The Texas A&M University (TAMU) System Board's decision to close its Qatar branch campus has become a focal point in global higher education discourse this year. The announcement regarding the cessation of TAMU's Qatar operations, previously lauded as a paradigm of Transnational Higher Education (TNHE), has left many in the sector bewildered. The withdrawal of an institution that benefited from substantial financial backing from the Qatar Foundation, estimated in the range of hundreds of millions to over a billion dollars, after more than two decades, undeniably marks a significant moment.
This decision does not precipitate an immediate cessation of ongoing educational programs or administrative services. A structured withdrawal, as stipulated in the agreement with the Qatar Foundation, is slated over the next four years. The university has pledged to continue supporting educational and faculty activities, despite emerging reports of student departures. TAMU’s faculty council is advocating for the welfare of staff members facing unemployment, and a former TAMU president has voiced regret, calling for transparency in the decision-making process, signaling ongoing repercussions.
Turning away from the shock that occurred in Qatar's 'Education City,' now better known through the 2022 World Cup, our attention shifts to the Incheon Global Campus (IGC), aspiring to be a 'Northeast Asian hub for international education'.
IGC was a 'multipurpose' national project encompassing economic and industrial revitalization, prevention of brain drain, improvement of living conditions for foreigners in the Free Economic Zone, and enhancement of domestic higher education competitiveness. The infrastructure cost of IGC is estimated to be over 500 billion KRW. Including the budget spent on legal and institutional preparations, partner search, establishment preparation costs, initial operation support, and exemptions from rent and management fees, it was indeed a 'mega project' unprecedented in the South Korean higher education sector.
The challenging journey to the establishment of IGC is well recounted by Dr. Oh Myung, the former Deputy Prime Minister of Science and Technology, and Dr. Song Hee-yeon, the former President of the Korea Development Institute (KDI) and the first CEO of the IGC Foundation, who led the efforts. In particular, Song's memoirs document the determination to establish foreign universities in our territory despite negative opinions from the educational authorities and public opinion. Although many memorandums of understanding were signed with foreign universities, visible outcomes were not readily apparent. However, momentum began with the partnership with Stony Brook University in 2007, and it has developed into a place where about 300 faculty members from four foreign universities educate over 4,000 students.
Twelve years after its launch in 2012, is IGC producing the outcomes expected by the South Korean government? Furthermore, are the overseas universities supplying programs to IGC achieving their anticipated effects?
To answer both questions is challenging because both positive and negative assessments have their persuasive power depending on the perspective. There seems to be no comprehensive and empirical evaluation of IGC's performance so far, except for occasional estimates of 'preventing foreign currency outflow' released by the IGC Foundation. Declaring effectiveness may be no more than a 'confession of preference'. Regarding the second question, the motives for establishing campuses in other countries are diverse and multilayered, ranging from improving access to higher education, generating income, strengthening the brand, cultivating talent, contributing to the development of the international community, strategic public diplomacy, to the vanity of leadership. Therefore, the evaluation will inevitably vary depending on what is emphasized.
Importantly, due to the characteristic 'in-betweenness' of TNHE, the tenant universities of IGC are destined to 'walk a tightrope' between the home (exporting) country's universities/society and the host (importing) country's government/market (students/parents)/local community/industry. Moreover, the contemporary value of a 'transnational university (or branch campus)' is dynamic within the transversal global higher education ecosystem and longitudinal changes over time. Hence, the significance of IGC for South Korea and on an international level has been continuously evolving, and it will continue to do so. The reason given by the TAMU System Board of Directors for closing the branch campus reflects this reality, stating, "Our core mission needs to be realized within Texas and the United States, and above all, by the mid-21st century, there will be no need for a university to have a campus 8,000 miles away."
The recent announcement of the introduction of a Master of Laws (LLM) program by George Mason University Korea at IGC signifies the continuous effort to seek opportunities and prove their worth. While the New York State University's Korea campus began at IGC with relatively traditional departments in 2012, the introduction of the 'Game Department' by the University of Utah Asia Campus, aligned with the growing global esports market, and the 'Computer Game Design' department by George Mason University Korea are glimpses of innovation at IGC. The bio-focused Ghent University Global Campus also expanded its influence by forming an agreement with Hanyang University ERICA Campus. The achievements of the Stanford University research institute, which opened at IGC in 2021, are also worth watching, and the positive indicator of an overall student enrollment rate exceeding 90% as of 2024 is observed.
In 2022, the 10th anniversary of the creation of IGC, Temple University Japan (TUJ), an American university operating in a neighboring country, celebrated its 40th anniversary. Two years later, in 2024, TUJ is accelerating its growth with the announcement of a plan to establish a second campus in Kyoto. The secret to TUJ's survival in Japan, where American universities had entered 30 years earlier than in Korea, was 'proof' through continuous innovation.
A critical question I recently received from a professor at a South Korean university, "What if that money had been invested in domestic universities?" reflects a valid perspective. Will IGC fade into obscurity as some argue, or will it leap forward as a leading model of transnational global higher education? It is time for IGC to prove itself.
*This is a translation of the Korean article published in the University News Network in April 2024. For the original work, please visit https://slv.news.unn.net/news/articleView.html?idxno=561274.
Comments
Post a Comment