Global Comparison of International Education

Abstract

This chapter focuses on the global comparison of international education. The first part of this chapter provides a working definition of international education for this chapter as well as an overview of international education in China, and then analyzes China’s education mobility from a global comparative perspective. Drawing upon statistics generated from government websites, official yearbooks, and academic reports, the results of this chapter demonstrate that China has effectively promoted the development of international education and international research collaboration in the past few decades. It also shows that China has been catching up with top universities in the world, in terms of the overseas campuses, overseas research center, exchange programs, international faculty ratio, international joint publication, international student ratio, student mobility, and international doctorate degrees. In terms of the student and faculty-related indicators, Chinese universities still have much potential to develop considering the percentages of international students and faculty in Chinese universities are still low. The second part of this chapter introduces the development of international education in China from four aspects, including best practices of international education, stories of inspiring international collaborations, latest research in international education, and overview of fundamental and key policies in international education. This chapter suggests that the continuous improvement of relevant policies, the strengthening of regulatory mechanisms, and the gradual deepening of China’s international exchanges strategies have jointly promoted the development of international education in China. International education has an increasingly important role to play in developing global workforce and facilitating cultural exchanges between China and the world.

1 Introduction

1.1 The Scope and Definition of International Education

International education is a widely used but loosely defined term in both policy discourse and academic discussions, which is closely related with internationalization in education. The concept of “international” was first used in political science and government relations before it was formally introduced into the field of education in the 1980s (Knight, 2003). Knight (2003) described internationalization as “the process of integrating an international, intercultural, and global dimension into the goals, teaching/learning, research, and service functions of a university or higher education system” (p. 1). This definition highlights the long-term, ongoing nature of international education that requires continuous effort.

As a trending topic in education, international education is a dynamic and evolving term that has been interpreted distinctly under different academic and ideological frameworks (Altbach, 2002). Friedman (2000) suggests that international education should not just be a direct product of the Second World War or a by-product of the second era of globalization. Internationalization is essentially a transition of capital across national borders under the influence of neoliberalism (Hanieh, 2011). Altbach and Knight (2007) support this view by stating that international education is fundamentally different from domestic education and is more concerned with profitability. Along with a series of neoliberal educational reforms, such as the privatization of education, international education has become a private good rather than a public responsibility that can be traded. Altbach (2015) further demonstrates that the practical application of this concept in education is specifically seen in the context of internationalization, where host countries promote the enrollment of international students for profit, thus providing a primary income to the domestic economy.

However, Knight (2003) argues that the definition of internationalized education should not be limited to neoliberal economic development. The core of internationalized education should be how to shape policy to promote practice and in turn how practice can influence and reflect definitions and policies. At the same time, Knight (2004) objectively acknowledges the complexity and variability of the definition of international education due to different countries, cultures, and education systems. The diversity of appeal factors structures the different educational frameworks, contexts, and practices within the different countries. The fact shows that international education should not exist independently of the individual country. The underlying dynamic relationships at the national and sector level, as well as the institutional level, need to be fully understood and considered in the definition of international education (Knight, 2003).

In the Chinese context, many scholars have been seeking the use and meaning of such concepts in the Chinese context. According to Gu (2011), international education is not westernization, nor is it international convergence. International education refers to the international exchange of personnel, financial support, information (including educational concepts and educational contents), international cooperation of educational institutions, and transnational educational activities. Internationalization of education is the basic feature of modern education. Based on the review of China’s major regulations centered on international education, Gu (2011) analyzed how the concept of international education is interpreted and practiced in the Chinese system. It includes promoting institutional collaborations, recruiting global talents, developing government-school relations, promoting student exchange, collaborating with international organizations to grasp trends and dynamics of international education, and introducing related theories and academic works into the Chinese context.

Considering the wide scope and diverse definitions of international education in both policy discourse and academic discussion, this chapter focuses on the development of international education in China in comparison with global trends. The key themes of this chapter include outbound Chinese students studying abroad, incoming international students to China, and China’s international collaboration with international counterparts. It then analyzes the general data, excellence indicators, best practices, inspiring stories, latest research, and governmental policies around this topic. The emphasis of this chapter is on higher education and the scope might expand to other educational levels in future editions of this book.

1.2 The Institutional Development of International Education in China

“International collaborative program” (zhongwai hezuo banxue, a term often used in the Chinese context) has a history of more than 140 years from the late Qing Dynasty to the present, and has gone through four main stages, namely, the budding development stage (late Qing Dynasty-Republican period), the exploration and development stage (1949–1977), the recovery and development stage (1978–2000), and the accelerating development stage (2001-present) (Tan & Liu, 2019). Specifically, along with the reform and opening-up, the Chinese government and the United Nations Development Program have signed four projects of strengthening student development and scientific research in key universities. After the reform and opening-up, it is the first group of international collaborative programs between the Chinese government and international organizations. In 1985, Tianjin University of Finance and Economics and the University of Oklahoma in the United States (U.S.) cooperated in organizing a Chinese MBA training course, which became the very first international collaborative program between Chinese and foreign universities since the 1980s. After the 1990s, China gradually strengthened the laws and regulations on international collaborative programs and promulgated a series of rules to regulate these programs. The list included 10 international collaborative programs at undergraduate or higher levels, including the master’s program of Change Management jointly organized by Fudan University and the Norwegian School of Management. By 2000, the Office of Degrees Committee of the State Council approved a total of 30 international collaborative programs at undergraduate or higher levels and 11 institutions (Tan & Liu, 2019).

In 2001, China joined the WTO, and according to the commitment, China would open up the education service sector conditionally through a step-by-step process. This caused international collaborative programs to enter a period of rapid development. The State Council issued a number of bills to standardize international collaborative programs and strengthen the supervision of school quality and access. Since then, the development of international collaborative programs has focused on improving quality and increasing efficiency.

At present, there are more than 2,000 international collaborative programs and institutions, with around 600,000 currently enrolled students (including 500,000 students of such programs at university level) and more than 1.6 million graduates from these programs. The exponential growth in both programs and students exemplify how international collaborative programs have entered a new stage of development (Zhang, 2018).

Scholars have identified several major challenges in the development of international collaborative programs. For instance, there is significant imbalance in terms of regional development. As for the enrollment scale of international collaborative programs, the eastern region accounts for 55.23%, the central region accounts for 34.14%, while the western region accounts for only 10.63% (Hong et al., 2016). Among institutions with international collaborative programs, 55 out of 1,679 are located in the eastern region, with a total of 71,820 students. At the same time, there are only five institutions in the western region, all of them locate in Sichuan and Chongqing, with about 2,500 students (ibid). In addition, although the education authorities have issued many documents to avoid excessive concentration of international collaborative programs in certain majors, the empirical study finds that two-fifths of the master’s students enrolled were enrolled in in management studies programs (ibid). The same pattern is also shown in undergraduate programs with two-fifths of the undergraduate students enrolled in those joint programs studying computer and information technology majors, which accounts for one-fifth of the overall enrollment in the international collaborative programs (ibid).

Since 2010, both the MOE and universities have attached great attention to the quality enhancement of international collaborative programs. At the governmental level, multiple approaches have been launched to improve overall planning and regulation at the macro level, which includes the enhancement of the quality control system and regulatory mechanism of international collaborative programs, as well as the separation of management, administration, and evaluation. Accordingly, the quality construction project has been promoted comprehensively and the cultivation of high-quality international talents has taken steps forward. Students’ employment rate and quality have steadily improved, and the credibility and societal recognition of these programs has increased. Moreover, universities promoted reform and development, and explored comprehensive reform of education and academic construction of higher education institutions (HEIs). Universities provided important experiences for the comprehensive deepening of education reform and academic construction of HEIs (Lin, 2016).

2 Highlighting Data

2.1 Global Education Mobility Overview

To depict global education mobility, this chapter integrates statistical data from the Open Doors Report 2021 (IIE, 2021) and the OECD enrollment of international students by country of origin (OECD, 2021), to including data on vocational education, bachelor’s, master’s, and doctoral degree programs. Figure 11.1 presents the number of international students studying in the top eight destination countries over the past few years. In general, the number of international students studying in the eight major destination countries has been on a steady rise, with the United Kingdom (U.K.), Australia, Canada, Germany, and Japan all maintaining a steady upward trend and reaching a peak in 2019/2020.

Fig. 1

Source IIE (2021); OECD (2021)

Number and growth of international students in higher education in the top eight global study destination countries.

Since 2018, the U.K. and the U.S. have hit an inflection point of sustained growth in the number of students studying abroad, with varying degrees of decline in the number of students studying abroad. According to the latest statistics released by IIE in the Open Doors Report 2021 (IIE, 2021), the number of international students pursuing higher education in the U.S. in the 2019/2020 academic year was 1,075,496, down 1.80% from the 2018/2019 academic year, the first time since the 2008 economic crisis that the number of students studying in the U.S. declined. China continues to maintain its position as the world’s third-largest destination for studying abroad. It is worth noting that both France and Russia experienced a significant dive in international students in 2018/2019, but both have since maintained an increase in numbers.

From the perspective of Chinese students, the 2020 Overseas Study Trends Report (Ipsos, 2020) focuses on the current situation of Chinese students in major English-speaking study destinations (U.K., U.S., Canada, Australia, Singapore), policies and changing trends in study destinations, reputation analysis of overseas universities, and post-study employment insights. For the overseas trend research, the report came up with the following main conclusions. Shares of international students at different stages varies significantly among the five major study-abroad countries. Singapore’s 11% share of basic education ranks second in the world according to OECD’s, 2018 Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) data (OECD, 2018), and Singapore’s bilingual environment makes it easier for younger students to adapt. Australia has a lower basic education share and a more balanced share of undergraduate, master’s, and doctoral degrees and above. Canada’s 44% undergraduate share, higher than the other four countries, benefits from its low overall study costs, more paid internship opportunities. The U.K. takes a 39% share of master’s degree programs, which enroll the largest number of international students in the country. Master’s programs at the British universities are attractive due to their short, one-year program length and relatively application process. The U.S. enrolls/attracts 40% of doctoral and post-doctoral students, thanks to its excellent research environment and abundant funding. As such, it is the first choice for doctoral and post-doctoral students interested in academic research.

2.2 Chinese Students Studying Abroad and Returning Home

The China Statistical Yearbook 2021 (National Bureau of Statistics [NBS], 2021) shows that the number of Chinese students studying abroad and those returning home has been increasing year by year, with a total of 703,500 students going abroad and 580,300 returning home in 2019. The Annual Report on the Development of Chinese Students Studying Abroad (2020–2021) (Wang & Miao, 2021) depicts current trends in Chinese international education:

First, Chinese students’ study-abroad destinations have become more diversified. Under the combined effect of various factors such as the further opening of international education resources and relatively relaxed and friendly study, Chinese students have more diversified study options for employment and immigration policies of major destination countries. Moreover, more children from ordinary Chinese families have more opportunities to pursue further studies abroad. The number of Chinese students studying in the U.S. may hit an inflection point, and the era of increased diversification of destinations for Chinese students to study abroad is anticipated. According to the Annual Report on the Development of Chinese Students Studying Abroad (2020–2021) (ibid), although the total number of students studying in the U.S. has continued to increase in the past 15 years, its growth rate has not changed significantly and fell from 29.90% in 2009/2010 to 0.80% in the 2019/2020 academic year. Under the influence of the ongoing pandemic and geopolitical tensions, many Chinese students planning to study abroad are looking to countries and regions with more friendly study environments and visa policies and more effective pandemic control. The statistics in the Current Situation of Studying Abroad under the New Normal (EIC Education, 2020) reveal that the proportion of international students choosing to go to Japan, Singapore and New Zealand all showed a slight increase, with the percentages of 4.54%, 3.84% and 2.51% respectively.

In addition, self-funded students are still the largest group of Chinese students studying abroad. According to the report, financial support from parents, relatives, and friends is still the most important source of study abroad funding for Chinese undergraduates. Additionally, the proportion of students relying on this source of funding has increased from 89% in the class of 2013 to 94.20% in the class of 2018. On the other hand, the proportion of students who rely on scholarships and financial support from foreign universities or institutions is decreasing year by year.

Second, international collaborative programs at Chinese HEIs have become a new alternative to study abroad during the pandemic. The international collaborative programs have played an important role during the pandemic, and study abroad in China will probably usher in new development opportunities. According to the report (Wang & Miao, 2021), thanks to the rapid development of international collaborative programs in China, there are new options for studying abroad during the pandemic, and local study in international collaborative programs is becoming a newly available alternative. During the pandemic, international cooperative educational entities are becoming important carriers for Chinese students to carry out online and in-person study in overseas cooperative educational institutions. For example, 3,000 Chinese students from New York University can pursue their studies at New York University in Shanghai (NYUS).

Third, the enthusiasm of students returning to their hometowns continues to rise, and new first-tier cities are more attractive. The number of international students returning to China continues to increase. Having an international perspective has become the new core advantage of the returnee group. As returnees continues to expand, challenges for returnees seeking employment is further highlighted. The group of returnees grew from 130,000 in 2000 to 4,231,700 in 2019, an increase of more than 31 times. Regarding the development advantages of returnees, the 2019 data show that having an international perspective replaces strong language communication skills as the main advantage for their development in China. According to the findings of the 2019 China Returnee Employment and Entrepreneurship Survey Report (CCG, 2019), the three most important factors that returnees interviewed considered when choosing a city to return to China were: fast economic development, high degree of internationalization, and multicultural inclusion. The returnees recognize the achievements of Chinese enterprises in globalization and are enthusiastic about entrepreneurship. The surveyed returnees were reported to recognize the global development of China’s leading local enterprises. Among them, market coverage is generally recognized, but technological influence, global influence, and job-seeking influence fell behind. This indicates that the returnees recognize China’s leading local companies well, but there is still room for improvement in enhancing the overall talent attraction.

2.3 International Students Coming to China

According to statistics (MOE), 492,185 international students of various types from 196 countries and regions studied at 1,004 institutions of higher education across 31 provinces (autonomous regions and municipalities) in 2018, an increase of 3,013 students or 0.62% compared with 2017 (Fig. 2).

Fig. 2

Source MOE (2019)

International students by continent.

International Students by Continent. The total number of Asian students is 295,043, accounting for 59.95%; the total number of African students is 81,562, accounting for 16.57%; the total number of European students is 73,618, accounting for 14.96%; the total number of American students is 35,733, accounting for 7.26%; the total number of Oceania students is 6,229, accounting for 1.27%.

Top 15 Countries of Origin. From Fig. 3, it can be seen that U.S., Japan and France, usually as popular study-abroad destinations for Chinese students, rank 5th, 9th, and 13th among the top 15 countries of origin, which indicates the development of a more dynamic mobility pattern between China and these countries. Moreover, it is also worth noting that some of the countries have participated the Belt and Road Initiative, including the top country of origin of international students, the Republic of Korea (ROK), Thailand, Pakistan, Russia, Indonesia, Laos, Kazakhstan, Vietnam, Bangladesh, Mongolia, Malaysia (Nedopil, 2020), which, to a certain extent, demonstrates the influence of the Belt and Road Initiative in China’s neighboring countries.

Fig. 3

Source MOE (2019)

Top 15 countries of origin of international students.

Top 15 Provinces/Cities Receiving International Students. From the data presented in Fig. 4, the most popular destinations for international students are Beijing and Shanghai, followed by other 8 provinces (Jiangsu, Zhejiang, Liaoning, Tianjin, Guangdong, Shandong, Heilongjiang, Fujian) from East China. Based on the geographical locations of these top 15 provinces/cities receiving international students, a regional disparity exists, with only five provinces from West and Middle China (Shaanxi, Sichuan, Guangxi, Yunnan, Hubei). It is worth noting that, benefited from the Belt and Road Initiative, Yunnan, Guangxi, Heilongjiang and other provinces located along China’s national border line have received considerable number of international students in the recent years. According to Gong (2020), the Belt and Road Initiative has reversed the geopolitical disadvantage of the border provinces into a geopolitical advantage, facilitating the development of international education in such areas.

Fig. 4

Source MOE (2019)

Top 15 provinces/cities receiving international students.

International Students by Categories. The total number of international students receiving academic education programs is 258,122, accounted for 52.44% of the total number of incoming students, an increase of 16,579 or 6.86% over 2017; the total number of master’s and doctoral students is 85,062, an increase of 12.28% over 2017, of which 25,618 are doctoral students, and 59,444 are master’s students. In 2018, there were 234,063 international students enrolled in non-degree education programs. (MOE, 2019) (Fig. 5).

Fig. 5

Source MOE (2019)

Funding methods of international students.

Funding Resources for International Students. International student”. Among these international students, 63,041 students were funded by Chinese government scholarships, accounting for 12.81% of the total number of incoming students, while 429,144 other international students (87.19%) were funded through other resources (MOE, 2019).

3 Excellence Indicators

3.1 Design

To present and compare the universities’ level of internationalization comprehensively, three dimensions and eight indicators are selected to measure the overall and average score of each university’s performance on internationalization. These dimensions and indicators are chosen with references to the methodologies of the world’s leading university rankings (i.e., Academic Rankings of World Universities [ARWU], QS World University Rankings [QS], Times Higher Education World University Rankings [THE]). Also, analysis in this chapter consolidates information presented on world top universities’ websites related to internationalization and global mobility and compares this information with the ranking methods presented by ARWU, QS, THE. Analysis of the three global ranking methods reveal that overseas campuses, overseas research centers, and exchange programs are not well presented in those leading university rankings, and these three indicators are the original contribution of the excellence indicator presented in this chapter. By carefully reviewing and examining the ranking method presented by ARWU, QS, THE, six indicators are selected and considered as essential in evaluating universities excellence in international education. Thus, this section includes excellent indicators in three dimensions (i.e., institutional, faculty and students) and eight indicators (i.e., overseas campuses, overseas research centers, exchange programs, international faculty ratio, international joint publications, international student ratio, student mobility, and international doctorate degrees).

Considering the nature of academic excellence, 20 universities appearing on all the three major rankings (ARWU, QS, & THE) and ranked in top 1–25 and 75–100 positions are selected as research subjects. On this basis, the diversity of countries is taken into account, by including countries that are less represented in the international academic market, such as Sweden, Finland, Israel, and Belgium.¹ In order to make a valid comparison with Chinese universities, this chapter selects the top 25 Chinese universities from mainstream world university rankings.²

3.2 Definitions and Sources

3.2.1 Overseas Campuses

This indicator looks at the number of the overseas campuses that a university sets up in foreign nations. Based upon the definition provided in the Observatory on Borderless Higher Education (OBHE) and the Cross-Border Education Research Team (C-BERT)’s report (Garrett et al., 2016), Wilkinds and Rumbley (2018) further incorporate several core features, including ownership, bottom line, substantive control, partnership and infrastructure, and provide a refined understanding of overseas campus. This chapter considers Wilkinds and Rumbley (2018)’s updated and revised discussions as the working definition on “overseas campus” (p. 14). The data of this indicator are collected from universities’ official websites.

An international branch campus is an entity that is owned, at least in part, by a specific foreign higher education institution, which has some degree of responsibility for the overall strategy and quality assurance of the branch campus. The branch campus operates under the name of the foreign institution and offers programming and/or credentials that bear the name of the foreign institution. The branch has basic infrastructure, such as a library, an open access computer lab, and dining facilities, and, overall, students at the branch have a similar student experience to students at the home campus.

3.2.2 Overseas Research Centers

This indicator looks at the number of overseas research centers of a university. The overseas research centers are limited to those with academic functions, not those with a focus on student recruitment or university promotion. Data for this indicator are collected from official university websites.

3.2.3 Exchange Program

This indicator looks at the number of exchange programs of a university. Data for this indicator are collected through universities’ websites, which includes the number of exchange programs or partnership universities. For the purposes of this study, exchange programs are defined as long-term exchange programs that are semester-based and have a credit exchange. Since summer/private/intern programs are mostly short-term and include many for-profit programs, this section contains data only on the number of exchange programs that are long-term and credit-bearing in nature.

Some universities present exchange/summer/private programs together on the website. Since most of summer/private/intern programs are relatively short and contain for-profit programs, these data are manually excluded from the data collection process. In addition, some schools offer little information on exchange programs, however they provide information on how many universities the schools have established partnerships with. After comparison, it is determined that the two data elements focus on the same type of cooperation and have been used interchangeably.

The data collection process shows that many exchange programs in U.S. schools were established with U.S.-based schools and can not be considered as overseas collaborations, so the data are removed manually. Some other universities do not have a quantitative presentation of overseas collaborations and exchange programs but only used a qualitative text to describe them (e.g., Cambridge University). In this case, exchange program data were collected based on textual descriptions.

3.2.4 International Faculty Ratio

Values for this indicator are generated from the newest QS ranking data. According to QS methodology, this indicator looks at the ratio of international faculty staff to overall staff. If an institution is attracting a sizeable population of international faculty, this has benefits in terms of research and teaching diversity and collaboration. Further, if an institution is attracting a sizeable number of overseas staff, it follows that it is attractive enough to do so. The number of faculty staff who contribute to academic teaching or research or both at a university for a minimum period of at least three months and who are of foreign nationality as a proportion of overall faculty staff. The term “international” is determined by citizenship. For EU countries, this includes all foreign nationals, even nationals of other EU states. In the case of dual citizenship, the deciding criteria should be citizenship obtained through birth or the first passport. Visiting international faculty staff who are of foreign origin but members of a university other than the one under submission are not counted under this category (QS, 2022).

3.2.5 International Joint Publication

Values for this indicator are generated from the 2022 U-Multirank data. According to U-Multirank’s explanation on its approach, this measure looks at the percentage of the department’s research publications that list at least one affiliate author’s address abroad. The rationale for this indicator is that the number of international joint publications reflects the degree to which a university’s research is connected to international networks. It includes the data of international joint research publications and research publications (U-Multirank, 2022).

3.2.6 International Student Ratio

Values for this indicator are generated from the 2022 QS ranking data. According to QS methodology, this indicator looks at the ratio of international students to overall students. If an institution is attracting a sizeable population of international students, this has benefits in terms of networking, cultural exchanges, a more diverse learning experience, and alumni diversity. Further, if an institution is attracting a sizeable number of overseas students, it follows that it is attractive enough to do so. The total number of undergraduate and postgraduate students who are foreign nationals and spend at least three months at a university is a proportion of the total number of undergraduate and postgraduate students overall. The term “international” is determined by citizenship. For EU countries, this includes all foreign nationals, even nationals of other EU states. In the case of dual citizenship, the deciding criteria should be citizenship obtained through birth or first passport obtained. Offshore exchange students and distance learning students are excluded from the calculations (QS, 2022).

3.2.7 Student Mobility

Values for this indicator are generated from the 2022 U-Multirank data. According to the U-Multirank methodology, this measure looks at a composite of international incoming exchange students, outgoing exchange students, and students in international joint degree programs. The rationale for this indicator is that having an international student body and offering students the opportunity to do part of their degree abroad signals the university’s international orientation. The data are collected through the institutional questionnaires. It includes the data of incoming students, students sent out in international exchange programs, students in joint degree programs, as well as total students enrolled (U-Multirank, 2022).

3.2.8 International Doctorate Degrees

Values for this indicator are generated from the newest U-Multirank data. According to U-Multirank methodology, it looks at the percentage of doctorate degrees awarded to international doctorate candidates. The rationale for this indicator is that the number of doctorate degrees awarded to international candidates reflects the international orientation of an institution. The data are collected through department questionnaires. It includes the number of doctorate degrees awarded to international doctorate candidates as well as the total number of doctorate degrees awarded (U-Multirank, 2022).

3.3 Findings

With regard to the institutional dimension, all three indicators presented in this chapter use original data. The data of overseas campuses, overseas research centers, and exchange programs are collected from individual university’s website. For overseas campuses and overseas research centers, the university’s score is the absolute number of their campus and institutions. Considering the number of exchange programs at each university varies significantly (several universities located in Europe report more than 500 exchange programs on their websites), 100 is set as the full score. All universities exceeding 100 will be calculated as 100, and the other universities’ scores are standardized accordingly. In terms of the faculty and student dimensions, the data for each indicator are generated from either QS or U-Multirank’s website. The newest 2022 data collected appears in a standardized format.

In Table 1, data are presented by consolidating university data into country-specific data, and the country scores are converted into a final score by calculating the average of university scores in the same country. The maximum score for each indicator is 100. Unavailable data are reported as N/A and excluded from calculations of the average score. The total score represents the sum of all the individual scores of each indicator, and the total and average score of each country are calculated.

Table 1 Excellence indicators of universities’ performance on international education

3.4 Discussion

Chinese universities generally have above-average results in international joint publications, especially compared to similarly ranked international schools. This indicates that China has effectively promoted international research collaboration in the past few decades. In addition, Chinese universities perform reasonably well in the two indicators for international exchange programs and overseas research centers, establishing a solid institutional foundation for deepening international exchange in terms of research and student exchange in the future.

In terms of the student and faculty-related indicators, Chinese universities still have potential to increase their overall scores. For example, the ratio of international students and the ratio of international faculty members are two areas in which Chinese universities perform unevenly, with most universities scoring below average. It is worth noting that the number of international students coming to study at Chinese universities has been increasing in recent years with the increased improvements of regulations governing international students and governmental efforts to promote international student scholarship programs. The indicators related to international students are expected to increase significantly in the coming years. However, the percentage of international faculty in Chinese universities is still low. In particular, the number of international faculty within Chinese universities has decreased rather than increased in the last two years, as international academic mobility has been more difficult due to the pandemic. At the institutional level, while most Chinese schools have a slight advantage in the number of overseas academic institutions and exchange programs compared to schools at the same level of the rankings, there is still more room for the development of overseas branches of Chinese universities.

4 Best Practices

The internationalization of higher education in modern world history has never failed to fascinate higher education institutions, provincial and national authorities, and international organizations. Considered as “the process of integrating international, intercultural, or global dimensions into the purposes and functions of higher education” (Knight, 1999, 2004), a cascade of universities has been taking conscious efforts towards improving internationalization with programs and activities taking many different shapes and forms. The idea of “internationalization at home” (IAH) is a comprehensive model to let every student have the global competencies needed in the era of globalization, as Beelen and Jones (2015) proposed “purposeful integration of international and intercultural dimensions into the formal and informal curriculum for all students within domestic environments” (Agnew & Kahn, 2014). China, a latecomer to this inexorable international trend, blazed its own trail and successfully moved from periphery to center of the global higher education stage (Li, 2020). As a Chinese proverb goes, yindi zhiyi, which means that tailored and innovative strategies and tactics shall be put in place to tackle local challenges. Thus, it is not difficult to understand that China’s approaches to internationalizing higher education are laid on the foundation China’s own interpretation about internationalization (Yang, 2016), while absorbing foreign elements to advance its higher education goals. This section reviews strategies Chinese HEIs have adopted to realize internationalization at home, including hiring faculty with more international experience, cultivating more global talents, and developing China-foreign cooperation in university operations.

4.1 Internationalization of Faculty and Students in Chinese HEIs

Faculty play a pivotal role in internationalizing HEIs and students are also “at the heart of internationalization” (American Council on Education, 2022). This section focuses on the numerous strategies used to attain the grand goal, together giving an all-round internationalization of faculty and students in Chinese HEIs.

4.1.1 Recruiting Foreign Faculty

At the institutional level, encouraging faculty to engage in the international context is crucial to internationalization (American Council on Education, 2022). The most obvious method of faculty internationalization is to hire foreign faculty, who have different cultural and academic backgrounds and bring new perspectives to both research and teaching in China. This idea was formally proposed in the Regulations on the Recruitment of Foreign Cultural and Educational Experts and Foreign Faculty in Higher Education Institutions (National Education Commission, 1991). The document clearly states that it is part of opening-up policy and put forth the principles of recruitment. As such institutions shall recruit foreign experts and faculty based on national and institutional needs, selecting the excellent candidates, using their strengths, and seeking effective results. Within this structure, hiring foreign faculty has become a long-term effort shared by many Chinese HEIs and an important way to learn advanced science, technology, and culture from the outside world.

This document aims at strengthening faculty and discipline building. To do so, the document also provides guidance on classifying foreign faculty recruitment based upon their fields of study. First, foreign faculty in science, engineering, agriculture, and medical professions shall be hired mainly for short-term lectures and cooperative scientific research. Second, experts of language professions should be mainly hired for training teachers and writing teaching materials, except for practical language classes (including listening, reading, writing, etc.) which can be taught to students. Third, foreign faculty in foreign literature, international journalism, international culture, international trade, international law, international political economy, and international relations should teach parts of courses or hold lectures and seminars mainly for Chinese faculty and graduate students. Fourth, experts in philosophy, sociology, law, political science, journalism, history, education, and other disciplines should conduct joint seminars with Chinese faculty. In addition to adapting to disciplinary needs, this document also requires HEIs to build a relatively complete management system for foreign faculty, with institutional leaders in charge of foreign affairs and full-time staff trained in this business. Institutions shall take initiative to respect foreign faculty, encourage their Chinese counterparts and students to make friends with them, and strengthen cooperation. In doing so, foreign faculty can better understand China and Chinese faculty will also better understand the world.

China has achieved remarkable results in this regard. From 2003 to 2020, only for part-time teachers in Chinese HEIs, the number of foreign part-time teachers has grown from 4,576 out of 134,250 all part-time teachers to 17,686 out of 562,252 (MOE, 2003, 2021). Under the guidance of this document, hiring foreign faculty has been conducive to improving the research and teaching at Chinese HEIs and cultivating talents to serve the socialist modernization construction.

4.1.2 Cultivating Domestic Faculty with International Experience

Apart from employing foreign faculty with selective criteria, Chinese HEIs are very supportive of faculty internationalization by cultivating Chinese faculty with internationalization experience (Cristwell II & Zhu, 2015). At present, there are still some faculty at HEIs have excellent education backgrounds and strong research abilities but lack international education experience and cultural immersion in international contexts, which limits their international vision. Thus, it may be more difficult to support research and teaching, especially in those disciplines with high international relevance. In recent years, Chinese HEIs have emphasizing the internationalization of higher education and cultivating domestic faculty with international experience after they step into the threshold of the work world has been an important part of the internationalizing endeavor.

In the globalized era, Chinese HEIs have attached great importance to cultivating domestic faculty with international experience after transforming from students to faculty. To motivate more local faculty participate in international education, China has taken a series of actions as follows: increasing investment in faculty’s international exchange and study, establishing cooperation mechanisms with prestigious international HEIs, regularly selecting outstanding teachers to further participate in international study, increasing opportunities to participate in international teaching seminars, and encouraging teachers to publish high-quality papers in international journals or academic institutions. For example, China Scholarship Council (CSC) issued Selection Methods of Young Excellent Teachers of Higher Education Institutions for Overseas Training Programs for six consecutive years (2017–2022), aimed at internationalizing local faculties. The document states that outstanding young faculty in HEIs, who have achieved remarkable results teaching, scientific research or management with solid professional abilities should be sent to well-known universities, research institutes, laboratories in developed countries as visiting scholars or postdoctoral researchers (CSC, 2022). This serves as a measure to encourage faculties to go abroad, immerse themselves in a foreign culture and academic environment, so that after coming back to China, they can work with a more globalized perspective and bring students new insights.

4.1.3 Encouraging Overseas Talents to Return

In addition to hiring foreign faculty and cultivating local faculty with international experience after steeping into the job market, encouraging Chinese overseas talents to return has also been a critical measure in the process of internationalization. Studying abroad, an important initiative of China’s opening-up, especially that of education, has been developing rapidly in the 13^th Five-Year Plan period. Recent years have witnessed a boom in the number of Chinese overseas students. The total number of Chinese overseas students was about 1.6 million in 2020, compared with 544,500 in 2016, an increase of 193% (China Youth Daily, 2020). MOE also issued the document Several Opinions of the Ministry of Education on Further Strengthening the Work of Introducing Excellent Overseas Educated Talents (MOE, 2007), supporting institutions in inviting China overseas talents back to work for the home country.

To boost internationalization, the document offers a comprehensive set of measures. First, it clearly defines “outstanding overseas talents” with three different groups: a group of experts specified in the disciplines leading in the international arena; a large number of outstanding academic leaders with solid academic foundation, outstanding innovation abilities and potential; and a large number of young excellent faculty. Combined these three groups form excellent and innovative teams, promote technological innovation and discipline development, and drive the improvement of the overall quality of the faculty and scientific research teams. Second, MOE has compiled a list of outstanding overseas talents, and established the database of outstanding overseas talents according to the actual needs for talents in education, science and technology, industrial and regional development. In addition, education offices of Chinese consulates abroad have strengthened the management and services for overseas students, and provides convenient, fast, accurate and timely information to serve the needs of overseas talents to work back in China. Third, a two-way selection platform for outstanding overseas talents shall be built for the convenience of these people. Meetings between outstanding overseas students and Chinese domestic employers shall be held to encourage and guide outstanding overseas students to return to work in Chinese HEIs within the framework of China’s policy on studying abroad in the New Era, which is known as “supporting students studying abroad; encouraging them returning to China; give them freedom to return or stay; let them play their parts!” (MOE, 2020a). Fourth, national science and technology, education and talent funding projects shall be fully leveraged. Outstanding overseas students return to work in China shall be prioritized as part of building world-class universities in HEIs implementing Project 211 and Project 985, with special funding to support. Moreover, MOE encourages HEIs take advantage of “Chunhui (literally means sunshine in spring) Program”, which “targets those returnees doctoral graduates with outstanding achievements in their respective fields” (MOE, 2009). This program also motivates outstanding overseas students in key fields to use their academic sabbaticals to return to China and engage in research and lectures at HEIs. This action facilitates soft landing through cooperation, so that some of returnees can eventually return to China for long-term work and could contribute to the emerging and frontier disciplines, internationalization of HEIs, and the building of world-class universities.

Internationalization of faculty is the bridge to internationalization of students. The more internationalized the faculty, the more diverse the disciplinary backgrounds, therefore the more students will be attracted to the international perspectives the faculty bring. By recruiting foreign faculty, internationalizing local faculty after they start to work and encouraging overseas talents to return and work back in HEIs, China offers comprehensive measures in internationalization. The internationalization of Chinese HEIs is strengthened by improving teaching quality of the school and cultivating talents with global perspectives and international awareness that enhance social and economic development (Tian & Liu, 2018). Chinese HEIs’ strategies for internationalization have been most strikingly featured by its vigorous and various engagement with the outer world. “This attitude is not only unprecedented in its modern history, but also differs much from many other developing countries’ interactions with the developed Western world” (Yang, 2016). “Walking on two legs”, or in other words, combining merits of foreign higher education into practices of Chinese HEIs, has been a strong contributor to the high achievement of China’s higher education internationalization development (ibid).

4.2 Integrating Chinese and Foreign Elements to Facilitate International Cooperation in Running Schools

Transnational education is regarded as one of the drivers of bettering international higher education landscape (Ma et al., 2019). China has become, during the past several decades, a burgeoning market for transnational education ventures, with branch campus being one of the representatives. Defined as “legally independent entities formed as joint ventures between Chinese universities and international institutions”, these universities have added fresh impetus to further the internationalization of higher education in China (ibid). To drive the development of international collaborative programs, Implementation Measures of the Regulations of the People’s Republic of China on International Collaborative Programs and Institutions was issued by MOE in 2004 and gives specific regulations in terms of the establishment, organization, and activities of branch campuses (MOE, 2004). International collaborative programs have been emphasized again in another important document, China Education Modernization 2035, which seeks to comprehensively improve international exchange and cooperation and enhance the quality of international collaborative programs (MOE, 2020b). As of June 2020, there were 2,282 Chinese-foreign cooperative education institutions and programs, including 1,196 institutions and projects above the undergraduate level (ibid). Among those, nine branch campuses have been well-known in China–Xi’an Jiaotong-Liverpool University (XJTLU), University of Nottingham Ningbo China (UNNC), Beijing Normal University-Hong Kong Baptist University United International College (BNU-HKBU), New York University Shanghai (NYUS), Wenzhou-Kean University (WKU), Duke Kunshan University (DKU), Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen (CUHKS), Guangdong Technion-Israel Institute of Technology (GTIIT) and Shenzhen MSU-BIT University (MSU-BIT) (ibid). This section discusses how branch campuses have integrated Chinese and foreign visions and values, modes of education, and management in their development, contributing to the internationalization of China’s higher education.

4.2.1 Integrating Chinese and Foreign Values

The educational philosophy of a university is the guiding principle of the vision and direction of the university’s development. The specific goals, missions, institutions, mechanisms, methods and even the motto, song, flag, emblem, and campus layout are the extrapolation of the university’s educational philosophy and unconsciously constrained by it (Lan, 2002). The mottos and educational philosophies created by branch campuses, provide a theoretical framework that integrate the values of Chinese and foreign cultures. For example, co-founded by Duke University in the U.S. and Wuhan University in China, DKU’s educational philosophy combines the Duke University motto of “Knowledge and Faith” with that of Wuhan University, “ziqiang, hongyi, qiushi, chuangxin” (which means “self-improvement, perseverance, truth-seeking and innovation”) and blends into its existing mission: “to serve truth and justice, to serve society and the nation”, which mirrors its goal of cultivating well-rounded global citizens with roots in Chinese culture. Likewise, XJTLU’s motto in Chinese is “boxue mingdao, duxing renshi” (which means “be knowledgeable and bring yourself to reason, practice earnestly, and have broad shoulders”) while its English version is “light and wings”, meaning “light to see” and “wings to fly”. The mottos of XJTLU inherits the meaning of “knowledge illuminates the way” from that of the University of Liverpool in the U.K. (the home university) and incorporates the pragmatic spirit of the motto of Xi’an Jiaotong University (the host university). Similarly, the motto of NYUS, “persevere and transcend, make the world your classroom” reflects both Western pursuit of truth and Chinese pursuit of a practical and innovative life. These mottos provide a cross-cultural atmosphere, connecting students globally and grounding them locally (Tang, 2020).

4.2.2 Integrating Chinese and Foreign Modes of Education

Chinese education has always put emphasis on building a solid knowledge foundation, which can be reflected by a wide reputation of excellence in academic performance from Grade 1 in elementary school to Grade 12 in high school. The potential problem, however, is some students will develop a habit of passive learning that they may carry on to their college years. In comparison, western education is more student-centered and individualized, making it easier for students to expand their horizons and explore their interests and strengths. This can become problematic when HEIs copy the Western style in detail. Successful branch campuses choose a different path and do not simply copy from either mode of education, be it Chinese or foreign. Rather, based on Chinese realities, these institutions provide a cross-cultural model of education by combining the Chinese emphasis on knowledge and the foreign emphasis student-centered teaching and learning. For example, XJTLU features the integration of Chinese, British, and North American modes. First, the university ensures students build a solid knowledge base. This shows Chinese characteristics, but XJTLU has changed the approach to learning from passive learning to active and research-oriented learning. Second, XJTLU borrows British quality assurance system and improves upon it. Third, XJTLU absorbs the flexibility of North America higher education and students are allowed to choose their majors as sophomores. Students are educated with both flexibility and a rigorous quality assurance system, and faculty at XJTLU implement new teaching methods so that students learn in a more exploratory, research-oriented way (EOL, 2021). A similar example can be found in the educational model at DKU, where a system of liberal education, professional education and practical courses were adopted, along with student-centered small class teaching in which students having multi-cultural backgrounds and the opportunity to develop discuss freely and cooperate in teamwork while attaching great importance to how well students have grasped the knowledge (Liu & Li, 2015).

4.2.3 Integrating Chinese and Foreign Management

In Chinese universities, the Party Committee has the highest decision-making power. General policies, development direction, and other important decisions of the university are made or determined by the Party Committee. The president and his team are responsible for implementing these decisions under the supervision of the Party Committee. In western universities, the Board of Directors is the highest decision-making body and is responsible for making decisions on major school issues. The president implements the decisions of the Board of Directors and is responsible for the education, teaching, and administration of the school. This is different from the management system adopted in China. Most of the branch campuses use a system of presidential responsibility under the leadership of a Board of Directors, but also has a Party Committee with some government officials involved. For example, the Board of Directors at DKU has a balanced representation of interests, with a mix of not only Chinese and American administrators (roughly a 50/50 representation from China and the U.S.), but also stakeholders with multiple interests (including university administrators and academics, as well as officials and local business representatives) (Tang, 2020).

From integrating Chinese and foreign visions and values, to modes of education and management, branch campuses have carved out a bright road to facilitating international education in China. Their international outlook along with Chinese characteristics have brought assets to students’ enjoying educational experiences there and assist them to become full-fledged members of this global community. Also, to the universities, the outlook helps them become an interdependent society of humankind in a fully global ecosystem.

5 Inspiring Stories

5.1 Xiao Xuehua: A Young Leader of Chinese Overseas Students in Education

Among Chinese overseas students, Xiao Xuehua (Felix) has been a new star in impacting international education, especially to the group of Chinese students studying abroad, with his big aspirations for the future and self-dependence as an intrinsic part of realizing his ambitions. Due to Felix and his friends’ dedication, the Chinese Overseas Student Conference and Providence Academy, both aiming to serve Chinese overseas students, now ranks among the most influential and nonprofit organizations among Chinese overseas students. In 2019 at the age of 23, Felix, was named to Forbes China 30 Under 30 list and recognized as one of the 2019 Hurun Report 30 × 30 Leading Entrepreneurs (Forbes, 2019). In an interview with Forbes at its Under 30 Summit, Felix said, “each era has a different ideal and thus needs a group of talents who learn the knowledge and pursue a career to serve the ideal. As Mu Ch’ien³ said, one should not only follow the times, but more importantly, know the times and lead the times.” (Sina, 2019).

Felix became independent throughout his education, which laid the foundation of becoming a future leader. Though born as a Beijing native and his grandparents had enough time to take care of him after schooling, he was still sent to a boarding school. At that time, he was only three and his parents did so in the hope that he could learn to be independent. This expectation did not turn to be a disappointment. According to Felix, with quality time spent with his teachers and schoolmates, he gradually developed the ability of independent thinking and learned to take care of himself. His determination and confidence grew as he refined his interests and strengths. He has always been passionate about photography and at the age of 17, he was awarded The United Nations-China National Campus Contest in Photography “Special Prize”. Felix’s “self-reliant” journey continued as he became immersed in Western culture while studying abroad. He first studied Visual Arts at Fordham University in the U.S. and later studied Adult Learning and Leadership as a graduate student at Columbia University (Sohu, 2019). Like other students studying abroad, independence became an essential identity, preparing him to become a leader.

In addition to being independent, his educational experience helped him find his passion for education and set goals of contributing to it. During his time at Columbia University, he was influenced by Dr. Cheng Yan Davis, the Special Advisor to the President of Teachers College. “Her dedication and hard work, in education has always influenced and changed me in a subtle way.” Felix said (ibid). With her mentorship, Felix, together with his friends, co-founded Chinese Overseas Student Conference (zhongguo liuxuesheng luntan) and Providence Academy (pusi xueyuan), serving the need of a growing population of Chinese overseas students and using multimedia to, such as Bilibili, a major Chinese video sharing and streaming platform, to spread their influence. The Chinese Overseas Student Conference aimed to create a platform for Chinese youth to communicate with accomplished entrepreneurs, experts, scholars, and leaders in various fields, to help overseas Chinese students understand industry trends abroad and at home. Through their guidance, students were encouraged to explore the new world pattern, and to encourage more students to return to China to serve the nation.

As the co-founder and chairman, Felix has organized the Chinese Overseas Student Conference annually for the past six years. Past attendees include Shi Yigong, President of Westlake University, representatives from China’s 100 top industry leaders, and Chinese overseas students from high-ranking institutions including Harvard University, Cornell University, Columbia University, University of Oxford, Cambridge University. Discussions have centered on education, finance, artificial intelligence (AI) and others, collectively representing 11 areas of leadership. From 2016–2020, over 6,000 live audience members and more than 120,000 online viewers have tuned in to the Conference (ibid). To further advance his goal of developing Chinese leaders Felix and his friends established Providence Academy, a platform for Felix and his friends to lead young people and cultivate more leaders. This mobile platform for global youth seeks to train a new generation of young leaders and calling on global youth to participate in the development of China and contribute their knowledge to build a share community of humanity. The academy’s motto is “responsibility, sincerity, compassion, and commitment, to share the responsibility of today and change the future of China and the world”. The academy brings together the presidents of academic associations, leaders of major overseas universities, and returnee entrepreneurs (Providence Academy, 2022).

5.2 Cao Wen: A Pilot in China’s International Education

Professor Cao Wen at Beijing Foreign Studies University (BFSU), worked as the Dean of Graduate School of Education at BFSU, and currently serves as the Chief Academic Officer at International Education Group of BFSU International, a pilot program in China’s international education landscape. Because of her dedication to international education and her brave deeds in finding better ways to promote China’s international education, Cao was awarded the “China Education Industry Outstanding Contributor” in 2017 (Sina, 2017).

When Cao was a student, she was transformed by studying the English language, which led her to pursue a career in international education. At the start of her college years, Cao studied English Language and Literature at BFSU for her bachelor’s degree. Then, as a postgraduate, she chose to explore Distance Learning at the University of Manchester, transitioning as a conventional face-to-face teacher to an online teacher. When attending Nottingham University for her Ph.D., Cao brought her eight-year-old son with her to the U.K. There, her son’s rapid progress in learning English surprised her and inspired her to shift her research interests from university education to basic education (Liuxue, 2020). Before long, Cao worked as a visiting scholar at Cambridge University. It was this visit that made her shift her focus from English education to international education, and begin to further explore the internationalization of basic education (ibid).

As a promoter of international education during her time in BFSU International, Cao became the Chief Academic Officer of BFSU International after the institution was established in 2014, which provides both curricular and extracurricular services while regarding international education as one of the indispensable elements. Following her lead, the in-class service of BFSU International focuses on providing support for schools, including dozens of schools affiliated with BFSU International and existing or newly founded state or independent schools dedicated to bringing foreign language and international education. BFSU International provides instruction in more than 50 foreign languages and focuses on four major service areas, including leadership and management, curriculum and teaching, faculty development, and student development, which lays a strong foundation for adding international elements into schooling. Extracurricular services focus on international literacy education. BFSU has opened 54 campuses in 15 cities, including Beijing and Nanjing, with more than 42,000 students enrolled. These services combine Chinese classics and international learning together and immerse students in an intercultural learning environment. Together with her colleagues, she has made both curricular and extracurricular services more international, and increased the public’s knowledge of international education. (ibid).

Through practice, Cao has honed her insights and become a pioneer in international education. When asked Cao how to define the word “pilot” in international education, she said a pilot should create a culture, set up new concepts, set standards, build platforms, provide services, and conduct evaluation. Her work at BFSU International exemplifies this definition. In terms of culture, her institution always emphasizes the academic features in their services instead of following the trend. The institution has published several annual reports concerning international education, widely spreading ideas and cultivating a culture of international education among the public. When it comes to evaluation, BFSU International has developed the “International School Quality Assurance Standard System” by conducting comprehensive research on school accreditation and evaluation standards at home and abroad. Collecting a large amount of empirical data on Chinese international schools, the institution has devoted itself to launching an evaluation standard system that reflects the characteristics of international schooling in China (ibid).

Cao believes that “internationalization” is a two-way concept that must include Chinese participation. International education is not as simply as introducing overseas courses or studying abroad, but rather it allows children to see things from different perspectives in China and abroad. The goal of international education is to cultivate “Chinese global citizens and international Chinese”. “Being Chinese is the core, but internationalization gives us another mission, which is to introduce China to the world and the world to China” Cao added. For example, since 2015, BFSU International has launched a program called Junior Researchers, in which teachers lead Chinese high school students to explore China’s intangible cultural heritage through scientific research methods. From designing a topic, searching literature, conducting empirical research, analyzing data, sharing presentations, and finally completing a research report in both English and Chinese, making students thinking and taking actions in how to better tell Chinese stories (ibid).

5.3 Cheng Yan Davis: A Bridge-Builder of International Initiatives: Cheng Yan Davis

Cheng Yan Davis, also mentioned in Felix’s story (see Sect. 5.1), is one of the founders of Forum for World Education and is Senior Advisor to the Shanghai Pudong Government. She served as Special Advisor to the President of Teachers College (TC) of Columbia University on international advancement. Before coming to TC, Cheng worked at the University of Pennsylvania (Penn), where she was the Vice Dean of Graduate School of Education (GSE) as well as Special Advisor to the President of the University of Pennsylvania on internationalization efforts (FWE, 2022). Before that, she served as the Vice President of Drexel University. Her forty-year career in international education and exchanges has earned her a reputation as a pioneer in international initiatives, be it China-U.S. relations or internationalization around the world. As such a bridge-builder, Cheng has been recognized with several awards for her outstanding accomplishment in international advancement. She received Penn GSE Alumni Pioneers Award the President Award for Excellent Leadership from Drexel University, the 2012 Outstanding Leadership award from Princess Sirindhorn of Thailand, and the 2017 Princess Maha Chakri Award (OECD, 2019).

Cheng is a practitioner of “East meets West” philosophy and a firm bridge-builder of China and U.S. relations. The starting point of her career began with international education. She founded the first international programs office, GSE International, during her work at Penn in 1993. It is the first office among multiple graduate schools at Ivy-league universities. Following her lead, GSE International has gained an international reputation for excellence, and is at the core of facilitating international development and cooperation for both GSE and Penn. In 2006, she created the Pre-College Program for Chinese high school students, the first among Ivy League Universities, which was well received in both countries (ibid). In addition to communications among faculty and students, Cheng helped to build several training programs for groups ranging from university administrators to government officials and corporate executives. The Penn-Securities Association of China (Penn-SAC) Program and the Penn-China Mutual Fund CEO Leadership Program, two of which are the first-ever training programs for executives in Chinese securities and mutual fund industries, have trained approximately 200 Chinese executives with the latest theories and practices of the U.S. finance sector (ibid). Additionally, Cheng initiated and organized the U.S.-China Future Leaders Program, which strives to develop a close relationship and improve mutual understanding among the rising young leaders of both nations (ibid). Cheng was also a Senior Advisor to Shanghai Pudong government and Senior Observer for the Shanghai International Business Leaders Advisory Council for the past two decades. Being capable of anticipating professional needs and maintaining good connections both at home and abroad, she built many bridges among many educational institutions, corporations, and government agencies between the U.S. and China. For example, when Pudong Institute of Finance was founded and establishing its academic committee, several U.S. and Europe business schools came to join at Yan’s invitation, including Harvard Business School, Wharton School, Columbia Business School, and International Institute for Management Development (IMD) of Switzerland (ibid).

Cheng’ bridge-building did not stop between the U.S. and China. She took footsteps in building multinational exchanges networks. She established education roundtables with France, New Zealand, Thailand, and China, with each of them “dedicated to information exchanges and joint exploration of the key education challenges facing each participating nation” in the twenty-first century (ibid). She is also a trailblazer in international education research by initiating “groundbreaking Six-Nation Education Research Program and its successor, the Eight Nations Education Research Project, which bring together national-level researchers and policymakers from key nations in Asia, Europe, and North America to conduct cooperative research on education policy” (ibid). The APEC Math and Science Teachers Program was also launched by Yan, together with programs mentioned above build bridges for education practitioners to enjoy more resources and improve their research and teaching abilities. These collaborative programs, together with all the international initiatives Cheng has participated in, has offered a moment for organizations from different countries to reflect on cultural and education differences which might work as a unique add-on to their communities and inspire themselves to learn from others.

6 Latest Research

6.1 General Overview

In the following section, data of Chinese literature research are obtained from CNKI, including CSSCI, EI, and core journals. Collection years are set from 2003 to 2021, and the keywords used are internationalization (guojihua), international education (guoji jiaoyu), and international collaborative programs (zhongwai hezuo banxue). A total of 1,035 articles are obtained. An English article search is also conducted through the Web of Science (WOS) database core by the keyword international education, and the year is set from 2003 to 2021. This search results in 3,442 documents after filtering and removing duplicates.

Figure 6 visualizes the changes in the number of papers published by domestic scholars on education internationalization research in the past two decades. The number of papers published by domestic scholars on the internationalization of education has shown an overall increase since 2003 and peaked in 2011, with a decreasing trend through 2021. The second highest point in terms of quantity was ushered in 2015 and 2017 respectively, while the number of papers published on internationalization of education was even lower than 40 in the latest 2021. Since 2007 the gap between the number of English and Chinese research articles on international education have widened. The number of international papers has shown a rapid growth trend. Especially after 2014, the number of documents in international education has been above two hundred and fifty every year.

Fig. 6

Source Compiled from search results from CNKI and WOS

Trend of the number of Chinese and English publications from 2003 to 2021.

According to Fig. 7, Beijing Normal University, Xiamen University, and East China Normal University are the main publishing units in the field of education internationalization from 2003 to 2021, including 53 articles published by Beijing Normal University, 44 articles published by Xiamen University, and 24 articles published by East China Normal University. Among them, Beijing Normal University published 53 articles, Xiamen University published 44 articles, and East China Normal University published 24 articles, mainly published by teacher training and national key universities. Among the major English publishers, Monash University, University of Toronto, and Deakin University publish at the highest rates in the internationalization of education field. Figure 7 also shows a large gap in the number of articles published by major domestic and international publishers, but among the top domestic publishers, Beijing Normal University published 53 articles, which is on par with the leading international publisher Monash University (54 articles).

Fig. 7

Source Compiled from search results from CNKI and WOS

Bar chart of major papers published in units from 2003–2021.

6.2 Research Fo in International Education

As shown in Fig. 8, keyword analysis, word frequency, and extended words were used to identify popular research trends in international education. Through Citespace’s keyword clustering analysis, domestic scholars’ concerns in the internationalization of education mainly include international education, internationalization, cooperative schooling, higher education, teacher training university, schooling mode, etc. The influence of WTO and Russia on international education in China is also widely discussed. Among them, higher education and cooperative education are the main topics in the internationalization research, which reflects the increasing demand for higher education in China.

Fig. 8

Source Compiled from search results from CNKI

CNKI keyword clustering view.

As shown in Fig. 9, in the English literature, in the field of education internationalization, scholars have a higher focus on international students, international student mobility, international education, international development, international migration, and international higher education while also giving greater attention to global health and teachers’ attitudes. Within education internationalization, English literature pays more attention to the micro-level by focusing on individual students and teachers while also maintaining a high focus on macro areas. In contrast, Chinese literature focuses on the analysis of macro areas.

Fig. 9

Source Compiled from search results from WOS

WOS keyword clustering view.

A keyword analysis was conducted on both Chinese and English education internationalization literature. This analysis revealed that in the Chinese literature, domestic scholars pay more attention to the fields of international education, internationalization, higher education, cooperative education, globalization, bilingual teaching, and talent training. Among them, the centrality of national education, internationalization, and cooperative education in higher education is close to or more than 0.1. Compared with the English literature, keywords such as international education, higher education, international students, education, students, experience, university, and model come to the fore. On the one hand, it can be seen that there is a broad consensus in the national and international fields about the connection between international education and higher education and universities. On the other hand, the papers published in the international field pay more attention to the analysis of micro students than papers published in Chinese (Table 2).

Table 2 CNKI keywords word frequency analysis table

In the analysis of expansion words, domestic literature does not have high-frequency words that have not appeared with smoother change frequency (i.e., the research heat in the field of internationalization of education lasts for a long time). While in the field of international research, the research hotspots that have gradually appeared since 2003 are education policy, developing countries, economic development, comparative education, and international education, among which education policy died down in 2015. Since 2010, international migration, social justice, inclusive education, and comparative international education gradually became hotspots, but none continued to 2020. In recent years, education adaptation research and PISA have continued to be of great concern (Fig. 10).

Fig. 10

Inflationary word analysis view

In terms of research themes, both domestic and international academics in the field of education internationalization pay much attention to macro- and meso-levels, such as international education, higher education, and cooperative schooling (overseas branches). At the same time, international scholars have similarly focused on individual micro levels such as international students’ learning, mobility, and migration.

From 2003 to 2021, the scope of domestic scholars’ concerns has expanded gradually on internationalization and related issues in the fields of vocational education, higher education, and international collaborative programs. Meanwhile, for internationalization, the analysis focuses on the relation between socio-economic development and education. The research and analysis of education policy has a more important role in both domestic and international publications, but the numbers of publications on international research declined after 20 years, and the attention of the international field to the adaptation of education and PISA has increased in recent years. On the other hand, the research of domestic scholars is closely related to the contemporary socio-economic context in which China is located, especially for the internationalization of education brought about by China’s entry to WTO and the national relations between China and Russia.

In conclusion, it is shown in the analysis that the research on internationalization of education in China is still in an exploratory phase. There is a room for further expansion in the field of international research. Cooperation between domestic universities, international organizations, and international universities should be further strengthened. Domestic scholars should consider broadening their research focus beyond to also include vocational education and international student mobility.

7 National Policies

7.1 Fundamental Policies in Chinese International Education

In 2003, the State Council promulgated the first administrative regulation on Chinese-foreign cooperative education in the history of higher education in China. It provides detailed regulations on various aspects of international collaborative programs, including the purpose, nature, establishment conditions and steps, organization and management mechanism, education and teaching norms, assets and financial system, change and termination conditions, and legal responsibilities (Tan & Liu, 2019). The regulations clearly state that the state encourages the introduction of international high-quality educational resources of international collaborative programs. The government also encourages international collaborative programs in higher education and vocational education. At the same time, Chinese higher education institutions and their international counterparts are encouraged to cooperate in school administration.

The introduction of Outline of the National Medium- and Long-term Education Reform and Development Plan (2010–2020) (The State Council, 2010) and Plan for Studying in China (MOE, 2010) have promoted the steady growth of the number of international students studying in China. Plan for Studying in China was released to implement Outline of the National Medium- and Long-term Education Reform and Development Plan (2010–2020), to strengthen educational exchanges and cooperation between China and abroad, to promote the sustainable and healthy development of study in China, and to improve the internationalization of China’s education. The Plan for Studying in China specifies development goals, main tasks, guiding ideologies, and working guidelines of the study in China program. This plan also clarifies the policies, institutions, mechanisms, publicity and promotion, admission and training modes, curriculum and teachers’ construction and implementation, and puts forward requirements for education management and its team, living services and social practice. The Plan for Studying in China is the first strategic guidance plan for the education of international students, proposing the goal of reaching 500,000 international students by 2020. The issuance of the Plan for Studying in China in the new era sets a tone of change and direction for the field of education for international students coming to China (Zhao, 2021).

7.2 Policies Related to International Collaborative Programs

7.2.1 Essential Policies

In 1995, the former National Education Commission promulgated a temporary legal regulation for international collaborative programs in China (Tan & Liu, 2019). This regulation details the meaning, nature, necessity, principles to be followed, approval criteria and procedures, main bodies and leadership systems, certificate issuance and diploma awarding, and supervision system of international collaborative programs (Xiong & Chen, 2018). This document states that international collaborative programs are an important form of international exchange and cooperation in Chinese education and are complementary to Chinese education and that these regulations are formulated in order to strengthen the management of international collaborative programs and to promote the development of China’s education and educational foreign exchange and cooperation. The regulation fully affirms the status and significance of international collaborative programs, builds a basic framework of international collaborative programs policy, and provides a policy basis for international collaborative programs to follow (Xiong & Chen, 2018).

In 2006, to further improve the quality of international collaborative programs at the undergraduate level and above, and to strengthen the standardized management, MOE emphasized the principle of public welfare of international collaborative programs. To better promote the steady and healthy development of international collaborative programs, MOE has put forward opinions on the current problems in international collaborative programs, emphasizing the need to adhere to the principle of public welfare, run the school according to the law, and strengthen the quality management and fee management of international collaborative programs (Tan & Liu, 2019).

In 2009, to further regulate management, improve quality, and promote the healthy development of international collaborative programs, MOE initiated the evaluation of international collaborative programs. The evaluation program conducts an assessment of international collaborative institutions and programs’ establishment and operation. The assessment focuses on strengthening the supervision of international collaborative programs through the evaluation of the overall thinking, asset management, teaching quality, faculty construction, social evaluation, and the internal and external benefits of school unit. This work has strengthened the state’s standardized management of international collaborative programs, promoted the operation of schools in accordance with laws, and improved the level and sustainable development of international collaborative programs (Xiong & Chen, 2018).

7.2.2 Recent Key Policies

In 2010, the Education International Exchange and Cooperation Project was included as one of the 10 major projects in China’s 10-year development plan, reflecting the importance that China attaches to international collaborative programs (Tan & Liu, 2019). The outline seeks to attract renowned schools, educational and scientific research institutions, and enterprises from abroad to cooperate in establishing educational teaching, training, and research institutions or projects. The outline also encourages schools at all levels to carry out various forms of international exchange and collaboration and run a number of model international collaborative programs and a number of international collaborative projects, to explore a variety of ways of utilizing foreign high-quality educational resources. In 2016, new and higher requirements for international collaborative programs were put forward, emphasizing the need to vigorously improve the level of governance of education, opening up to the outside world and strengthening the organizational leadership of education opening up to the outside world (Xiong & Chen, 2018). In the same year, MOE proposed implementing the “Belt and Road” collaborative education promotion plan as an important element of the supporting framework for developing talent cultivation. This shows that international collaborative program, as an important part of China’s education reform and development, is itself an essential part of China’s education opening-up to the outside world. (Xiong & Chen, 2018).

7.3 Policies Related to International Students Coming to China

7.3.1 Essential Policies

In the 1960s and 1970s, accepting and cultivating international students was listed as a strategic task of China’s foreign relations. This mission set up regulations for the management of international students, which includes the ideological and political work and political activity management, academic registration management, life management and social management, and organization and leadership. At the same time, this mission also focuses on international student experiences in China, including enrollment, teaching, professional internship and social investigation. This document emphasizes the role of education for international students in China in promoting educational, scientific and technological, cultural exchanges and economic and trade cooperation between China and other countries in the world. The policy on education for international students in China has shown a clear political and diplomatic orientation. The policy first emphasizes fulfilling internationalist obligations and the promotion of cooperation and interaction between China and other countries in the world in various fields (Liu & Zhang, 2018).

In 2000, a systematic summary of the policy adjustments and management practices of education in China after the reform and opening-up was issued, which also provided a forward-looking view and institutional arrangement for the development of education in China in the new century. In order to enhance the understanding and friendship between China and people all over the world, promote international exchange and cooperation between higher education institutions, and strengthen the standard management of accepting and cultivating international students, the regulations clarify the management responsibilities of local authorities and schools, and establish the management system of coordinated management by MOE, coordinated management by local education administrative departments, and independent management by schools (Liu & Zhang, 2018).

7.3.2 Recent Key Policies

In 2016, two policy documents were issued to promote the growth rate of students coming to China to reach a new peak. These documents call for accelerating the development of study abroad and improving the quality of study abroad education. It is proposed optimizing the layout of countries and majors of international students, increasing the construction of branded majors and branded courses, building a socialized and specialized service system, and creating the brand of Studying in China. This indicates that the policy on education for studying in China has paid more attention to internal development (Zhao, 2021).

In 2018, a systematic and specific regulation focusing on international students’ talent cultivation, enrollment and admission, education and teaching, and management and service support was issued, which clearly states that the quality assurance of international students’ education should be continuously improved. The education of international students in China basically shows the characteristics of education-oriented and begins to pay more and more attention to the quality of education (Zhao, 2021). The regulation aims to guide the activities of higher education for international students and continuously improve the quality of higher education for international students and is the basic guideline for higher education institutions to carry out education for international students. It is essential for higher education institutions such as colleges and universities to improve the internal quality assurance of higher education for international students. This includes both self-evaluation and the basis for various educational evaluation organizations to evaluate higher education for international students.

In 2020, additional regulations were issued on the acceptance of international students by higher education institutions to study at the undergraduate level and require higher education institutions to strictly examine the nationality status and eligibility of international students applying for admission in accordance with the law. This change seeks to maintain the fairness of higher education in China and to further restrict the eligibility of international students to apply for admission to study at the undergraduate level in Chinese higher education institutions (MOE, 2020b). According to Chen Zhiwen, executive director of the China Association for International Education Exchange, the revised regulation has improved the higher education system (Li, 2020). This is part of the efforts to improve the quality of international students coming to China. From the perspective of the college entrance examination, it is a major step to ensure the fairness and impartiality of the college entrance examination (Li, 2020).

7.4 Policies Related to Overseas Talent Recruitment to China (National Level)

7.4.1 Essential Policies

In 1994, the state established the National Outstanding Young Scientists Fund, thereby promoting the growth of young scientific and technological talents, encouraging overseas scholars to return to work in China, and accelerating the training of a group of outstanding academic leaders who will enter the frontier of science and technology in the world. Applicants include young Chinese scholars and young scholars from outside the People’s Republic of China. The National Outstanding Young Scientists Fund program supports young scholars who have made outstanding achievements in basic research, enabling them to choose their research directions to carry out innovative research. This has greatly facilitated the growth of young scientific and technological talents and attracted overseas talents while nurturing several outstanding academic leaders who have entered the frontiers of world science and technology (Cheng, 2014).

Furthermore, China has launched policy measures fostering the innovation and entrepreneurship of overseas students. It has also launched the demonstration construction of the national overseas students’ entrepreneurship parks in 2000 and issued relevant guidance in 2001. These policy initiatives have stimulated the enthusiasm of overseas students to return to China for innovation and entrepreneurship and become an important push to guide overseas students to return to China for innovation and entrepreneurship (Sun & Wang, 2010).

7.4.2 Recent Key Policies

The official implementation of the Thousand Talents Program by the Ministry of Organization in 2008 became a milestone in the field of overseas talent introduction policy in China. This means that China has started to participate in the competition for international talents in all aspects and has been recognized as a national priority. There is an urgent need to vigorously introduce high-level international talents to expand the opening up to the outside world and improve international competitiveness further. It is a major initiative to thoroughly implement the scientific development concept, build an innovative country, and achieve the goal a prosperous society. China focuses on the strategic goals of national development through four platforms: national innovation projects, key disciplines, key laboratories, central enterprises and state-owned financial institutions, and various parks mainly for developing high-tech industries. China supports scientists and leading talents who can break through key technologies, develop high-tech industries, and drive emerging disciplines to return to China for innovation and entrepreneurship.

In 2010, the Outline of the National Medium- and Long-term Education Reform and Development Plan (2010–2020) points out that talent is the first resource for China’s economic and social development. It also clearly proposed a more open talent policy, elaborated the goal of talent team building, presented institutional and institutional innovation, significant policies, major talent projects, standardized the organization and implementation process. By 2020, the overall goal of China’s talent development is: to cultivate and create a large scale, optimized structure, reasonable layout, excellent quality talent team, establish the country’s comparative advantage in the talent competition, enter the ranks of the world’s talent power, and lay the foundation of talent for the basic realization of socialist modernization in the middle of this century (Guan, 2013).

8 Summary

The development of international education plays an important role in the globalization of the Chinese education system and the cultivation of innovative talents. Since the reform and opening-up, the development of international education in China has promoted international cooperation in research and innovation, cultivated a large number of advanced talents in highly sophisticated industries, enhanced the international influence of Chinese universities, and played a significant role in the economic and social development of China.

This chapter provides a global comparison of international education. The first part of this chapter provides a working definition of international education for this chapter as well as an overview of international education in China and then compared the situation of global education mobility with China’s case. Despite the enduring impact of the pandemic on educational mobility in China and around the world, from an overall perspective, the number of Chinese students studying abroad and international students coming to China has been steadily increasing during the past decades, and the international collaborative program system has been improved greatly after a series of reforms.

Drawing upon statistics generated from government websites, official yearbooks, and academic reports, the results presented in this chapter demonstrate that China has effectively promoted the development of international education and international research collaboration during the past few decades, and has achieved comparable results with top universities in the world, in terms of the overseas campus, overseas research center, exchange program, international faculty ratio, international joint publication, international student ratio, student mobility, and international doctorate degrees. In terms of the student and faculty-related indicators, Chinese universities have further opportunities for growth, considering the percentage of international students and faculty in Chinese universities is still low.

The second part of this chapter introduces the development of international education in China from four aspects, including best practices of international education, stories of inspiring international collaborations, latest research in international education, and overview of fundamental and key policies in international education.

Through best practice sharing, the chapter introduces how China, as a latecomer in this inexorable international trend, blazed its own trail and successfully moved from the periphery to the center of the higher educational international arena. Among the numerous strategies used to attain this goal, this chapter focuses on faculty internationalization and internationalization at home, two representative means done by Chinese higher education institutions (HEIs) to meet this end. Then, this chapter presents three inspiring individuals’ stories, respectively, Xiao Xuehua, the Gen Z leader of Chinese overseas students; Cao Wen, a pilot in China’s international education; and Cheng Yan Davis, a bridge-builder of international initiatives to document the remarkable moments in the development of international education in China.

Finally, this chapter presents the reform and developments of international education in China from diverse aspects, and demonstrates how China has made its way from zero to one of the major countries of origin and destination of international mobility. The efforts of government departments, higher education institutions, and every student and teacher involved in the internationalization process are crucial to the development of international education in China. This chapter suggests that the continuous improvement of relevant policies, the strengthening of regulatory mechanisms and the gradual deepening of China's international exchanges strategies have jointly promoted the development of international education in China. International education has an increasingly important role to play in promoting the cultivation of international talents and facilitating cultural exchanges between China and the world.