Higher Education

, Volume 69, Issue 4, pp 547–565 | Cite as

Globalisation and MATESOL programmes in the UK

  • Mostafa HasratiEmail author
  • Parvaneh Tavakoli


This article reports the results of a mixed-methods approach to investigating the association between globalisation and MATESOL in UK universities. Qualitative and quantitative data collected from academic staff through eight emails, four interviews and 41 questionnaires indicate that the globalised context of higher education has affected these programmes in a number of ways including an increasing interest in recruiting more international students and a growing awareness about the need for curriculum and content modifications. The analysis of the data suggests that although change has been an inherent characteristic of these MAs over the past decade, it has been implemented gradually and conservatively, often relying on a dialectic relationship between academic staff and universities’ policies. The results also imply that factors other than globalisation have also been at work. Many of the participants contend that globalisation has not lowered the quality of these MAs or standards of good practice.


Globalisation Commodification of knowledge MATESOL Internationalisation of Higher Education Global education markets 


  1. Altbach, P. G. (2004). Globalisation and the university: Myths and realities in an unequal world. Tertiary Education and Management, 10(1), 3–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aronowitz, S., & Giroux, H. (2000). The corporate university and the politics of education. The Educational Forum, 64(4), 332–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Biggs, J. (2003). Teaching for quality learning at university. Buckingham: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Blok, P. (1995). Policy and policy implementation in internationalisation of higher education. Amsterdam: European Association for International Education.Google Scholar
  5. Brandenburge, U., & de Wit, H. (2012). Higher education is losing site of what internationalisation is all about.
  6. Caffarella, R. S., & Barnett, B. G. (2000). Teaching doctoral students to become scholarly writers: The importance of giving and receiving critiques. Studies in Higher Education, 25(1), 39–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Casanave, C. P. (1995). Local interactions: Constructing contexts for composing in a graduate sociology programme. In D. Belcher & G. Braine (Eds.), Academic writing in a second language: Essays on research and pedagogy (pp. 83–112). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
  8. Clothey, R., Mills, M., & Baumgarten, J. (2010). A closer look at the impact of globalisation on science education. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 5(2), 305–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative enquiry and research design. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  10. Davis, J. (2009). The english empire: Global higher education. The Round Table, 98(405), 753–765.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. European Commission Erasmus Programme. (2014). Retrieved January 8, 2014, from
  12. Giddens, A. (1990). The consequences of modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  13. Hasrati, M. (2005a). An introduction to grounded theory. Iranian Journal of Linguistics, 3, 75–86.Google Scholar
  14. Hasrati, M. (2005b). Legitimate peripheral participation and supervising PhD students. Studies in Higher Education, 30(5), 557–570.Google Scholar
  15. Hasrati, M. (2013a). Material and credentialing incentives as symbolic violence: Local engagement and global participation through joint publication. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 27(2), 154–179.Google Scholar
  16. Hasrati, M. (2013b). Why bother about writing a Masters dissertation: Assumptions of faculty and Masters students in an Iranian setting. Asia Pacific Education Review, 14(3), 455–465.Google Scholar
  17. Holtman, R. J. (2005). Making globalisation. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.Google Scholar
  18. Howatt, A. P. R. (1984). A history of english language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Hyland, K. (1990). Providing productive feedback. ELT Journal, 44(4), 279–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hyland, K. (2003). Second language writing. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jiang, X. (2008). Towards the internationalisation of higher education from a critical perspective. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 32(4), 347–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Knight, J. (1997). Internationalisation of higher education: A conceptual framework. In J. Knight & H. de Wit (Eds.), Internationalisation of higher education in Asia Pacific countries (pp. 5–19). Amsterdam: European Association for International Education.Google Scholar
  23. Kvale, S. (1996). Interviews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  24. Lee, J., & Caldwell, B. (2011). Changing schools in an era of globalisation. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  25. Marginson, S., & Van der Wenden, M. (2007). Globalisation and higher education. Paris: OECD/CERI.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Mazzarol, T., & Soutar, G. N. (2012). Revisiting the global market for higher education. Asia Pacific Journal for Marketing and Logistics, 24(5), 717–737.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Mirzaee, A., & Hasrati, M. (2014). The role of written formative feedback in inducing non-formal learning among masters students. Teaching in Higher Education, 19(5), 555–564.Google Scholar
  28. OECD. (2009). Education at a glance: OECD indicators. OECD Publishing.
  29. OECD. (2010). Education at a Glance 2010: OECD indicators. OECD Publishing.
  30. Parry, S. (2007). Disciplines and doctorates. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  31. Porter, P., & Vidovich, L. (2000). Globalisation and higher education policy. Educational Theory, 50(4), 449–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Riazi, A. M., & Candlin, C. N. (2014). Mixed-methods research in language teaching and learning: opportunities, issues and challenges. Language Teaching, 47(2), 135–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Ross, A. (2008). The offshore model for universities. Liberal Education, 94(4), 34–39.Google Scholar
  34. Russell, D. R. (1991). Writing in the academic disciplines, 1870–1990: A curricular history. Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Ryan, J. (2011). Teaching and learning for international students: Towards a transcultural approach. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 17(6), 631–648.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Svensson, L., & Wihlborg, M. (2010). Internationalising the content of higher education: The need for a curriculum perspective. Higher Education, 60(6), 595–613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Tarar, O. N. (2006). Globalisation and higher education in Pakistan. Economic and Political Weekly, 41(40), 5080–5085.Google Scholar
  38. Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2003). Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  39. Torres, C. A., & Rhoads, R. A. (2006). Introduction: Globalisation and higher education in Americas. In R. A. Rhoads & C. A. Torres (Eds.), The university, state, and market: The political economy of globalisation in Americas (pp. 3–38). Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Tavakoli, P., & Hasrati, M. (in preparation). MA's in ELT/Applied Linguistics in Anglophone countries: A global perspectiveGoogle Scholar
  41. Wilkins, S., & Huisman, J. (2012). The international branch campus as transnational strategy in higher education. Higher Education, 64(5), 627–645.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Yang, R. (2002). University internationalisation: Its meaning, rationales and implications. Intercultural Education, 13(1), 81–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of English Language and LinguisticsRazi University of KermanshahKermanshahIran
  2. 2.Department of English Language and Applied LinguisticsUniversity of ReadingBerkshireUK

Personalised recommendations