Higher education (HE) mobility programmes around the globe have been key initiatives over the past thirty years, driven by combinations of supranational and national state-led knowledge economy policies, university strategies, and decisions made by individuals regarding employability, credentials, or academic tourism. In this paper we argue that mobility too often is understood through the prism of internationalism, itself umbilically tied to and nourished by Enlightenment liberal thinking, such as Kantian cosmopolitanism, and the romantic figure of the wandering scholar. This has (...) the effect of reducing our understanding of transnational mobility to individual actors, their desires, and experiences. In this paper we ask: to what extent and in what ways can HE transnational mobility projects be understood as forms of imperialism? In this regard we examine the literature on imperialism and argue for a more capacious use of the term; as taking economic, political and cultural forms. We use these to examine the links between the expansion and securing of empires historically, the state’s spatial projects and global market making. We do this through the prism of two nations, the UK and China, comparing their state’s transnational HE strategies, selectivities and outcomes. (shrink)

Michael A. PetersBeijing Normal UniversityMy deepest condolences to Pepe, Dom and Marcus and to Jim’s grandchildren. Tina and I spent a lot of time at the Marshall family home, often attending dinn...

In his 1984 allegorical novel, The Unbearable Lightness of Being, Milan Kundera explores existential questions around freedom and identity, meaning and purpose, in a period of upheaval in Soviet dominated Czechoslovakia. In this paper we draw on the rich symbolism in Kundera’s novel to bring into view upheavals in the social relations underpinning contemporary societies, and the tensions between freedom and commitment, lightness and weight that seem to characterise the nature of work in post-industrial societies. Our paper addresses three tasks. (...) Theoretically, we take up the invitation offered by this Special Issue to re-engage with critical theory, and in our case, the Frankfurt School tradition, to develop a more situated critique of education and work in contemporary capitalism and society. Substantively, we use this more reflexive and situated approach to critical theory to examine the tensions in the OECD’s current education futures policy work, and specifically their turn to a set of humanistic concepts. Normatively, we critique the OECD’s futures policies, and propose a set of propositions that might guide education into the future, as a matter of social justice. (shrink)