(original pdf) international students and scholars in the united states: coming from abroad 2013 edi
(Original PDF) International Students and Scholars in the United States: Coming from Abroad 2013 Edition install download https://ebookluna.com/product/original-pdf-internationalstudents-and-scholars-in-the-united-states-coming-fromabroad-2013-edition/
Instant digital products (PDF, ePub, MOBI) ready for you
Download now and discover formats that fit your needs...
(eBook PDF) Academic Legal Discourse and Analysis: Essential Skills for International Students Studying Law in The United States
Forty years after Diane Crane’s book Invisible Colleges: Diffusion of Knowledge in Scientific Communities highlighted the ways in which scientists communicate and collaborate, it is clear that today’s scientific communities have become even more invisible, with drastically improved modern communication technologies facilitating collaborations without the need for face-to-face interactions. With the accelerated pace of globalization, these communities have also become more transnational in nature, taking the form of “knowledge diasporas” (Welch and Zhen 2008). At the same time, formal higher-education institutions can be argued to be more “visible,” both literally and figuratively. This is due to the increasingly transnational flows of students and faculty members of different racial/ethnic backgrounds in academia. Academic exchanges of international students and scholars are not a new phenomenon, but in the past two decades such exchanges have become faster in pace and broader in scope: higher-education sectors in Western countries increasingly seek international students as academic and financial assets to boost enrollment and to raise revenue. The rapid economic growth of some low-per-capita-income countries over this same period means that study abroad is now a reality for more than just a privileged few. Thus, many students from newly affluent or middle-class families are now also receiving higher education beyond their national boundaries, with some eventually going on to take academic positions overseas.
Many receiving countries in the Global North, as well as countries experiencing rapid economic development in the Global South, have begun to issue policies to proactively recruit such talent to keep and improve their country’s global standing. Some international treaties also include stipulations to promote skilled migration (such as the TN visa in NAFTA that encourages skilled Canadian and Mexican professionals to work in the United States). Moreover, the recent global economic downturn has not only hastened some existing trends but also shaken, if not altered, the global geopolitical and economic power balance. As such, notions such as a one-way “brain drain” for sending
countries and “brain gain” for receiving countries have shifted to an emphasis on the transnational nature of “brain exchange” or “brain circulation.” In these ways, the internationalizing of academia should not be, and often no longer is, a zero-sum game between sending and receiving countries, or between domestic and foreign-born academics. However, how to make such trends fair and just, with positive impacts for all parties involved, remains to be addressed with policy interventions.
Several questions are critical to tackling this outstanding challenge: How do the experiences of students and faculty from different countries and various backgrounds differ? Why and how do international academics make the decision to stay in their host country or return to their country of origin? Who will stay and who will return and when? How do transnational connections and activities facilitate “invisible colleges”? What are the impacts of internationalization efforts in higher education on domestic academics of different racial backgrounds? These are issues of particular significance to the United States that, to date, remains the world’s largest and strongest magnet for foreign-born academics, and is therefore at the forefront of such debates. Within these changing global and US contexts, International Students and Scholars in the United States: Coming from Abroad is a timely and welcome addition to the existing literature on “academic migrations.” It is, therefore, a privilege and pleasure to write a foreword for this book.
Coming from Abroad combines academic analysis of the experiences of foreign-born academics and the diversification of academia with implementable suggestions for international academics to thrive, and for university administrators to guide and assist them, in academia. The chapters are written by a diverse group of scholars and practitioners, ranging from leading scholars and academic administrators to seasoned service professionals, from faculty members to PhD students. About half of the authors are themselves former international students, most of whom are now international faculty (countries of origin represented include China, Germany, India, Kenya, and the United Kingdom), contributing to the diversity of personal and professional perspectives offered. Collectively, the chapters address academic migration at different career stages, including both international students and foreign-born faculty; and along two axes: from the Global South to the Global North (African and Chinese students) and North to North (British students and German faculty).
Focusing on the United States as the most significant receiving country for international students provides a number of contributions
to the literature. First, a number of previously understudied groups are included in the analyses. In particular, Irungu’s chapter on African students and Hazen and Alberts’ work on the return migration intentions of international students from a range of countries uncover trends among previously under-researched groups and call for more balanced research on different groups. Second, this volume incorporates a wide range of research methods and approaches, ranging from quantitative to largely qualitative, and including mixed methods of survey, focus groups, and interviews. The approach taken by Alberts, Hazen, and Theobald of presenting voices from both sides of the classroom in analyzing teaching by nonnative English-speaking instructors is especially refreshing and useful. They compare and contrast students’ interactions with international instructors in the classroom with the voices of foreign-born instructors to facilitate possible dialogue and search for the best and most feasible ways for both sides to benefit from their interactions. Third, on a theoretical level, several chapters critique the broad brushstrokes that have thus far typically been used in pursuing an internationalization agenda within academia. In particular, as Pandit and Theobald point out in their respective chapters, domestic diversity agendas and internationalization goals may intersect but do not replicate one another. As such, it is important to consider carefully how an internationalization agenda might affect preexisting diversity concerns and future goals.
Despite the accomplishments and advances made by this edited volume, there is, of course, always more research needed to further our knowledge on the subject of foreign-born academics. Here I would highlight two major areas for future study:
1. More comparative, transnational, and longitudinal work: Given the accelerated internationalization of the higher-education sector, and the increasing numbers of foreign-born academics working in academia, more work with comparative, transnational, and/ or longitudinal approaches is warranted. Hazen and Alberts’ chapter on the return migration intentions of international students demonstrates the value of comparative work on the differential experiences of students from various countries at the same academic institution. Along these lines, more comparative work—for instance directly comparing different groups in the same receiving institutions/regions/countries or the same group in different receiving institutions/regions/countries—would add considerable insight to our understanding of academic migrations, which could be used to develop more culturally sensitive and considerate
policies toward foreign-born academics. Another dimension that has so far been largely unaddressed is the significant East to West migration that is occurring among academics, with those from current or former socialist countries moving to Western countries, the United States included. Some works on South-to-North migration (such as from China to the United States) imply but do not explicitly address the particular analytical angle of this EastWest dimension. The break up of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s resulted in a large exodus of Soviet and other Eastern scientists to Western countries, with persistent impacts on today’s “Invisible Colleges.” Another dimension that should receive more scholarly attention is transnational work—the existing literature often focuses on either sending or receiving areas/countries but rarely connects the two. Simultaneous research conducted in both sending and receiving regions could provide some unique angles of analysis and policy implications, especially when addressing the complex issues of “brain drain/gain/circulation/exchange.” Moreover, much current research takes a cross-sectional snapshot approach. Truly longitudinal work, while more difficult to tackle in terms of both time required and logistics involved, will tease out much more detail about changing attitudes, behaviors, and experiences of foreign-born academics as well as the opportunities and constraints enabling or discouraging such changes.
2. Confronting issues of race and racialization: While not implying or suggesting to privilege one group, one type of research, or one ideological or political stance over others, there is a need to directly confront issues of race and racialization in our research. Foreign-born academics are often exposed to, and to a certain extent already buy into, media portrayals of different population groups while still in their countries of origin. Once they arrive, these academics experience the racial reality of the United States or other receiving countries. The preconceived racial images or beliefs held by foreign-born academics often manifest themselves in this new context, and can reinforce existing racial hierarchies via skewed thinking processes and actions. Some academics join the racialized majority with certain privileges, while those from racialized minorities become deprived of such privileges, irrespective of their class, gender, or human capital (Li and Yu 2012). When it comes to a discipline or academia as a whole then, the impacts and results are far reaching. A recent president of the Association of American Geographers, Audrey Kobayashi, recently wrote that “it is easier to celebrate diversity than to address racism” and
“before we can celebrate diversity we need to address the ongoing, real, and socially damaging effects of racism” (Kobayashi 2012, 3). Several chapters in this book either explicitly address, or implicitly allude to, these issues of race and experiences by people from racial minority backgrounds. This represents an important step, and invites further research to directly tackle issues of race, racialization, and the impacts of racism on both domestic and foreign-born academics. Such research helps tease out how, and how much, one’s race makes a difference, and how to level the playing field so that all academics—racial majority and minority, domestic and international—have an equal chance to survive and succeed.
In short, I congratulate the achievements of Alberts and Hazen and all their contributors in providing such a fine volume of solid academic analysis and useful practical solutions. I look forward to future works by them and others to broaden and deepen our understanding of the complex relationships around globalization, racialization, and internationalization of higher education.
Wei Li, Arizona State University
Works Cited
Crane, D. 1972. Invisible Colleges: Diffusion of Knowledge in Scientific Communities. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Kobayashi, A . 2012. “Can Geography Overcome Racism?” AAG Newsletter 47(5): 3.
Li, W., and W. Yu. 2012. “Racialized Assimilation? Globalization, Transnational Connections, and US Immigration.” In Race, Ethnicity, and Place in a Changing America, 2nd edition, edited by J. Frazier, E. Tettey-Fio, and N. Henry, 33–44. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press. Welch, A ., and Z. Zhen. 2008. “Higher Education and Global Talent Flows: Brain Drain, Overseas Chinese Intellectuals, and Diasporic Knowledge Networks.” Higher Education Policy 21: 519–37.
This page intentionally left blank
Introduction
Helen Hazen and Heike Alberts
Knowledge flows increasingly freely in today’s global society. Human beings, in whom this knowledge is embedded, are now also highly mobile (Meyer, Kaplan, and Charum 2002), resulting in an integrated global market for the highly skilled. Academics are a significant stream within this global flow of talent. While early educational exchanges were often associated with policies to promote cultural, social, and political ties between specific countries, more recently expansions in international student migrations have been attributed also to declining transport costs and improving technologies (OECD 2010). In addition, increased demand for higher education has in some cases outpaced the capacity of individual countries to provide quality higher education, motivating students to seek opportunities internationally (Bhandari and Blumenthal 2009). Such factors led to a tripling of the number of students studying outside their country of citizenship between 1980 and 2008 (OECD 2010, 313). By 2008, approximately 3.3 million students were pursuing tertiary education abroad, the majority (79%) in the affluent countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (OECD 2010).
Academic careers are often characterized by significant geographical flexibility; indeed, international mobility is frequently considered an integral part of academic work (McNamee and Faulkner 2001; van de Bunt-Kokhuis 2000). As such, “the idea of an extreme volatility of highly skilled people, who are submitted attractive offers and hence are susceptible to move from one place to another overnight, is gaining momentum” (Meyer, Kaplan, and Charum 2002, 310). Academics are nonetheless subject to barriers to migration (see Richardson 2009), and a deeper understanding of their migration patterns is called for.
While international students dominate flows of international academics, significant numbers of individuals also move to take up positions in other countries with their degree in hand. These positions include academic faculty posts, as well as postdoctoral and other research jobs; individuals in these positions are often referred to collectively as “international scholars.” International students and scholars share some of the same motivations, such as the desire to improve their economic circumstances, take advantage of more promising opportunities elsewhere, and experience another culture. Similarly, they encounter many of the same challenges, including cultural dislocation and language issues. There is also a lot of continuity among these two groups as a significant number of international students eventually become international scholars. Efforts to investigate common ground are, therefore, warranted. However, these groups are also distinctive in some ways, particularly in how they are recruited, whether or not they will be remunerated for their work overseas, and their typical age and stage of life. It is therefore important to avoid inaccurate generalizations when analyzing migration patterns of academics. Even among students a distinction has to be made between undergraduate and graduate students in terms of their opportunities to obtain external funding, the degree to which they are actively recruited, and their likely degree of commitment to an academic lifestyle, among other things. This volume attempts to carefully draw out commonalities in the experiences and context of academic migrants, while recognizing variations in the patterns that typify different groups.
The United States is a particularly important case study within discussions surrounding academic migrations owing to its dominant, and rapidly evolving, global position in hosting international students. For several decades, the United States has been one of the most significant recipients of international students, and is today host to the largest number of international students worldwide. However, in the face of increasing competition from other countries (Bevis and Lucas 2007; Mooney and Neelakantan 2004; NAFSA 2003), improving opportunities in major sending countries such as India and China (Mooney and Neelakantan 2004), tightening immigration restrictions and hostility toward foreigners in the United States (Dollag 2004; Hindrawan 2003), and economic constriction, the United States risks losing its position as the primary global recipient of international student and faculty talent (McHale 2011; Lin, Pearce, and Wang 2009; Florida 2005; NAFSA 2003). As Florida (2005, 147) points out, international students are the “canaries of
the global competition for talent,” with fluctuations in international student enrollments indicating wider trends in highly skilled migrations. A declining share of international students in the United States could therefore be followed by a decline in the share of highly skilled migrants more generally. The United States may have to make a coordinated and proactive effort to maintain its attractiveness to international students (NAFSA 2007, 2003).
F raming A cademic M igration
While the migration of international academics has traditionally been framed within the “brain drain” discourse, with Western countries seen as overwhelmingly benefiting from their ability to attract global talent and draining skills from the low-income world, the reality today is far more complex. New players are emerging on the scene as providers of world-class education, some low-income countries now actively send students abroad to transfer knowledge back to the home country, and many student and faculty migrations have been revealed to be circular rather than unidirectional. Indeed, “mobility” may be replacing “migration” among the highly skilled, reflecting the idea that the movements of highly skilled migrants today are often short term (Vertovec 2002). As a result, many scholars now argue that the terms “brain circulation” and “brain exchange” more accurately describe the increasingly multidirectional nature of international migrant flows and the growing awareness that these movements are beneficial for both sending and receiving nations (Bhandhari and Blumenthal 2011; Brooks and Waters 2011; Goldin, Cameron, and Belarajan 2011; Johnson and Regets 1998; Gaillard and Gaillard 1997). Nonetheless, migrant flows from less to more developed regions continue to dominate (Meyer, Kaplan, and Charum 2002). Since the 1990s, there has also been increasing attention to the transnational position of migrants, recognizing that many migrants maintain close ties to both home and host country, even when the two are geographically distant. Migrants are understood to “develop and maintain multiple relations—familial, economic, social, organizational, religious, and political—that span borders” (Glick Schiller, Basch, and Szanton Blanc 1992, 1). Thus, they remain embedded within their country of birth while creating ties to, and potentially even settling permanently in, a new host country.
While global forces have led to increasing numbers of students seeking the best education available from a worldwide pool of universities, institutions and governments for their part have developed
internationalization policies to try to capitalize on these cross-border flows. Three main rationales are given for implementing internationalization agendas: economic, political, and academic. From an economic point of view, internationalization prepares individuals for international careers, also benefiting the country as a whole by importing talent and knowledge. Within the political realm, internationalization is seen as contributing to national security, while in academia internationalization is in line with liberal education goals (Childress 2009). Although the notion of internationalization in higher education is supposed to involve the integration of international/intercultural approaches throughout all aspects of university life, in reality many universities have largely focused on recruiting international student and faculty talent in order to further their research agendas and attract investment and fee-paying students (Kelly 2009; Kim 2009; Waters 2008).
I nternational A cademics in the U nited S tates
In the United States’ early years international educational exchanges were not always considered positive as the large number of students going to Europe served as a reminder that European institutions were superior to American universities. By 1900 the quality and reputation of American universities was improving, however, and the United States began to attract foreign students looking for a good education and research opportunities (Bevis and Lucas 2007). By the 1920s, the paradigm shift was complete, as international exchanges began to be actively promoted. A milestone was the opening of the Institute of International Education (IIE) as a clearinghouse for international exchanges in the United States in 1919. The IIE published lists of foreign scholarship opportunities, organized exchanges of professors, assisted in the creation of a student visa, and established more uniform evaluation of academic credentials from other education systems (Bevis and Lucas 2007). Today the IIE continues to be active in promoting and documenting international academic exchanges, and publishes annual Open Doors reports—the most important source of data on international students and scholars in the United States.
The most recent Open Doors report shows that 723,277 international students studied at US institutions in the 2010/11 academic year, numbers having increased on an annual basis with very few exceptions since the 1950s (Institute of International Education 2011a). Since the mid-twentieth century, the migration of students
and faculty has increased rapidly worldwide, but particularly in the United States. By 2008, 19 percent of all students enrolled outside their country of citizenship were studying in the United States, making the United States host to by far the largest share of international students worldwide. The United Kingdom, with 10 percent of international students, ranks a distant second (OECD 2010, 314), but illustrates the significance of English-speaking countries in dominating the list of major host countries. The consistently high ranking of US research institutions, coupled with generous funding in certain fields, makes the United States a very attractive destination for international students (Goodman and Gutierrez 2011).
Despite these advantages, the United States’ share of the international student market declined from 24 percent of international student enrollees globally in 2000 to 19 percent in 2008 (OECD 2010, 314). Furthermore, there are now about a dozen countries in the world where international students account for a larger proportion of the country’s student body than in the US (Florida 2005). Increases in foreign student enrollments in the United States stopped in the 2002/03 academic year and declined over the next two years, even as other countries’ international student enrollments continued to expand (Institute of International Education 2011a; Lin, Pearce, and Wang 2009). This decline has been linked to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, after which the PATRIOT Act and the Border Security and Visa Reform Act of 2002 tightened immigration rules and intensified screening procedures for foreigners (Florida 2005). These reforms were designed to address concerns raised over the potential security risks posed by international students, related to fraudulent admissions of students and lack of monitoring (Borjas 2002). While stricter rules, and accompanying delays in issuing visas and increased visa rejection rates, had an influence on students (and scholars) from all countries (see Florida 2005), students from Muslim regions and countries that were seen as sponsors of terrorism were most affected. Hardening attitudes toward immigrants more broadly led to increasing discomfort for both students already in the United States and students contemplating a course of study there (Lin, Pearce, and Wang 2009; Alberts 2007; Bevis and Lucas 2007; McCormack 2007; Field, Mooney, and Neelakantan 2004). In response, numerous initiatives have been proposed or implemented to streamline the student-visa process and reduce the hardships imposed (Bevis and Lucas 2007; NAFSA 2003). In particular, the US government has made an effort to speed up visa procedures and offer opportunities for practical training after graduation in order to encourage renewed growth in
international student numbers. However, critics argue that other laws and regulations, for instance related to obtaining drivers licenses and social security numbers, have simultaneously made the situation more difficult for international students (McCormack 2007); furthermore, demand for visas and permanent residency status (“green cards”) outpace the supply, resulting in delays (Jasso et al. 2010).
Since 2006, international student numbers in the United States have once again begun to rise, with each progressive year hitting a new record high in terms of international student enrollments (figure 1.1). As reported in the Chronicle of Higher Education, “higher-education officials attribute the growth to stronger recruitment efforts by universities, the rising numbers of students who seek education abroad, and continued efforts by the U.S. government to smooth the visaapplication process” (McCormack 2007, A1). In many US universities, international students today account for a significant proportion of the student body, especially in certain disciplines and at the more prestigious universities. For example, international students constitute more than 20 percent of enrollments in advanced research programs in the United States (OECD 2010), and community colleges are now beginning to attract international students (McCormack 2007). Nonetheless, some policymakers and scholars continue to voice concerns that the United States may be losing its premier position in
International student enrollments in the United States, 2001/02–2010/11
Source : Institute of International Education (2011a)
terms of recruiting and keeping global intellectual talent (McHale 2011; Lin, Pearce, and Wang 2009; Florida 2005) because of current weaknesses in the US and global economy and budget problems at the scale of individual universities (NSF 2010) that make it harder for students to obtain funded positions.
The contributions that international students make in the United States are increasingly being recognized, and universities compete aggressively for international enrollees. The number of international students that a university hosts is sometimes even interpreted as a marker of prestige (Lee 2010; Hazelkorn 2009). International students have long been considered significant contributors to the United States’ knowledge economy (Lin, Pearce, and Wang 2009). In 1999, it was estimated that approximately one-quarter of those holding H1-B visas (the United States’ visa category for highly skilled workers) had previously been enrolled in US universities, for instance, and some 40 percent of the United States’ foreign-born population holds tertiary degrees (Solimano 2003, 5). Increasingly, international students are also being recognized for bringing more immediate economic benefits (Bhandari and Blumenthal 2011; Gürüz 2011). According to the US Department of Commerce, international students contribute nearly US$20 billion per year to the US economy through tuition and living expenses (Institute of International Education 2010), making higher education the fifth largest service export sector in the United States (Bhandari and Blumenthal 2011). With almost 70 percent of international students’ funding originating from outside the United States (Institute of International Education 2010), and international students often paying higher tuition rates than domestic or local students (Khoser 2007), international students provide a much-needed financial injection into US tertiary education.
Regionally, South and East Asia are by far the dominant sending regions of international students to the United States, with China, India, and South Korea ranking first, second, and third in terms of student enrollments (figure 1.2). Fully 46 percent of international students are accounted for by these top three sending countries. Canada, Japan, Taiwan, and Saudi Arabia are also significant, although each country makes up less than 5 percent of total international enrollments (Institute of International Education 2011a).
Over the past ten years, approximately equal numbers of international students have arrived in the United States to pursue graduate as undergraduate studies, with a slight dominance of graduate students in most years. A far smaller proportion—over the last decade typically about 5 to 8 percent of the total number of international
Figure 1.2 Country of origin of international students in the United States, 2010/11
Source : Institute of International Education (2011a)
students—arrive as nondegree seeking students (Institute of International Education 2011a). Business, management, and engineering comprise the top fields of study, accounting for approximately 40 percent of all enrollments in 2010/11. Beyond this, physical and life sciences, math and computer science, and the social sciences accounted for about 9 percent of students each (Institute of International Education 2011a). Waters and Brooks (2010) suggest that international students from low-income contexts tend to select fields of study on the basis of their potential to improve “employability” or “positional advantage,” in order to justify the expense and effort of pursuing international study. The dominance of students from low-income countries such as India and China may, therefore, help to explain the large proportion of students pursuing subjects that enhance job prospects in a straightforward manner such as business, engineering, and computer science. Since 2006, foreign-born students—mostly Chinese, Indians, and South Koreans—have earned over 50 percent of US doctoral degrees in mathematics, computer science, physics, engineering, and economics (Bhandari and Blumenthal 2011).
International faculty members and other international scholars are also prominent on US campuses, although it is difficult to determine exactly what proportion of the faculty in the United States is
Figure 1.3 International scholars in the United States, 2001/02–2010/11
Source : Institute of International Education (2011b)
international owing to the lack of detailed data. Some estimates are available, however. Lin, Pearce, and Wang (2009) report that 22 percent of the faculty at four-year teaching colleges was foreign-born in 2003, approximately double the percentage of immigrants in the overall US population at that time. The Institute of International Education (2011b) reports that there were over 115,000 international scholars in the United States in 2010/11, and that their number has increased significantly over the past few years—the number was under 97,000 as recently as 2005/06. As with international students, a few countries dominate the flow of scholars coming to work in the United States; together, the top ten countries of origin account for roughly two-thirds of all international scholars in the United States. China is in a class of its own as a sending country, with over 30,000 scholars in the United States in 2010/11, but scholars from India (almost 12,000) and South Korea (over 9,000) are also numerically important (Institute of International Education 2011b). Beyond this, most other major sending countries are European (figure 1.3). This large proportion of East and South Asian academics represents a significant shift from the early years of international academic migrations when most international faculty were White males from Anglophone countries (Theobald 2009).
In 2010/11, two-thirds of international scholars were concentrated in just four fields—the biological and biomedical sciences (24.5%), health sciences (17.0%), engineering (12.9%), and physical sciences (11.5%). A large proportion of academic migrants are also drawn to a small number of “magnet” locations, both at the national
and subnational scale. Indeed, international students and scholars are often concentrated at just a few institutions, often those that are most prestigious and receive most research funding (Gürüz 2011; Smetherham, Fenton, and Modood 2010). In 2010/11, the top recipient of international talent was Harvard University, with 4,459 international scholars, followed by Berkeley (2,929), Columbia (2,819), and Stanford (2,754) (Institute of International Education 2011b).
Research on International Student and Scholar Migrations and Experiences
As international student and scholar numbers have risen, and increasing attention is focused on processes of globalization, there has been a burgeoning interest in international academics. One body of literature, targeted at international students themselves, provides advice on succeeding in the US education system (e.g., Bailey 2011; Gebhard 2010; Lipson and Goodman 2008; Badke 2003); similar advice is available for international faculty (e.g., Alberts 2008; Wu 2003; Sarkisian 2000). A separate literature, aimed at contributing to academic debates and of greater relevance here, explores the characteristics and context of international student and faculty migrations (e.g., Bhandari and Blumenthal 2011; Gürüz 2011; Bevis and Lucas 2007). This literature examines, among other things, the characteristics and intentions of the migrants, the impact of the migrations on host and home societies, and the barriers and challenges experienced by migrants. Many studies investigate the experiences and characteristics of student migrants, often focusing on migrants from particular countries or regions (e.g., Brooks and Waters 2011; Liu-Farrer 2011; Waters 2008). Generally, less is known about the experiences and career trajectories of international faculty (Saltmarsh and Swirski 2010). Here we consider this literature on international academic migrations by theme.
Motivations for and Barriers to International Academic Migrations
In trying to understand the motivations for international academic migrations, many researchers list pros and cons of the migration process. Authors routinely cite advantages such as opportunities for career advancement, the appeal of experiencing a different culture, and the potential for personal development (e.g., Waters and Brooks 2010; Inkson and Myers 2003; Osland 1995). Financial concerns may
Other documents randomly have different content
CHAPTER XIV
ON THE TRAIL
Disappointment showed plainly on the faces of the three motor boys. They looked at one another, and then at Mrs. Johnson, the housekeeper. She could not mistake their feeling.
“I’m sorry,” Mrs. Johnson remarked. “If he had known you were coming to see him, I’m sure he would have waited for you. But I understood him to say, when he left here, that he was going to call on you boys, and get you to go with him.”
“He did call on me,” explained Jerry, “but he left suddenly to make a search for some specimens, and did not return. We supposed he came back here.”
“No, he didn’t,” the housekeeper answered, “though he sent me a letter in which he said he was going to the mountains, and for me not to worry about him.
“But I always do that, when he’s off on one of his queer trips,” went on Mrs. Johnson, with a sigh. “I never know what danger he may get into. I don’t fuss so much when I know he is with you boys, for I know you’ll sort of look after him. But when he’s by himself he’d just as soon get wet through and never change his things from one day to another. He is so thoughtless!
“And now it is such a queer search he is on. A two-tailed lizard! As if there could be any such thing as that. Oh dear! I don’t know what to do!”
“Well, the professor has found queerer things than two-tailed lizards,” remarked Jerry, “so that part is all right. But I can’t
understand about his going away without saying a word to us. That’s what makes it seem queer.”
“It sure does,” agreed Ned.
“Didn’t he want you to go with him?” Mrs. Johnson wanted to know.
“He didn’t give us a chance to say,” was Bob’s answer. “He just— disappeared.”
“Have you his address?” asked Jerry of the housekeeper.
“Yes, it’s Hurdtown, but you’ll wait a good while before you can get an answer from there.”
“Why?”
“Because it’s miles away from a railroad, and in a lonely part of the mountains. I have written once to the professor since he sent me word where he was going, but I haven’t heard from him.”
“Hurdtown,” observed Jerry. “I wonder how we could get there?”
“Are you going after him?” the housekeeper wanted to know.
“I think so—yes,” replied Jerry. “I want to see him on important business.”
“Oh, I’m so glad!” Mrs. Johnson cried. “He just needs you boys, I know he does! I can’t understand his going away without you. Please find him, and here—take these dry socks to him. I know he’ll go about with wet feet.”
Jerry smiled as he took the socks, and then his face grew grave. He was thinking of the yellow mud of the swamp, and wondering what Professor Snodgrass would say when asked why he had told Jerry it was worthless, and why, later, he had indorsed it as of great value.
Mrs. Johnson brought out the professor’s letter. It was short, as his epistles always were, and merely stated that he had gotten on
the track of a two-tailed lizard. He gave his address simply as Hurdtown, Maine.
“Well, we’ll have to go after him!” decided Ned, “and the sooner we start the better. I wonder where this place is, anyhow?”
“I looked it up on the map,” said the housekeeper eagerly. “I can show it to you.”
Hurdtown appeared to be in the northern part of New England, several hundred miles from Boston, and in a lonely section, poorly supplied with railroad facilities.
“Yes, we could get there,” decided Jerry, looking at the map. “We could best make it by road and river, as well as by some lake travel. See,” he went on, tracing out a route with a pencil. “We could go up that far in the auto, leave the car there, and make the rest of the trip in the motor boat. That river would take us nearly to Hurdtown, and we could finish up with a lake trip.”
“Shall we do it?” asked Bob.
“I’m willing, if you are,” assented Jerry. “I sure do want to have a talk with the professor.”
“Well, it will be an all-right jaunt; merely as a trip,” said Ned slowly, “and of course we’ll stand by you, Jerry. But I don’t see how we’re going to do any water traveling—not with our motor boat, anyhow. We can’t haul it along behind the auto very well.”
“No, but we could ship it on in advance, and have it waiting for us at the head of Silver River. Then we can go down that to Lake Mogan and so on to Hurdtown. It will be quite a trip, but maybe we’ll enjoy it.”
“Enjoy it! I should say we would!” cried Bob. “We can take along a lot of things to eat, and——”
He stopped as he saw his chums smiling at him. A flicker of amusement also came into the face of Mrs. Johnson.
“Well, I certainly will be glad if you boys can locate the professor,” she said. “Tell him I was quite worried about him. But then I don’t s’pose that will do any good—he’ll do just the same thing next time —or worse. But you can send me word how he is when you find him, and that’s more than he’d do. When he writes all he thinks about is his bugs, and he’ll write and tell me how many of such-and-such an insect he has. He gives them their Latin names, and he might just as well talk Italian to me. But you boys will look after him; won’t you?”
“We sure will!” exclaimed Jerry. In spite of the feeling he had that Dr. Snodgrass had not played fair with him, the tall lad could not forget the affection he had for the absent-minded scientist.
“Well, if we’re going to make that long trip we’d better set about it,” spoke Ned. “We’ll have to go home and make preparations, I suppose.”
“Oh, sure!” broke in Bob. “It’ll take a lot of grub——”
“Can’t you think of anything else, Chunky?” asked Jerry, with a smile. “Of course we’ll have to make some plans,” he went on, “and arrange to ship the motor boat. We’d better get busy, I guess.”
They said good-bye to Mrs. Johnson, and, a little later, were on their way back home in the auto. The visit to the professor’s house had detained them somewhat, as Mrs. Johnson insisted that they stay to dinner.
“We can’t make Cresville by night,” observed Ned, looking at his watch, when they were on the road. Ned was at the wheel.
“No, we’ll stay at a hotel until morning, after we cover as much ground as we care to,” decided Jerry. “No use taking any chances with night travel.”
They had said nothing to Mrs. Johnson about their reasons for wanting to see the professor, and to his original one, of merely desiring an explanation about the yellow clay, Jerry had added another.
“Fellows,” he said, “I’m not so sure but what mother could claim that she was fraudulently induced to sell that land. It wasn’t a square deal, anyhow, and maybe the professor, unless he’s too friendly with that Universal Plaster Company, could give evidence in our favor.”
“What good would it do?” asked Bob.
“Why, if we could prove that the sale of the land was brought about by fraud, the transfer would be set aside,” Jerry said. “Mother could have her property again, and get a profit from the medicated mud. I only hope it will turn out that way.”
“And you think the professor can help you?” asked Ned.
“He may be able to. I can’t believe that he’s gone back on me altogether, though it does look so.”
Discussing this subject made the time pass quickly for the boys, and soon they had arrived at a hotel where, once before, they had put up over night.
“We’ll stay here,” decided Jerry, “and go on in the morning.”
At supper that evening Bob called Jerry’s attention to an advertisement in the paper, extolling the virtues of the yellow clay for rheumatism and other ills.
“Don’t take my appetite away, Chunky!” begged Jerry. “I don’t want to think about it until I have to. And yet, with it all, I can’t believe the professor has betrayed us.”
“Me either,” chimed in Ned.
Mrs. Hopkins, after some thought, consented to the plans of her son and his chums.
“I know you will be careful,” she said, “though I have not much hope that you will accomplish anything. I haven’t the least idea that Professor Snodgrass is at fault. He is not that sort of a character. There has been some mistake, I am sure. But the trip may do you
good, even if you don’t get my land back, Jerry,” and she smiled at her impulsive son.
“Well, I’ll give the professor a chance to explain, anyhow,” the tall lad remarked. “One funny thing about it is that he hasn’t sent for the things he left here. I should think he’d want them. There are some specimens, and his clothes. I wonder——”
Jerry was interrupted by a ring at the door. A servant came back with a note.
“Great Scott!” cried Jerry, as he noted the writing on the envelope, “it’s from Professor Snodgrass himself!”
“Maybe he’s coming back!” added Ned.
“Or maybe it’s an explanation,” said Bob.
But it was neither, as Jerry discovered when he opened it. It was merely a request that the professor’s possessions at the Hopkins house be sent to an address he gave.
“I am off after a two-tailed lizard,” the scientist wrote. “I’ll see you boys later. No time to come and say good-bye.”
“Humph! He was in something of a hurry,” observed Jerry.
The note thus delivered was the one Professor Snodgrass had written at the instigation of Fussel and his fellow conspirator, who had used the scientist for their own ends. They had held back his communication until it pleased them to have it delivered. They now thought they had matters in their own hands. Of course Jerry and his chums had no means of knowing this.
“Well, we’ll send his things, of course,” Jerry decided. “Or, rather, we’ll take them to him ourselves. We can do it as quickly as they would go to him by express. Come on, boys, let’s hustle and get on the trail.”
The motor boat was sent by freight to the headwaters of Silver River, and then the boys spent a few days getting their own outfit ready to take with them in their auto.
“Say, I wish you’d take me!” cried Andy Rush, when he heard something of the prospective trip. “I’d help—do the cooking—bring the water—rustle the wood—stand guard—Noddy Nixon might try some of his funny tricks—I’d stand him off—take me along I need a vacation—I’ll pump up the tires—whoop!”
“You’ve got enough hot air—that’s sure—to pump up a dozen tires, Andy,” said Jerry. “But it can’t be done!”
CHAPTER XV A STOWAWAY
“Well, are we all here?”
“Looks so—what there is of us.”
“And have we got everything?”
“Couldn’t take much more.”
It was Jerry who asked the questions, and Ned and Bob, in turn, who answered them. The big automobile stood in the yard at the side of the Hopkins homestead, stocked with the various things the boys thought they would need on their tour to the mountains to find Professor Snodgrass. In addition to their own outfit, they had with them some of the things the scientist had left behind, when he so unexpectedly departed.
Fortunately for the boys, the auto was an extra large one, capable of carrying eight passengers, and as there were but three of them they used the extra space to pack away their belongings.
In addition to extra clothing, and some provisions (you can easily imagine who oversaw to the packing of them), the boys took a small but complete camping outfit. There was a sleeping tent, a portable stove and other things, for they had decided to take their meals in the open when it was not convenient to go to a hotel over night.
It was possible, also, to sleep in the auto, in case too severe a storm made the tent undesirable. The heavy canopy of the big car would prove most effectual against rain.
The motor boys planned to make part of the trip in the auto, and part in the boat. The latter, they hoped, would be waiting for them
on Silver River when they arrived.
“And we’ll have more fun aboard her than in the auto,” said Ned. “There’s more room to spread yourself, and the traveling is easier.”
“We can sleep aboard very comfortably,” added Jerry.
“And it’s a good deal easier to cook,” remarked Bob, innocently enough, whereat his chums burst into laughter.
“Oh, well, you don’t need to eat if you don’t want to, Ned!” spluttered the stout lad, for his tormentor was poking him in the ribs, under pretense of seeing how much fatter he had grown.
“Don’t let him worry you, Chunky,” consoled Jerry. “He’ll be glad enough to sit up at the table when the gong rings. Now then, help me get this trunk up on the rear,” for a trunk, containing some of the things they would not need for a time, was to be put on the luggage carrier of the auto.
“Well, boys, take care of yourselves,” cautioned Mrs. Hopkins, as Jerry took his place at the wheel. The tall lad generally did the steering for his chums.
“We’ll try to,” answered Ned.
“And, Jerry,” his mother went on, coming down the path to kiss him good-bye, “don’t be too harsh with the professor, even if you find he is against you.”
“All right, Momsey, I’ll try,” was his answer, after a moment of thought.
“And it may be all a mistake,” she added. “I’m sure I hope it will prove to be so.”
“I do, too,” added the tall lad. “All ready, fellows?”
“All right,” answered Ned, stowing away the last of his belongings.
“Let her go!” called Bob.
“We’ll go past you fellows’ houses so you can say good-bye,” Jerry announced, as he turned the lever of the self-starter and the big car
moved slowly forward.
In turn, as they glided past their homes, Ned and Bob waved farewells to their folks, and then, reaching the broad highway that extended over the first part of their tour, Jerry opened the gasoline throttle a bit wider. With a hum and a roar, the powerful engine took up the burden, bearing the boys toward the mountains.
There had been busy times since they had come back from their fruitless trip to see Professor Snodgrass. The preparations for the trip occupied some time, and one day was spent in going to the swamp where the taking out of the yellow clay was in progress.
Jerry did not wish to get into a conflict—verbal or otherwise—with Fussel and his workmen, nor with Noddy Nixon, who, it appeared, was still acting as assistant foreman. So the motor boys did not approach very closely the scene of operations.
They could see, however, that a larger force of men was employed, and that considerable of the yellow clay was being taken out. It was being piled on narrow, flat-bottomed boats, that had been made purposely to float along the little canals created when the clay was cut out.
“They’re working on a big scale,” remarked Ned, as he stood beside Jerry in the motor boat, watching the operations.
“Yes, and most of their work is being done on the land my mother used to own,” replied the tall lad. “Well, maybe we’ll be able to get our rights; but it looks doubtful.”
Noddy Nixon had strolled down to the fence that marked the limits of the ownership of the Universal Plaster Company. But he had no excuse for ordering away our friends, for which he was doubtless sorry. Jerry, however, took care not to give him any chance to be insulting, if nothing worse.
Then had come the packing up and the start.
On and on sped the auto, the boys talking of many matters, and speculating as to what Professor Snodgrass would say when he saw
them.
“Here, you take the wheel a while, Ned, I’m tired,” requested Jerry, after about an hour in the front seat. The car was stopped while the transfer was being made, and when they were about ready to proceed again Bob called:
“Hey! Wait a minute. I see some apples over in that field. Wait ’till I get some.”
“Eating again!” cried Jerry, with a gesture of mock despair, for Bob had been nibbling at something ever since they started.
Without waiting for assent the stout lad slipped over the fence and he had his hands and pockets full of the apples before his chums had ceased laughing long enough to object.
“They look dandy!” exulted Bob, as he climbed back over the rails. “Have some, fellows; I guess I’m some little Willie when it comes to gathering apples; eh?”
“I guess you are, son, but it’ll cost ye suthin’!” and to Bob’s astonishment a tall, lanky farmer arose from where he had been concealed in the tall grass near the fence, and laid a detaining hand on the stout lad’s shoulder.
“Hey? What’s the matter? Let me go!” spluttered Bob, so surprised that he dropped part of the fruit. Jerry and Ned, in the car, were laughing at his plight.
“Oh, I’ll let ye go all right,” said the farmer, with a grin, “but you’ve got to settle fust! I find this is the best way to collect,” he went on. “Wait until they have the goods and then nab ’em. There ain’t no way gittin’ away from that there!”
Truly it seemed so.
“How—how much do you want?” faltered Bob. He was caught redhanded. He could not deny it. And the apple tree had seemed so isolated—so far from any house.
“Wa’al, son, them apples’ll cost ye about a dollar,” said the farmer grimly. “Them’s my best Gravensteins, and right choice they be. Yep, I guess about a dollar’ll square matters.”
“A dollar!” cried Bob. “Why, I haven’t got more’n a quart of your old apples. A dollar a quart! Why, that’s thirty-two dollars a bushel!”
“Yep. Apples is kinder high this year,” went on the man, and, whether it was intentional or not, he reached down and brought into view an old shotgun.
“This is robbery!” protested Bob.
“Are you speakin’ of what you did?” inquired the farmer, with a twinkle in his blue eyes. “If ye are I agree with ye!”
“A dollar!” spluttered Bob. “I’ll never pay it.”
“Wa’al, mebby ye’d ruther come along up to Squire Teeter’s, an’ have him value them apples,” said the farmer coolly.
“Oh, here’s your dollar!” cried Bob, handing over a crumpled bill. “But it’s robbery.”
“Yep,” admitted the farmer coolly, as he pocketed the money. “That’s what the folks around here calls takin’ other people’s things— robbery.”
He sank down in the grass again, probably to wait for his next victim, while Bob, under the laughing eyes of Jerry and Ned, made his way to the auto. They started off, and Bob’s good nature came back as he viewed the apples.
“Well, they look fine, anyhow,” he said.
He set his teeth into one—after an effort—and then he let out a yell.
“Whew! Ouch! Good night!” he cried.
“What’s the matter?” asked Jerry.
“They’re as hard as rocks, and as sour as lemons!” cried Bob. “I’m stung, all right! Those apples won’t be ripe until next winter. The old
skinflint! A dollar a quart! Whew!” and Bob threw the apples into the road.
They stopped for lunch beneath a big shady maple tree, near a cool spring bubbling out of a roadside hill.
“Bring that box under the back seat when you come,” called Ned to Bob, who was handing out the eatables.
“What box?” demanded the stout youth.
“The one marked ‘cakes.’ I put in a tin of fancy ones.”
“Good,” cried Bob, who had a sweet tooth.
He reached under the seat, where Ned had told him, but a look of surprise spread over Bob’s face, as he brought out an empty tin.
“They’re gone!” he cried.
“What’s gone?” asked Ned.
“The cakes!”
“They are? Then somebody’s eaten ’em! I’ll have a look!”
Ned ran toward the car, but, before he reached it, there was a movement under the seat. The leather flap was lifted up and a voice said, mildly enough:
“I ate the cake, fellows. I was hungry.”
“Andy Rush!” cried Jerry, as he saw the disheveled figure of the small chap. “How in the world did you get there?”
“Oh, I stowed away,” replied Andy, as he crawled out. “Can’t I come along, fellows? I’ll be good, and I’m awful hungry.”
CHAPTER XVI
A HARD FALL
Jerry Hopkins hardly knew whether or not to be angry at the small lad who had the assurance to stow himself away in the auto. Bob looked at his tall chum as if to shape his own conduct by Jerry’s. Ned was frankly angry.
“Well, you have got nerve, Andy Rush!” exclaimed Ned. “What do you mean by slipping in on us this way; eh? What do you mean?”
“I—er I, well, I just couldn’t help it,” burst out Andy, who seemed to be in some difficulty as to what to say. “I wanted to come awfully bad, and I was afraid you fellows wouldn’t let me if I asked you.”
“That’s the time you spoke the truth!” muttered Ned. “You sure are right—we wouldn’t have let you.”
“And I thought maybe, if I came along anyhow, and you didn’t find me until you had a good start, you’d let me stay rather than take me home,” finished Andy.
“Take you home!” cried Ned. “Well, you sure have got nerve! Take you home? Well, you’ll go home the best way you can. We’re not going to turn around and take you back to your mother; you can make up your mind to that!”
“You—you won’t leave me here; will you?” faltered Andy, looking around apprehensively, for they were in a rather lonely neighborhood.
“It’s as good a place as any,” grumbled Ned. “Stowaways can’t be choosers.”
Andy looked more frightened than ever. He was only a small chap, and not very robust. His usual vivacious manner, and his rapid style of talking seemed to have deserted him.
“Go on home!” exclaimed Ned. “We don’t want you!”
“Oh, don’t be mean,” urged Bob in a low tone to his chum.
“No, we can’t desert him this way, even if he did sneak in on us,” added Jerry.
Andy took heart from this.
“I I didn’t mean to do wrong,” he said eagerly. “I’m willing to pay my way. I’ve got ’most five dollars saved up. You can have that!” and he pulled some change from his pocket. “Don’t send me back!” he pleaded. “Let me come along.”
A flicker of a smile lighted Ned’s face. I fancy those of you who know the merchant’s son realize that this harsh attitude was only assumed for the time being. Really Ned was very gentle, and he only spoke that way on the impulse of the moment, and to make Andy feel a proper sorrow for his escapade.
“You will let me stay; won’t you?” the small boy pleaded. “I—I’ll do anything you say. I’ll help a lot—run all your errands for you—I’ll get water for the auto—I’ll pump up the tires—I I’ll put up the tent, chop wood—whoop! I’ll do everything!” And Andy fairly yelled—a return of his usual spirits.
“All right, if you want to work your passage,” agreed Ned, as though a problem were solved. “I’ve no objections, if you’re willing to help out,” and he winked at his chums. “But it won’t be easy,” he warned Andy.
“Oh, I’m not looking for anything easy,” replied Andy quickly. “I’ll do anything you tell me to.”
“All right, then get some wood and make a fire,” ordered Ned. “We want to boil some coffee. Then hand me another of the boxes of the cakes I put away. If it hadn’t been for them we wouldn’t have known
where you were. After that you can hunt up a spring and get a pail of water. I guess the auto radiator needs filling; doesn’t it, Jerry?”
“Oh, be a bit easy with him,” pleaded fat Bob, who knew what it was to keep pace with Ned’s demands.
“Keep still! It’ll do him good to hustle,” warned Ned to Chunky, as Andy set off on his first errand, that of getting wood.
“But we don’t need a fire,” objected Jerry. “The coffee is hot in the vacuum bottle.”
“I know it,” laughed Ned, “but Andy ought to do something to work his passage, and that’s the only thing I can think of now. Let him make a fire. And we really ought to put some water in the radiator. Let him go.”
“All right,” agreed the tall lad. “Of course Andy had no right to stow himself away, and he ought to have it rubbed in on him a little. But don’t be too rough with him, Ned.”
“I won’t,” was the promise, but Ned winked at Bob.
If Andy thought he was to have a sinecure on his stolen jaunt with the boys he was sadly mistaken. Ned particularly seemed to “have it in for him” and invented new tasks constantly.
Some of them were errands that really needed to be done, and, to the credit of Andy be it said, he did not once grumble. He might have suspected he was being “worked,” when he was made to wash the few dishes from lunch through two waters, a hasty rinse being all that the boys usually indulged in. But Andy was “game” and the dishes fairly shone when he restored them to the hamper.
But when, as they were traveling slowly along, looking for a good place to camp for the night, Ned looked over, saw one of the tires flat, and ordered Andy to get ready to pump it up, Jerry objected.
“You know he can’t pump it up—he isn’t strong enough,” the tall lad said. “Besides, we have an air pump on the motor.”
“I know, but I just want to see what Andy will say.”
