Critical Review of Ferzghi & Tsegay (2019): Internationalisation of Higher Education in China

-

Introduction

The article Internationalisation of Higher Education in China: A Critical Analysis by Ferzghi and Tsegay (2019) examines the role of government intervention and student mobility in China’s higher education internationalisation process. The authors argue that China’s approach to internationalisation is state-driven, with the government exercising significant control over policies, funding, and institutional collaborations. The study highlights China’s efforts to attract international students, improve university rankings, and enhance its global influence through higher education.

A screenshot of the article by Frezghi and Tsegay.

The research is relevant to discussions on China’s global education strategy, particularly its increasing dominance as a destination for international students. However, despite providing useful insights, the study has limitations in its theoretical framework, methodological clarity, and depth of critical analysis, which could have strengthened the discussion on the broader implications of China’s higher education internationalisation model.

Summary of Key Points

Ferzghi and Tsegay explore three key dimensions of China’s higher education internationalisation strategy: government intervention, inbound and outbound student mobility, and institutional challenges. The authors highlight how the Chinese government has played a pivotal role in shaping higher education policies, particularly through initiatives such as Project 211, Project 985, and the Double First-Class Initiative. These policies have sought to elevate Chinese universities to world-class status, increase research output, and attract top-tier faculty and students.

The study also discusses student mobility as a core strategy of China’s higher education policy. The authors provide statistical evidence showing how China has become the third most popular destination for international students, behind the United States and the United Kingdom. Meanwhile, China also remains one of the largest sources of outbound students, with many Chinese students pursuing higher education in Western institutions. This two-way mobility, the authors argue, strengthens China’s global education influence and contributes to its economic and diplomatic engagements.

Additionally, the article identifies key challenges facing internationalisation efforts, including the language barrier, lack of institutional autonomy, and limited interaction between Chinese and international students. The authors argue that while China has successfully expanded its international education programs, issues related to cultural integration, academic freedom, and the dominance of the Chinese government in higher education governance remain significant concerns.

Critical Analysis

Ferzghi and Tsegay provide a well-structured discussion on China’s approach to higher education internationalisation. The study effectively links government policies, student mobility, and institutional challenges, providing a comprehensive overview of the topic. The authors’ emphasis on China’s use of higher education as a tool for global influence aligns with existing literature on China’s soft power strategies. The article also successfully incorporates both historical and contemporary policy developments, offering a broad perspective on China’s evolving higher education landscape.

However, the article has several limitations. One of the key weaknesses is the lack of a strong theoretical framework. While the study touches on internationalisation theories, it does not engage deeply with existing literature on soft power, global education governance, or public diplomacy. Referencing key scholars such as Jane Knight (2008) on internationalisation or Joseph Nye (2004) on soft power could have provided a more rigorous theoretical foundation for the analysis.

Another issue is methodological clarity. The study relies on document analysis, but the authors do not clearly specify how sources were selected, categorized, or analyzed. The lack of empirical data, such as interviews or surveys, limits the study’s ability to assess the actual experiences of international students in China or the effectiveness of government-led policies. Incorporating qualitative research methods could have strengthened the findings by providing firsthand insights into the impact of China’s internationalisation efforts.

Furthermore, the study does not compare China’s approach to other countries’ higher education internationalisation models. While China has taken a unique state-controlled approach, many countries, such as the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia, have relied on market-driven and institution-led internationalisation strategies. A comparative analysis could have highlighted China’s distinct model and provided a broader understanding of its advantages and limitations.

Another limitation is that the article does not fully explore the long-term impact of internationalisation on China’s higher education system. While it discusses China’s success in attracting international students, it does not critically evaluate whether these students remain in China post-graduation, contribute to China’s workforce, or maintain long-term academic and professional ties with China. Addressing these aspects would have added depth to the discussion on the sustainability of China’s higher education internationalisation strategy.

Evaluation and Conclusion

Ferzghi and Tsegay (2019) provide an important contribution to the study of China’s higher education internationalisation by offering a critical analysis of government policies, student mobility, and institutional challenges. The article is well-organized and informative, effectively linking China’s education policies with its broader geopolitical and economic ambitions. However, its lack of a strong theoretical framework, absence of empirical research, and limited comparative analysis weaken its overall impact.

Despite these shortcomings, the study is valuable for researchers and policymakers interested in China’s evolving role in global higher education. Future research could expand on Ferzghi and Tsegay’s work by incorporating comparative studies, empirical data, and theoretical discussions to provide a more nuanced understanding of China’s higher education internationalisation strategy and its long-term implications for global education dynamics.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

FPA: Organizational Process Model

-
This model centers on the fact that different bureaucracies have different standard operating procedures. These procedures are made in order to allow day to day operations to be carried out. Thus, a foreign policy decision is made based on these standard operating procedures. It is hard for a bureaucracy to make a decision or let alone function out of character or contrary to their standard operating procedure. The reading Chapter 4: Foreign policy shares a straight forward explanation of the OPM: "An alternative to the rational model of decision making is the organizational process model. In this model, foreign policy decision makers generally skip the labor-intensive process of identifying goals and alternative actions, relying instead for most decisions on standardized responses or standard operating procedures. For example, the U.S. State Department everyday receives more than a thousand reports or inquiries from its embassies around the world and sends out more than a ...
Read more

Commercial liberalism and the six norms

-
Image
Liberal internationalism is defined by Griffiths, O'Callaghan and Roach (2008, p.190) as a project to transform international relations so that they conform to models of peace, freedom, and prosperity allegedly enjoyed within constitutional liberal democracies. The same scholars go further by dividing liberalism into three distinct groups. They say these are the three ways to implement the project. The way they present liberal internationalism as a project makes their work interesting. Three distinct groups Firstly, commercial liberalism is about free trade between states. States bilaterally or multilaterally via a platform like APEC pursue the goal of trade liberalization. Griffiths, O'Callagahan and Roach (ibid.) argued that economic interdependence would decrease the likelihood of going to war. Republican liberalism is about democratic peace. The scholars argued that the spread of democracy among states so that governments will be accountable to their citizens makes it di...
Read more

Allison's rational actor model

-
There are 3 common models of foreign policy decision making according to Graham Allison: rational actor model organizational process mode government politics model.  We will discuss the 3 models and compare them with the 3 levels of analysis. However, I challenge you to use your own initiative to learn about the other models of decision making. This will help you as future decision makers or analysts to understand how decisions are made and the processes. When one wakes up from bed he or she decides whether or not to brush their teeth, comb their hair and have a shower. These decisions are paramount, they affect and influence how the individual interacts in a social setting. This highlights the fact that as human beings we make decisions every day. Decision making is defined as the thought process of selecting a logical choice from the available options. In the case of the ‘Kibung peles boy’ analogy; the male student had a choice of approaching the girl to ask he...
Read more