This article examines how internationalization is defined by three leading higher education professional associations: NAFSA, the International Association of Universities, and the European Association of International Education. We examine key publications to understand which activities, topics, and constituencies are included in conceptualizations of internationalization and, conversely, which are absent. We find that all three rely on similar definitions that emphasize international students, student and scholarly mobility, and curricular change. We argue that current definitions are largely de-politicized and de-historicized, while internationalization is often assumed to mean more and better coverage of the globe. Little attention is given to the ethics of international engagement, particularly across unequal relations of power. We conclude with numerous questions for administrators and faculty engaged in internationalization that seek to deepen conversations about this work. In particular, we emphasize the importance of identifying enduring patterns of global inequality, recognizing ethical responsibilities, and enabling alternative possibilities.

Internationalization is a rapidly growing trend among higher education institutions (HEIs) around the world. This article situates internationalization within comparative education by theorizing it as processes of global diffusion and localization. It analyzes survey data from administrators at 1,439 HEIs in 137 countries to understand their interpretations of the benefits of internationalization. Findings show that administrators at HEIs in knowledge-intensive economies, and those in the United States and Anglophone Canada in particular, are more likely to frame benefits in terms of enhancing students’ international awareness, while revenue generation is much more likely to be cited in other Anglophone contexts. It argues that in Anglophone North America, higher education is being leveraged to combat histories of parochialism; in knowledge-intensive economies, it is seen as supporting pipelines of skilled labor; and in Anglophone contexts outside of North America, it is framed as an economically valuable...

This article examines education policy for Syrian refugees in Lebanon, drawing on 44 stakeholder interviews conducted in March 2016. Findings indicate that the idea of children’s rights, enshrined in international conventions, combined with foreign aid, encouraged the creation of a national refugee education framework that expanded refugees’ access to schooling. However, in local communities and classrooms, where the government’s stated commitment to education must be realized, we find that policies are not fully implemented and that many unofficial educational programmes are operating in contradiction to government policy. We argue that, while such gaps between policy and practice in education are common, refugee contexts present distinct challenges for policy implementation due to the role of international actors in setting policy, weak state authority and refugees’ lack of legal status. We suggest that a better starting place for understanding education policy implementation is to understand the often competing sources of state and non-state authority that affect decision-making at the local level.

This article investigates cross-national patterns of public and private higher education institution (HEI) foundings from 1960 to 2006. It argues that in addition to national demographic and economic factors, patterns of HEI foundings also reflect world-level models about how nations should structure their higher education systems. Findings document a rapid, recent rise in new private HEIs and point to supranational normative, mimetic, and coercive pressures that have encouraged nations to expand private higher education, including international development aid trends in peer nations, and linkages to intergovernmental organizations. I argue that while the public-sector HEI has been a long-standing and globally legitimated model for national development, private higher education has historically been associated with some world regions but not others. However, over the past two decades, supranational actors and ideas helped legitimate the private HEI as an acceptable model, spreading it even in regions that previously eschewed private higher education.

This article examines how a sample of 62 higher education institutions in Canada, the United States and the United Kingdom discuss international students in their official institutionalization strategies, focusing on how ideas of race and diversity are addressed. We find that institutional strategies connect international students to an abstract notion of diversity, using visual images to portray campus environments as inclusive of racial, ethnic and religious diversity. Yet, strategy documents rarely discuss race, racialization, or racism explicitly, despite the fact that most international students in all three countries are non-white. Moreover, racial injustice is externalized as a global issue and racial diversity is instrumentalized as a source of improving institutional reputation or diversity metrics. We argue that a first step to creating more inclusive and anti-racist campuses is to acknowledge international students’ racial identities and experiences with racism in official discourses and strategies.