Available via license: CC BY-NC-ND 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
Revista Românească pentru Educaţie Multidimensională
ISSN: 2066-7329 | e-ISSN: 2067-9270
Covered in: Web of Science (WOS); EBSCO; ERIH+; Google Scholar; Index Copernicus; Ideas RePeC; Econpapers;
Socionet; CEEOL; Ulrich ProQuest; Cabell, Journalseek; Scipio; Philpapers; SHERPA/RoMEO repositories; KVK;
WorldCat; CrossRef; CrossCheck
2021, Volume 13, Issue 3, pages: 508-529 | https://doi.org/10.18662/rrem/13.3/464
Modern State in
Higher Education
Internationalization
at Global and Local
Levels (by the
Example of SSU,
SNAU, SSPU.
Ukraine)
Аndrii CHYRVA1,
Оlena STATSENKO2,
Тetiana KYRYCHENKO3
1 Assoc. Prof. in pedagogical sciences,
Associate professor, Foreign Languages
Department, Sumy National Agrarian
University, 40021, Ukraine, Sumy,
Herasyma Kondratieva str., 154/2, r/111
candrew@ukr.net
2 Lecturer, Foreign Languages Department,
Sumy National Agrarian University,
Ukraine, helen0876@meta.ua
3 Senior Lecturer, Foreign Languages
Department, Sumy National Agrarian
University, Ukraine, honey11t@ukr.net
Abstract: The article aims to reveal modern state of higher
education internationalization (HEI) at global and local levels.
Synthesis of conceptual approaches to studying HEI allowed to
concretize the meaning of HEI at modern stage in a global and
institutional levels. Renovated notion has been proposed as
“complete internationalization”. It is interpreted as engagement,
devotion and commitment of both all education management
levels and teaching stuff to multifaceted process of intentional
long-lasting infusion and integration of international dimensions
with comparative constituent into all functions and missions of
higher education and active designing of policies, plans,
programs, strategies and approaches for promotion of
internationality in higher education. Due to theoretical method of
conceptual and comparative analysis of research and strategic
documents and the latest scientific publications on issues of
global internationalization of higher education, analysis of foreign
and local experience, conceptual approaches to studying HEI
were depicted modern internationalization forms at global level.
Interviews initiated with heads of international affairs offices
enabled us to find out HEI state at local level. Questionnaires
with international students, focused on likes and dislikes
concerning infrastructure, teaching methods, communication
with local students, future plans helped to identify the level of
students’ satisfaction and attractiveness of Sumy universities.
Main priorities of stakeholders are defined. Recommendations
concerning further possible development of higher education
internationalization are given.
Keywords: Higher education internationalization (HEI), trends,
universities, perspectives, international students, mobility.
How to cite: Chyrva, A., Statsenko, O., & Kyrychenko, T.
(2021). Modern State in Higher Education Internationalization
at Global and Local Levels (by the Example of SSU, SNAU,
SSPU. Ukraine). Revista Romaneasca pentru Educatie
Multidimensionala, 13(3), 508-529.
https://doi.org/10.18662/rrem/13.3/464
Modern State in Higher Education Internationalization at Global and Local …
Аndrii CHYRVA, et al.
509
1. Introduction.
Globalization and intensive development of international educational
space stipulate essential changes in the sphere of higher education. Social
needs in professional training of specialists adapted to international labour
market and able to interact with representatives from different cultures,
based on poli-cultural thinking, to solve the problems outgoing the borders
of national interests expect internationalization of higher education at all
levels. Internationalization is a phenomenon rapidly becoming popular in
developing countries around the world. More and more of higher
educational establishments in developing countries consider the
phenomenon as the condition and guaranty of existence and development.
Nowadays many universities of the world take the aim to internationalize
their own education.
During recent years, development of higher education
internationalization is taking place under influence of globalization of higher
education. Discourse of scholars from different countries concerning
interpretation of HEI is controversial and in addition, it is being changed
with the time as internationalization mostly reflects impact of political and
economic factors. Besides, stakeholders treat the notion, as it is suitable for
them. Some researchers consider the phenomenon only from point of view
of priorities and such elements as crossing borders, student mobility, and
recruitment of foreign students outlined by authorities or by institution
leaders. Therefore, the reality lies in the fact that there exist only few
elements of HEI appropriate for all engaged subjects and objects. There is
no internationalization model suitable absolutely for all parties. HEI is not a
static phenomenon but it always stays in dynamics – new forms of HEI and
new pedagogic paradigms appear. That is why knowledge require constant
renovation. The problem draws attention of scientists and international
organizations from different parts of the world.
It is very important for developing countries to study positive
theoretic and practical experience of HEI, cumulated in developed countries.
Necessity of scientific working up of theoretic, normative, organizational,
process fundamentals of higher education internationalization at world
universities is strengthened by available contradictions. The first - growing
requirements of modern globalized society to have higher education with
international dimension and insufficient preparedness level of national
higher educational systems to corresponding changes. The second -
necessity to adapt national graduates for work under conditions of multi-
Revista Românească pentru September, 2021
Educaţie Multidimensională Volume 13, Issue 3
510
cultural environment and insufficient level of development of their
intercultural competence. The third - the need of higher education content
improvement under conditions of labor market internationalization and
traditional approaches to elaboration of educational programs.
Rapid economic development of Asian and African countries
together with growing of global needs in higher education caused
appearance of such trends in higher education as massification and
diversification. Growing availability to global higher education advanced
such trends as marketization and commodification of HE. HEI was
traditionally used to be considered as traditional response to the global
trends, but internationalization itself is also influenced by global rationales.
In the light of modern changes and challenges came the time to reinterpret
and renovate conceptual understanding of the notion higher education
internationalization (HEI), the state in global internationalization and locally.
2. Methodology.
2.1. General characteristics
The aim of the research was:
- to reveal the state in higher education internationalization (HEI) at global
level: concretize the meaning of HEI at modern stage and depict modern
internationalization forms;
- outline the most important internationalization forms at local level, define
weak points on the example of three universities.
2.2 Sample of research.
To reach the second part of research aim we turned to three heads
of international affairs offices to initiate interviews and selected 118
international students, who agreed to participate in questionnaires, from
three universities, namely: Sumy State Pedagogical University named after
A.S. Makarenko (40 students), Sumy State University (44 students), and
Sumy National Agrarian University (34 students). We decided to use quote
of two academic groups from each university. The choice of groups was
casual. The number of representatives from each university was different
due to different number of students in academic groups. Most of selected
international students were representatives from China, Turkmenistan and
African continent. It can be explained by the fact that they compose the
majority of international student body in Sumy. The data saturation was
achieved by collecting the responses and disposing them into the tables for
the following processing and analysis.
Modern State in Higher Education Internationalization at Global and Local …
Аndrii CHYRVA, et al.
511
3.3 Methods and materials
To reach the aim of the article the following research methods were
used.
- theoretical methods: research document analysis conducted to
collect current information concerning the state in higher education
internationalization (HEI); synthesis of conceptual approaches to studying
HEI allowed to concretize the meaning of HEI at modern stage; method of
conceptual-comparative analysis of foreign experience, which contributed
to define the state of the investigated issue and find out actual questions
which have not been solved yet; generalization and systematization of
theoretical material, which allowed to outline modern trends in higher
education internationalization.
- empirical methods: diagnostic tools (interviews initiated with
heads of international affairs offices to find out HEI state at local level;
questionnaires with international students, were used to identify the level of
students’ satisfaction and attractiveness of Sumy universities).
- statistical: percentage indicators of the quantitative and qualitative
characteristics of interview data were chosen as units of measurement.
We developed and used our own diagnostic methods – written
interview paper and questionnaires. Written interview paper was elaborated
for people responsible for internationalization processes in the universities.
The decision concerning the question inclusion in the interview paper
questionnaire was taken on the basis of theoretical analysis of world HEI
state. Thus, theoretic results were fundamental for empirical part of our
research. The following issues were included in the interview paper:
availability of “HEI strategic document and department responsible for
HEI”, “Priority directions”, “International students and lectors” “Local
students going abroad for study”, “Lectors with intercultural experience”,
“Joint research and publications in foreign editions”, “Joint academic
programs and special programs for foreign students”, “Internationalized
curriculum”, “ICT for HEI”, “Assessment of HEI results”. Questionnaires
were focused on students satisfaction: likes and dislikes concerning
infrastructure, teaching methods, communication with local students, future
plans.
3. Results.
Survey of global state and trends in higher education
internationalization is highlighted regularly by scholars of such international
organizations as International Association of Universities (https://www.iau-
Revista Românească pentru September, 2021
Educaţie Multidimensională Volume 13, Issue 3
512
aiu.net) and European Association for International Education
(https://www.eaie.org). One of the main HEI form, student mobility, both
vertical and horizontal, long-term and short-term, is revealed by Teichler U.
(2017), Caruso R. & De Wit H. (2018), Cavalli А. & Teichler U. (2015).
Others, Crăciun D. (2018), Yudkevich M., Altbach P. & Rumbley L. (2016),
Jones E. (2016), De Wit H. (2017) studied changes in global and institutional
academic policy and practice. Leask B. (2015), Green W. & Whitsed C.
(2013) and others, researched transformation of education content within
limits of internationalization, in particular curriculum. Such scholars as
Kuroda K. (2016), Knight J. (2017) investigated phenomenon of HEI
regionalization. Jonathan Crichton et al (2004) studied internationalization
mostly from the point of intercultural competence acquisition. All
mentioned scientists treated and interpreted the notion of HEI, mainly,
according to the interests of different stakeholders on different stages of
internationalization development. Of course, there were attempts to
introduce a universal understanding. However, vision and approaches to the
concept of HEI are being changed steadily with the time and therefore
require renovation, specification and systematization for the whole
perception of HEI. Analysis of the literature will lead to better
understanding of the phenomenon at modern stage and contribute to
renovation of the notion.
Having analyzed a mass of literature concerning understanding and
interpretation of the notion higher education internationalization we
conclude that different interpretations of the notion HEI reflect realities of
the time, within limits of which the phenomenon was explored. At the
broadest level of discourse, internationalisation was characterised in a variety
of ways. The most common internationalisation meanings associated with:
the presence of international students; study abroad/international mobility
programs; internationalising the curriculum; off-shore academic programs;
international cooperation and joint research; international knowledge and
skills such as cultural awareness, second language acquisition, and interaction
across cultures and so on. Of course, the meanings may be used at further
development of the concept.
As Australian researcher Jonathan Crichton stated, most definitions
are couched in terms of objectives or spheres of activity. For instance, the
definition provided by Notre Dame University includes a specific focus on
interaction among people across cultures. It is as follows: ‘broadening the
experience and perspectives of all students regardless of geographical origin
(but especially for local students) to encompass a wide range of learning
environments, as well as aspects of social and professional interaction with
Modern State in Higher Education Internationalization at Global and Local …
Аndrii CHYRVA, et al.
513
people from other races and cultures….’. (Crichton et al., 2004, p.120). This
definition emphasises intercultural goals of internationalisation where
international activity is sufficient. It does not describe qualitative indicators
of internationalisation process but focus on intercultural competence
development.
But we fully agree with Australian researchers Jonathan Crichton and
his colleagues who noticed that the desire for a definition, the challenge of
fully conceptualising not only the scope but also the nature of
internationalisation, and the difficulties in gaining full acceptance from staff
for the process of internationalisation would suggest that, as institutions
engage with the process of internationalisation, continuously expanding the
range of activity in quantitative terms, increasing attention will need to be
given to ways of conceptualising the process in qualitative terms. This points
to the need for a conceptualising framework that captures all aspects of
internationalisation and provides some sense of coherence in what would
otherwise appear to be a list of fragmented objectives or activities. (Crichton
et al., 2004). It is clear that internationalization should be understood both at
global and institutional levels.
The most complicated stage of the notion development is the need
of its universality, we mean possibility of its application in different
countries, cultures, educational systems. It should be noted, that universality
of the notion is not connected with understanding rationales, gains, incomes,
actors, activity and stakeholders, as they can be different from nation to
nation and in different institutions. It is very important that international
dimension concerns all aspects of education and its role in society. To our
mind, the most universal interpretation of the notion is proposed by
Canadian scientist Jane Knight (2004). She accentuates that:
“Internationalization is a process of integrating an international, intercultural
and global dimensions into the goals, primary functions and delivery of
higher education” (Knight, 2004). This notion interprets internationalization
as continuous and steady process of creating something international but not
one separate kind of activity. It covers different aspects of
internationalization such as institutional strategy, mobility of students and
lectors, curriculum and learning process, including issues of curricular
transformation and quality improvement, research activity, projects of
international development, personnel development and export of
educational services abroad.
However, this universality is not enough nowadays. Modern realities
required renovation of internationalization vision and J. Hudzik (2015) has
proposed the notion “comprehensive internationalization” which defines the
Revista Românească pentru September, 2021
Educaţie Multidimensională Volume 13, Issue 3
514
concept as intentional, institutional commitment and action to infuse and
integrate international, global, and comparative content and perspective
throughout the teaching, research, and service missions of higher education.
Beyond such basic functions of higher education institutions, he argues that
the comprehensive approach is the overarching intention to integrate
internationalization into the core institutional ethos, values, and mission
(Hudzik, 2015).
Trying to connect the notions of two mentioned above scientists
Japanese researcher O. Hiroshi (2018) explains internationalization as a
multifaceted and multidimensional process integrating international,
intercultural, and global content and dimensions into the functions and aims
of higher education institutions and systems. We agree with such combined
interpretation of the notion but would like to add modern vision of another
scholar, who sees internationalization as active engagement with the design
of policies, plans, programs, strategies and approaches at various levels of
decision-making so as to promote the idea of internationality in higher
education (Crăciun, 2018).
Thus, on the basis of the literature analysis we consider it necessary
to renovate the meaning of HEI and synthetize modern notion which will
combine universality and comprehensiveness. We propose the notion
“complete internationalization”. Our interpretation of complete
internationalization is the following: It is engagement, devotion and
commitment of both all education management levels and teaching stuff to
multifaceted process of intentional long-lasting infusion and integration of
international dimensions with comparative constituent into all functions and
missions of higher education and active designing of policies, plans,
programs, strategies and approaches for promotion of internationality in
higher education.. We consider this combined vision to be universal,
multifaceted and comprehensive enough, applicable for our further research
and it may be applied in different countries with different educational
systems and different level of development.
3.1. Global HEI state. One of the main trends at global level is
orientation of universities on institutional ratings provided by international
assessment agencies. The main indicators of successful higher education
internationalization are availability of joint international research projects,
joint international scientific publications, presence of international teaching
stuff, international students, and availability of internationalized curricula.
Most universities engaged in internationalization indicate availability of
departments responsible for internationalization and develop official
Modern State in Higher Education Internationalization at Global and Local …
Аndrii CHYRVA, et al.
515
strategic statements and documents concerning HEI. At modern stage of
global development of HEI under conditions of social and economic
challenges, caused by quarantine, the highest actuality receive innovative
forms of internationalization connected with the usage of ICT-
means/technologies. Among them are virtual mobility, distant academic
mobility, electronic internationalization.
So, analysis of research provided by representatives from
International Association of Universities (https://www.iau-aiu.net),
European Association of Distant Teaching Universities
(https://eadtu.eu/about-eadtu/about-eadtu) for the last three years and also
scientific literature: J. Crichton et al (2004); J. Knight (2004); R. Caruso
(2015); J. Hudzik (2015); B. Leask (2015); K. Kuroda (2016); J. Knight
(2017); U. Teichler (2017); D. Crăciun (2018); O. Hiroshi (2018); O. Lvova,
2019) allowed us to outline the most important classic and innovative higher
education internationalization forms at all levels (table 1).
Table 1. The most important higher education internationalization forms.
Main classic forms
Main innovative forms
Development of strategic
documents
Academic mobility
Joint international research and
publications
Internationalized curriculum
Virtual mobility
Distant academic mobility
Electronic internationalization
Source: Authors’ own conception
Main classic forms include: development of strategic documents –
official papers including internationalization aims, tasks, missions,
statements; academic mobility – recruitment of international students and
lectors as well as local students and lectors going abroad for studying and
gaining international experience; joint international research and publications
– cooperative scientific investigations and publication of research results in
foreign editions; internationalized curriculum – availability of joint academic
programs, special academic programs for foreign students, international and
internationalized disciplines (with international content), English-speaking
courses. Main innovative forms are: virtual mobility, distant academic
mobility and electronic internationalization
Virtual mobility is developing rapidly side by side with student and
academic stuff physical mobility, which became an integral part of HEI in
economically developed countries. This form of HEI is not restricted in
Revista Românească pentru September, 2021
Educaţie Multidimensională Volume 13, Issue 3
516
space and time, and it opens opportunity to all willing students and lectors
to enrich their portfolio with international experience and gain international
and intercultural competence. And higher educational institutions can
elaborate innovative educational programs. More over virtual mobility assists
cooperation of individuals from different cultures, countries and spheres
inside of virtual society. Example of regionalized virtual mobility may be
European Association of Distant Teaching Universities
(https://eadtu.eu/about-eadtu/about-eadtu). Anticipating on new
developments in mobility European wide, EADTU established a Task Force
Virtual Mobility in 2018, focusing on mapping blended and online mobility
in the context of international collaboration.
Distant academic mobility means opportunity for students to receive
educational services online on relative websites. It contributes to broaden
mental outlook of students, join the treasure of global knowledge, look at
different events and phenomena from different points of view, and
understand cultural and national differences and peculiarities, feel
themselves a part of global society. As a rule, tutors recommend suitable
sites to students or the last ones can search themselves but results of
educational steps are discussed with the lectors. The main challenge for this
form of HEI stays the language of international communication, English. As
the level of mastering by international students is desired to be much better,
for exception students from English-speaking countries. In a result one can
observe the following trends of HEI development:
1. Emersion of specialized resources providing adequate translation,
gaining, mastering and improving language skills.
2. Strengthening of competitive positions at global market of
educational services, rising attractiveness of national educational
establishments abroad and improvement of own efficiency as exporter of
educational services. To reach this aim universities use more and more
innovative ІCТ-technology.
Electronic internationalization provides internet resources of
educational institutions in English, including sites with corresponding
information (at least about institution, its history, acceptance rules,
educational programs, library, mission and strategic goals, contacts) and
reports about higher educational establishment in English-speaking social
nets (Lvova, 2019).
In general, international scholars, representatives of international
organizations such as International Association of Universities during the
last 30 years outlined the following features of HEI:
Modern State in Higher Education Internationalization at Global and Local …
Аndrii CHYRVA, et al.
517
- More focused on internationalization abroad than on
internationalization at home.
- More ad hoc, fragmented and marginal than strategic,
comprehensive and central in policies.
- More in the interest of a small, elite subset of students and faculty
than focused on global and intercultural outcomes for all.
- Directed by a constantly shifting range of political, economic,
social/cultural, and educational rationales, with increasing focus on
economic motivations.
- Increasingly driven by national, regional, and global rankings.
- Little alignment between the international dimensions of the three
core functions of higher education: education, research, and service to
society.
- Primarily a strategic choice and focus of institutions of higher
education, and less a priority of national governments.
- Less important in emerging and developing economies, and more of
a particular strategic concern among developed economies.
(de Wit, 2018).
3.2. Local HEI state. Vision of global trends in HEI supports
studying the phenomenon at institutional level as the aims are similar though
stakeholders are different. According to information presented by Ukrainian
universities in their strategic documents we can observe steady growing of
interest to HEI at institutional level. Most institutions go on using strategic
approaches to HEI. More than 90% of universities indicated availability of
internationalization in their strategic plans. The institutions with high
interest to HEI in the past state growing of internationalization importance.
This trend may lead to growing inequality between institutions. The principal
rationales are – institutional leadership and international offices. The main
barriers are insufficient financial resources, bureaucratic difficulties and poor
knowledge of English (Chyrva, 2013).
According to information regularly revealed by International
Association of Universities (https://www.iau-aiu.net) we can state that these
trends are also characteristic for global level. Educational purposes,
academic freedom and autonomy are indicated as principal values of HEI.
The most important forms are student mobility, strategic partnership and
international research cooperation. Assessment of internationalization is
becoming general practice for universities, however only part of them use
complex approach.
At their official documents, leading Ukrainian universities mention
most frequently the following principal forms of higher education
internationalization: effective cooperation between universities-partners,
Revista Românească pentru September, 2021
Educaţie Multidimensională Volume 13, Issue 3
518
intensification of academic mobility for students and teaching stuff,
development of language courses for students, inviting international
scholars for lecturing intercultural content and increasing the number of
English-speaking courses in curriculum (Chyrva, 2013).
Regionally, the situation may look different, so we decided to
conduct in-depth analysis of three Ukrainian universities in Sumy region.
The choice is simply explained - we live and work there.
Based on the data analysis from interviews initiated with heads of
international affairs offices at three universities of Sumy region, namely
Sumy State University (https://sumdu.edu.ua/int/en/), Sumy National
Agrarian University (http://www.snau.edu.ua/) and Sumy State Pedagogic
University (https://sspu.edu.ua/), we got the vision of real HEI picture in
Sumy region which is depicted in table (table 2). The table was composed
according to the order of the questions asked during the interviews. First
question was included due to its prior importance in the global scale, and
most leading universities pay much attention to elaboration or development
of internationalization strategies (strategic documents).
Table 2. Internationalization at local universities. (Sumy, Ukraine)
SSU
SNAU
SSPU
Availability of
HEI strategic
document
Internationalization
strategy
Internationalization
statements
HEI plan
Departments
responsible for
IHE
department of
international
relations,
international
education,
internationalization
of educational
activity, agency on
student mobility
department of
foreign affairs,
department of
international students
support
department
of foreign
affairs
Priority directions
International
cooperation,
education quality,
intercultural
competence
(comprehensive
internationalization)
International
cooperation, research
and publications,
recruitment of
international students
international
cooperation,
academic and
research
programs,
mobility,
intern.
ranking
International
1616 (8610) 18,7%
500 (3700) 13,5
374 (4100)
Modern State in Higher Education Internationalization at Global and Local …
Аndrii CHYRVA, et al.
519
students
9,1%
Local students
going abroad for
study
2%
About 1%
Less 1%
International
lectors
3,2%
Less 1%
Less 1%
Lectors with
intercultural
experience
About 10 %
About 2%
Less 1%
Joint research
100+
30+
8
Publications in
foreign editions
400+
280+
120+
Special acad.
programs for
foreign students
68
5
3 (Russian,
nursing,
visagist)
Joint acad.
programs
5
2
3
Internationalized
curriculum
-
-
-
ICT for HEI
-
-
-
Assessment of
HEI results
-
-
-
Future plans
concerning HEI
development
Complex
(comprehensive)
internationalization
cooperation,
recruitment of
international students
cooperation,
attracting
more
international
students
Source: Authors’ own conception
According to interviews initiated with heads of international affairs
offices, we could outline the following internationalization features at local
level. All the interviewees proved that universities are devoted to the process
of internationalization but not equally. All three universities developed
strategic internationalization documents. (SSU – strategy 2019-2025, SSPU -
HEI plan, SNAU – internationalization statements) and have departments
devoted to the process of internationalization. Here, we have to state that
level of university devotion to the process is different. As we can judge
from the interviews, SSU takes the lead. It has the biggest number of
departments responsible for IHE: department of international relations,
department of international education, internationalization of educational
activity department, agency on student mobility. SNAU takes the second
place having two departments: department of foreign affairs and department
Revista Românească pentru September, 2021
Educaţie Multidimensională Volume 13, Issue 3
520
of international student support. Concerning priority directions, all three
interviewees pointed out number one priority - international cooperation. As
for the second and third ones, interviewee from SSU outlined education
quality and intercultural competence, interviewee from SNAU - research and
publications as they influence on international ranking most of all and
recruitment of international students, interviewee from SSPU - academic and
research programs, mobility. Incoming international students is of high
importance for all three universities. Statistical method of quantitative
characteristics counting allowed us to show percentage indicators of
academic mobility. SSU takes the lead – 18,7% of international students
from the total student body, SNAU – 13,5% and SSPU – 9,1%. Thus,
according to interview data analysis we can affirm that recruitment of
foreign students stays to be one of the main trends in HEI at local level.
General percentage (13,7 %) of international students in the region allows to
state that all three universities are rather attractive for foreigners. It also can
be proved by the level of university attractiveness and international students’
satisfaction, which was defined by us with the help of questionnaires focused
on students’ satisfaction: likes and dislikes concerning infrastructure,
teaching methods, communication with local students, future plans. The
questionnaire data collection is depicted in the table (table 3).
Table 3. University attractiveness level for international students.
Question
SSU
(44 students)
SSPU
(40 students )
SNAU
(34 students)
Likes about
infrastructure (5
point
assessment)
«3» - 4
«4» - 36
«5» - 4
«3» - 4
«4» - 10
«5» - 26
«3» - 4
«4» - 10
«5» - 20
Satisfaction with
methods of
teaching
(5 point
assessment)
«3» - 2
«4» - 20
«5» - 22
«4» - 14
«5» - 24
«3» - 2
«4» - 20
«5» - 11
«3» - 3
Easiness of
communication
with local
students?
easy - 30
with problems - 6
hard - 8
easy - 24
with problems-10
hard - 6
easy - 12
with problems
-18
hard - 4
The biggest
challenges
weather cond.-13
kitchen - 17
language barrier-7
other - 7
weather cond. - 6
kitchen - 14
language barrier-14
other - 6
weather cond. -
11
kitchen - 13
language
Modern State in Higher Education Internationalization at Global and Local …
Аndrii CHYRVA, et al.
521
barrier-5
other - 5
Dissatisfactions
(multiple choice)
No - 16
Medicine level-24
Hostels – 20
Kitchen - 12
Other - 16
No - 20
Medicine level-19
Hostels – 18
Kitchen -14
Other - 7
No - 8
Medicine level-
22
Hostels - 13
Kitchen – 9
Other - 9
“Will you
recommend the
university to
your
compatriots?”
«yes» - 42
«no» - 2
«yes» - 40
«yes» - 33
«no» - 1
Future
employment
planning
«Abroad» - 16
«Home» - 28
«Abroad» - 14
«Home» - 26
«Abroad» - 18
«Home» - 16
Source: Authors’ own conception
According to questionnaire data analysis we can confirm that most
of international students from three universities are satisfied with
infrastructure and methods of teaching, though they face such challenges as
difficulties in communication with locals, adjusting to the weather, kitchen.
Despite dissatisfaction with hostels and medicine care, they are ready to
recommend the universities to their compatriots, and many of them are
going to look for a job in Ukraine. Thus, international students assisted in
revealing weak points to be improved by university authorities.
We also should emphasize some weak points related to
internationalization in the regional universities. The percentage of outgoing
students at these universities is low 1-2%. Financial barriers and low
incomes of most Ukrainian families, which cannot afford studying abroad,
can explain this trend. Percentage of international lectors at Sumy region is
also rather poor, in general about 1,5 %. Lectors with intercultural
experience indicated a little higher figure - about 4 %, mostly thanks to the
figure of SSU (about 10%). Number of joint academic programs in the
region is very small, only 5 at SSU, 2 at SNAU and 3 at SSPU. All three
interviewees admitted the absence of internationalized curriculum and main
innovative forms: virtual mobility, distant academic mobility, electronic
internationalization as the weakest points of HEI. Elaboration of
internationalized curriculum has to be started by the Ministry of education
of Ukraine as universities has no enough autonomy for it. We also have to
ascertain the fact that assessment of results of higher education
Revista Românească pentru September, 2021
Educaţie Multidimensională Volume 13, Issue 3
522
internationalization is not carried out at Sumy region. Concerning special
academic programs for international students, they are not popular within
SNAU and SSPU, they have only 5 and 3 such programs accordingly. Only
SSU is constantly developing special academic programs for international
students and has 68 of them for now. All three universities are engaged in
joint research to different extent (SSU – more than 100, SNAU – more than
30, SSPU - 8). And all of them are devoted to publications in foreign or
international editions. Again, SSU takes the lead – more than 400
publications, SNAU and SSPU – over 280 and 120 accordingly.
Nevertheless, all universities have plans concerning HEI further
development.
4. Discussion.
Related to the research ethics, we would like to thank all the
participants who kindly agreed to help us. It should be mentioned that
research was previously approved by foreign languages department of
SNAU. All the participants were told about the purpose of the study and
were gallantly asked to take part in interviews and questionnaires. They were
informed that participation was voluntary and anonymous, therefore they
could withdraw with no consequences on their status.
In fact, there are up to a dozen of higher education institutions in
Sumy region, but most of them train specialist with bachelor degree.
(colleges, technical schools, special schools). Moreover, these institutions
train students of younger age and practically all of them are not engaged in
internationalization and do not train foreign students. Some rare exceptions
are students from post-soviet area who know Ukrainian or Russian. And this
situation is actual for the whole Ukraine, exceptions are only some colleges,
dominantly in Kyiv. That is why we focus on establishments training full-
time students including foreigners which aim to get master degree –
universities. Most universities of Ukraine try to be compatible and therefore
are involved in internationalization to different extend. There are only three
universities in Sumy region really engaged in HEI and besides this, they
provide higher education (master degree) to the majority of students
studying in the region, so we consider it correct and relevant to draw the
conclusions based on the study results of only three universities.
We would like to emphasize the international significance of the
article as a combined universal, multifaceted and comprehensive vision of
the phenomenon, applicable in different countries was proposed. For the
first time was introduced and interpreted the notion of “complete
internationalization”, which may be worthy in the further development of
Modern State in Higher Education Internationalization at Global and Local …
Аndrii CHYRVA, et al.
523
higher education field at international level. The most important classic and
innovative higher education internationalization forms were outlined. All the
issues connected with the outlined forms were included in the interview
paper. Besides this, an issue of measuring and assessing HEI results could
not be ignored while approaching internationalization as it became rather
actual necessity at modern stage of global HEI development, so it was also
included. With the help of interview and questionnaire data analysis we have
done a small-scale evaluation of HEI at universities of our region. The paper
proposes analysis of HEI state in one of twenty-four regions of Ukraine and
identifies strong and weak points. From scientific point of view, these results
can be valuable for the stakeholders interested in complete
internationalization not only within Ukraine but also around the world in
particular in developing countries where similar situation may occur. The
conducted research of HE internationalization state in the region will allow
to predict its potential. The data we referred to may be comprehensive at the
regional level and as a potential extension they may refer to the national, and
international level
It was mentioned earlier that most universities of the world accept
HEI as an aim itself. However, Holland scholar Hans De Wit (2018) does
not share such position. In his scientific paper, he argues that HEI is
mistakenly taken as an aim itself but not the means of education and science
quality improvement. Internationalization has to influence improvement of
education and research for all students and teaching stuff and make
significant contribution to human society. Usually economic and political
rationales become the main reason for distortion of main
internationalization idea. Researcher outlined the following global and
controversial trends affecting the HEI policy: massification from one side
and knowledge economy from the opposite one; autonomy and academic
freedom confront reputation and rates, and also changes in economic and
political climate (de Wit, 2018).
As we can see, understanding of HEI is being changed from reactive
to proactive that is at modern stage HEI for universities is not only a
declaration, concept or statement, but action and reality. Initiatives are
changing from imitation to attempts to act and stay in the same level with
successful universities, taking into consideration own peculiarities.
Besides this, at modern stage there appear thoughts concerning
expediency of deviation from generally accepted westernized conception of
HEI, and English-speaking paradigm. A number of scholars of new
generation rise their voices for protection of non-English-speaking
Revista Românească pentru September, 2021
Educaţie Multidimensională Volume 13, Issue 3
524
paradigm: Jones E. & de Wit H. (2014), de Wit H., Gacel-Avila J., Jones E.
& Jooste N. (2017), Proctor D. & Rumbley L. (2018).
In one of her recent studies of global situation around HEI German
explorer Daniela Crăciun (2018) stated the fact that only 11% of world
countries have official strategies of internationalization and in addition,
mostly well-developed countries. The leaders are European countries, which
promote strategic thinking concerning internationalization at national level.
Two thirds of all national strategies of the world belong to European
countries, and their programs Erasmus+ and Horizon 2020 resulted further
harmonization of higher education systems. (Crăciun, 2018).
As we can judge on the literature reviewed, the presence of
international lectors at universities is considered all around the world to be
important dimension of higher education in a global knowledge economy.
However, according to the data of IAU (https://www.iau-aiu.net/),
international teaching stuff compose only small part of total personnel. 20%
of higher educational establishments have no international lectors at all, and
34% of them have less than 5% of international lectors from total number
of teaching stuff. Regionally, the lowest percentage of international stuff has
Latin America and Caribbean region, at the same time, the highest in Asia,
pacific region and Northern America.
Another important dimension of the phenomenon is
internationalization of research, as they require international cooperation
and competition. Long-time planning of research infrastructure, growing
number of research works, development of new research platforms and
better coordinationіon between research subdivisions, all this require more
strategic approach for increase of research number and for policy of
international research. Rising of financing, growing number of patents,
publications and citations require development of research teams of global
origin. Talented post-graduates and scholars are international human capital,
on which research, development and innovations are based. All this,
together with international rates explains growing attention to elaboration of
national and institutional strategies of research internationalization.
Consequently, we can state that principal rationales of HEI at universities
are rates and qualitative internationalization indicators, which they are based
on: number of international students, lectors and publications with
international co-authors.
Because of the mentioned quality indicators of international agencies
universities face with such challenges of the present time as pressure in the
direction of necessity to generate income, competition for talents, branding
and reputation (rates), international research and publications, recruitment of
Modern State in Higher Education Internationalization at Global and Local …
Аndrii CHYRVA, et al.
525
international students and engagement of international scholars, usage of
English as a language of research and teaching. This pressure is controversial
to more inclusive and less elite approach to internationalization, which is
based on the needs and possibilities of local students and teaching
personnel. In other words, there exists tension between short-term
neoliberal approach, which is focused mostly on mobility and research and
long-term one – comprehensively qualitative approach of global education
for all. Such values of rate agencies move to backside such forms of
internationalization as internationalized curriculum, internationalization of
teaching and learning and generate negative phenomena such as
fragmentation and marginalization.
With the aim to overcome negative phenomena of HEI -
fragmentation and marginalization, Canadian scientist John Hudzik (2015)
proposes to take into consideration more centralized, integral and systematic
approach to HEI. The researcher introduces the notion «comprehensive
internationalization», which provides deliberate benevolence and actions
directed on implementation and integration of international, global and
comparative content, and perspectives in teaching, research and goals of
higher education. He accents, that this comprehensive approach is all-
embracive intention to integrate internationalization into the heart of
institutional ethos, values and missions (Hudzik, 2015).
At global level, as it is mentioned by representatives of IAU, the
most expected advantage of HEI for all regions, except for Northern
America, is broadening of international cooperation. By our research, it is
also proved to be true for local level. We believe that main social risks are
commodification and commercialization of educational programs together
with brain drain. The principal external rationales are: needs of business and
industry, inquiries from foreign universities and governmental policy. The
most important barriers are difficulties at recognition of qualification
equivalence, educational programs and credits.
Under conditions of COVID pandemia especially current is
development of collaborative international online learning. One of the most
expedient recommendation we consider implementation of exactly this
paradigm. It provides creation of joint poly-cultural educational environment
for development of intercultural competence. Collaborative international
online learning due to innovative online pedagogy, combines main
dimensions of virtual mobility: collaborative practice for students and
lectors, applied usage of online technologies and interaction, international
dimensions, integrity in educational process.
Revista Românească pentru September, 2021
Educaţie Multidimensională Volume 13, Issue 3
526
In Ukraine, the concept of virtual internationalization of higher
education may be considered as an attempt of virtual internationalization at
national level. The project Tempus «Е-internationalization for
Collaborative Leaning» gave opportunity to state that virtual HEI is –
including different international aspects into research, teaching and
administrative activity of higher educational establishments based on usage
of modern informative technologies. This project includes examples of
virtual internationalization of higher education in Ukraine. In particular,
international web-seminars and е-practicums, international video-
conferences, video-lectures, video-seminars, work in virtual groups on
conducting joint situation tasks, participation in international professional
internet-forums, online cooperation in preparation of scientific articles,
remote usage of research and laboratory equipment, student participation
in international contests, business games and so on (The Concept of virtual
internationalization of higher education of Ukraine).
Analysis of interviews initiated with heads of international affairs
offices enabled us to reveal weak points of internationalization at
institutional level in the region. For improvement of the situation, based on
the research conducted, we can draw the following recommendations for
university policy makers in Ukraine, which also can be valuable for global,
regional, local and institutional stakeholders interested in
internationalization, in particular in developing countries where similar
situation may occur: engaging all possible human resources in the process,
elaboration of marketing, program, organizational and academic strategies
of higher education internationalization; teaching general and special
disciplines in foreign languages. Broadening of institutional connections
between universities abroad; conducting joint scientific and technical
research with foreign laboratories and institutions; development and
implementation of aiming language courses for teaching stuff,
implementation of internationalized academic programs into educational
process may contribute significant to HEI. Development and
implementation of special courses with intercultural content and invitation
of foreign scholars to teach disciplines; conduct seminars, organize
trainings, round tables on current issues of international higher education,
academic mobility, internationalization of higher education systems in EU
for lectors from Ukrainian institutions must become a strategic
institutional issue. Main innovative forms: virtual mobility, distant academic
mobility, electronic internationalization should also be taken as tools for
higher education internationalization.
Modern State in Higher Education Internationalization at Global and Local …
Аndrii CHYRVA, et al.
527
We have to admit some limitations of the work. Small number of
respondents, only 118 international students from 3 universities were
engaged. The scope of questions is not broad enough. Study of the situation
at the whole national level was geographically restricted. So, we stress on the
need for detailed study of HEI at national level, in particular implementation
of internationalized curriculum. Under conditions of Ukraine, as universities
have no enough autonomy and depend on ministry of education and science
of Ukraine concerning curricular, therefore they can internationalize the
content of education only by transformation of working academic programs
and individual disciplines.
5. Conclusion.
So, main general modern HEI trends are: strengthening of global
competition for international students; growing necessity in curriculum
internationalization, internationalization of teaching and learning results,
further development of international cooperation in research.
Strategic approach to HEI becomes more general phenomenon, but
this approach is not taken as a tool by all institutions. More characteristic is
availability of internationalization policy or strategy, and it becomes the
norm. Together with internationalization of research appears more global
approach to HEI. Curriculum internationalization is considered to be very
important form of internationalization, however, in practice student mobility
retains to be the most important activity. Accordingly, less than 5% of
students receive advantages of higher education internationalization.
International teaching stuff retains to be minority. Even if universities
appreciate international experience, they consider it more helpful than
necessary.
The scope and nature of academic mobility remains insufficiently
studied, in particular at regional level. An issue of HEI assessment requires
deep and detailed studying, as there exist necessity of developing highly
efficient methods of evaluating results of internationalization for efficient
distribution of recourses. The whole educational system of Ukraine should
be addressed from the prospective of internationalization.
References
Cavalli, A., & Teichler, U. (2015). Mobility and migration in science. European
Review, 23(1), S1-S5. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1062798714000751
Caruso, R., & De Wit, H. (2015). Determinants of mobility of students in Europe:
Empirical evidence for the period 1998-2009. Journal of Studies in
Revista Românească pentru September, 2021
Educaţie Multidimensională Volume 13, Issue 3
528
International Education, 19(3), 265-282.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1028315314563079
Crăciun, D. (2018). National Policies for Higher Education Internationalization: A
Global Comparative Perspective. In Curaj, A., Deca, L., & Pricopie, R.
(Eds.), European Higher Education Area: The Impact of Past and Future Policies
(pp. 95 – 106). Springer. http://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-77407-7_7
Conceptsia virtualnoi internationalizatsii vyshchoi osvity Ukrainy. Proect «Е-
internationalizatsia dlia navchannia u spivpratsi» [The Concept of Virtual
internationalization of higher education of Ukraine. The project «E-
internationalization for Collaborative Learning»]. Retrieved September 15,
2020: http://www.eicl.kharkiv.edu/upload/E-
internationalization%20concept_Ukraine.pdf
Chyrva, А. (2013). Tendentsii internatsionalizatsii soderzhania vysscheho obrazovania Kanady.
Monohrafia [Trends of higher education content internationalization in
Canada. Monograph]. LAP LAMBERT. Academic Publishing.
Crichton, J., Paige, M., Papademetre, L., & Scarino, A. (2004). Integrated resources for
intercultural teaching and learning in the context of internationalisation in higher
education. Report to Teaching and Learning Committee. University of South
Australia.
https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.116.5500&rep
=rep1&type=pdf
De Wit, H. (2018). Evolving Concepts, Trends, and Challenges in the
Internationalization of Higher Education in the World. Educational Studies,
Higher School of Economics, 2, 8-34. https://doi.org/10.17323/1814-9545-
2019-2-8-34
De Wit, H., Gacel-Avila, J., Jones, E., & Jooste, N. (Eds.). (2017). The Globalization
of Internationalization: Emerging Voices and Perspectives (1st ed.)
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315657547
Green, W. & Whitsed, C. (2013). Reflections on an alternative approach to
continuing professional learning for internationalization of the curriculum
across disciplines. Journal of Studies in International Education, 17(2), 148 - 164.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1028315312463825
Hiroshi, O. (2018). Internationalization of Higher Education: Global Trends and
Japan’s Challenges. Educational Studies in Japan: International Yearbook, 12, 91-
105. https://doi.org/10.7571/esjkyoiku.12.91
Hudzik, J. (2015). Comprehensive Internationalization: Institutional Pathways to
Success. High Education, 72 (1st ed.). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-015-
9948-9
Jones, E, Beelen, J., Coelen, R., De Wit, H. (Eds.), (2016). Local and Global
Internationalisation. Internationalisation of Education. Springer.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6300-301-8
Modern State in Higher Education Internationalization at Global and Local …
Аndrii CHYRVA, et al.
529
Jones E., & De Wit, H. (2014). Globalized Internationalization: Implications for
Policy and Practice. IIE Networker, 28-29. Institute of International
Education
https://www.academia.edu/6528914/Globalized_Internationalization_Im
plications_for_Policy_and_Practice
Knight, J. (2004). Internationalization Remodeled: Definition, Approaches, and
Rationales. Journal of Studies in International Education, 8(1), 5-31.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1028315303260832
Kuroda K. (2016). Regionalization of higher education in Asia. In C. Collins, M.
Lee, J. Hawkins, & D. Neubauer (Eds.), The Palgrave Handbook of Asia
Pacific Higher Education (pp. 141-156). https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-
137-48739-1_10
Leask, B. (2015). Internationalizing the Curriculum. Internationalization in higher education.
Routledge.
Lvova, O. (2019). ІCT-tools for internationalization of continuous education.
RUDN Journal of Informatization in Education, 16(1), 56-63.
https://doi.org/10.22363/2312-8631-2019-16-1-56-63
Proctor, D., & Rumbley, L. (Eds.), (2018). The Future Agenda for Internationalization in
Higher Education: Next Generation Insights into Research, Policy, and Practice (1st
ed.). Routledge.
Teichler, U. (2017). Іnternationalisation trends in higher education and the
changing role of international student mobility. Journal of international
Mobility, 5(1), 177-216. https://doi.org/10.3917/jim.005.0179
Yudkevich, M., Altbach, P., & Rumbley, L. (Eds.), (2016). The Global Academic
Rankings Game. Changing Institutional Policy, Practice, and Academic
Life (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.1177/0268580918791974
