Page 3 - Brandenburg and de Wit-EH final-2

FROM SUBSTANCE TO FORM

Gradually, the “why and wherefore” have been taken over by the way

internationalization has become the main objective: more exchange, more degree

mobility, and more recruitment. Even the alternative movement of

“internationalization at home” of the late 1990s has shifted rapidly into this

instrumental mood.

This development coincided with the dawn of a second, rivaling term:

globalization. In fact, it seems that both terms act like two connected universes,

making it impossible to draw a distinctive line between them. Today,

internationalization has become the white knight of higher education, the moral

ground that needs to be defended, and the epitome of justice and equity. The

higher education community still strongly believes that by definition

internationalization leads to peace and mutual understanding, the driving forces

behind programs like Fulbright in the 1950s. While gaining moral weight, its

content seems to have deteriorated: the form lost its substance.

Internationalization has become a synonym of “doing good,” and people are less

into questioning its effectiveness and essential nature: an instrument to improve

the quality of education or research.

THE DEVALUATION OF INTERNATIONALIZATION

On the other side, globalization is loaded with negative connotations and is

considered more predominant than internationalization. This formula sees

internationalization as “good” and globalization as ”evil.” Internationalization is

claimed to be the last stand for humanistic ideas against the world of pure