor’s story, what happens to yours?

Untold? Unheard?

Don’t let the oppressor’s water wagon dim your light. Put melody to your poems and sing your song as loud as it feels good. Cardi A. leans on our ancestor’s knowledge of resistance, suffering and blossoming. Cancelling them in the name of modernity or worshiping them in the name of honoring – both are foolish to Cardi A. Humans are complex being – so are our leaders, neighbours, grandparents – why choosing single color to paint them?

5. Muhammad Ali: Play the Long Game, Stay Light on Your Feet

Joy is strategy. I know! I know! The word strategy is traumatizing for many in higher education – but stay with me.

Muhammad Ali knew how to read the fight, when to punch, when to lean back, when to dance. He understood that power is not just about strength—it’s about knowing when to engage and when to let your opponent exhaust themselves.

Cardi A. knows cultivating joy means knowing where to place your energy. Some fights are necessary; others are distractions. Joy is not about letting everything slide—it’s about choosing your battles wisely.

As they say: “Float like a butterfly, sting like a bee, and never let them pull you into fights that drain your brilliance.”

Joy as Endurance: How Cardi A. Refuels

Joy is not just an act of resistance—it is a practice of sustainability. The world will try to wear you down. Systems of oppression don’t just attack your work; they attack your energy, your hope, your belief that change is possible.

So how does Cardi A. keep going? By treating joy as a renewable resource.

  • By surrounding themselves with their people: Joy is not a solo project. Although sometimes you may wish to be left alone. Cardi A. surrounds themselves with people who remind them why they started in the first place. And show them the door when they need the silence.
  • Through rituals: Whether it’s music, movement, meditation, ethical sex, or mindless reality TV—joy needs space to exist outside of work. Make joy as a ritual – however way it is coming to you, practise it.
  • Through laughter: Because nothing enrages oppressive systems more than seeing you unbothered. But hey—you don’t have to laugh when you don’t feel like laughing just to bother the oppressor. Sometimes, frowning is the way to go.

Be Your Own Cardi A

Somewhere I read that joy isn’t just a fleeting feeling—it’s a discipline. So go ahead, share your discipline in the comments. And if today feels like one of those days where you don’t quite know how to access joy, I have a prescription: open a new tab, blast your favorite dance mix, and dance, baby. Just dance.

Love,

Arif

Posted on

Australia’s International Education Policy Reform: Implications for Study Abroad and Working Holiday Pathways for Japanese Students

By Yuka Jibiki

Australia is an important international education provider, especially to its Asian neighbors, known for its quality education, English learning opportunities, and attractive work permits (Tsukamoto, 2009). Between 2023 and 2025, 71.5% of Australia’s international students were from Asian countries (Department of Education 2023). However, since early summer 2024, Australia has implemented dramatic changes in its international education policies that may significantly impact the global student community. 

In December 2023, the Department of Home Affairs announced that the Genuine Temporary Entrant (GTE) requirement for student visas would be replaced by a Genuine Student (GS) requirement after March 23, 2024. Under the new requirement, visa applicants must explain their reasons for choosing a specific course and provider in Australia, allowing better screening of applicants with non-study intentions (Department of Home Affairs, 2024a; 2024b). In July 2024, the government doubled student visa fees from 710 Australian dollars (AUD) to 1,600 AUD (Nikkei Asia, 2024) and planned to limit international student enrollment through an international student cap called the National Planning Level (NPL) for 2025 admissions (Packer, 2024; Study Australia, 2024). 

The policy limiting international student numbers has shocked the international education industry. This could impact the enrollment of Asian international students, who formed a substantial portion of the international student body in Australia. Meanwhile, Canada, another highly popular destination for international students, has taken similar steps. In January 2024, the Canadian government set up a temporary, two-year international student cap to deliver quality education and to improve its student visa programme (Brunner & Cervantes-Macías, 2025; ICEF Monitor, 2024). 

This paper explores how recent changes in Australia’s international education policy have impacted Japanese students’ study abroad. As a practitioner at a Japanese university overseeing study abroad programs in Australia, I have seen how the change, particularly the rise in visa fees, has startled faculty, administrators, students, and families. While the discussion centers on Japanese students, the issues explored here, including rising visa fees and shifts in student mobility, carry implications for policymakers, scholars, and practitioners worldwide.  

Australia witnessed a rapid increase in foreign students after the COVID-19 pandemic suspended outbound travel. It has been one of the most popular choices for international students, including Japanese students, thanks to its geographic proximity, relatively affordable airfare, and well-known working holiday program. In this post-COVID era, Japanese students are eagerly pursuing “revenge” study abroad, an opportunity to reclaim study, work, or living abroad experiences they missed during the pandemic. In 2023, about 10,000 students from Japan studied in Australia, which ranked 16th, accounting for one percent of all international students there (Department of Education, 2023; Department of Home Affairs, 2023). 

International education functions not only as an academic exchange but also as a vital economic sector. Tuition paid by international students in 2022 accounted for 25% of public university revenue. Their economic impact is estimated at more than 30 billion AUD annually (Nikkei Asia, 2024). International education income is a critical financial source “to bridge funding gaps for domestic health education and to underwrite services for socio-economically disadvantaged Australian students” (Ross, 2024). Nonetheless, domestic concerns have prompted the government to shrink the international student population through new policies, including doubling the student visa fees and NPL. The government officials see that increased migration has made housing less affordable. They also want to fix the labor shortage after the pandemic by reducing immigration (Nikkei Asia, 2024). The NPL is intended to free housing and redistribute international enrollments more equitably (Ross, 2024). 

While there is a concern that the NPL would limit study opportunities in Australia, it exempts school students, full-time students in English Language Intensive Courses for Overseas Students (ELICOS), and students in transnational education programs (Study Australia, 2024). Japan is the second-largest source country with 13% of the ELICOS market (BONARD, 2024). Thus, many Japanese students on short- or mid-term study abroad programs may not be significantly affected by the cap. However, these exemptions do little to ease the broader tension. The government’s restrictive measures, driven by concerns over housing affordability and labor market adjustment, curtail the long-term benefit of international education, challenging policymakers to balance immediate domestic needs with sustainable benefits.

Beyond traditional study abroad pathways, Australia’s shifting policies and the post-COVID society are reshaping alternative mobility options like working holidays, which are becoming increasingly popular among Japanese students. In my experience, I have observed students opting for working holidays even after securing full-time job offers, driven by the desire to live abroad without concrete long-term career plans. According to the Japan Association for Working Holiday Makers (JAWHM), the largest number of Japanese people traveled to Australia in June 2023. Factors driving this trend include accelerated yen depreciation and Australia’s higher minimum wage compared to Japan, making this option attractive. Social media fuels an appealing myth that even individuals with limited English proficiency or prior work experience can earn higher wages on a working holiday in Australia. Reality, however, can be less glamorous. Despite the attractive image portrayed online, finding stable employment can be challenging. Increased migration contributes to a crowded labor market. With raising wage costs, employers may be reluctant or even unable to hire additional people. Many young Japanese embark on working holidays without sufficient planning, leaving them vulnerable when the stark realities of a competitive job market and high living costs set in. Consequently, some rely on free meals provided by local charities while struggling financially. The JAWHM warns that success in Australia requires more than determination; it demands local networks, professional connections, business etiquette, professional experience, and English skills to obtain jobs (Handa, 2024; Shūkan Gendai, 2024a; 2024b).

Australia’s new policy may drive interest in other study abroad options (Packer, 2024). Some Japanese universities offer study abroad programs in Southeast Asia, attracted by lower costs in the face of a weakening yen and rising energy prices (Nakagawa, 2023). For example, After COVID, Kyoto Tachibana University saw more interest in its Malaysia program (Matsutani, 2023). Interestingly, Malaysia and other Asian countries host Australia’s transnational education (TNE) programs, providing cost-effective Australian education at offshore campuses. While TNE offers financial advantages for budget-conscious students, it cannot provide the authentic living experience in Australia (Harris, 2024). This fundamental limitation could mean TNE remains an imperfect solution for Japanese students wanting immersion in Australian culture, even as it presents a more affordable pathway to Australian qualifications.

In conclusion, the shifting landscape of Australia’s international education policies has impacted Japanese students’ choices and the development of study abroad programs. These policy changes are in response to social changes and challenges in the post-COVID period, but they require study abroad program developers, scholars, and policymakers to remain agile and forward-thinking. While traditional destinations, such as the US, Canada, and Australia, still hold appeal, especially to English language learning students, there lies a potential for expanding study abroad programs to non-traditional locations and forms. Furthermore, it is essential to provide careful guidance on working holiday pathways. Much like study abroad programs, working holiday opportunities require meticulous planning and preparation. By understanding how these changes affect student mobility and program design, stakeholders can proactively address emerging challenges and leverage new opportunities in the global education market.

References

BONARD. (2024, June). National ELICOS market report 2023. English Australia. https://www.englishaustralia.com.au/documents/item/2442

Brunner, L., & Cervantes-Macías, M. E. (2025). Reflections on Canada’s first international student cap. Critical Internationalization Studies Review, 4 (1), Article 2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.70531/2832-3211.1043

Department of Education, Australian Government. (2023, March 11). International students studying in Australia (2005-2023). International Education Data and Research. https://www.education.gov.au/international-education-data-and-research/international-students-studying-australia-between-2005-and-2023

Department of Home Affairs, Australian Government. (2024a, September 23). Genuine student requirement. https://immi.homeaffairs.gov.au/visas/getting-a-visa/visa-listing/student-500/genuine-student-requirement

Department of Home Affairs, Australian Government. (2024b, March 20). New genuine student requirement. News. https://immi.homeaffairs.gov.au/news-media/archive/article?itemId=1187#:~:text=New%20 Genuine%20 Student%20requirements Text=This%20change%20was%20 announced%20as,or%20after%2023%20March%202024

Department of Home Affairs, Australian Government. (2023, November 7). International student and education statistics by nationality.https://www.education.gov.au/international-education-data-and-research/international-student-and-education-statistics-nationality

Handa, N. (2024, September 11). Jobs difficult to find for those on working holiday in Australia. The Asahi Shimbun. https://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/15395932

Harris, T. (2024, June 18). Transnational education – not a solution to the caps problem. The Koala – International Education News. https://thekoalanews.com/transnational-education-not-a-solution-to-the-caps-problem/

ICEF Monitor. (2024, January 22).Canada announces two-year cap on new study permits. ICEF Monitor. https://monitor.icef.com/2024/01/canada-announces-two-year-cap-on-new-study-permits/

Masutani, F. (November 17, 2023). Study-abroad programs hurt by weaker yen, soaring prices. The Asahi Shimbun. https://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/15038692

Nakagawa, H. (2023). Shiritsu daigaku ni okeru kaigai ryuugaku puroguramu no genjyou to sono tokuchō – koukateki na kaigai ryuugaku puroguramu kaihatsu ni kansuru ichikousatsu- [Characteristics and current trends of study abroad programs at japanese private universities]. Ikoma Journal of Economics, 21 (1), 85-97,

Nikkei Asia (2024, July 4). Australia ryugakusei visa tesuryo2baini imin yokusei nerai [Australia doubles student visa fees aminig to curb immigration]. https://www.nikkei.com/article/DGXZQOCB0345Q0T00C24A7000000/

Packer, H. (2024, September 3). UK universities expected to benefit from Australian caps. Times Higher Education (THE). https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/uk-universities-expected-benefit-australian-caps

Ross, J. (2024, September 5). Who wins and who loses if Australia goes ahead with overseas cap? Times Higher Education (THE). https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/who-wins-and-who-loses-if-australia-goes-ahead-overseas-cap

Shūkan Gendai. (2024a, September 24). “Ichinichi ni rirekisyo 50mai dashitemo saiyou zero” “Comyuryoku ga zetsubouteki” Australia zaijyu nihonjin ga kataru “mukeikaku sugiru wahorisei” no kibishii syusyoku jijyou [Japanese living in Australia talk about the harsh job-hunting conditions of “unplanned working holiday students” who “send out 50 resumes a day and get zero employment” and “are hopeless at communicating]. https://gendai.media/articles/-/138001?imp=0

Shūkan Gendai. (2024b, September 24). “Waholi wo amakumita” nihon no wakamono tachi, sono hisansugiru matsuro… Australia ni sattoumo “homeless muke no syokuryouhaihu ni tyoudano retsu” “shikatanaku genchino kyabakura de hataraku hito mo” [Japanese youths who “underestimated working holiday” and their miserable end… Rushed into Australia but “waiting in a long lines for food distribution to homeless people” and “no choice but to work in local cabarets”]. https://gendai.media/articles/-/138000?imp=0

Study Australia. (2024, August 29). The new student cap: what it means for you. News. https://www.studyaustralia.gov.au/ja/tools-and-resources/news/national-planning-level-2025

Tsukamoto, K. (2009). The Interconnection Between Australia’s International Education Industry and Its Skilled Migration Programs. In: Fegan, J., Field, M.H. (eds) Education Across Borders. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9411-8_4

About the Author

Yuka Jibiki is an assistant professor at Department of International Studies in Tokyo Seitoku University and a PhD student in the University of Sacred Heart, Tokyo. Her work focuses on teaching English as a foreign language, study abroad preparation, reflection, and program management. She is currently exploring how students integrate study abroad experiences with learning at home, with a focus on fostering lifelong learning attitudes and skills. 

Posted on

Eulogy: An Update on the Leadership Under Fire Seminar Series

by Abu Arif

Yes, you heard it right. After an 18-month run and six episodes of inspiring dialogue, I have decided to end the Leadership Under Fire seminar series.

Some of you know me; others may not. I’m Abu Arif—son of a Bangladesh liberation war freedom fighter and a poet; husband to a very handsome man; brother to some annoying siblings; an uncle to half a dozen mischievous nephews and nieces; and a self-proclaimed best friend of my best friend. I write to you from the comfort of my home while listening to Meghero Gohonokale and debating whether to record my husband’s snoring. My home is situated on the traditional territory of the Mi’kmaq and Beothuk peoples, known as St. John’s, Newfoundland and Labrador. I am a doctoral candidate and PhD Fellow at the Faculty of Education at Memorial University and an assistant editor of the Critical Internationalization Studies Review.

It was my honor to curate six episodes of the Leadership Under Fire seminar series—a journey through the rugged terrains of internationalization in higher education, where each episode critically examined leadership in international higher education. After several conversations with peers, mentors, and colleagues, I have decided to end this journey so that another can begin.

For the past six months, my heart, like many of yours, has been stirred by global crises. Everywhere I look, I see valleys of loss—bodies, trees, rivers, progressive ideas and policies, our joy, dreams, and faith in our ability to weave a different world. These moments have impelled me to shift my focus from shedding light on the complexities of leadership in the internationalization of higher education to exploring how we might cultivate joy and self-care while living out our purpose amid forces intent on division and despair.

In the words of Maya Angelou, “We may encounter many defeats, but we must not be defeated.” Her wisdom reminds us that resistance work need not be devoid of relational care or moments of joy. As a disobedient son, loving partner, occasionally annoying brother, fun uncle, and an unsure scholar navigating these complex intersections, I affirm that our struggles are interwoven with the necessity of healing, creativity, and deep connection. Stay tuned for a new series launching this summer, where we will continue exploring how to live our truths and cultivate hope and joy—even when we must organize for profound resistance.

Reflecting on the Journey

Our series was a vibrant platform for critical reflection and bold ideas throughout six episodes. Each session offered a unique perspective on the complexities of internationalization in higher education and its intersections with equity, diversity, and inclusion.

  • Episode One: In our inaugural session, we opened with a candid exploration of the “bruises and breezes” of international higher education. Esteemed voices—Dr. William Radford, Dr. Clayton Smith, and Ms. Kate Jennings—set the stage by sharing their diverse experiences, sparking a dialogue about the human cost and promise of internationalization. I asked everyone to bring popcorn, and the panelists gave you the real talk – Dr. Radford stirred controversy, Dr. Smith hung on to his usual balancing tactic, and Ms. Jennings – like a truly international education cadre – walked the rugged terrain as if it were a breezy sea beach. You can find the recording here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIvYQ8FAaIk.

  • Episode Two: This session focused on the lived experiences of international students and the persistent challenges of racism in academic settings. My dear friend and brilliant student advisor, Georginne Worley, hosted the event. Under the guidance of Priscilla Tsuasam, the conversation was enriched by the insightful contributions of Danai Bélanger and Rohene Boujram. The powerful opening by Dr. Shetina M. Jones will hook you right away, and what follows can be described as weaving strategies for how far the light can reach. Their combined perspectives underscored the necessity of deep listening and systemic change to dismantle barriers to inclusion and Black women leaders’ experience in the Canadian higher education system. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqsXuPaH3VE&t

  • Episode Three: A pivotal moment came in the third episode, as the series shifted its lens to grassroots movements within international higher education. With an inspiring opening from Dr. Sharon Stein and thoughtful moderation by Dr. Melissa Whatley, panelists Dr. Santiago Castiello, Dr. Jenna Mittelmeier, and CJ Tremblay illuminated how community-led initiatives can challenge entrenched norms and ignite transformative change. I hoped for greater live participation, but people wanted to listen to the recording instead. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHVz3XrbME8

  • Episode Four: The fourth episode broadened our perspective by engaging leaders of national and regional organizations lobbying for the internationalization of education. Moderated by Dr. Sonja Knutson, this session featured the powerful contributions of Dr. Dorothea Antonio of NAFSA: Association of International Educators, Dr. Lavern Samuels of International Education Association of South Africa (IEASA), and Vinitha Gengatharan of York University. Their insights reinforced that equitable leadership in international education requires collaboration across borders and sectors. Participants were not shy to ask difficult questions – yes, that which shall not be named – was named. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qj50l6gSb4I&t

  • Episode Five: Shifting the focus to student affairs, the fifth session showcased how universities integrate global perspectives into local contexts. Opening speaker Dr. Birgit Schreiber, President of the International Association of Student Affairs and Services (IASAS), laid a great foundation by emphasizing that student success is everyone’s business. Denai Belanger returned once again (this time as Vice President of Student Affairs of Bishop University – yes, the light will go further than our imagination) and, joined by Dr. Ainsley Carry, discussed the infamous cap that has thrown the “greedy internationalization complex of Canada” into a whirlwind. No, they did not address the unsettling chuckling of the Canadian Minister of Immigration as he bulldozed the dreams of many international students, but they covered everything else. Dr. Christine Arnold—who moderated the session—posed challenging questions for all the popcorn lovers. Their insights painted a vivid picture of the evolving role of student affairs in supporting the diverse needs of both international and local student populations, especially during crises like the “year of sledgehammering.” The recording is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHVz3XrbME8

  • Episode Six: In our final episode, the dialogue came full circle by examining the intersections of internationalization, diversity, equity, and inclusion. The panel discussion, framed by Rohene Boujram (yes, she came back this time to moderate the conversation), explored the pandemic’s complex aftermath alongside rising geopolitical tensions, evolving international funding and immigration policies, and recent U.S. policy shifts. Panelists Punita Lumb and Dr. Amie Mclean shared personal journeys that underscored the nuanced definitions of DEI/EDI and internationalization in higher education. They debated how institutional frameworks—from neoliberal risk management to visions of socially just communities—intersect with lived experiences, emphasizing the need for safe, authentic dialogue and critical, relational practices. The conversation also highlighted practical strategies, such as co-leadership and decolonial approaches, to bridge gaps between policy and practice, ultimately urging a collective, hopeful journey toward justice and inclusion. You can find the recording here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLzjFiGCGzA&t

Looking Forward

The conclusion of this series is not an end but a transformative moment—a turning point that signals the beginning of new explorations. The insights shared across these sessions have profoundly enriched our understanding of international higher education leadership and have sown the seeds for future initiatives that will continue challenging the status quo and amplifying the voices working at the margins.

We thank every speaker, panelist, moderator, and participant who supported these sessions. Your contributions—whether through thoughtful dialogue, courageous storytelling, or innovative ideas—have been the lifeblood of this series.

As we close this chapter, we remain dedicated to reimagining higher education—a journey fueled by the courage to confront inequities and the collective will to create spaces of hope, joy, and transformative resistance.

Posted on

Practice Implications for Supporting International Students’ Racial Learning in the U.S.

A practice brief by Mianmian Fei

In my recently published article, Fei (2024), I reviewed 11 studies that explored the micro-narrative of international students in the U.S. to re-examine the Learning Race in a U.S. Context emergent framework (Fries-Britt et al., 2014) a decade after its publication. The article concluded with three theoretical implications, suggesting that the framework expand the scope of ethnic/racial encounters, emphasize the influences of home country context, and maintain flexibility regarding racial learning outcomes. While several empirical studies on international students’ racial learning and racial identities have touched on practice implications, no article to date has systemically discussed practice-orientated recommendations for supporting international students’ racial learning. Drawing on additional literature, this practice brief fills that gap and provides actionable insights for higher education practitioners. 

Racial Learning of International Students in the U.S.

As highlighted in Fei (2024), empirical studies on international students’ racial learning over the past ten years reveal that most international students enter the U.S. with limited understanding of race in the country’s context. Their racial learning is generally informal and experiential, which can either prompt them to examine their racial identities within the U.S. context or reinforce preexisting racial stereotypes from their home countries. While some students attempt to resist dealing with race or accepting the racial identities imposed upon them, the ubiquity of race in everyday life in the U.S. often leaves them feeling confused or frustrated. Moreover, international students’ stereotypical views of certain racial groups can potentially harm their racially minoritized peers and jeopardize efforts to foster an inclusive campus climate. 

Practice Implications

Drawing on existing literature, the following sections present practice implications regarding higher education administration, curricula, and student affairs programming for supporting international students’ racial learning.

Administrative Implications

Higher education institutions around the country tend to aggregate international student data solely based on geographic origins while neglecting their racial/ethnic identities, following the example of the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System of the National Center for Education Statistics (Buckner et al., 2021; Hou et al., 2023; Jiang, 2021). Even when race is mentioned in institutions’ internationalization strategies, it is typically framed as a global issue rather than an institutional concern, reinforcing the othering of this population and overlooking their struggles with race in the U.S. (Buckner et al., 2021). U.S. higher education institutions must acknowledge international students’ racial/ethnic identities along with their national identities. Doing so would be an important first step toward recognizing their racialized experiences on campuses and thus incorporating them into discussions of racial diversity and multiculturalism policies (Jiang, 2021; Yu, 2024). 

Curricular Implications

Coursework on American history, particularly its racial foundations, is one widely recommended practice in existing literature (Mitchell et al., 2017; Ritter, 2016; Yu, 2024), although whether such courses should be required remains a topic of debate (Althen, 2009). Beyond credit-bearing courses, creative alternatives like for-credit intergroup dialogues, which combine classroom instruction with conversations and community action projects, offer flexibility and practical relevance (Mitchell et al., 2017; Ritter, 2016). While ethnic studies courses available in most universities and colleges address race-related content, their focus on U.S.-based racial-ethnic groups may limit their relevance for international students from different cultural and historical backgrounds (Ham, 2023; Jiang, 2021). Jiang (2021) therefore proposed joint coursework between ethnic studies and international studies, making discussions about race in the U.S. context more relevant for international students. Additionally, specifically regarding economically privileged Chinese international students, Yu (2024) called for civic education curricula that address the intersections of race, nativity, and class. Such curricula aim to encourage students to reflect on their intersecting yet inconsistent social identities, ultimately fostering a commitment to social justice.

Programmatic Implications

The most common practice recommendation in the literature is to formalize international students’ racial learning through student affairs programming. These programs can include initiatives to foster meaningful connections between international students and racially diverse domestic students, faculty, and staff (Fries-Britt et al., 2014; Jiang, 2021; Mitchell et al., 2017; Ritter, 2016; Yu, 2022, 2024), facilitated space where international students can ask questions and engage in discussions without fear of reprisal (Yao et al., 2024; Yu, 2024), and targeted orientations for international students which openly address racial issues in the U.S. (Jiang, 2021; Yao et al., 2023; Yu, 2022, 2024). 

Surveying the programming efforts of international students offices across the U.S., Althen (2009) found that higher education institutions in urban settings with racially heterogenous populations often offered limited programming on racial learning, assuming that international students would acquire racial knowledge from daily interactions with diverse campus populations. Fei’s (2024) findings, however, underscored the need for such programming regardless of an institution’s geographic location, since even international students in diverse states like California might retain problematic racial biases against certain minority groups, shaped by perspectives from their home countries. Althen (2009) also found that some institutions only offered programming for international undergraduate students, assuming that international graduate students were uninterested in anything beyond their academic pursuits. However, research has shown that international graduate students also face challenges stemming from their lack of racial knowledge in the U.S. context (Bardhan & Zhang, 2017; Feraud-King & George Mwangi, 2022; Jiang, 2021; Mitchell et al., 2017; Okura, 2019; Ritter, 2016). While they might be less inclined to spend time learning about race in the U.S. context, insufficient knowledge to cope with racist encounters could distract them from their academic goals and negatively impact their overall well-being. 

At the institutional level, recognizing the intersecting identities of international students, Feraud-King and George Mwangi (2022) and Yao et al. (2023, 2024) recommended fostering collaboration between offices responsible for international students and those overseeing multicultural affairs. Such partnership would allow student affairs professionals to leverage the expertise of multicultural affairs offices in developing race-related programming while addressing the intersection of nativity and race in supporting international students’ racial learning (Althen, 2009). Feraud-King and George Mwangi (2022) further advocated for restructuring student support services beyond these two offices, emphasizing the need for integrated approaches that transcend silos based on social identities.

It is important to stress that the burden for racial learning should not rest solely on international students. Fries-Britt et al. (2014) and Yao et al. (2024) advocated for formalized learning opportunities for faculty and staff, particularly those working in departments with a high proportion of international students. These opportunities can equip educators and administrators with an understanding of how race is perceived differently outside the U.S., enabling them to better support international students as they navigate racial learning. Malcolm and Mendoza (2014) also highlighted the prevalence of U.S.-superiority attitudes among domestic students in their interactions with international peers, calling for programming efforts that foster global awareness and sensitivity. Similarly, Jones et al. (2020) emphasized the responsibility of faculty and the institution to cultivate an appreciation of cultural diversity and to encourage thinking beyond U.S.-centric cultural norms in domestic students. This is especially important as U.S. higher education institutions increasingly rely on graduate students––many of whom are international––to fulfill teaching duties.

Conclusion

In conclusion, drawing on existing literature, this practice brief recommends that U.S. universities and colleges support international students’ racial learning by recognizing their racial/ethnic identities in institutional data and providing relevant coursework and student affairs programming for both international and domestic students and faculty.

References

Althen, G. (2009, June). Educating international students about ‘race.’ International Educator, 18(3), 88–93.

Bardhan, N., & Zhang, B. (2017). A post/decolonial view of race and identity through the narratives of U.S. international students from the Global South. Communication Quarterly, 65(3), 285–306. https://doi.org/10.1080/01463373.2016.1237981

Buckner, E., Lumb, P., Jafarova, Z., Kang, P., Marroquin, A., & Zhang, Y. (2021). Diversity without race: How university internationalization strategies discuss international students. Journal of International Students, 11(S1), 32–49. https://doi.org/10.32674/jis.v11iS1.3842

Fei, M. (2024). Re-examining Fries-Britt’s Learning Race in a U.S. Context emergent framework drawing on the micro-level narratives of international students in the United States. Journal of Comparative & International Higher Education, 16(5). https://doi.org/10.32674/etcvg369

Feraud-King, P. T., & George Mwangi, C. (2022). “I don’t feel oppressed at all”: Foreign-born Black college men’s perceptions of U.S. racism. Journal of African American Males in Education, 13(2), 1–16.

Fries-Britt, S., George Mwangi, C., & Peralta, A. (2014). Learning race in a U.S. context: An emergent framework on the perceptions of race among foreign-born students of color. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 7(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035636

Ham, S. (2023). Understandings of race and racism in globalizing higher education: When East Asian international student perspectives resonate with color-blindness. Race Ethnicity and Education, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2023.2257138

Hou, M. H., Yu, J., & Katsumoto, S. (2023). Methodological approaches to the study of international students. Critical Internationalization Studies Review, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.32674/cisr.v2i1.5372

Jiang, S. (2021). Diversity without integration? Racialization and spaces of exclusion in international higher education. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 42(1), 32–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/01425692.2020.1847635

Jones, V., Kim, Y., & Ryu, W. (2020). Intersecting roles of authority and marginalization: International teaching assistants and research university power dynamics. Journal of International Students, 10(2), 483–500. https://doi.org/10.32674/jis.v10i2.757

Malcolm, Z. T., & Mendoza, P. (2014). Afro-Caribbean international students’ ethnic identity development: Fluidity, intersectionality, agency, and performativity. Journal of College Student Development, 55(6), 595–614. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2014.0053

Mitchell, D., Steele, T., Marie, J., & Timm, K. (2017). Learning race and racism while learning: Experiences of international students pursuing higher education in the Midwestern United States. AERA Open, 3(3), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858417720402

Okura, K. (2019). There are no Asians in China: The racialization of Chinese international students in the United States. Identities: Global Studies in Culture and Power, 28(2), 147–165. https://doi.org/10.1080/1070289X.2019.1663053

Ritter, Z. S. (2016). International students’ perceptions of race and socio-economic status in an American higher education landscape. Journal of International Students, 6(2), 367–393. https://doi.org/10.32674/jis.v6i2.362

Yao, C. W., Gause, S., Hall, K., & Dou, J. (2024). “Why is this still happening?”: International students of color’s racial sensemaking and perceptions of racial conflicts and racial movements in 2020. The Journal of Higher Education, 95(4), 450–472. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2023.2203627

Yao, C. W., Oates, E. Q., Briscoe, K. L., Buell, K. J., & Rutt, J. N. (2023). Re/negotiating race and racialization for international students of color in the US. Journal of College Student Development, 64(1), 79–95. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2023.0003

Yu, J. (2022). The racial learning of Chinese international students in the US: A transnational perspective. Race Ethnicity and Education, 28(1), 154–173. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2022.2106878

Yu, J. (2024). “I don’t think it can solve any problems”: Chinese international students’ perceptions of racial justice movements during COVID-19. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 17(5), 775–786. https://doi.org/10.1037/dhe0000457

About the Author

Mianmian Fei, M.A., is a Ph.D. Candidate in Higher Education and Studies Affairs at The Ohio State University’s College of Education and Human Ecology. She also works as a Graduate Research Associate at the QualLab research center and an Editorial Assistant at the Review of Higher Education. Her research interests revolve around international and comparative higher education, particular global student mobility.

Posted on

Understanding Expectations: International Postgraduate Students’ Perspectives of an Internationalized Curriculum in Canadian Universities

by Siyin Liang

The 6th International Association of Universities Global Survey Report on Internationalization of Higher Education revealed that 75% of respondents from higher education institutions had noted a significant rise in the emphasis placed on internationalizing their curriculum at home (Beelen & Jones, 2015, p. 69) in recent years (Marinoni & Pina Cardona, 2024). Although higher education institutions in Canada are increasingly considering advancing internationalization within their formal curricula, there is a noticeable lack of policy initiatives and academic discourse on how to progress in this endeavor (Clarke & Kirby, 2022). Moreover, the experiential dimension of internationalization in the formal curriculum in Canadian universities and beyond, as students perceive it, hasn’t been given enough attention (Fakunle, 2019; Jones & Caruana, 2010; Liang, 2024).

To gain more insights into students’ interpretations, expectations, and experiences of internationalization in their formal curriculum, I conducted an interpretive case study from 2021 to 2022 in a school of education at a large, research-intensive Canadian university (Liang, 2024). Research data were collected from public documents, semi-structured interviews with student participants, and my reflexive research journals. It should be noted that at this university, while international postgraduate students had accounted for more than 30% of the university’s entire postgraduate student population since 2021, the percentage of international postgraduate students in the school of education climbed from about 4% in 2021 to 7% in 2023. Obviously, despite this growth, it remains a modest proportion of the overall postgraduate student population within the school. While recognizing the benefits of advancing curriculum internationalization for all students, I opted to include international postgraduate students in the participant sample (n=9), confident that my long-term experience as an international postgraduate in Canada had provided me with more insight to navigate my roles as an insider and an outsider. The participants were five female and four male graduates. They ranged in age from late 20s to late 30s, studying in research-based programs in education and hailing from six different regions: Southern Asia, Eastern Asia, North America, Sub-Saharan Africa, Southern Europe, and Western Asia. Two of my key research questions were:

1. How do international postgraduate students interpret an ‘internationalized’ formal curriculum and describe such a curriculum?

2. What types of activities do international postgraduate students consider engaging in when they envisage internationalization in the formal curriculum?

Two main themes emerged during my analysis of the research findings that responded to these questions. They were (1) embarking on the deliberate expansion of content diversity and (2) promoting inclusive course design to reduce inequalities. 

Content Diversity

All participants suggested that expanding content diversity in an internationalized, formal curriculum is crucial. This means the curriculum should include different perspectives, practices, and issues from various countries and nations. More specifically, they made several suggestions, including adding materials by researchers from different national or cultural backgrounds to the required reading list. Omar, one of the participants, said, “When I come to a multicultural country like Canada, I expect an internationalized curriculum to include reading and resources…written by people who come from different parts of the world.” For students like Omar, including these readings is significant, which increases the representation of diverse voices within the formal curriculum and, more broadly, within a multicultural and multi-ethnic society like Canada.

Another participant, Sophia asked an interesting question about the extent to which adding articles written by researchers from different countries genuinely contributes to internationalizing course content, particularly if the goal of including diverse perspectives is interpreted as incorporating various philosophical traditions like Hinduism and Taoism. She said, “Just because you use an author from a different country doesn’t necessarily mean it’s internationalized because it could still be the same school of thought.”

Inclusive Course Design

Most participants highlighted the importance of the inclusive course design, noting that educators could achieve this in many ways. For instance, educators could add course materials that reflect students’ sociocultural backgrounds and actively seek ideas from international students in classroom discussions. Monica, who identified as Asian and was attentive to Asian perspectives, suggested, “If you have students from another social background like Germany or Spain, maybe you should update your course…For example, in the readings required for us to read, I remember there is no Asian scholar talking about educational philosophy.” 

Reflecting on an inclusive classroom activity, another participant, Mastay said,

I had that moment and then I realized that our curriculum has been internationalized… We got to a point in time in some of our discussions in the classroom [where] we don’t really focus on Canada as a whole but we look at different ideas from other colleagues in other countries. So we looked at different colleagues from across the world about how they are responding to this.

All in all, the emergent voices from my study revealed many complexities in internationalizing formal curricula. By better understanding these dynamics and nuances, educators and institutional leaders could create a more timely and inclusive learning environment for local and international students. Of note, increasing efforts to enhance the quality of academic and support services for students helps counter the interim, unsustainable, and neoliberal approaches to internationalizing higher education.

Further Thoughts after the Study

Professors in Canada have been part of the key driving force in internationalizing curricula in higher education (Bond, 2003; Odgers & Giroux, 2009; Stephenson et al., 2022; Tarc & Budrow, 2022). The Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada (2009) and the Association of Canadian Deans of Education (2014) also actively advocated for curriculum internationalization. Following the COVID-19 pandemic, it is evident that more Canadian universities have incorporated curriculum internationalization in their recent strategic plans or set it as a key initiative. However, academic discourse on advancing this effort remains scarce (Garson, 2023; Liang, forthcoming).

Notably, Canada is recognized for having a highly decentralized education system, where ten provinces and three territories are responsible for shaping the structure of its post-secondary education system. Most provincial governments developed their own strategies and visions for international education, often operating separately from both the federal government and each other (Trilokekar et al., 2020). 

In addition, Canadian universities are autonomous, to varying degrees, in academic affairs, setting their own quality assurance standards and procedures, although there is backing for the Canadian Degree Qualification Framework (Universities Canada, n.d.). The definitions and metrics used to assess university performance on a national level are not provided (Eastman et al., 2022). Other than international student recruitment, decisions and directions of other approaches to internationalization have mostly been left to institutions (Stephenson et al., 2022; Tamtik et al., 2020). In other words, in fact, the institutions have led, and are leading, the vast majority of internationalization initiatives.

What’s more, in the culture of collegiality, the extent to which these initiatives contribute to changes and achieve proposed objectives in a Canadian university depends heavily on the amount of available resources and the degree of consensus-building among faculty members, administrators, and other relevant groups. This is surely relevant when the initiatives attempt changes to the formal curriculum— the required courses and activities that students must complete in their degree program. So, with this said, how can curriculum internationalization advance in Canadian universities? This is a question that warrants extensive research and thoughtful discussions.

Acknowledgement: I would like to thank all the participants for their valuable time and insights shared during the study. I also extend my gratitude to Dr. Colleen Kawalilak for her unwavering, long-term support in my exploration of internationalization of higher education.  

References:

Association of Canadian Deans of Education. (2014). Accord on the internationalization of education. https://csse-scee.ca/acde/wp-content/uploads/sites/7/2017/08/Accord-on-the-Internationalizationof-Education.pdf

Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada. (2009). Internationalization of the curriculum: A practical guide to support Canadian universities’ efforts. https://www.massey.ac.nz/massey/fms/NCTL/VC%20symposium/curriculum-primer_e.pdf

Beelen, J., & Jones, E. (2015). Redefining internationalization at home. In A. Curai, L. Matei, R. Pricopie, J. Salmi, & P. Scott (Eds.), The European higher education area: Between critical reflections and future policies (pp. 59–72). Springer.

Bond, S. (2003). Untapped resources, internationalization of the curriculum and classroom experience: A selected literature review. Canadian Bureau for International Education. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED549984.pdf

Clarke, L., & Kirby, D. (2022). Internationalizing higher education curricula: Strategies and approaches. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 10(6), 408–417. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2022.100605

Eastman, J., Jones, G. A., Trottier, C., & Bégin-Caouette, O. (2022). University governance in Canada: Navigating complexity. McGill-Queen’s University Press.

Fakunle, O. (2019, February 15). Students: The missing voices in internationalization. https://www.universityworldnews.com/post.php?story=20190212144121925

Jones, E., & Caruana, V. (2010). Nurturing the global graduate for the twenty-first century: Learning from the student voice on internationalization. In E. Jones (Ed.), Internationalization and the student voice: Higher education perspectives (pp. xv–xxiii). Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.

Liang, S. (2024). Advancing Internationalization in the Formal Curriculum: Content Integration and Inclusive Design. Journal of Studies in International Education, 28(5), 743–760. https://doi.org/10.1177/10283153241262461

Liang, S. (forthcoming). Curriculum Internationalization: Aligned with Equity and Social Justice? Journal of Comparative & International Higher Education, 17(2), 2025.

Marinoni, G., & Pina Cardona, S. B. (2024). Internationalization of higher education: Current trends and future scenarios. https://www.iau-aiu.net/6th-IAU-Global-Survey-on-Internationalization-Current-Trends-and-Future 

Odgers, T., & Giroux, I. (2009). Internationalizing faculty: A phased approach to transforming curriculum design and instruction. In R. D. Trilokekar, G. A. Jones, & A. Shubert (Eds.), Canada’s universities go global (pp. 252–276). James Lorimer & Co.

Stephenson, G. K., Jones, G. A., Bégın-caouette, O., & Metcalfe, A. S. (2022). Professors and Internationalization in Canada: Academic Disciplines and Global Activities. Yükseköğretim Dergisi, 12(Supplement), 14–23. https://doi.org/10.2399/yod.22.202202

Tamtik, M., Trilokekar, R. D., & Jones, G. (2020). Conclusion: International education as public policy-the Canadian story. In M. Tamtik, R. D. Trilokekar & G. A. Jones (Eds.), International education as public policy in Canada (pp. 407–426). McGill-Queen’s University Press.

Tarc, P., & Budrow, J. (2022). Seeking the cosmopolitan teacher: Internationalising curricula in a Canadian preservice teacher education program. Teachers and Teaching, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2022.2062744

Trilokekar, R. D., Jones, G. A., & Tamtik, M. (2020). Introduction: The emergence of international education as public policy. In M. Tamtik, R. D. Trilokekar, & G. A. Jones (Eds.), International education as public policy in Canada (pp. 3–25). McGill-Queen’s Press-MQUP.

Universities Canada. (n.d.). How quality assurance works in Canada. https://univcan.ca/universities/quality-assurance/ 

Siyin Liang holds a PhD (Adult Learning) from the Werklund School of Education at the University of Calgary and an MA (Adult Education) from the Faculty of Education at the University of Regina. Her doctoral studies focused on internationalization of the curriculum in the context of Canadian higher education. Currently she continues studying internationalization of higher education while also working in projects as a postdoctoral research assistant in the Faculty of Education at Memorial University of Newfoundland to explore newcomer integration, English as an Additional Language, and public engagement in research. Email: sliang@mun.ca

Posted on

Intra-Africa Student Mobility from a Critical Perspective

by Tibelius Amutuhaire, Bayreuth International Graduate School of African Studies (BIGSAS)

Email: tibelius.amutuhaire@uni-bayreuth.de

Introduction

The study, ‘Internationalization and Student Mobility: Exploring the Mobility of Higher Education Students in East Africa‘ (Amutuhaire, 2024) explored intra-Africa student mobility, an aspect of south-south mobility, using evidence from Uganda, Rwanda, and Burundi. Researchers argue that intra-Africa student mobility will strengthen higher education (HE) in Africa and help the continent mitigate challenges such as brain drain and the marginalization of its HE systems (Agbaje, 2023; Sehoole & Lee, 2021; Trines, 2024). However, this view overlooks some contextual factors that shape intra-Africa student mobility. The study explored international student mobility (ISM) in East Africa (a case of intra-Africa student mobility) using theoretical orientations of critical internationalization with a view that internationalization thrives on and propagates inequalities between individuals and social systems (Buckner & Stein, 2020; George Mwangi et al., 2018). 

Brooks and Waters (2011) argue that “ISM is never a neutral act or something that just happens; rather, it is filled with social, cultural, and political meaning. It is therefore a worthy subject of investigation” (p. 130). The study explored the following research questions in line with this position: (i) How do HE systems in international students’ sending and receiving countries affect ISM in East Africa? (ii) How does social class privilege influence ISM in East Africa? (iii) How do immigration policies affect international students in East Africa? Uganda is reportedly the East African country with the most international students, mainly from Kenya, Tanzania, South Sudan, Rwanda, and Burundi (ICEF Monitor, 2017). Therefore, it was considered the ‘receiving country’ and the main focus of the study. Countries from which Uganda’s international students come, i.e., the ‘sending countries,’ were represented by Rwanda and Burundi.

I collected quantitative data from international students at Uganda’s Makerere University (MU) and Kampala International University (KIU) using self-administered email questionnaires. I also interviewed international students in Uganda, staff in charge of international students’ offices and HE councils, and an immigration officer in Uganda. Quantitative data analysis used the Statistical Package for Social Scientists (SPSS) to generate descriptive and inferential statistics, including percentages, means, standard deviations, and Chi-Square tests, which were used to explore the study variables. Qualitative data was analyzed through Thematic Analysis to develop summary statements and representative quotes to make sense of the data. 

Study Findings 

Through analysis of quantitative and qualitative data pertinent to the first research question, the study reports that the East African countries that send international students to Uganda are characterized by:

  • High tuition fees and other education costs
  • Universities with a low reputation in terms of global and regional rankings
  • Universities with few academic programs
  • Limited opportunities to improve English Language proficiency

The HE system in Uganda (the receiving country) was characterized by:

  • Lower educational costs
  • Universities with an international reputation 
  • A variety of academic programs from which international students can choose
  • Academic programs offered in English

These attributes influenced Uganda’s inbound student mobility. Seventy-five percent of the respondents held that the low-quality HE in their home countries instigated their outbound mobility. When cross-validated, over 80% of the respondents indicated that studying in Uganda enabled them to attain their dream education. 

These findings point to arguments in support of internationalization, depicting it as being entirely beneficial without pointing out the critical issues that inform the status quo and conceal that:

  • Lower tuition rates in Ugandan universities are a strategy to attract more international students, as claimed by ICEF Monitor (2017), which considers Ugandan universities as aggressive recruiters of international students.
  • The absence of reputable universities stems from colonization, whereby the colonialists entrenched Uganda as East Africa’s education center by establishing MU in Uganda as early as 1921 (Chacha, 2023). Comparable developments in Rwanda, Burundi, and DRC only came after the 1960s. Consequently, such HE systems in these countries are still developing.
  • Uganda inherited English from its British colonizers, which put it in an advantaged position (considering the hegemony of the English language in HE) compared to its francophone neighboring countries.

Thus, ISM in the countries considered in this study thrives on historical inequalities arising from coloniality and continues to sustain the same disparities. It is, therefore, not different from the south-to-north mobility in which students move from weaker to more robust education systems. Moreover, ISM is a source of revenue to support East Africa’s underfunded HE sector, hence assigning mutual benefit from ISM a low priority. 

For the second research question, students’ social class was determined based on an average index of their parents’ income and levels of education. Most international students (59%) were in the high social class, with only 9.2% in the lower social class. Interview data supported these findings and indicated that participation in ISM mainly favors students from the higher social class. It also clarified that households use ISM to perpetuate their social class. Further, interviewees also indicated that, through struggle, some lower social classes participate in ISM to transcend their social class positioning. Expanding ISM opportunities to benefit more students from the lower social class is essential.  

Regarding the third research question, the student visa (‘student pass’) was international students’ most common residence document. Further, 91% of the sampled international students were not employed, with 82% indicating that it was difficult to get jobs. While several challenges limit international students from accessing jobs in Uganda, the main challenge was the immigration policies that exclude international students from employment, i.e., a student’s pass holder has no employment rights. An international student must change the residence document from a student pass to a costly work permit. This shows that ISM in East Africa is shaped by other factors rather than the search for jobs. However, some international students indicated they need jobs to gain hands-on international work experience and enrich their CVs; denying them a right to work limits their benefits of participation in ISM. Therefore, while Uganda aims to attract international students, these students are still treated with disdain. However, I acknowledge the employment situation in Uganda, where many educated nationals have no employment. Formulating a policy enforcing the employment of international students when there are unemployed citizens is unattainable.

The study concluded that:

  1. The historical reputation of some universities in East Africa, which is not necessarily linked to quality education, informs the region’s ISM trends. 
  2. Internationalization and ISM in the countries considered are responses to market forces, with the primary purpose being maximizing economic gains rather than improving service delivery.
  3. ISM mainly intends to reproduce social class, which has sustained social inequalities and cultural barriers, rather than undoing them. However, students can also use it to transcend the socioeconomic ladder.
  4. The search for jobs does not incentivize participation in ISM since the immigration policies in East Africa exclude international students from employment.

This study contributes to the growing research on critical internationalization scholarship by revealing the commercial orientations and inequalities that inform ISM in East Africa. Intra-Africa mobility is influenced by competition to attract international students as a source of institutional revenues, as is usually the case with south-to-north ISM. Thus, intra-Africa mobility must be revisited to deliver more of the anticipated benefits. 

References 

Agbaje, O. (2023). Intra-Africa student mobility: benefits for Africa and factors militating against it. African Journal of Teacher Education 12(2), 144–161. 

Amutuhaire, T. (2024). Internationalization and Student Mobility : Exploring the mobility of Higher education students in East Africa – EPUB Bayreuth. https://epub.uni-bayreuth.de/id/eprint/8099 

Brooks, R., & Waters, J. (2011). Student Mobilities, Migration and the Internationalization of Higher Education. Palgrave Macmillan.

Buckner, E., & Stein, S. (2020). What counts as internationalization? Deconstructing the internationalization imperative. Journal of Studies in International Education 24(2), 151–166. 

Chacha, N. C. (2023). Decolonization of higher education in East Africa — Princeton University Humanities Council. https://humanities.princeton.edu/event/decolonization-of-higher-education-in-east-africa/ 

George Mwangi, C. A., Latafat, S., Hammond, S., Kommers, S., Thoma, H. S., Berger, J. B., & Blanco-Ramirez, G. (2018). Criticality in international higher education research: a critical discourse analysis of higher education journals. Higher Education, 76 (6), 1091–1107. 

ICEF Monitor, (2017). Recruiting in East Africa. Market intelligence for international student recruitment. https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:1FEm-jXDTV0J:https://monitor.icef.com/2017/01/from-the-field-recruiting-in-east-africa/+&cd=6&hl=nyn&ct=clnk&gl=ug&client=firefox-b-d

Sehoole, C. T., & Lee, J. J. (2021). Intra-Africa student mobility in higher education: Strengths, Prospects and Challenges. Palgrave Macmillan.

Trines, S. (2024, October 3). Intraregional student mobility in Sub-Saharan Africa. WENR. https://wenr.wes.org/2023/10/intraregional-student-mobility-in-sub-saharan-africa 

AUTHOR’S BIOGRAPHY

Tibelius Amutuhaire recently completed a PhD project on international student mobility in East Africa, graduating with a PhD in Education from the Bayreuth International Graduate School of African Studies (BIGSAS), University of Bayreuth (Germany). He is a member of the African Network for Internationalization of Education. He researches the field of higher education, focusing on internationalization and regionalization. 

Posted on

Reflections on Canada’s first international student cap

by Lisa Ruth Brunner and María E. Cervantes-Macías

In January 2024, Canadian higher education was rocked by a two-year intake cap on post-secondary study permit applications, amounting to a 35% decrease from 2023 (IRCC, 2024a; 2024b). Given the sector’s dependency on differential international student tuition fees (Statistics Canada, 2022) and the highest proportion of international post-secondary enrollments globally (IIE, 2023), the potential impacts were stark. Institutions’ desire for international student funds had become insatiable, and, for decades, no stakeholders – including the provinces, which hold responsibility for education in Canada – were motivated to question the underlying ethics of a system rooted in large wealth transfers to Canada from the Global South. But Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) finally decided to “rein it in” (CPAC, 2023, 13:59).

What happened? After all, just like its higher education system, Canadian immigration also depends on international students, both as temporary labour (during and immediately after their studies) and permanent residents. A growing number of Global North countries, in fact, rely on higher education as a “feeder for labour migration” (Kamm & Liebig, 2022, para. 4). The resulting education-migration nexus, also known as edugration, has become a celebrated strategy in the so-called global race for talent (Brunner, 2022). Immigrant-dependent governments presume international students to be ‘the best and the brightest’ and thus ‘easily integrated’ into local labour markets, requiring limited support as they contribute to tax bases over their lifetimes.

However, cracks in that strategy have emerged – first in Australia, and now elsewhere (Sabzalieva et al., 2022). There are strings attached to edugration’s extractive, neoliberal logics. Paraphrasing the playwright Max Frisch’s description of guest worker programs in Europe, governments want workers but get people instead. When post-secondary institutions recruit international students-as-migrants, they get people too. And people need housing. They need to support themselves and their families. They need to feel safe and dignified and have a sense of belonging. And, in the context of international students, they may need specialized services to adjust to the unfamiliar, inequitable conditions they face as newcomers, like discriminatory job markets.

Post-secondary institutions have no clear mandate to ensure these needs are met. Because international students are positioned as a source of economic subsidies to institutions, they are subject to a cold calculation: every dollar towards their needs represents a dollar subtracted from earmarked funds, resulting in uneven availability of support and infrastructure. When international students are not well supported by their institutions, they turn to the broader community to meet their needs. And that’s when they present complications for the federal government, since immigration also operates by the same cold calculation: international students are ‘ideal immigrants’ only when they are self-sufficient. The moment workers or students are revealed to be people – i.e., ‘real’ instead of ‘ideal’ – tensions arise.

In Canada, concentrations of international students in certain regions – especially at institutions with subpar or non-existent support systems – had ripple effects. The dominant racialized trope of their value to Canada as ‘cash’ became overshadowed in Canadian public opinion by the threat they supposedly posed as ‘competition’ (Stein & Andreotti, 2016). This was particularly acute in Canada’s tight, profit-oriented housing market, allowing the government to focus on voters’ fears rather than long term structural inequities ultimately based on capitalist Indigenous dispossession.

The federal government also came to see Canada as, in the words of IRCC Minister Marc Miller, “targeted for abuse and exploitations by some unsavoury actors” (CPAC, 2023, 15:54). Who is abusing who is a matter of perspective; many actors used IRCC’s policies to exploit international students, including employers, landlords, and recruiters. Miller focused on private “unscrupulous institutions” (CPAC, 2023, 16:26) that rely almost entirely on international student tuition and use Canadian permanent residency as a marketing strategy. Operating in a largely public higher education system, these private colleges were positioned by Miller as “the diploma equivalent of puppy mills” (CPAC, 2023 11:50), offering “garbage programs” and functioning as “backdoor entries into Canada” (Raj, 2024, 38:28). 

Exploitative private colleges undoubtedly deserve strong critique, as do the marketized systems which produced and allowed them to flourish. But it is also important to remember two points. First, many private “garbage programs” were delivered through lucrative curriculum licensing arrangements with public institutions. Second, the line between “unscrupulous institutions” and supposedly ethical ones, including public universities, is blurry. Through edugration, virtually all Canadian post-secondary institutions rely on an exchange of economic capital for an academic credential of inflated value due to its connection to (a chance at) Canadian permanent residency. The difference is the extent to which meritocracy is used to justify what has become a classist and (neo)racist global sorting system structured by Western supremacy.

The desirability of international students-as-migrants in Canada has also complexified. During recent stakeholder consultations, IRCC stated its plan to focus on the “quality of students, education and client services over quantity” and “attract and nurture top international talent” (IRCC, 2023, slide 7). At first glance, Miller’s positioning of international master’s and doctoral students as “the bright people that we need to retain” (CPAC, 2024, 16:24) seemed aligned with edugration’s rallying call to recruit ‘the best and the brightest.’ Along with a few other subcategories, master’s and doctoral students were exempted from IRCC’s intake cap. Their spouses and partners retained the ability to apply for open work permits, and the length of post-graduation work permits was extended for short master’s programs “in recognition that graduates of master’s degree granting programs are excellent candidates to succeed in Canada’s labour market and potentially transition to permanent residence” (IRCC, 2024b, para. 7).

On the other hand, IRCC restricted post-graduation work permits entirely at certain private colleges (IRCC, 2024b). A clear hierarchy thus emerged, based on international students’ likely post-graduation outcomes: private college programs were at the bottom, public undergraduate college and university programs were in the middle, and graduate programs were at the top.

However, this hierarchy does not match the reality of Canada’s labour market. First, desirable jobs for ‘the best and the brightest’ are not necessarily in Canada; immigrants who were former international students are “especially likely to leave Canada” (Bérard-Chagnon et al., 2024, p. 5), and the probability of an immigrant eventually leaving increases with higher education levels. Second, Miller also signaled the federal government’s intention to “work with” provinces’ requested study permit cap exemptions for trade schools, noting that “nursing or healthcare or in construction” are “where some of the needs are” (CPAC, 2024, 16:39). Indeed, shortly after the cap was announced, British Columbia Premier David Eby asked for exemptions in high-demand fields such as truck driving, warning that “we can’t have this cap impacting our healthcare system or the availability of childcare, or the ability to build the homes that we need” (Hunter, 2024, para. 3). In other words, Canada’s dependency on international students’ relatively low-waged labour also runs deep, exposing tensions between the short-term labour market needs of the provinces and the long-term economic outcomes valued by the federal government.

The dust from January’s announcement is far from settled. Still, despite the handwringing, it is unlikely that Canada’s long tradition of reliance on international students to address its national interest priorities (McCartney, 2021) will fundamentally change. It will simply become more targeted, refined, and directly controlled by IRCC’s interests. A meaningful challenge to its underlying logics will require much more.

References

Bérard-Chagnon, J., Hallman, S., Dionne, M., Tang, J., & St-Jean, B. (2024, February 2). Emigration of Immigrants: Results from the Longitudinal Immigration Database. Statistics Canada Demographic Documents. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/91f0015m/91f0015m2024002-eng.htm 

Brunner, L. R. (2022). ‘Edugration’ as a wicked problem: Higher education and three-step immigration. Journal of Comparative & International Higher Education, 13(5S). https://doi.org/10.32674/jcihe.v13i5S.4061 

Cable Public Affairs Channel [CPAC]. (2023, December 7). Federal government doubling financial requirement for international students [Video file]. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_tmPo-UywI 

Cable Public Affairs Channel [CPAC]. (2024, January 22). Canada announces two-year cap on international student visas [Video file]. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eiTruogAsp4 

Hunter, J. (2024, January 29). B.C. seeks leniency as Ottawa reins in international student numbers. The Globe and Mail. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/british-columbia/article-bc-seeks-leniency-as-ottawa-reins-in-international-student-numbers/ 

Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada [IRCC]. (2023, June 23). Modernization of the International Student Program: Presentation for partners and stakeholders [PowerPoint slides]. 

Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada [IRCC]. (2024a, January 22). Canada to stabilize growth and decrease number of new international student permits issued to approximately 360,000 for 2024 [News release]. https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/news/2024/01/canada-to-stabilize-growth-and-decrease-number-of-new-international-student-permits-issued-to-approximately-360000-for-2024.html

Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada [IRCC]. (2024b, February 5). Additional information about International Student Program reforms [Notice]. https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/news/notices/international-student-program-reform-more-information.html 

Institute of International Education [IIE]. (2023). Project Atlas. https://www.iie.org/research-initiatives/project-atlas/

Kamm, E., & Liebig, T. (2022). Retention and economic impact of international students in the OECD. In Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (Ed.), International migration outlook 2022 (Chapter 7). OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/30fe16d2-en  

McCartney, D. (2021). “A question of self-interest”: A brief history of 50 years of international student policy in Canada. Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 51(3), 33-50. https://doi.org/10.47678/cjhe.vi0.189179 

Raj, A. (Host). (2024, February 9). Is Canada’s consensus on immigration fracturing? [Audio podcast episode]. In It’s Political. The Toronton Star. https://www.thestar.com/podcasts/its-political/is-canada-s-consensus-on-immigration-fracturing/article_53cf4984-c6d0-11ee-b574-4f2859d9434b.html 

Sabzalieva, E., El Masri, A., Joshi, A., Laufer, M., Trilokekar, R. D., & Hass, C. (2022). Ideal immigrants in name only? Shifting constructions and divergent discourses on the international student-immigration policy nexus in Australia, Canada, and Germany. Policy Reviews in Higher Education, 6(2), 178–204. https://doi.org/10.1080/23322969.2022.2096106 

Statistics Canada. (2022, September 7). Tuition fees for degree programs, 2022/2023. The Daily. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/220907/dq220907b-eng.htm 

Stein, S., & Andreotti, V. (2016). Cash, competition, or charity: International students and the global imaginary. Higher Education, 72, 225–239. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-015-9949-8

About the Authors

Lisa Ruth Brunner is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow (Centre for Migration Studies) and Postdoctoral Teaching Fellow (Department of Educational Studies) at the University of British Columbia on xʷməθkwəy̓əm (Musqueam) Territory in Canada. She conducts critical, interdisciplinary research on international migration and education, especially regarding migration governance, citizenship, and ‘integration’ in Global North and settler-colonial contexts. She has over a decade of practitioner experience as an international student advisor and has been a Regulated Canadian Immigration Consultant since 2014.

María Cervantes-Macías holds a degree in International Relations from Tecnológico de Monterrey, Mexico, and a Master of Arts in Geography from the University of British Columbia, Canada. Currently a PhD candidate at the University of British Columbia, her research explores the ways in which immigration policies and education impact the choices of highly skilled migrants throughout their lives, shaping their understandings of citizenship and identity.

Posted on

Research Brief: What is an ‘international student’ in transnational higher education?

A research brief by Jason Lane, Jessica Schueller, and Christine Farrugia

What is an ‘international student’? For most scholars and practitioners, the mainstream concept of an international student is defined by one’s nationality or visa status vis-a-vis their location of study. While there is no precise definition of ‘international student,’ they have been generally defined as those who leave their home country to pursue an education in a different country (Lane & Bhandari, 2014). A binary distinction was traditionally made between domestic students from the country where the university is situated, and international students who come from abroad (Brooks & Waters, 2022). This straightforward distinction helps to recognize students who study in familiar surroundings from those who navigate a new cultural setting.

This conceptualization of ‘international student’ developed during a period when institutions were largely immobile and did not account for students participating in transnational education (TNE) (Mittelmeier, 2023; Steyn & Gunter, 2023). For most of the 5 million students who study abroad each year, this definition remains fairly accurate (UNESCO, 2024). However, the rise of TNE means that both students and institutions are mobile, and this multi-modal mobility challenges traditional conceptions of ‘international student’. For students in TNE, such as the more than 180,000 students studying at over 300 international branch campuses (IBCs) worldwide, traditional binary distinctions do not apply (CBERT, 2023; Garrett et al., 2016). This can have significant implications for nations such as the UK, which enrolls nearly as many students in TNE as they do international students in UK-located programs (Universities UK, 2023). In this context, how do we conceptualize an ‘international student’ when both the student and the institution are mobile? 

Transnational Higher Education and International Students

Most definitions of international students do not account for students enrolled in TNE, which revolves around providing educational opportunities from one country who remain physically located in another country, often in the form of a locally established institution. As Stephenson and Gabay (2016) point out, IBCs “host a diverse body of students whose identities cannot be captured through the binary definitions of international or local” (p. 243). Since the institution is foreign, the question arises as to what the students should be defined as, especially if they are local to the country but studying at a foreign institution such as an IBC. 

An example would be an Emirati student attending the Dubai branch of Australia’s University of Wollongong (UW). This student remains in their home country but is enrolled in an institution rooted in a foreign educational system. The cultural surroundings are familiar, but the academic environment differs from a local Emirati university. Should this student be labeled as domestic or international? How does this compare to studying at the main UW campus in Australia or an Australian student attending the Dubai branch? Or, what if a student from Africa travels to Dubai to attend the branch? If both students and institutions are moving across borders, or the institution moves but the student does not, the traditional distinction between international and domestic students blurs quickly.

A TNE Student Typology

TNE students are often still not counted as international students, leaving them and their experience invisible (Waters & Leung, 2013). As TNE grows, how students are considered in research and practice will become increasingly relevant to the study and practice of international higher education. To address the nature of ‘international student’ within TNE, Lane and Farrugia (2022) developed a typology based on the perspective of the institution’s and the student’s country of origin (see Figure 1). 

Figure 1
Typology of International Branch Campus Students

Domestic student  (IBC Perspective)International student  (IBC perspective)
Domestic student (home campus perspective)
Boundary spanner
Individuals with an association with both countries, either  through dual citizenship or family expat status such that they could be viewed as “domestic” by both campuses
Passthrough
Students pursing an education in a foreign country and doing so in an educational context that is likely to be familiar
International student (home campus perspective)
Staycationer
Students from the country where the IBC is located, but without formal association with the IBC’s home country; seeking a “foreign” educational experience without leaving the country
Explorer
Students without a formal association with either the home or host country; pursuing a foreign educational experience

Source: Lane & Farrugia (2022, pp. 8-9). Reproduced by permission of Taylor & Francis Group.

The vertical axis represents student type according to the home campus perspective, and the horizontal axis refers to the IBC perspective. A student is considered domestic if they have citizenship or a long-term residency permit in the country where the campus is located. Students without citizenship or long-term residence in the IBC-country are considered international. 

Boundary spanners are domestic students by the home campus and IBC perspectives. Examples include long-term expats, dual citizens, or students who have “an affiliation with both countries, and it may well be that these individuals have lived in both countries and are comfortable moving between the different countries” (Lane & Farrugia, 2022, p. 23). This includes students who grew up in the host country, with parents from a different country, which is sometimes but not always the IBC home country. 

Staycationers are considered international to the home campus and domestic by the IBC. Examples include citizens of the host country, long-term expats, and undocumented residents. These students have some affiliation with the host country, but none with the IBC’s home country. As such, these students “are taking an educational adventure while staying close to home” (Lane & Farrugia, 2022, p. 24). 

Passthrough students attend an IBC that is from their home country. They use their education to return to their home country or to move to another country. This may be because the ease of access to the IBC is higher than pursuing a similar route in the home country. These students see their time at the IBC as temporary and engage with local society and culture on a limited basis.  

Explorer students have no association with home or host country. An example of this would be an American student attending a British IBC in the UAE. Indeed, such student mobility is the goal of so-called “education hubs” that use IBCs to attract students (Knight, 2013). There is also likely to be situations where overlap occurs between the four types. 

Definitions Matter: Problematizing “International” When Students and Institutions Move

By exploring the muddy waters of defining an ‘international student’ in TNE and basing definitions not only on the student’s nationality but also on the institution’s origin, insight can be garnered into how current international student definitions may not capture the full lived experience of who is seeking and obtaining an international higher education. This brief establishes an understanding of the complexity of defining ‘international student’ using the example of students enrolled in TNE. It illustrates the need to move beyond traditional notions of mobility centered on the nation-state (Rose-Redwood & Rose-Redwood, 2023; Richters & Teichler, 2006). Understanding of international student definitions could be enriched by exploring what it means to be an ‘international student’ when it is the institution, not the student, moving. This is particularly the case when IBCs cater primarily to minority, expatriate, and mobile students.  Researchers, policymakers, universities, and practitioners should consider the complexities of who is counted and who is not in different forms of international student mobility. 

References

Brooks, R., & Waters, J. (2022). Partial, hierarchical and stratified space? Understanding “the international” in studies of international student mobility. Oxford Review of Education, 48(4), 518–535.

Cross-Border Education Research Team (C-BERT). (2023). List of International Campuses. Accessible at http://cbert.org/ 

Garrett, R., Kinser, K., Lane, J.E., & Merola, R. (2016). International branch campuses: Trends and developments, 2016. Observatory for Borderless Higher Education and Cross-Border Education Research Team. 

Knight, J. (2013). Education hubs: International, regional, and local dimensions of scale and scope. Comparative Education, 49(3), 374-387. 

Lane, J.E. & Bhandari, R. (2014). Measuring higher education internationalization. In J.E. Lane (Ed.), Building a smarter university: Data, big data, and analytics (pp. 239-262). State University of New York Press. 

Lane, J., & Farrugia, C. (2022). Which students are “international” at an international branch campus? Problematizing “international” when universities, and students, cross borders. In H. A. &. Sally (Ed.), International Student Mobility to and from the Middle East (pp. 13-32). Routledge.

Mittelmeier, J. (2023). International Students in Open, Distance, and Digital Higher Education. In O. Zawacki-Richter & I. Jung (Eds.), Handbook of Open, Distance and Digital Education (pp. 389-406). Springer Nature Singapore.

Richters, E., & Teichler, U. (2006). Student mobility data: Current methodological issues and future prospects. In M. Kelo, U. Teichler, & B. Wächter (Eds.), EURODATA: Student mobility in European higher education (pp. 78–95). Lemmens.

Rose-Redwood, C., & Rose-Redwood, R. (2023). Containing the Multitudes: Critical Reflections on the Concept of the “International Student” Through a Pluriversal Lens. Journal of International Students, 14(2), 107-114.

Stephenson, G.K. & Gabay, D. (2016). Aren’t We All International Students?: Supporting Diverse Populations at University Branch-Campuses. In K. Bista & C. Foster (Eds.) Campus Support Services, Programs, and Policies for International Students (pp. 243-263). IGI Global. 

Steyn, C., & Gunter, A. (2023). When an international student stays at home: defining an international student in distance education. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 47(1), 56–70.

UNESCO Institute of Statistics (UIS). (2024). Global Flow of Tertiary-Level Students. https://uis.unesco.org/en/uis-student-flow 

Universities UK. (2023). The scale of UK transnational education. https://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/universities-uk-international/insights-and-publications/uuki-insights/scale-uk-transnational-education Waters, J., & Leung, M. (2013). Immobile Transnationalisms? Young People and Their in situ Experiences of “International” Education in Hong Kong. Urban Studies, 50(3), 606–620.

About the Authors:

Prof. Dr. Jason Lane serves as the President of the National Association of Higher Education Systems (NASH) and as a special advisor to the President of the University of Illinois System. He is co-director of the Cross-Border Education Research Team (C-BERT).

Jessica Schueller is a Ph.D. candidate in Educational Leadership at Miami University in Oxford, Ohio, and is the project manager of the Cross-Border Education Research Team (C-BERT).

Dr. Christine Farrugia is the Assistant Provost of Institutional Effectiveness at Manhattanville College. She was previously research director at the Columbia University School of Professional Studies as well as at the Institute of International Education (IIE), where she led Open Doors, a large-scale annual survey of international educational exchange in the United States.

Posted on

Research with International Students: Looking back on lessons learned

by Kalyani Unkule

A year ago, my co-editors Jenna Mittelmeier, Sylvie Lomer, and I contributed an introduction to our then forthcoming edited volume “Research with International Students: Critical Conceptual and Methodological Considerations” (henceforth RIS) to this newsletter. Following the open-access release of this work, I aim to share reflections here on how this book might be used by researchers as well as those planning projects of this nature in the field and beyond. 

RIS is not a how-to guide on designing research studies. Although each chapter concludes with practical suggestions for researchers, the preceding discussion encompasses considerations relating to axiology, ontology, epistemology, and reflexivity. The volume is critical of prevailing approaches to research in the field as well as deficit narratives attached to students from certain geographies even as various sectors of the global economy profit – and in some cases draw their very sustenance – from their mobilities. Broadly speaking, I believe the volume contains useful insights for scholars seeking to ground their research using critical lenses as well as those seeking to more mindfully approach the range of decisions involved at various stages of the research process across a spectrum of fields. In the rest of this article, however, I will focus my attention on four specific aspects: lines of enquiry, concepts, reflexivity, and access.

Our questions/Research “with”

Our training emphasizes “advancing the field.” So, we take for granted the questions already being asked – established lines of enquiry. In doing so, we fail to revisit assumptions about the world and characterisation of certain regions/peoples/experiences that are built into these questions. We know enough about the history of scientific research to recognise that there is no field, no discipline which can claim it’s foundation in disinterested enquiry. Yet, not only does the edifice continue to be built but it also dresses itself in the veneer of objectivity. Add to which, the vogue is to foreground hitherto marginalised voices. Unless new voices generate new questions, this is nothing but a form of co-option – feeding new experiences without changing the fixed molds used to describe the world. Thereby, the first way to use this book would be to pay close attention to unstated assumptions about the world underlying frequently investigated questions in the literature. Sometimes, the field doesn’t need advancing. It needs course correction – targeted intervention that comes in the form of a spanner in the works.

When the inclusion of new voices results in new questions, we are learning “with” them rather than “about” them. Hence, the title and focus of the book – research “with” international students.

Our concepts/Pluriversality

What is the recurring terminology in the literature? Whose worldview does it encapsulate? Are textbook definitions of the concepts we use rooted in a spacio-temporal specificity but precisely because they are found in textbooks, assumed to connote a universal understanding of the idea?

Every field has its own vocabulary or jargon. Now it makes sense that as the field advances, our associations with those terms transform. But this seldom occurs. Instead, we keep concepts constant and use these fixed frames to make sense of diverse situations. As a result, any experience that was not foundational to defining that concept becomes a departure from the standard. The leap from operationalising concepts to allowing concepts to unravel that we seek to make in the volume is a step in the direction of theorising around other ways of knowing the world and other ways of being in the world.

Our selves/Reflexivity

Many understand reflexivity as our background and experiences shaping the way we view and navigate the world – which is important and should be made more explicit in our research and writing. Due to its scope and subject matter, however, this volume adds another dimension to reflexivity – that of positionality. Acknowledging our location is one piece of reflexivity. Making the effort to properly contexualise our field and what we study within a hegemonic economic and ideational order is another equally important piece (not least to maintain the distinction between reflexivity and subjectivity).

As individualised as it sounds, reflexivity cannot be a solo effort when it comes to research. There is a need to design our projects as spaces where people can be themselves. Whether it be walking the extra mile to invite contributors from diverse backgrounds, or linguistic and stylistic license, or how we write author bios – these are often choices made about the extent of our complicity.

Our readers/Access

Although I mention this last, audience and readership issues must be thought through at the outset of undertaking a book project like this one. This determines who conceives the work, who contributes to it, how it is structured, how it is written, where it is placed, and what interventions are needed for its message to translate into practice.

The way this volume has been daydreamed into being, opens up a tripartite dialogic space between the researcher, the “researched” as co-participant, and the reader as the next link in the chain. In the process, we hope to have shown how impact in research is not just made through findings but in fact, stems from undergirding the effort of knowledge creation itself in a relational ethic of responsibility.

About the Author

Kalyani Unkule (kalyani.u7@gmail.com) is associate professor at O.P. Jindal Global University in India. Her research complements her practice in intercultural dialogue and impact-driven projects in higher education internationalization and spiritual learning.