ÌÇÐÄVlog

Nearly a decade ago, my PhD research focused on the inequalities embedded within China¡¯s international education landscape, particularly in outbound mobility and transnational education (TNE).

These opportunities, I argued, were mostly accessible only to students from affluent families, often privileging financial capital over academic merit. I drew on postcolonial theory to explore how international education reinforced global imbalances while reproducing social stratification within China.

Yet when I subsequently worked in the international offices of UK universities, driving recruitment, partnership development and TNE, my role was to deliver commercial outcomes within precisely the systems I had critiqued.

Now working in the private sector, advising on China¡¯s international education market, I find myself reflecting beyond the ¡°what¡±, ¡°when¡± and ¡°how¡± of global engagement and to ask the deeper and more urgent question: why internationalise?

For many, the answer lies in ideals: to promote cross-cultural understanding, global citizenship and academic collaboration. But the reality is often more complex. Internationalisation is increasingly shaped by economic imperatives, national strategies and geopolitical tensions.

China is a case in point. The country has long been a leading source of international students for the UK, US, Australia and Canada. But less acknowledged is its growing ambition to become a global destination in its own right.

Unlike many Western nations where international education is primarily market-driven, China¡¯s recruitment of international students is underpinned by strategic, diplomatic and reputational goals. It sees education as a tool for soft power, fostering people-to-people exchange and strengthening global influence, particularly across developing countries.

By 2018, China had already become the leading study destination in Asia, and it was third globally if you include short-term mobility students.?Although the pandemic interrupted this trajectory, China¡¯s long-term commitment to internationalisation remains clear.

Recent (2020) provides valuable insight into China¡¯s future as a host country. Drawing on interviews with 30 international educators in the country, the study identifies key ¡°pull¡± and ¡°push¡± factors shaping student decision-making.

Government support is central. China attracts international students with generous scholarships, relatively low tuition fees and increasing investment in university infrastructure and quality. This creates opportunities for students from less privileged backgrounds who might be priced out of other study destinations.

China¡¯s continued economic development and?projects such as the Belt and Road Initiative further strengthen its attractiveness, particularly for students from the Global South seeking better career prospects at home or in China. Chinese universities are becoming more proactive and selective in international collaborations, moving beyond the traditional ¡°big four¡± (UK, US, Australia and Canada) to forge ties across Asia, Africa, the Middle East and Latin America.

In other words, as Wei Liu previously argued, Chinese internationalisation has moved from a phase of ¡°learning from the West¡± to one of standing on equal footing, both collaborating with and competing against Western institutions.

Yet while China positions itself as an emerging study destination, another important mobility trend is unfolding domestically that reflects the growing diversification of student pathways within China itself.

As Jon Santangelo, an international educator and founder of Chariot Global Education, has pointed out, many Chinese students pursue international education not as a first choice but as a fallback option. After underperforming in the (China¡¯s high school entrance examination) at the end of grade nine and, therefore, failing to win a place in the nation¡¯s top-tier senior secondary schools, a significant number transfer to an international education track, with a view to studying abroad. However, I¡¯ve seen many students receive conditional offers from anglophone universities only to fall short on English-language or end-of-school exam requirements.

As a result, more students are opting for in-country pathways, such as foundation programmes or 2+2 joint degree arrangements between Chinese and Western universities, as more practical and supportive alternatives. In addition, they are increasingly looking beyond traditional overseas study destinations to closer-to-home alternatives, such as Hong Kong, Macao or elsewhere in Asia. Another option is transnational education programmes within mainland China, which replicate aspects of global learning within local contexts.

These trends could ultimately reduce the number of Chinese students who head to the West. However, significant barriers remain to China¡¯s ascent as an academic destination in its own right. Its global image, particularly in Western media, is a key deterrent. Geopolitical tensions and concerns about academic freedom might also discourage students from developed countries.

Language is another barrier. While growing numbers of programmes are offered in English, most university courses in China are still delivered in Mandarin. This raises broader questions: if internationalisation requires English-medium instruction globally, are we simply reinforcing linguistic homogenisation ¨C or, worse, a form of cultural erasure?

There are also concerns among international students about educational quality, international rankings and student support services, especially in comparison with well-established systems in the West. And, domestically, there is increasing scrutiny of government financial support for international students at a time of economic uncertainty for many Chinese families.

Despite these challenges, there is cautious optimism among international educators within China. The country remains committed to investing in domestic research, developing TNE partnerships with a wider range of countries, and improving student support and integration. And while it might struggle to attract students from the West, China¡¯s appeal to those from other BRICS countries and the Global South is likely to grow.

That should challenge universities across the world to rethink their approach to international education. Is it truly inclusive and reciprocal ¨C or are they privileging certain forms of knowledge, language and mobility over others?

Ultimately, the best answer to the ¡°why¡± of internationalisation remains its most human-centred one. The aim should not simply be to move students across borders in pursuit of economic and reputational advantage. It should be to build understanding across them.

Cheryl Yu is managing director of Connected International Education and vice-president of London Global Education.