Search results

As an emerging market of international education, Asian countries ambitiously launched internationalization initiatives and strategies to attract international talent. Since the 1990s, Taiwan's government has implemented various internationalization policies. Partly affected by the political forces of neighboring China, Taiwan's government launched the New Southbound Policy (NSP) as the main regional strategy in 2016. One of the aims of this strategy was to promote mutual talent mobility between Taiwan and New Southbound Policy countries (NSPC). The purpose of this study is to explore how the NSP influences the student mobility scheme in Taiwan.

This study adopted the qualitative document analysis to investigate and compare the major Asian countries' internationalization focus and summarize Taiwan's internationalization development process and policy priorities. Moreover, a qualitative approach was adopted in order to collect data from 2005 to 2018 to examine Taiwan's student mobility scheme under the policy change.

Under the influence of the NSP after 2016, the student mobility scheme between Taiwan and NSPC could be categorized into five categories in accordance with the mobility rate. Although the nation-driven policy was considered powerful, the unbalanced flow between Taiwan and NSPC became severe.

The study lacked statistics on the degree level of outbound Taiwanese students going to NSPC. It could not compare the student mobility scheme between Taiwan and NSPC by degree level.

The research looked at the initiatives Asian countries have developed in order to raise higher education internationalization and regional status, which shed light on the national/regional approaches under the global change.

The 2020 pandemic disrupted traditional student mobility and forced a larger majority of transnational programmes to switch to a virtual or hybrid mode, including joint and double degree programmes. Therefore, this study aims to perceive the linkage between quality assurance (QA) and delivery modes of cross-border higher education (CBHE) in Asia before and during the pandemic.

Through an online survey and semi-structured interviews, the process by which top 200 ranked universities in the 2022 QS global ranking responded to QA and qualification issues of joint/dual degree programs in conjunction with delivery modes was explored.

The study has discovered that most respondents from universities, to some extent, tended to be positive about the effectiveness of hybrid delivery of the joint/dual degree programs, even if they still preferred the physical mode to alternatives. Either “divergence” or “responsiveness” QA modes were not applied appropriately in most joint/dual degree programs of the selected universities during the pandemic. Moreover, a fair, transparent and convergent quality and qualification system should be established to facilitate agility and responsiveness of CBHE.

The findings are of value for policymakers, QA agencies and universities to advocate the new QA model for CBHE as a systematic approach in response to changing higher education landscape in the post-pandemic era.

In 2022, the International Network for Quality Assurance (QA) Agencies in Higher Education (INQAAHE) published the new guidelines by adding three QA modules in response to the changing higher education landscape. The paper aims to investigate the transformative focus of quality assurance in higher education globally as well as Asian response to three new QA modules according to the INQAAHE ISGs.

The research conducted a quantitative approach for data collection. An on-line survey was conducted to perceive QA practices, perceptions toward new emerging QA modules and challenges encountered. In total, there were 26 responses from 18 territories with 22 QA agencies. A total of 13 out of them have a national qualifications framework in place.

Three are three major findings in the study. First, national policy and criteria and standards in distance education have been developed in the majority of Asian nations. Second, non-signatories of the Tokyo Convention had a higher proportion of having related policies, regulations and criteria in CBHE and distance education. Third, national policies and regulations; and lack of professional staff are two common challenges implementing QA in new types of providers.

The findings are of value for policymakers, QA agencies and universities to advocate the new QA model as a systematic approach in response to changing higher education landscape in the post pandemic era.