While the second half of Internationalizing Higher Education Worldwide continues to discuss various models of internationalization, one model in particular grabbed my attention. Hubs, which have been sprouting up mostly in Eastern Asia and the Middle East, are relatively new forms of partnerships designed to promote international education. Jane Knight puts it succinctly, describing one as “a planned effort to build a critical mass of local and international actors – higher education institutions and providers, students, research and development centres and knowledge industries – who work collaboratively on education, training, and knowledge production and innovation.” The reading for this week cites three primary examples of hubs, which are located in Ecuador, Singapore, and United Arab Emirates (UAE), but there are also locations in Botswana, Qatar, and Malaysia.

The reason I have decided to comment on hubs is very simple- I had actually heard of them before this class, and quite possibly before I even became interested in higher education. I have little experience myself in international education, never having studied abroad or been exposed to it besides my sister living in Spain for a semester. Despite this distance from internationalization, I somehow got wind of hubs and thought they were fascinating. The extent of my exposure was looking up a few photographs of the hubs and maybe checking out a couple Wikipedia pages, but the concept was interesting and memorable. Of all the myriad models of internationalization, hubs seem to me the most complete and quintessential. Host countries and cities attract various educational institutions from around the world to build branches within a designated zone. This is the epitome of collaboration- countries, institutions, and students all create partnerships with one another, and with the region the hub is stationed.

While investment is not particularly my area of interest, it is an important topic to discuss because it ends up being a key factor of one of the very few criticisms of hubs that both myself and other scholars have (which I will mention in the next paragraph). Jane Knight, an international education researcher, sums up investment strategies quite nicely in her article “Investing in Education Hubs- Local Investment is Key.” As indicated in the title, public funding is essential in order for hubs to survive. For most, if not all hubs, public funding accounts for no less than 50% of funding, and in some cases, covers 100% of funding. In Qatar, the federal government covers all costs, while in other countries and cities, the regional or city government covers costs. In a few hubs, both foreign investment (from the branch institutions themselves) or private investment can sometimes offset costs, but this is never more than 10-20%. It is easy to see that the public is responsible for the maintenance of hubs, which I actually initially found (and still find, to some extent) somewhat surprising. I assumed that the foreign institutions would pay a heftier sum in order to ‘rent’ space in these educational zones because the marketing and exposure seem to be worth investing in. Apparently it is the other way around, and the local governments have to find ways to attract these institutions. Covering most to all costs seems to be a successful way of doing that!

Now to the criticism. I claim that hubs are the embodiment of internationalization, but in one respect, they totally miss the point. Despite excessive local investment, very few students from the region will attend school at the hubs. In Dubai, only approximately 8% of the student population in Knowledge Village and Dubai International Academic City are UAE citizens. This opposes another concept that Internationalizing Higher Education Worldwide espouses- internationalization at home. Students who are ‘immobile’ should still have the opportunity to learn how to be global citizens. That being said, it seems unfair that so few locals are able to study at these educational centers. Peter Waring echoes this notion, stating “There appears to be a prevailing sense of frustration with the government’s perceived efforts to attract international students while not providing sufficient places for local students.” That is just a shame. Obsess over international students and forget your own (see the correlation with NYU? Apparently there is a trend in international higher education)! It would certainly be uplifting to see these hubs place more of an emphasis on educating the people of their own regions, but that is probably a tall order.

 

Links

Jane Knight Article

http://www.universityworldnews.com/article.php?story=20150128085234959

Peter Waring Article

Couldn’t find it for free, but it is cited directly in the reading on page 58.

Posted in UncategorizedTagged ,

2 thoughts on “W3- Hub Initiatives

  1. Hello Ben,

    Thank you for your post! I too think it’s great that the government, in most places, pays for most of the cost of these hubs. However, I do feel it’s a little disturbing that citizen dollars are being used to educate and train students from other countries and they only account for 8% of the student body. I understand reason behind using a free ride to attract foreign students, but it would be more rational to allow only 50% of study abroad students from foreign countries to participate in the program on a lottery/merit based system. I don’t necessarily believe that current citizens would learn how to be global citizens at a hub in their own country, but it would give them a chance to appreciate diversity in the classroom. They would still need to partake in a study abroad experience as well.

  2. Hi Ben,
    I decided to comment on your post because it discussed a topic I believe most of our classmates didn’t touch on. Educational hubs have been seen as a way to internationalize higher education and stimulate the economy of the country where the hub is located. I did some research and found an article that proposes creating/establishing “one or more regional-based California Higher Education Hubs.” The reasons that the author provides as to the need to create an educational hub in California seems to be based on the economy value that the hubs will bring to the state. Specifically, “new revenue helps subsidize and expand access to higher education for native Californians.” I believe educational hubs should uphold the ideas that you mention from Jane Knight, the economy benefits are important but they shouldn’t be the only reason as to why educational hubs are established.

    Douglass, J.A., Edelstein, R., Hoareau, Cecile. (2014) Bring the world to California. BOOM, 4(1). http://www.boomcalifornia.com/2014/04/bring-the-world-to-california/

Leave a Reply