-

Öz

This paper explores critical aspects of the development of movements in Higher Education (HE). It describes the impacts of trade rules in higher education. HE is viewed as an important economic asset. In fact, there is little discussion as to whether the anticipated economic and supply benefits are reasonable and probable. The main problem associated with economy in HE are the application of trade rules and the competition created by globalization. The challenge that is created is; whether the trend of trade rules helps to preserve the diversity of European higher education, or whether it leads to uniformity according to specific indicators. Contrary to its stated aim, GATS (General Agreement on Trade in Services) hasn’t democratised higher education, yet the effects remain unclear. It doesn’t provide any framework for the solution of these problems thus giving rise to the globalisation has added new dimensions to existing disparities in higher education. The rationale is sometimes couched in the ideological jargon of the Cold War but is often obscured by rhetoric about cooperation. ‘Europeanisation’ and ‘colonisation’ is used in reference to cooperation and mobility. It is called ‘new neocolonialism’. The goals are political and economic and education is a key battlefield.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Globalisation, diversity, Europeanisation and colonisation in HE

Higher Education as a Battlefield: Internalisation and Globalisation as a Cold War

Öz

Bu çalışma yükseköğretim (YÖ) alanında meydana gelen gelişmelerin kritik özelliklerini incelemekte ve ticari kuralların yükseköğretim üzerindeki etkisini açıklamaktadır. Yükseköğretim önemli bir ekonomik değer olarak görülmektedir. Aslında öngörülen ekonomik ve kaynaksal faydaların mantıklı ve muhtemel olup olmadığı ile alakalı çok az tartışma mevcuttur. Ticari kuralların uygulanması ve küreselleşme ile ortaya çıkan rekabet; hızla artan karşılaştırma ve karşılaştırabilirlik trendinin Avrupa yükseköğretiminde çeşitliliğin korunmasına yardımcı olup olmadığı ya da belirli göstergelere göre bütünleşmeye önayak olup olmadığı yükseköğretimde ekonomiyle ilişkili ana problemi teşkil eden durumlardır. Mevcut hedefinin aksine Hizmet Ticaret Genel Anlaşması henüz demokratikleştirilmemiş ve etkileri bilinmemektedir. Bu problemlere bir çözüm çerçevesi önermemesi küreselleşmenin yükseköğretimde var olan farklılıklara yeni boyutlar kazandırmasına yol açmıştır. Kimi zaman olayın mantığı ideolojik bir jargon olan Soğuk Savaş kavramının satır aralarında yer alsa da bu çoğunlukla işbirliği ile ilgili retorik yüzünden belirsiz bir hal almaktadır. “Avrupalılaşma” ve “sömürü” kavramları işbirliği ve mobiliteye istinaden kullanılmaktadır ve bu “yeni sömürgecilik” olarak adlandırılmaktadır. Hedef siyasi ve ekonomik olmakla birlikte bunlara ulaşmak için verilen mücadele öğretim alanında gerçekleşmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Yükseköğretimde küreselleşme, çeşitlilik, Avrupalılaşma ve sömürge.

Kaynakça

1. Ahola, S. (2005), “Global and Local Priorities in Higher Education Policies: A Headache at the National Level?”, Tertiary Education and Management, 11: 37-53.
2. Altbach, P.G. and Teichler, U. (2001), “Internationalization and Exchanges in a Globalized University”, Journal of Studies in International Education, 5(1): 5-25.
3. Altbach, P. G. (2004a), “Globalization and the University: Myths and Realities in an Unequal World”, Tertiary Education and Management (online), 10(1), Available at: http://www.hi.is/~joner/eaps/altbach1/htm/, (accessed 21 February 2007).
4. Altbach, P. G. (2004 b), “Higher education Crosses Borders”, Change
5. (online), Volume 36, (March/April), Available at: http://www.hi.is/~ joner/eaps/ altbach1/htm/, (accessed 21 February 2007).
6. Billing, D. (2004), “International comparisons and trends in external quality assurance of higher education: Commonality or diversity?”, Higher Education, 47: 113-117.
7. Billing, D. and Thomas, H. (2000a), “The International Transferability of Quality Assessment Systems for Higher education: the Turkish experience”, Quality in Higher Education, 6(1): 31-40.
8. Billing, D. and Thomas, H. (2000b), “Evaluating a Transnational University Quality Assessment Project in Turkey”, Journal of Studies in International Education, 4(2): 55-68.

9. Brennan, J. and Shah, T. (2000), “Quality assessment and institutional change: Experiences from 14 countries”, Higher Education, 40: 331-349.
10. Gumport, P, J (2000), “Academic Restructuring: Organizational change and institutional imperatives”, Higher Education, 39: 67-91.
11. Harvey, L. (2004), “War of the Worlds: who wins in the battle for quality supremacy”, Quality in Higher Education, 10(1): 65-71.
12. HEFCE (2006), “Review of the Quality Assurance Framework: Phase two outcomes”, Aavailable at: http://www.hefce.ac.uk/media/ hefce/content/ about/ staffandstructure/ board/2006/108/B78a.PDF, (accessed 21 February 2007).
13. Hodgson, A and Spours, K. (2000), “Expanding Higher Education in the UK: From ‘System Slowdown’ to System Acceleration”, Higher Education Quarterly, 54(4): 295-322.
14. Klein, B. M. (2003), “Scottish Higher Education and the FE-HE Nexus”, Higher Education Quarterly, 57(4): 338-354.
15. Knight, J. (2001), “Monitoring the Quality and Progress of Internationalization”, Journal of Studies in International Education, 5(3): 228-2
16. Knight, J. (2002), “Globalization and Higher Education: GATS- Higher Education Implications”, UNESCO First Global Forum on International Quality Assurance, Accreditation and the Recognition of Qualifications in Higher Education, Available at: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0013/ 001314/131402e.pdf.
17. Knight, J. (2003), “GATS, Trade and Higher Education Perspective 2003Where are we?” The Observatory on Borderless Higher Education, Available at: www.obhe.ac.uk
18. Lemaitre, M. J. (2002), “Quality as Politics”, Quality in Higher Education. 8(1): 29-37.
19. Lomas, L. (2002), “Does the Development of Mass Education Necessarily Mean The End of Quality?”, Quality in Higher Education, 8(1): 71-79.
20. Meek, L.V. (2000), “Diversity and marketisation of higher education: incompatible concepts?”, Higher Education Policy, 13: 23-39.
21. Mızıkacı, F. (2003), “Quality Systems and Accreditation in Higher Education: an overview of Turkish higher education”, Quality in Higher Education, 9(1): 95-106.
22. Morley, L. (2003), Quality and Power in Higher Education, Open University Press.
23. Morley, L. (2001), “Producing New Workers: quality, equality and employability in higher education”, Quality in Higher Education, 7(2): 131-1
24. Morse, J. A. (2006), “The INQAAHE Guidelines of Good Practice for External Quality Assurance Agencies: Assessment and next steps”, Quality in Higher Education, 12(3): 243-253.
25. Peters, M. (2006), “Higher Education, Development and the Learning Economy”, Policy Futures in Education, 4(3): 279-291.
26. Ramsden, P. (1991), “A performance indicator of teaching quality in higher education: The Course Experience Questionnaire”, Studies in Higher Education, 16(2): 129-150.
27. Rowley, J. (2003), “Retention: rhetoric or realistic agendas for the future of higher education”, The International Journal of Educational Mangement, 17(6/7): 248-253.
28. Tam, M. (2001), “Measuring Quality and Performance in Higher Education”, Quality in Higher Education, 7(1): 47-54.
29. Teichler, U. (2004), “The changing debate on internationalisation of higher education”, Higher Education, 48: 5-26.
30. Temple, B. and Billing, D. (2003), “Higher Education Quality Assurance Organisations in Central and Eastern Europe”, Quality in Higher Education, 9(3): 243-258.
31. Tight, M. (2006), “Changing Understandings of ‘Public’ and ‘Private’ in Higher Education: the United Kingdom Case”, Higher Education Quarterly, 60(3): 242-256.
32. Torres, C. A. and Schugurensky, D. (2002), “The political economy of higher education in the era of neoliberal globalization: Latin America in comparative perspective” Higher Education, 43: 429-455.
33. UNESCO (1998), “World Declaration on Higher Education for the TwentyFirst Century: Vision and Action”, Available at: http://www.unesco.org/education/educprog/wche/decleration_eng.htm
34. (accessed 28 November 2006).
35. Van der Wende, M. C. and Weterheijden, D. F. (2001), “International Aspects of Quality Assurance with a Special Focus on European Higher Education”, Quality in Higher Education, 7(3): 233-245.
36. Van der Wende, M. C. (2003), “Globalisation and Access to Higher education”, Journal of Studies in International Education, 7(2): 193-206.
37. Watson, D. (2002), “Can We Do It All? Tensions in the Mission and Structure of UK Higher Education” Higher Education Quarterly, 56(2): 143-1
38. Yorke, M . (2000), “Developing A Quality Culture In Higher Education”, Tertiary Education and Management, 6(1): 19-36. www.aic./v/ace/ace_ disk/GATS/ Bologna GATS(ESİB), (accessed 21 February 2007). http://portal.unesco.org/education/en/ev.php-URL_ID=21758&URL_DO
39. =DO_ PRIN… (accessed 21 February 2007).
40. Dr. Figen Arkın received her MA in English Language Teaching at European University of Lefke and her PhD in Education Sciences at University of Sussex. She is currently Director of English Preparatory School and the Department of English Language Teaching at European University of Lefke. Her area of expertise includes Quality Assurance and Globalization in Higher Education and Management in Education. Dr. Figen Arkın Yüksek Lisans eğitimini İngilizce Öğretmenliği alanında Lefke Avrupa Üniversitesinde tamamlamıştır. Doktora derecesini Sussex Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri alanında tamamlamıştır. Dr. Figen Arkın halen Lefke Avrupa Üniversitesindilizce İngilizce Hazırlık Okulu Müdürü ve İngilizce Öğretmenliği Bölüm Başkanı olarak görev yapmaktadır. Dr. Arkın’ın araştırma alanları: Yüksek Öğretimde Kalite Denetleme, Eğtimde Küreselleşme ve Yöneticiliktir.