Transnational Student Voices

Abstract

The intensity of provision of transnational education (TNE) in the Asian region by Australian universities has been increasing over the past three decades. Although much is claimed, little is actually known about the outcomes and opinions of students enrolled in TNE programs. This article investigates student experiences through the longitudinal extension of an ethnographic study of one TNE program in Singapore. Student motivations, career paths, and adaptations are considered in the context of “second chance” and lifelong learning in Singapore. Analysis reveals something of a good news story in the face of much negativity about transnational education at the current time. The study reveals that TNE students are achieving high-level positional outcomes and developing transformative learning habits. Recommendations are made for the use of global comparative studies in TNE programs to facilitate mutual learning through respect for local knowledge.

Keywords

transnational education student motivations contextualization of curriculum Singapore human capital development human resource development higher education

The motivations behind the “delivery” of Australian transnational education have been interpreted as having everything from altruistic to neocolonial overtones. On one hand, Australian universities are cast in the role of intellectual aid providers delivering developing countries from the economic and social disadvantages resulting from of a paucity of skilled human capital and supplementing overburdened higher education institutions that are currently at capacity. At the other extreme, delivery can resemble the dumping of uncontextualized material into foreign contexts with scant consideration for anything other than profit margins.

Whatever the espoused and the actual motivations for Australia’s delivery of transnational education (TNE) may be, it is common knowledge that sector growth has been rapid, is increasingly complex, and continues apace. Within this dynamic environment, perhaps more than ever before, Australian universities seeking to engage in offshore entrepreneurialism are faced with considerable risk. While some organizations have reaped significant economic return, others have experienced equally noteworthy financial and reputational loss. Indeed, there are warning signs that, after decades of seemingly unfettered growth, Australia’s TNE bubble may be about to burst. Some Australian universities are reassessing financial and reputational detriments and as a result are closing down offshore campuses and programs (e.g., see Lim, 2009). Importer countries are simultaneously becoming more interventionist in the regulation of providers operating within their borders perhaps because they have come to consider in-country TNE as a complementary and valued component of national medium-term human capital development strategies.

Despite, or perhaps because of, the unstable nature of the sector, there has been surprisingly little research undertaken that focuses on the TNE-student experience, indeed TNE students’ voices are rarely heard (Chapman & Pyvis, 2005; Cuthbert, Smith, & Boey, 2008; Ziguras & McBurnie, 2011). We know little about their preferences, even less about the outcomes that they attribute to their TNE experience and nothing in any depth about their longer term career and life trajectories. This gap in our understanding is quite surprising; particularly when compared to any other “businesses” of the magnitude of Australian TNE, most of which would spend a great deal of time and money seeking to understand the motivations and opinions of key stakeholder groups, and incorporating their findings into strategic plans to ensure future viability. Although many people are uncomfortable with the conceptualization of higher education as a business, surely there is nothing sinister in attempting to understand whether or not this “service” is meeting its stated aims in the longer term and at a human level. Indeed, to consider TNE as something unique and valuable (something that is more than a money-making concern) we need to substantiate the often-claimed global engagement and societal benefits that can otherwise become very intangible indeed.

This study establishes that there have been tangible positional and transformative outcomes for one group of TNE students and also demonstrates how learning from a TNE program can be transferred to local and even regional societies. In this “good news story,” the respondent students found in their TNE program the opportunity to transcend a range of disadvantages and become motivated professionals and lifelong learners.

Method

This study draws on findings from the longitudinal extension of an ethnographic study, in this case a TNE bachelor program (education and training) program taught in Singapore (Hoare, 2006). During the original study, the researcher lived in Singapore for a semester attending all classes in the role of observer as participant (Merriam, 1998; Walsh, 1998) and conducting at least two in-depth, individual interviews with 51% of the student cohort. The respondents to the original study were contacted 5 years after graduation, via the researcher’s records and networks (including Facebook) and the students’ informal networks. Sixteen of the original 30 research participants were available to be interviewed. As in the original study, the primary research method was in-depth semistructured individual interviews, as is most common in ethnographic work (Fetterman, 1989).

The author has not identified any other in-depth longitudinal qualitative research with TNE students other than the methodologically similar but now dated work of Hodgkin (1966, 1972) and Keats (1969). Although almost 40 years have passed since Hodgkin’s (1966) and Keats’ (1969) ethnographies, the in-country methodological challenges in this study were similar. Hodgkin considered that there was a possibility of bias from students who were proud of their outcomes and therefore perhaps most likely to respond. The majority of respondents to this study were also proud of their achievements and therefore it is possible that graduates who were embarrassed by their life/career trajectories may have elected not to participate the second time around. However, while this potential bias must be acknowledged, anecdotal evidence (respondents talking of the successful careers of some of those who could not attend because of work commitments in the region) would suggest that is not necessarily the case.

This research is a small study that does not claim to provide a representative sample of TNE in Singapore. However the study does offer unique insights into some of the intangible outcomes from one TNE program. These insights were accessible because of the researcher’s depth of relationship with a group of graduates who have participated in a community of practice over time. This study is, therefore, potentially significant because it adds to our contemporary understanding of TNE. Emergent themes from small, in-depth studies such as this serve to provide foundations for future, broader research and can contribute to our conceptualization of emerging questions about the quality and relevance of Australian education in the Asian region.

Transnational Education Export: Definitions, Dilemmas, Development

There is a good deal of terminological and conceptual confusion within and between literature and policy referring to the international mobility of education. Exporter (also known as “sending” and “source”) and importer (also known as “receiving” and “host”) nations frequently use the same terms interchangeably, and in different contexts. Despite several noteworthy analyses of terminology and application (e.g., Knight, 2005; Lim, 2009; Naidoo, 2009; Yang, 2008), no global terminological consensus exists. “Transnational education” is the term consistently used in Australia to describe exported education although “offshore education” and “overseas programs” are also used. McBurnie and Ziguras (2006, p. 1) define TNE as “any education delivered by an institution based in one country to students located in another.” The program described in this article aligns with McBurnie and Ziguras’ description and thus the term “transnational education” (TNE) will be used.

Over recent decades, economic benefits from TNE have almost exclusively been remitted to developed nations. A TNE “stock take” by Naidoo (2009) attempts to remedy the absence of accurate statistical data that has been noted by many long-term observers (Altbach, 2002; Knight, 2005; McBurnie & Ziguras, 2006; Ziguras & McBurnie, 2011). Most importer nations tend to focus on domestic education provision; however, it is clear that education services comprise the third, fourth, and fifth largest service exports of Australia, New Zealand, and the United States respectively (Naidoo, 2009). Of those countries, only Australia collects data on offshore enrolments and reports an extraordinary increase from 15,000 enrolments in 1996 to 60,000 in 2004 (Ziguras & McBurnie, 2011). Naidoo (2009) maintains that Australia is the world’s most active TNE provider nation, with 1,569 education programs and 37 institutes; an overall “intensity” of 42.4 programs per institution.

The foundation of Australia’s success in transnational education is attributed in no small part to relationships developed during the education-as-aid period of the 1950s Colombo Plan (Davis, Olsen, & Bohm, 2000; Fell, 1999). Australian universities also continue to echo the raison d’être espoused during those times: assertions of sociocultural benefits (often couched as an all-encompassing “internationalization”) and the promotion of cooperative development. Although there is surely much potential to realize reciprocal learning from truly internationalized programs, to date little evidence of such mutuality has emerged. Even the early justifications for Australia’s educational aid were paradoxically hegemonic: overtly promoting intercultural understanding, but at the same time intended to “encourage the adoption of Western liberal-democratic values” (Oakman, 2002, pp. 89-90 citing Richard Casey, then Australian Minister for External Affairs ). Indeed, it seems that there has long been a complacent, if not arrogant, assumption within Australian universities that the success of offshore programs can be attributed to quality, prestige, and the desire for a superior “Western” education. This assumption has an “uncomfortable colonial feel” (Pyvis & Chapman, 2007, p. 237) that does not bode well for long-term mutual interaction in the region and belies a somewhat ethnocentric naivety which—given the dearth of understanding of the experiences and outcomes of transnational student experience—contributes to the significant risk for the sector and Australia’s relations in the region.

Transnational Education in Southeast Asia

Most research related to TNE student experiences has been very small scale and related to Australia’s key importer countries: Singapore, Malaysia, and Hong Kong. These middle-income countries have became “hotspots of TNE program mobility” (Naidoo, 2009, p. 321) where labor market demands, growth in secondary school completions, and developing middle-class aspirations have exceeded the capacity of local higher education institutions.

In the past two decades, Singapore has been a major importer of TNE from around the globe and from Australia in particular. Singaporean economist Linda Low (2003, p. 305) emphasizes that higher education is a “consuming preoccupation” in the natural resource poor nation state, driven by the manifest need at a personal and national level to maintain an edge in human capital development. In 2007/2008 an astonishing 36% of Singaporean higher education students were enrolled in some 491 TNE award qualifications provided by 45 Australian institutions (Naidoo, 2009; Ziguras & McBurnie, 2011). Clearly, in Singapore, TNE has evolved from providing a supplementary to a complementary supply of graduates to national human capital. Although most Singaporeans would prefer to study at a local university, many cannot gain entry and TNE has advantages for mature-aged students when compared with study abroad including ease of access, reduced expenditure, capacity to study part-time while working, and maintenance of family commitments (Chapman & Pyvis, 2005; Hoare, 2006). Of course, there are disadvantages that potential participants in TNE program must take into account, such as the widely held perception that TNE programs are of an inferior quality compared with home campuses (Ziguras & McBurnie, 2011), and lack of international exposure. However this article will show that respondents did not regret their choice despite such prejudices.

Findings

Motivations and Career Outcomes

The assumption of inherent superiority and status of “Western” degrees has been challenged (Hoare, 2006, 2010; Pyvis & Chapman, 2007; Ziguras & McBurnie, 2011). Chapman and Pyvis’s (2005) research suggests that students in the region seek an international education for a variety of reasons, including learning about contemporary global issues in their profession of choice. Of course, like students the world over, Singaporeans invest in a tertiary credential for career advancement and/or personal development. Pyvis and Chapman (2007, p. 236) describe these motivations as positional and self-transformative investments in a TNE context and their descriptors are useful in this study. Respondents agreed that positional investments were motivated by Singaporean employers’ tendency to recruit based on an applicant’s credentials. Some reflected that this mindset was entrenched in Singapore and would have agreed with Linda Low’s observation that educational credentialing was a Singaporean preoccupation. As mature-aged students, all of the respondents to this study held polytechnic diplomas and most had significant (up to 18 years) job experience. Despite their considerable skill and knowledge base, many had been “passed over” for promotion. Some were concerned that they were approaching the age where one is considered an “older worker” (which in Singapore is 45 years of age; Ministry of Manpower Singapore, 1999). In particular, participants recognized that a degree was a necessary passport to even attempt an application for a job in prestigious and secure government organizations or multinational corporations.

The positional investments of respondents could certainly be said to have “paid off.” All of the participants in the longitudinal study had attained new jobs, new roles and/or promotions, and attributed these outcomes to the credentials and knowledge gained from their TNE degree. Typical stories included having escaped subordinate or menial job roles. Positional outcomes included “a very sharp acceleration in career” and “drawing in the region of 300% more in terms of compensation.” Despite completing a degree that was not available in any Singaporean university and thus evidently not identified as key to Singapore’s human capital development needs, these graduates related impressive career stories and had come to include among their ranks HR directors, local and/or regional HRD managers, and successful consultants.

For some respondents, positional and transformative motivations were contiguous. For example the statement “when I move to the next level of my career, I want to know that I am able to grasp and handle my job” reveals both types of motivation. In fact, most of the graduate respondents who revealed positional motivations also spoke of transformative outcomes, which was a noticeable change since the original research where positional motivations dominated (Hoare, 2010). Several respondents spoke of a transformative element attributed to their study, as typified by the following quote:

[I sought to] enrich myself even further, and perhaps the value that I bring to myself will be much higher than simply the degree . . . I want to transform myself.

It was evident for such respondents that the TNE degree was primarily a platform for further learning. However others, who had enrolled reluctantly and/or predominantly for positional purposes, found that transformative outcomes were an unexpected bonus. Considering that the respondents were self-described “late bloomers,” it was impressive that during the 5 years between research interviews five respondent had gone on to complete master’s programs. Quite typical of these postgraduates was a woman who reflected that she would “never in a million years” have considered herself as a potential MBA holder prior to her “second chance education.”

Several respondents reflected on two transformative outcomes that they had not anticipated. One was enjoyment of a learned capacity to find authoritative resources when required, “Education doesn’t just stop there . . . resources are available everywhere and now you can find them.” The second actually evidenced the development of a lifelong learning mindset and was described as “learning how to learn.” As one respondent reflected, “Actually I now have a very open mind . . . previously I would say ‘this theory says this so that’s what we’ll do’ . . . but now I think that is only one view.”

Thus the TNE experience has the capacity to develop an unexpected motivation for transformative learning, and postgraduate study. This is clearly a highly desirable outcome for countries such as Singapore, where government policies are encouraging lifelong learning. Given the numbers of Singaporean students enrolled in TNE this finding, if it were a pattern, has significant implications for the nation state’s human capital development as well as TNE providers.

Confidence and Credibility

One of the most frequently reported transformative and potentially positional outcomes was confidence and credibility gained from course-based learning and workplace application. Previous studies of returned international students who studied in Australia also reported self-confidence as an outcome (e.g.,Cannon, 2000; Daroesman & Daroesman, 1992). The confidence discussed in the Daroesman’s study was strongly linked to English language improvement; however, the confidence and credibility reported in this study had nothing to do with English and was mentioned by nearly every respondent. It manifested as personal and professional agency, an affective outcome more in line with Cannon’s (2000) work. Typically, respondents spoke of a hesitance to make their opinions heard prior to undertaking their degree, however as graduates; “I can express myself, be on the same page as [senior staff]. I can demand attention because I know what I say is meaningful in the field.”

This professional confidence was also described by one participant as being self-perpetuating, “it [the qualification and knowledge gained] gives me confidence, and of course with confidence things go better . . . it adds a difference, you get a little inch taller.” Confidence also underpinned respondents’ capacity to provide ethical advice and to convince managers and clients that they were dealing with a subject matter expert, as explained by another participant:

If there’s a formal meeting, I can discuss and quote a theory . . . that convinces people. Theory is respectable not just some statement plucked out of the air.

Credibility was also evident in the employment market; “and . . . it’s nice to receive calls from head hunters . . . they do that because you’ve established yourself as a professional.” Clearly potential employers considered some graduates to be desirable additions to Singapore’s human capital.

Human Capital Development

Human capital is defined by the OECD as “knowledge, skills, competencies and attributes embodied in individuals that facilitate the creation of personal, social and economic well-being” (Keeley, 2007, p. 29). It relies on positional and transformational motivations to create outcomes at a national and personal level. The strategic development of human capital has been fundamental to the economic success of Singapore: a country with virtually no natural resources. This much-cited deficit has mandated the nimble alignment of Singapore’s workforce with the forecast needs of global business and has implications for developing countries in the region (Cuthbert et al., 2008; Low, 2003). This has been achieved through “manpower” planning that has maximized science and engineering intakes in local universities. Educational streaming dominates citizens’ career choices, but of course not everyone is suited for the career chosen for them. In fact many respondents spoke of being “railroaded” into early career paths for which they had little aptitude or interest. In fact, these mature-aged students accessed TNE to subvert the career plans made on their behalf.

The TNE course of the original study was a “soft skills” specialization not offered in Singapore. As far back as 1972, Hodgkin observed that developmental needs were greatest when a nation’s human capital needs evolve from hard to soft skill bases. In a “hard skills” focused environment, niche programs have been identified as one of the pull-factors toward TNE (Knight, 2010) and are an unplanned and essentially risk-free boon to the national economy (Low, 2003). To differing extents, the respondents to this study were gambling that a credential in a specialization would complement their skill and knowledge sets, provide renewed job satisfaction, and fill a valued employment niche in Singapore, as the following explains:

My friends told me I’m crazy to choose human resource development as a degree. It’s not going to earn me lots of money . . . but I’m much happier now because I’m doing something I love . . . now I’m doing the work, I’m creating direction and coaching others.

Participants also recalled previous work roles that had frustrated them because they did not “really allow me to understand organizational issues.” Diplomas and workplace-based learning, as explained by one respondent, could “explain what to do, but not why . . .” As he said, “..if I want to learn a presentation skill, I would have just done a simple two-day train the trainer, but the degree has given me more depth.” This “depth” was mentioned by most participants and was particularly valued when course-based learning validated previous experience, for example,

I realised that I had been doing a lot of the things we were discussing in class, but they were not pinned in strong theory, so I had been doing things unconsciously . . . we were applying these theories day by day, we just didn’t realize it. Therefore we didn’t have a good depth in understanding.

Several respondents had originally thought that immediate application of learning was important for understanding of theories and models. However, over the longer term, some graduates found that the understanding they sought did not truly manifest until they had the opportunity to combine theory with practice during workplace experience (e.g., praxis). Moreover, time was a crucial contributor to this depth of which they spoke. This thinking is exemplified by the following quote in which an MBA graduate recalls a breakthrough in understanding in relation to the relatively complex organizational learning theories of Argyris (1999):

Something happened at work and I re-read the article one year after the course . . . it takes time to really understand because as you achieve much more experience then you tend to appreciate it more. When you have experience and application at the same time, then you can really understand. Perhaps ten or even twenty years down the road another situation will happen and that’s when I’ll appreciate more of the learning.

Regional and Global Impact

Both the “aid” and “trade” phases of TNE have forecast transformational outcomes within and beyond national boundaries and governments have long forecast that returned study-abroad students would contribute to national development. Keats’ (1969) and Hodgkin’s (1972) early research confirmed that returning Colombo Plan students were passing on skills and knowledge to others. More recently, “traded” TNE continues to claim social distribution of knowledge, yet few studies exist to prove or disprove these claims. Unexpectedly, this study did find evidence of cross-border transfer of learning in the form of local and regional coaching, mentoring, and training. Although Singapore was the primary work location of most respondents, many traveled within and beyond the Southeast Asian region. Members of this globetrotting group of graduates maintained active, self-supporting communities of practice. For example, some individual members employed others; groups met to discuss HRD-related ideas and practices; and respondents had joined professional associations across the region. Respondents also reported transfer of learning to local “grass roots” community groups, mentoring and coaching of work colleagues, as well as coaching, mentoring and “training” in developing countries, as demonstrated in the following quotes:

Here in the (ethnicity-based community welfare organisation in Singapore) I’m now actually taking charge of two programs. I have credibility and depth of knowledge . . . it’s so useful what I’ve learned.

I’ve run about seventy management training courses in the region; wherever I go I carry brand name Singapore into regional areas. Emerging economies, China, Vietnam, Myanmar . . . want to know more about training and development . . . there are some skills that they lack, and when they engage me I feel good to apply what I have learnt actually to teach them. That makes [the TNE] program a little more value added to me.

I go to Malaysia to run programs, and I will go to Hong Kong to run a regional program. I interact with people from around the region . . . they are sometimes our competitors and they are hungry for knowledge.

Respondents sought a degree that would add value to their professional practice by providing in-course international comparisons that furthered their global outlook; “you find out from texts and papers that other people in Western countries like America or Australia share what you think.” Such comments and experiences underpin the need for TNE courses to provide exposure to contemporary global issues in students’ professions of choice if Australian university degrees are to have credibility and impact.

The Employment Status of TNE Degree Holders in Singapore

Australian TNE has long been held in high regard by its graduates (Banks & Lawrence, 2008; Cuthbert et al., 2008; Hodgkin, 1972; Keats, 1969). There is plenty of evidence, however, that employers in Singapore favor graduates of local higher education institutes. This discrimination is reinforced by both global and local opinion. The much-cited Shanghai Jiao Tong Academic Ranking of World Universities (SHJT) lists the National University of Singapore ahead of most of the exporting Australian universities when compared globally, and Nanyang Technological University is very competitive in regional comparison (Marginson, 2010; Shanghai Jiao Tong University Centre for World-Class Universities & Shanghai Jiao Tong University Institute of Higher Education, 2010). The Singaporean press frequently runs headlines reporting global university rankings and highlighting concerns about the quality of what Singaporeans term “distance” education (and the terminology used reflects and amplifies the confusion surrounding modes of study). Frequent media interrogation of the appropriateness of course content to the Singaporean work environment and negative publicity related to the withdrawal of offshore providers add to employer prejudice (Davie, 2003; Lim, 2009). The Singaporean government is an employer of choice that also has the capacity to recognize providers and regulate supply (Haley & Low, 1998); however, approval of TNE providers within Singapore for government employment purposes has long been less than transparent (Hoare, 2006, 2010; Ziguras, 2001). These factors combine to make the choice of a degree something of a minefield for many students.

Despite the fact that their degree was from one of the top three Australian universities as listed in the SHJT, several respondents had experienced discrimination against their Australian qualification from both government and private sectors:

They look at your degree and they say ‘oh, so this is distance learning’, but the fact is we put in a lot . . . get the credit required . . . why are we not treated in the same way? That’s something I do not understand.

In government sectors somehow my degree is not as recognised as a local university degree, and [Australian university] is a good university, so why is that so?

They say “sorry, you don’t have a local university degree,” so I don’t understand that part of it. The government encourage those who stay abroad to come back home, but if they’re not going to recognise Australian degrees then how are they going to make them feel comfortable to come back home?

Student Reflections on Contextualization

A further examination of barriers to employment encountered by TNE graduates in Singapore is clearly required, but is beyond the intent of this article. However several respondents were drawn to reflect on the frequent media indictments of Australian TNE program content. The capacity for foreign curriculum and pedagogy to create frustration when unsuited to local conditions and to undermine the nation building role of the local education system has been discussed in the literature for some decades (Keats, 1969; Mok & Xiaozhou, 2008; Ziguras, 2009). In response, exporting universities grapple with appropriate contextualization of TNE programs. Individual educators who are concerned about contextualization can spend a lot of time and effort attempting to keep up to date with offshore news and legislation and “beating themselves up” over potential cultural faux pas (Hoare, 2006) although it would seem that TNE students are quite forgiving. Indeed, previous research has found TNE students were more concerned about “Western” course content than the intercultural sensitivity of lecturers (Leask & Pollock, 2006; Pyvis & Chapman, 2007). Despite the best intentions, however, intercultural adaptation and contextualization efforts can be undermined by well-intentioned curriculum designers who are, often unconsciously, enmeshed in a dominant university paradigm that relies on “Western” ways of knowing and English language traditions (Marginson, 2010).

This study found that participants’ opinions of the need for contextualization had changed over time. As undergraduates, many had reported some discomfort with the predominantly American/Australian theories to which they were being exposed, because, for example, “that is not how people behave in Singapore” (Hoare, 2006). Like the postgraduate students in Chapman and Pyvis’s (2005) study, they had experienced difficulty transferring the concepts to their work-lives and lost interest when lecturers drew on foreign case studies and Western philosophies. However, on reflection, students thought that during their undergraduate studies they had developed a selective adaptation approach for course content that they considered to be too foreign;

It was a cherry picking operation . . . you have to update what you’ve learned. Whatever is not needed you take out . . . because if you just go ahead with an overseas model, there is a lot of resistance.

If it’s not useful you don’t use it . . . I put it down to being a mature aged student . . . I can adapt quickly. American, Australian . . . I just tune the theory to the needs of the local, but the core remains the same.

There usually isn’t any local model, it’s always adopted from the States etc . . . we can still apply it. It has basically given us the tools and a thinking process; we have to work out how to use them.

In other words, the students were tacitly recontextualizing course content for themselves. This was occurring both individually and during in-class discussion, sometimes independent of lecturer intent or realization.

With the benefit of hindsight and work experience, however, many of the respondents had become less convinced that “Singaporeanization” of “Australian course content” had actually mattered as much as they thought it did when they were students, because they were experiencing and enacting a hybridized and culturally aware practice that most agreed to be essential for HRD practitioners in all countries. The following respondents provide illustrations of their thoughts about such adaptive practice;

Models and theories are sometimes not really applicable in anyone’s real life . . . sometimes you have to deviate from the model . . . so I have lots of adulterated models.

I have different training centres in different cultures around the region, so you have to adapt and consider the culture . . . which will make the training more effective.

Culture differs between companies, departments, countries, you can’t get away with not altering . . . there’s no fixed rule . . . as an HRD specialist you’ve got to be non-biased. You move in and look from an independent neutral perspective. And you have to twitch your program based on the culture.

Not all respondents entirely agreed with the above statements. Some, predominantly those who worked in Singaporean small to medium enterprises, had found that HRD theory and practice was significantly culturally bound and differentiated from “Western” practices, for example, “training the local crowd is quite challenging because Singaporeans are by nature reserved, it’s hard to draw responses from them.” Thus there was disagreement about the need for contextualization predominantly based on the type of company in which respondents were employed; however, respondents agreed that awareness of cultural difference and a corresponding capacity to adapt practice were essential aspects of competence.

This finding is very similar to that of Tran (2011) who observed and categorized “adaptation behaviours” employed by international students in Australia. In what she calls hybrid adaptation, Tran proposes that “students engage critically and creatively with the disciplinary requirements and treat their first language and culture as a resource rather than a problem” (p. 12). She contends that hybrid adaptation is important for the sustainability of international education and the respondents to this study certainly reinforce her contention. In the preceding paragraphs, we have seen that perhaps employers should be less concerned about the capacity of TNE graduates to adapt their learning to Singaporean needs. Moreover, it appears that TNE providers should maximize the potential for in-class intercultural and transnational comparisons rather than, or at least as well as, attempting to inject local “flavor” into course content from a distance. The local knowledge of the student body should be harnessed rather than underestimated. TNE students may be better able to contextualize materials in-class because they can discuss transfer of learning with local classmates who are also Singaporeans, as one respondent explained:

Actually I learned a lot from classmates, and our community is ongoing. There is a lot of useful debate and discourse and perhaps I get the most from really understanding how others feel about a topic and how it might work in Singapore.

Conclusion

In one of the few academic papers that asks what we know about outcomes from contemporary transnational education, Cuthbert et al. (2008, p. 261) observe that the benefits of TNE to individuals and the community are “often-asserted, but rarely established.” Although this study cannot claim to measure the outcomes of TNE, it does establish that there have been some: that “delivery” of TNE can transcend purely economic objectives. Although it is always difficult to attribute direct causality of behavioral change to any specific learning intervention, the study has attested to students’ positive perceptions of relevance, usage, and endurance of learning. It is thus something of a “good news story,” which both counters the author’s initial expectations and contrasts with much of the negative press that TNE is attracting at the time of writing. As the researcher is now a transnational educator herself, she has actively encouraged and participated in considerable soul searching related to offshore programs, and certainly did not commence this research seeking the role of apologist for the TNE sector. Yet this longitudinal study has revealed an aspect of TNE that other studies have not had the opportunity to uncover and which the author did not expect to find in such strength. It has shown that TNE provides a potentially rich experience for “second chance” learners, which can change lives, often in situations where there are few other options. We have seen that exporting universities still have some way to go in terms of overcoming ethnocentricity; yet if we are able to engage with students in ways that incorporate and respect local knowledge and mutual learning, exporting universities can truly build capacity and thereby reap the sociocultural and reputational benefits that they espouse.

Footnotes

The author declared no potential conflicts of interests with respect to the authorship and/or publication of this article.

The author received no financial support for the research and/or authorship of this article.

Bio

Lynnel Hoare is a lecturer at RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia. She is a relatively new academic whose previous career spanned more than 20 years in human resource development. She has recently taught “Working with Diversity” at postgraduate level and “Human Resource Development” at undergraduate level, both in Australia and offshore in the Southeast Asian region. Her research interests relate to the nexus between culture and pedagogy, particularly within the Asia Pacific region.

References

Altbach

P. G.

(2002). Perspectives on international higher education. Change, 34(3), 29-31.

Argyris

(1999). On organizational learning (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.

Banks

Lawrence

(2008). Outcomes for graduates. In Banks

Olsen

(Eds.), Outcomes and impacts from international education: From international student to Australian graduate, the journey of a lifetime (pp. 23-48). Canberra, Australia: IDP Education.

Cannon

(2000). The outcomes of international education for Indonesian graduates: The third place? Higher Education Research and Development, 19, 357-379.

Chapman

Pyvis

(2005). Identity and social practice in higher education: Student experiences of postgraduate courses delivered “offshore” in Singapore and Hong Kong by an Australian university. International Journal of Educational Development, 25, 39-52.

Cuthbert

Smith

Boey

(2008). What do we really know about the outcomes of Australian international education? A critical review and prospectus for future research. Journal of studies in international education, 12, 255.

Daroesman

I. P.

Daroesman

(1992). Degrees of success: A tracer study of Australian government sponsored Indonesian fellowships 1970-1989. Canberra: Australian International Development Assistance Bureau (AIDAB) and the International Development Program of Australian Universities and Colleges (IDP).

Davie

(2003, January, 18). Will NUS or NTU be on top? The Straits Times, p. H18.

Davis

Olsen

Bohm

(2000). Australia’s international student program In D. Davis, A. Olsen & A. Bohm (Eds.), Transnational education providers, partners and policy. Challenges for australian institutions offshore. Brisbane, Australia: IDP Education.

10.

Fell

(1999, October 5-8). Onshore, offshore or Internet? Paper presented at the 13th Australian International Education Conference, Fremantle, Australia.

11.

Fetterman

D. M.

(1989). Ethnography: Step by step. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.

12.

Haley

U. C. V.

Low

(1998). Crafted culture: Governmental sculpting of modern Singapore and effects on business environments. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 11, 530-553.

13.

Hoare

(2006). So near and yet so far: An ethnographic evaluation of an Australian transnational education program (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

14.

Hoare

(2010). The cultural complexities of internationalisation: Student and lecturer experiences of an offshore Australian program. In Kell

Vogle

(Eds.), Global student mobility in the Asia Pacific: Mobility, migration, security and well-being of international students. Newcastle, UK: Cambridge Scholars.

15.

Hodgkin

M. C.

(1966). Australian training and Asian living. Perth, Australia: University of Western Australia Press.

16.

Hodgkin

M. C.

(1972). The innovators: The role of foreign trained person in Southeast Asia. Sydney, Australia: Sydney University Press.

17.

Keats

D. M.

(1969). Back in Asia—A follow-up study of Australian trained Asian students. Canberra: Australian National University, Department of Economics, Research School of Pacific Studies.

18.

Keeley

(2007). Human capital. How what you know shapes your life. Paris, France: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development.

19.

Knight

(2005). Borderless, offshore, transnational and cross-border education: Definition and data dilemmas. Retrieved from www.obhe.ac.uk

20.

Knight

(2010). Quality dilemmas with regional education hubs and cities. In Kaur

Sirat

Tierney

(Eds.), Quality assurance and university rankings in higher education in the Asia Pacific (pp. 99-119). Penang, Malaysia: Penerbit Universiti Sains Malaysia and National Higher Education Research Institute.

21.

Leask

Pollock

(2006, October 10-13). Keeping the promise to transnational students—Developing the ideal teacher for the transnational classroom. Paper presented at the Australian International Education Conference, Perth, Australia.

22.

Lim

F. C. B.

(2009). Education hub at a crossroads: The development of quality assurance as a competitive tool for Singapore’s private tertiary education. Quality Assurance in Education, 17(1), 79-94.

23.

Low

(2003). Competitive education and human resource development: Overseas education. In Low

Johnston

D. M.

(Eds.), Singapore Inc. public policy options in the third millennium (pp. 305-333). Singapore: Eastern Universities Press.

24.

Marginson

(2010). The global knowledge economy and the culture of comparison in higher education. In Kaur

Sirat

Tierney

(Eds.), Quality assurance and university rankings in the higher education in the Asia Pacific. Penang, Malaysia: Penerbit Universiti Sains Malaysia and National Higher Education Research Institute.

25.

McBurnie

Ziguras

(2006). Transnational education. Issues and trends in offshore higher education. London, UK: Routledge.

26.

Merriam

(1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

27.

Ministry of Manpower Singapore. (1999). Older workers. Singapore: Manpower Research and Statistics Department.

28.

Mok

K. H.

Xiaozhou

(2008). When China opens to the world: A study of transnational higher education in Zhejian, China. Asia Pacific Education Review, 9, 393-408.

29.

Naidoo

(2009). Transnational higher education. A stock take of current activity. Journal of Studies in International Education, 13, 310-330.

30.

Oakman

(2002). Young Asians in our homes: Colombo Plan students and White Australia. JAS, Australia’s Public Intellectual Forum, 72, 89-98, 270-272.

31.

Pyvis

Chapman

(2007). Why university students choose an international education: A case study in Malaysia. International Journal of Educational Development, 27, 235-246.

32.

Shanghai Jiao Tong University Centre for World-Class Universities, & Shanghai Jiao Tong University Institute of Higher Education. (2010). Academic ranking of world universities. Retrieved from http://www.arwu.org/ARWU2009.jsp

33.

Tran

L. T.

(2011). Committed, face-value, hybrid or mutual adaptation? The experiences of international students in higher education. Educational Review, 63, 79-94.

34.

Walsh

(1998). Doing ethnography. In Seale

(Ed.), Researching society and culture. London, UK: SAGE.

35.

Yang

(2008). Transnational higher education in China: contexts, characteristics and concerns. Australian Journal of Education, 52, 272-286.

36.

Ziguras

(2001, December 2-6). The effect of GATS on transnational higher education: Comparing experiences of New Zealand, Australia, Singapore and Malaysia. Paper presented at the Australian Association for Research in Education Annual Conference, Fremantle, Australia.

37.

Ziguras

(2009). Home country responses to international student emigration. Melbourne, Australia: RMIT University.

38.

Ziguras

McBurnie

(2011). Transnational higher education in the Asia-Pacific Region: From distance education to the branch campus. In Marginson

Kaur

Erlenawati

(Eds.), Higher Education in the Asia Pacific: Strategic responses to globalization. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.