The Global Race in Higher Education Internationalization: Australia's Dominance in Asia-Pacific and Africa's Pursuit of Equality

Internationalization of higher education has become a highly discussed topic in recent times. Globalization is pushing every country to adhere to a common standard of quality in human resources. Therefore, according to Murphy (2007), several countries worldwide are actively engaging in the internationalization of higher education within their own borders to meet the demand for high-quality international resources. Nevertheless, is the internationalization process in each nation driven by identical and equitable objectives, or do distinguishing factors set them apart? In this scholarly exposition, I shall endeavor to juxtapose and scrutinize two distinct higher education internationalization strategies hailing from nations marked by contrasting attributes: the internationalization initiatives undertaken by Griffith University in Queensland, Australia, and those of Stellenbosch University in South Africa.

In this essay, I will compare two overarching frameworks. First, I will examine the philosophical foundations, both historical context and future blueprints that serve as the basis for why both universities have embarked on the journey of internationalization. Second, I will provide a comparative analysis of practical steps related to real-world techniques implemented by both universities. This analysis will cover various aspects, including curriculum, internationalization of research, target markets, marketing strategies, and facilities enhancing the international student experience. Philosophical Foundation on Internationalization

Within this philosophical framework, I will emphasize the bacground of internationalization efforts at both campuses, examining them through two distinct time periods: the historical past and future blueprints. These two elements, it could be argued, represent the most compelling motivations for both universities to embrace the concept of international education. It is evident that the political, historical, and social contexts of each country's past have played an integral role in shaping their respective strategies for defining internationalization goals.

Historical Context and Future Blueprint

Both Australia and South Africa share a history as former British colonies, but their paths to independence differ significantly. Australia achieved constitutional independence from the Commonwealth in 1986 and formally declared sovereignty in 1901, over a century ago. During this period, Australia developed substantial economic strength, particularly in the Asia-Pacific region, with the 1980s marking a significant shift towards neoliberal economic reforms under Prime Minister Bob Hawke, known as the "Hawke reforms" (Collins, 2010). This historical context profoundly shaped Griffith University's approach to internationalization in Australia. Griffith University aimed to exert substantial influence in the Asia-Pacific region, attracting students from mainland China, Southeast Asia, Melanesian nations like Papua New Guinea, and New Zealand. The university designed its curricula and pedagogical approaches to address Asia-Pacific issues, with the goal of nurturing future leaders in the region. This strategy aligned with Australia's ambition to become a dominant economic force in the Asia-Pacific, making internationalization a catalyst for producing exceptional human capital.

In contrast, South Africa gained independence in 1961, but its path was marred by the enduring struggle against apartheid and the pursuit of equality for its black population, culminating in Nelson Mandela's presidency in 1994. South Africa's journey to stability and progress spans only the last three decades. Therefore, the internationalization efforts of Stellenbosch University are significantly influenced by the decolonization spirit, seeking academic parity for South Africa on the global stage (Odendaal, 2009). Through the internationalization initiatives of Stellenbosch University, South Africa is actively creating a platform to welcome scholars and students worldwide to engage with the local academic community. This endeavor aims to elevate the quality of local human resources to meet global standards and effectively compete. Unlike Griffith University's aggressive pursuit of international students, Stellenbosch University maintains a more measured approach to attracting international students, with a perceived emphasis on prioritizing domestic students within its internationalization vision and mission. Practical Measures on Internationalization

The differing philosophical foundations naturally lead to diverse practical approaches in the field. Therefore, in this section, I will attempt to compare the two universities through two prominent sets of practical steps: curriculum and research internationalization, as well as target demographics, marketing strategies, and international student facilities. Curriculum and Research Internationalization

In terms of curriculum, both universities exhibit distinct pedagogical approaches and content emphases. Griffith University adopts an intercultural curriculum framework, employing pedagogical strategies that heighten students' exposure to the global arena, particularly the Asia-Pacific region. The university has instituted a plethora of programs, encompassing student exchange initiatives, internship opportunities, global scholarship programs, and more. Notably, Griffith University engages in collaborations with over 500 international institutions, extending across the Americas and Europe, aimed at fortifying cooperative efforts in cultivating globally cosmopolitan talent. Significantly, Griffith University also forges alliances with multinational corporations to ensure the worldwide employability of its graduates. Despite its ambitious character, Griffith University's curriculum is thoughtfully designed to impart students with a genuinely international educational experience. Conversely, Stellenbosch University, situated in South Africa, adopts a more humanitarian orientation in its curriculum, placing emphasis on fostering critical thinking, stimulating debate, and embracing values such as democracy, human rights, and social justice, with a forward-looking international perspective. Through a collaborative curriculum design and pedagogical approach, Stellenbosch University endeavors to nurture future leaders who champion principles of justice and aspire to foster equity across diverse sectors encompassing social, economic, and environmental domains.

Otherwise, the research strategies pursued by both institutions are in harmony with their respective teaching and learning environments. Griffith University diligently pursues cutting-edge research endeavors, disseminating a wealth of knowledge and scholarly discourse, particularly geared toward the Asia-Pacific region. Extensive collaborations are fostered with prominent institutions in Asia, notably in China, alongside the development of specialized Ph.D. programs tailored to facilitate high-caliber research. While, Stellenbosch University initiates a diverse array of Ph.D. programs and research initiatives that actively encourage collaboration with international researchers. Through this strategy, South Africa aspires to elevate the standards of its domestic researchers to align with global benchmarks, while also affording national scholars broader recognition. Stellenbosch University additionally implements robust incentives aimed at attracting foreign researchers, thus addressing concerns related to the brain drain phenomenon within South Africa. As the university serves as a host for an increasing number of researchers conducting their work under its auspices, it contributes to the stimulation of intellectual innovation within South Africa.

Target Demographics, Marketing Strategies, and International Student Facilities

Within two vastly different objectives for internationalization, the go-to-market strategies of the two campuses also differ significantly. In order to target international students from around the world, Griffith University has implemented several practical steps tailored to market needs and sentiments. On their website, Griffith University employs provocative terminology that aligns with the needs of international students, such as "top-ranked," "global impact," and "teaching excellence." Notably, Griffith University also highlights its global ranking as a primary attraction. Demonstrating readiness to welcome international students, Griffith University has a marketing kit that is easy to understand, including brochures, website interfaces, and more. Moreover, Griffith University provides a variety of language options on its website. To ensure that every international student feels comfortable, adaptation programs and well-being counseling are well-prepared and structured, including collaboration with language institutions to enhance English language proficiency as the medium of instruction. However, amidst all the efforts and enthusiasm in welcoming international students, Griffith University Australia overlooks providing specific opportunities for local students, especially indigenous people. Consequently, this may pose a new equality issue for local students because the more international students come to Australia, the fewer opportunities local students have to access higher education.

On the other hand, the most striking difference with Stellenbosch University in South Africa is the absence of a focus on world rankings. Instead of prioritizing world rankings, Stellenbosch University emphasizes that they have been engaged in the internationalization of higher education for 30 years. This seems to assure prospective students that Stellenbosch University has been an internationally standardized institution for quite a long time. The diction used on the website further strengthens this goal, with phrases like "international undergraduate curricula," "sustainable development at the University," and "network and consortia" reinforcing the discourse that Stellenbosch University is making a concerted effort to validate that it is indeed internationally standardized. However, when looking at pamphlets, the information covered by Stellenbosch University is less practical and marketable. In stark contrast to Griffith University Australia, Stellenbosch University seems to provide ample space for local students by featuring a dedicated platform for South Africa on their website, specifically designed to promote a robust academic environment that drives development in Africa. In its pursuit of higher education internationalization, Stellenbosch University does not forget its traditions and the development needs of the local community. Conclusion

A single strategy for internationalizing higher education can have multifaceted implications for universities, each with distinct contexts and objectives (Tarc, 2019). For Australia, internationalization represents an opportunity to cultivate a cosmopolitan society and consolidate its soft power in the Asia-Pacific region. In contrast, for South Africa, internationalization serves as a means to expedite the attainment of equity for the African nation and establish a new global standard, departing from the image of a marginalized, impoverished, and undereducated black nation. 

So, will this status quo persist in the years to come? It is not guaranteed. There is a possibility that, after undergoing transformation into a developed nation and enduring a protracted period of independence, South Africa may alter the trajectory of its higher education internationalization efforts, aiming to bolster its soft power within the region. This mirrors the endeavors of Indonesia, a nation that gained independence earlier, currently involved in the process of building its soft power in Southeast Asia, or it might opt to emulate Australia's path. However, in my perspective, regardless of the objectives and strategies employed, the internationalization of higher education must consistently uphold a set of unassailable principles and an unwavering spirit. This core mission is to foster an academic environment capable of enhancing the well-being and promoting justice for all individuals on our planet.