- 1National and Kapodistrian University of Athens (NKUA), School of Economics and Political Sciences, Department of Political Science and Public Administration, Athens, Greece
- 2Metropolitan College, Global University Hub, Marousi, Greece
Introduction
The concept of internationalization in higher education is traditionally defined as a comprehensive process by which institutions integrate an international, intercultural, or global dimension into their core purpose, functions, or delivery of education (Knight, 2003). This integration typically manifests through various strategic initiatives, including curriculum internationalization, student and faculty exchanges, foreign language training, and partnerships with overseas institutions. These efforts aim to prepare students for a globalized world, enhance cultural understanding, and foster global cooperation (Knight, 2022).
However, in today's context, marked by significant political, economic, and cultural divisions, the landscape of internationalization faces new and complex challenges. Universities must navigate a labyrinth of evolving geopolitical realities, which may include dealing with the implications of nationalism, trade wars, and shifting alliances (Hunter et al., 2023; Knight, 2020). Additionally, domestic policy shifts, such as changes in immigration laws and educational policies, can significantly affect the ability of institutions to host international students or engage in overseas collaborations (Birrell and Perry, 2009).
Furthermore, cultural tensions, both within countries and between them, can impede the mutual understanding and respect that are foundational to successful internationalization efforts. These tensions may arise from differing cultural norms, miscommunications, or conflicts regarding values and ethics in education (Moon, 2016).
This article aims to dissect these multifaceted challenges while exploring viable pathways for institutions to not only sustain but also expand their international reach in this fragmented global context. It builds on Knight's (2003) conceptualization of internationalization as a multifaceted and evolving process, extending her framework to address the current challenges posed by geopolitical divisions and digital transformations. By examining the interplay between internal capabilities and external environments, the discussion will shed light on how universities can adapt and innovate to continue their mission of broadening global perspectives and connections despite considerable obstacles. Through this exploration, the article offers strategic insights into how higher education can effectively respond to and capitalize on the opportunities presented by a rapidly changing world.
Opportunities for internationalization in a divided world
The Comprehensive Internationalization Framework (Hudzik, 2011) underscores the importance of aligning institutional policies with international strategies, a practice increasingly necessary in navigating divided geopolitical climates.
In this context, the rapid expansion of online learning platforms and digital resources has unlocked new possibilities for international education, particularly significant in today's fragmented geopolitical climate. These technologies enable universities to extend their educational offerings beyond traditional geographical and political barriers. For instance, during the COVID-19 pandemic, universities worldwide significantly expanded their digital offerings, launching virtual exchange programmes that connected tens of thousands of students worldwide. In these extraordinary times, Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) have also become powerful tools for preserving educational continuity and promoting global cooperation (Rulinawaty et al., 2023).
By leveraging online courses, virtual exchange programmes, and remote learning opportunities, educational institutions can reach a wider audience. This digital expansion not only allows access to education for students globally but also ensures continuous learning despite physical barriers and geopolitical conflicts. Through such innovations, universities are instrumental in creating a more interconnected and educated global community, which fosters increased cultural understanding and cooperation (Kamraju et al., 2024).
Despite geopolitical tensions, universities have the opportunity to strengthen and expand their global networks by developing strategic partnerships with other institutions and corporations around the world (Wilkins, 2016; Kleibert et al., 2021). These collaborations are crucial for facilitating student and faculty exchanges, promoting joint research initiatives, and sharing educational resources.
Such synergies enrich the educational experience and amplify the global impact of higher education. More importantly, these networks serve as essential channels for cultural exchange, helping to bridge divides and promote international solidarity (Briede, 2020).
Universities play a pivotal role in cultivating global citizens who can navigate and address the complexities of a divided world. This requires a comprehensive integration of global awareness into their curricula, ensuring students not only learn about different cultures and global issues but also acquire the skills needed to effectively engage with them (Rhoads and Szelenyi, 2011). Furthermore, fostering an inclusive campus culture is critical. This culture should celebrate diversity as a strength, creating a platform where varied perspectives are not only shared but respected and integrated into the learning experience (Pless and Maak, 2004).
As the demand for global competency among graduates grows, employers are increasingly valuing skills such as cross-cultural communication and a nuanced understanding of global issues. By internationalizing their curricula and enriching the campus culture with a genuine global dimension, universities can better prepare their students to thrive in a globally interconnected workforce. This approach not only enhances the employability of graduates but also empowers them to make positive contributions to a world that, while interconnected, is often divided by cultural and geopolitical conflicts (Reimers, 2009).
Difficulties in pursuing internationalization
Rising geopolitical tensions often result in stringent visa policies and restrictions that can significantly hamper academic collaborations and student mobility. Such policies not only obstruct the flow of international students but also adversely impact collaborative research and academic exchanges. The unpredictability of funding for international initiatives further complicates these endeavors, challenging institutions to maintain stable international partnerships (Moscovitz and Sabzalieva, 2023).
Navigating differences in cultural norms and educational expectations presents also significant challenges in internationalization (Johansen and Tkachenko, 2019). Additionally, there are profound ethical considerations, such as ensuring equitable access to educational resources for all students, irrespective of their geographical or economic backgrounds. These ethical challenges require universities to adopt thoughtful and inclusive strategies that respect diverse cultural perspectives and promote fairness (Stein, 2016).
Moreover, the economic impact of global conflicts and pandemics has led to tightened budgets across many higher education institutions (Özer and Suna, 2020). This financial strain makes it difficult to invest in internationalization initiatives, such as developing overseas campuses or enhancing technological infrastructure (Wihlborg and Robson, 2017). The necessity for substantial financial resources, which may not always be readily available, poses a significant barrier to the expansion and sustainability of international efforts.
Solutions to foster internationalization in a divided world
In the face of increasing geopolitical divisions and varied educational demands, universities have several strategies at their disposal to foster internationalization effectively.
To navigate the challenges posed by travel restrictions and diverse learning preferences, universities can adopt more flexible learning models. Hybrid formats that blend online and in-person elements are particularly beneficial. These models provide accessible options for international students who may encounter logistical or financial barriers, ensuring that higher education remains within their reach regardless of their physical location (Singh et al., 2021).
Higher education institutions can also take a proactive stance in policy advocacy. By engaging in dialogues with policymakers, universities can help shape more open and supportive visa and immigration policies. This effort can greatly alleviate the geopolitical barriers that hinder international education and collaboration, making it easier for students and scholars to cross borders for educational purposes (Kahanec and Králiková, 2011).
Creating a welcoming and inclusive campus culture is essential for the success of internationalization efforts. This goes beyond merely supporting international students with tailored services and programmes; it involves integrating diverse cultural perspectives into the campus environment and curricula. By doing so, universities nurture an atmosphere of global understanding and respect, which is critical in a divided world (Glass et al., 2015).
Together, these solutions provide a robust framework for universities aiming to expand their international reach and impact, even amidst global tensions and barriers.
Discussion
Recent geopolitical events, including Brexit and escalating US-China tensions, have disrupted traditional student mobility pathways, necessitating innovative approaches to sustain international collaboration (Moscovitz and Sabzalieva, 2023). As we navigate the complexities of a divided world, the internationalization of higher education emerges as both a crucial challenge and a significant opportunity. Universities, positioned at the intersection of cultural, educational, and technological shifts, have the potential to bridge global divides and foster international collaboration and understanding (Hunter et al., 2023).
While Knight (2022) emphasized the role of mobility in internationalization, this piece argues that digital education and hybrid learning models can act as complementary pathways, mitigating barriers such as restrictive visa policies and funding shortages. Hence, to thrive amidst these dynamics, universities must adopt a comprehensive approach to internationalization. This includes enhancing digital infrastructure to ensure that online learning platforms are accessible, efficient, and capable of delivering high-quality education to international students. Additionally, universities must engage in dialogues to advocate for more open and supportive international educational policies. Furthermore, cultivating an inclusive campus ethos is essential; campuses should not only welcome diversity but also actively integrate diverse perspectives into all aspects of university life, from curricula to campus activities (Chan et al., 2021).
Ethical considerations and sustainability should underpin all internationalization efforts. Universities need to establish equitable partnerships that respect cultural differences and promote mutual growth. It is vital to prioritize the needs and values of both local and international communities to ensure that internationalization efforts enrich rather than homogenize cultural identities (Hunter et al., 2023).
Despite the obstacles, by pursuing internationalization guided by ethical principles and a commitment to global citizenship, universities can lead the way in creating a more interconnected and empathetic world. This strategic approach will remain essential as universities seek to make impactful contributions in an increasingly fragmented global context.
Author contributions
EL: Conceptualization, Investigation, Validation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. IM: Conceptualization, Investigation, Validation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing.
Funding
The author(s) declare that no financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Publisher's note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
References
Birrell, B., and Perry, B. (2009). Immigration policy change and the international student industry, People Place 17, 64–80. doi: 10.4337/9781849802079.00011
Briede, B. (2020). “Successful global collaborations in higher education institutions,” in Publishing Journal of Language and Education, Vol. 6, eds. A. AI-Youbi, A. H. M. Zahed, and W. G. Tierney (Cham: Springer International), 189–192.
Chan, R., Bista, K., and Allen, R. (Eds.). (2021). Online Teaching and Learning in Higher Education during COVID-19: International Perspectives and Experiences, 1st Edn. London: Routledge. doi: 10.4324/9781003125921
Glass, C. R., Wongtrirat, R., and Buus, S. (2015). International Student Engagement: Strategies for Creating Inclusive, Connected, and Purposeful Campus Environments, 1st Edn. London: Routledge.
Hudzik, J. K. (2011). Comprehensive Internationalization: From Concept to Action. Washington, DC: NAFSA: Association of International Educators.
Hunter, F., Ammigan, R., de Wit, H., Gregersen-Hermans, J., Jones, E., and Murphy, A. C. (eds.), (2023). “Internationalisation in higher education: responding to new opportunities and challenges,” in Ten years of research by the Centre for Higher Education Internationalisation (CHEI) (Milan: EDUCatt).
Johansen, J. S., and Tkachenko, E. (2019). Exploring the dynamics of cultures of learning in internationalised higher education. Teach. High. Educ. 24, 633–648. doi: 10.1080/13562517.2019.1619546
Kahanec, M., and Králiková, R. (2011). Higher education policy and migration: the role of international student mobility. CESifo DICE Rep. 9, 20–27. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.1977819
Kamraju, M., Krishnaiah, J., Durgesham, G., Shaba, N., Begum, S. F., Nazneen, F., et al. (2024). Exploring the impact of online education on higher education. ASEAN J. Sci. Technol. Dev. 03, 27–36.
Kleibert, J. M., Bobée, A., Rottleb, T., and Schulze, M. (2021). Transnational education zones: towards an urban political economy of ‘education cities'. Urban Stud. 58, 2845–2862. doi: 10.1177/0042098020962418
Knight, J. (2003). Updating the defnition of internationalization. Int. High. Educ. 33, 2–3. doi: 10.6017/ihe.2003.33.7391
Knight, J. (2020). The internationalization of higher education scrutinized: international program and provider mobility. Sociologias 22, 176–199. doi: 10.1590/15174522-97865
Knight, J. (Ed.). (2022). “The changing world of international higher education, research and innovation,” in Knowledge Diplomacy in International Relations and Higher Education (Cham: Springer), 39–50. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-14977-1_4
Moon, H. C. (2016). “Understanding internationalization from a cultural perspective,” in The Strategy for Korea's Economic Success, ed. H.-C. Moon (Oxford: Oxford Academic), 167–182. doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190228798.003.0010
Moscovitz, H., and Sabzalieva, E. (2023). Conceptualising the new geopolitics of higher education. Glob. Soc. Educ. 21, 149–165. doi: 10.1080/14767724.2023.2166465
Özer, M., and Suna, H. (2020). “COVID-19 pandemic and education,” in Reflections on the Pandemic in the Future of the World, eds. T. B. Akademisi, M. Şeker, and Özer (Ankara: Turkish Academy of Sciences Publications), 157–178. doi: 10.53478/TUBA.2020.032
Pless, N., and Maak, T. (2004). Building an inclusive diversity culture: principles, processes and practice. J. Bus. Ethics 54, 129–147. doi: 10.1007/s10551-004-9465-8
Rhoads, R., and Szelenyi, K. (2011). Global Citizenship and the University: Advancing Social Life and Relations in an Interdependent World. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. doi: 10.1515/9780804777803
Rulinawaty, K., Priyanto, A., Kuncoro, P., Rahmawaty, S. D., and Wijaya, A. (2023). Massive open online courses (MOOCs) as catalysts of change in education during unprecedented times: a narrative review. J. Penelitian Pendidik. 9, 53–63. doi: 10.29303/jppipa.v9iSpecialIssue.6697
Singh, J., Steele, K., and Singh, L. (2021). Combining the best of online and face-to-face learning: hybrid and blended learning approach for COVID-19, post vaccine, and post- pandemic world. J. Educ. Technol. Syst. 50, 1–32. doi: 10.1177/00472395211047865
Stein, S. (2016). Rethinking the ethics of internationalization: five challenges for higher education. InterActions: UCLA J. Educ. Inf. Stud. 12, 10–14. doi: 10.5070/D4122031205
Wihlborg, M., and Robson, S. (2017). Internationalisation of higher education: drivers, rationales, priorities, values and impacts. Eur. J. High. Educ. 8, 1–11. doi: 10.1080/21568235.2017.1376696
Keywords: cultural integration, digital education, ethical internationalization, globalization, international collaboration, policy advocacy, sustainability
Citation: Lazari E and Matsoukas IG (2025) Bridging divides: the bold new era of university internationalization. Front. Educ. 9:1473045. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2024.1473045
Received: 30 July 2024; Accepted: 11 December 2024;
Published: 03 January 2025.
Edited by:
Francis Thaise A. Cimene, University of Science and Technology of Southern Philippines, PhilippinesReviewed by:
Wright Jacob, King's College London, United KingdomCopyright © 2025 Lazari and Matsoukas. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Ianis G. Matsoukas, SU1hdHNvdWthc0BtZXRyb3BvbGl0YW4uZWR1Lmdy