Understanding Education Hubs Within the Context of Crossborder Education
The purpose of this chapter is to expand on the typology and explain in detail how the three models differ or overlap in characteristics and how they relate to one another. A framework is used to guide the exploration and comparison of education hubs along five different lines of analysis: focus, primary objectives, key policy sectors involved, major actors and the dominant strategies. Each of these elements is studied in depth in order to understand the differences and similarities across the three models of education hubs. This analysis is critical to understanding the six case studies which follow.
KeywordsHost Country International Student High Education Institution Soft Power Student Mobility
- Alba, J., Hur, J., & Park, D. (2010). Do Hub-and-Spoke free trade agreements increase trade? A panel data analysis (An ADB working paper series on regional economic integration No. 46). Manila: Asian Development Bank.Google Scholar
- Bohm, A., Davis, D., Meares, D., & Pearce, D. (2002). The global student mobility 2025 report: Forecasts of the global demand for international education. Canberra: IDP.Google Scholar
- Knight, J. (2008). Higher education in turmoil: The changing world of internationalization. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
- Knight, J. (2010). Regional education hubs: Rhetoric or reality? International Higher Education, 59, 20–21.Google Scholar
- Knight, J. (2011b). Three types of education hubs-are indicators ‘useful and feasible? (Research report). London: Observatory of Borderless Education.Google Scholar
- Knight, J. (2014). Understanding education hubs within the context of crossborder education. In J. Knight (Ed.), International education hubs: Student, talent, knowledge-innovation (pp. 13–28). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
- OBHE, & Becker, R. (2009). International branch campuses: Markets and strategies. London: The Observatory on Borderless Higher Education.Google Scholar
- OBHE, Lawton, W., & Katsomitros, A. (2012a). MOOCs and disruptive innovation: The challenge to HE business models. London: The Observatory on Borderless Higher Education.Google Scholar
- OBHE, Lawton, W., & Katsomitros, A. (2012b). International branch campuses: Data and developments. London: The Observatory of Borderless Higher Education.Google Scholar
- OECD. (2012). Education at a glance 2012. Organization for Economic and Community Development. Retrieved October 31, 2012 from http://www.oecd.org/edu/highlights.pdf
- UNESCO Institute for Statistics. (2010). Global education digest. Custom tables. Retrieved August 14, 2011 from http://stats.uis.unesco.org/unesco/TableViewer/document.aspx?ReportId=136&IF_Language=eng&BR_Topic=0
- UNESCO. (2012). Table 17: Inbound mobility rate, female percentage, and sums of internationally mobile students in tertiary education by host country and continent of origin (ISCED 5 and 6). UNESCO Institute for Statistics, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. http://stats.uis.unesco.org/unesco/TableViewer/tableView.aspx?ReportId=170. Accessed Oct 2012.
- Verbik, L., & Merkley, C. (2006). The international branch campus-models and trends. London: Observatory on Borderless Higher Education.Google Scholar