Consider this opening paragraph to an article in University World News early this year:
Many Asian countries have been setting ambitious goals to expand and improve their higher education sectors to respond to their growing aspirational middle class and as a result are on the way to catching up with and even overtaking the best higher education systems of the West.
Indeed, the Institute of International Education’s latest report on global education research entitled “Asia: The next higher education superpower?” finds that the total number of universities and tertiary graduates in Asia outnumber those in North America and Europe.
From the viewpoint of many Western policymakers and media elite, the rise of Asia in terms of education is understood both as an opportunity and source of anxiety. On the one hand, countries such as Australia view the rise of Asia as an opportunity to expand trade, increase student mobility, and grow research collaborations. On the other hand, as Asia becomes a dominate global education player, some Western governments — and universities — fear they will loose out to their Asian counterparts.
How do we understand these mixed feelings?
The guest on this show of FreshEd is Fazal Rizvi, Professor in Education at the University of Melbourne. He has a forthcoming book chapter in the Handbook of Global Education Policy, which will be published by Blackwell press in 2016, that uses a post-colonial analysis to understand Western discourses on the rise of Asia. Within these discourses, Rizvi finds an “us” versus “them” dichotomy that he connects to colonialism. The rise of Asia from this perspective “invokes conceptions of the Asian ‘others’ whose cultures must be understood, whose languages must be learnt, and with whom closer relationships must be developed – in order for us [the West] to realize our economic and strategic purposes” (Rizvi, 2013).
Citation: Rizvi, Faizal, interview with Will Brehm, FreshEd, 9, podcast audio, December 21, 2015. https://freshedpodcast.com/fazalrizvi/
Will Brehm 2:26
Fazal Rizvi, welcome to FreshEd.
Fazal Rizvi 2:28
Thank you.
Will Brehm 2:30
You have a new chapter coming out in 2016 all about Asia rising in higher education. Can you tell us some of the empirical facts that talk about what you mean by Asia rising?
Fazal Rizvi 2:45
Well, in the first instance, I’m really talking about the very general terms – the economic rise of Asia. Basically, their economic modernization, their participation in global economy, and indeed their rates of economic growth. But in the second sense, I’m talking about rising Asia in terms of its geopolitical positioning, and how it is becoming increasingly important for international trade, international investment, and indeed, international cultural, and economic production. So I’m really talking about Asia rising in a number of different ways. And of course, there are a whole range of quantitative markers, indicators for this, including the growth rate, including the rise in number of universities, including the production of research papers and research projects, and indeed increase in standards of living right around Asia, but in ways that are uneven. Some countries are progressing very rapidly, and are becoming quite rich and quite significant in global economy. Others, not so much.
Will Brehm 3:57
And what is causing this rise in various indicators in education in Asia?
Fazal Rizvi 4:05
Well, there are a number of different ways you can answer that question. The first is that economic growth itself, especially in relation to services industries, and in terms of new modes of production of manufacturing goods requires new knowledge, and the countries of Asia, India, China, Japan, Korea, Singapore, Hong Kong are investing very heavily. So that’s, if you like, an answer in relation to investment in higher education as a way of responding to the new skills needs, and knowledge needs. And the other one is basically the aspirations of parents and students themselves. You know, there is quite a determined effort to participate in educational systems to the highest level, going as far as higher education. So for example, in Korea, the participation rates are almost 100%. In Japan, it’s very high as you know, and in Hong Kong and Singapore, it’s 90% or thereabouts. So as a result, people’s aspirations and people’s expectations of their life chances are becoming very closely tied to the extent to which they participate in higher education systems. So it’s not only being driven by the governments and corporations, but it’s also being driven, at the cultural level, by individual parents and the communities.
Will Brehm 5:37
And how is this rise in higher education or education generally in Asia, being perceived by the West?
Fazal Rizvi 5:46
Well, the West is both interested and alarmed by the rise. In the chapter, I give a number of media headings, which suggest things like, “The rise of Asia and decline of the West”. Basically, the altering power relations in geopolitics is assumed to be linked to higher education, as well. And as a result, there is a degree of anxiety at one level, but a degree of opportunity as well. So, for example, a system like Australian higher education is now become totally dependent on the rise of middle class in Asia, because that’s where we get nearly 25, 30% of our students. And it’s an important source of revenue. So in other words, we want a rising Asia on the one hand. On the other hand, we will also realize that we will not be the powerhouse of research and knowledge creation, in the ways that we have been in the past in the, if you like, the colonial era. That the postcolonial era, actually, in the altered patterns of relations would mean that we’d have to relate to Asia not as simply giving us our consumers, but in some other way, which needs to be thought about. So to my mind, the perception – the Western perception – of the rise of Asia is systematically ambivalent. It is both desired and derided at the same time. So for example, derided in the sense that people say that, “Well, the standards aren’t as high”, and that, “We are still better at providing quality education, in a way in which Asian universities are”. Of course, that’s not really the case in all subjects. In some subjects it is, but in STEM subjects, the rise of leading universities in China, and universities like Tokyo Institute of Technology, or Hong Kong University, is much more rapid than we have realized so far. I mean, people who are working in education don’t realize how rapid the growth in STEM subjects has been in China, for example.
Will Brehm 8:03
And we will get into the Australian case in a little bit – to dig more into this anxiety-opportunity binary that you describe. But first, I want to just talk about the theoretical stance that you bring to this subject. And you’re using parts of postcolonial theory and before we jump into the main pieces of the theoretical work that you’re using, how would you define post-colonial theory in a nutshell in very simple language to the listeners out there?
Fazal Rizvi 8:41
Postcolonial theory to me, I mean, there are a number of different ways to interpreting it. Some people see postcolonial simply as a chronological matter, after independence, if you like. My definition is not so narrow. I’m actually looking at a much more, if you like, theoretical way of looking at it: perspectival. So I see most of what is happening, as in some ways, being derived out of the history of colonialism. So, I see history of colonialism as being always present in most things that we do. And that it is such a powerful history of 200 years that our reforms, and our new ways of thinking quite often reference that colonial past. So in other words, it’s an attempt to make history relevant to the understanding of the present that defines for me the idea of postcoloniality. That is postcoloniality in the sense that even though the countries have nominally become independent, the history continues to shape the ways in which our everyday life, our political relations, our social formations, are still formed by that.
Will Brehm 9:57
What is an example of how colonialism is still present today in the current moment?
Fazal Rizvi 10:04
Well, let’s look at the school system: the school system is largely a product of colonial history. I mean, the schools in India, before the arrival of the British, were very differently organized. Then they were organized in much the way that’s become familiar to us: classrooms, you know, timetable, the importance of time periods, and things like that. You know, those are colonial constructs and they persist. And indeed, any definition of what good schooling is does not ignore those constructs, and define whatever good is, in terms of those colonial definitions. So my view is that we need to actually understand that history as a way of understanding contemporary formation of schooling. And of course, in curriculum too:the ways in which our subjects are organized, the ways in which our knowledge is constructed, the ways in which we organize the governance of schooling, and also of higher education, is really a colonial construct, you know, that has continued to be part of it. Now, of course, we can’t say that we must either go back, or construct a completely new way. But I think the recognition that these things have been defined and constructed through the history of colonialism is an important one so that we can understand how it is that we are both indebted to colonial powers but also are resisting it at the same time. And that gives us a certain level of power to construct the things, both in terms of continuities, and perhaps in some cases, discontinuities.
Will Brehm 12:05
So how is postcolonial theory helpful in your understanding the anxiety that you find within Western discourses on Asia rising?
Fazal Rizvi 12:16
Well, the colonial discourse was predicated on asymmetry of power, okay. The colonial was, there was the colonizers, and there were colonized. And it was assumed that colonizers had all the knowledge, and all the money, and all the ways of guiding through some linear modern path, the countries of the non-West, if you like, non-colonial, the colonized. And the whole development ideology was based on that. And that we are helping these countries develop towards certain part of progress. But the progress itself was considered linear and teleological. In other words, directed towards an endpoint. And that endpoint was defined by the colonizers themselves. Of course, with the rising power of Asia, that may not always be the case, and things will change as people in previously colonized countries will assert their authority and their power to develop their own systems. And that would, to that extent, weaken the assumed authority of the West. And I think it’s the loss of authority and loss of power – legitimate authority – that many countries and many people are quite often concerned about, and are anxious about. So anxiety enters as a way of being concerned about a rearticulation of power relations.
Will Brehm 13:58
And you use Homi Bhabha’s notion of ambivalence to understand this anxiety and opportunity, the colonized and the colonizer. Can you explain this concept of ambivalence in simple language for us?
Fazal Rizvi 14:15
Well ambivalence is simply that the colonized doesn’t buy what the colonizer is offering polis bolus. There is always refraction. There is always rearticulation. There is always revision. There is always mimicry. And there is always opposition, resistance if you like. And similarly, the colonizer doesn’t always want to unambiguously dominate in its own interest. Sometimes the colonizer is quite interested in helping the colonized as well. However you define helping. So the relationship is not totally hegemonic, but always partial. So the idea of ambivalence is capturing that partiality, if you like, of power relations, rather than assuming the colonizer to be all powerful, and the colonized to be all powerless. It’s never like that. There is a degree of complicity by the colonized, and there is a degree of altruism by the colonizer. So in that sense, the relationship is an ambivalent one.
Will Brehm 15:31
So how do you see an ambivalent relationship in the case of Asian higher education, with the rise of Asian higher education?
Fazal Rizvi 15:40
Well the West sees it in one way, really, beneficial to its interest. As more and more people in Asia are educated, they are participating in a global trade, which often is assumed to benefit the rest. So for example, reports after reports that come out, are always highlighting how the Rising Asia, rising China in particular, and to a lesser extent, India, will be of great benefit in trade terms to countries like Australia or the United States, that it will bring in new consumers into the system. And as a result, we will economically benefit from it. That’s on one side. On the other hand, there is an assumption that our power, and the power relations, and our authority is going to be somehow weakened. So those two things are happening at the same time. You know, there is an admiration of China. On the other hand, there is a derision of China. So the conceptions of ‘yellow peril’, for example, the highly colonial and racist representations of Asia haven’t entirely disappeared, but have been tempered by a certain admiration of the growth rates that are 10% per year, going over two decades. And the hard work, and the contribution that China is making to global economy, is admired. But at the same time, there is a kind of derision, which suggests that they’re making huge progress, but they’re not as good really, and they threaten our interest as well.
Will Brehm 17:32
So perhaps, a way to really dig into these concepts is through a case study which you do offer in the case of Australia. So can you walk me through this? What are some of the major policies that Australia has implemented towards Asia in the higher education sector? And where do you see this notion of ambivalence, as you describe it?
Fazal Rizvi 17:59
Well, to begin with, I think we have the issue of Australia, and Australian higher education in particular, becoming sustainable economically, as a result of the rise of Asia. As Asian countries become much more economically well-off, they create a middle class with purchasing power, of being able to buy education in Australian universities and to a lesser extent, in Australian school. So for example, the University of Melbourne where I work, 20% of our revenue comes from international students. So we become incredibly dependent on tuition coming from that source. So as a result, we have to actually develop a situation where we continue to believe that we have something distinctive, and something better to offer them, as a consumer society, you know, something to be consumed. On the other hand, we want to actually sort of saying, we are helping to develop Asian countries, through the kind of education that our students … So the ambivalent relationship comes about as a result of us both benefiting economically from international students, and also being somewhat concerned that we will, perhaps in the future, no longer be needed. So as university like Tsinghua, and Beijing Normal, and NUS, National University of Singapore, University of Hong Kong rise in the rankings, there is a considerable anxiety in leading universities in Australia and with Australian governments, that our strategic economic advantage may be disappearing. And that the best students will not necessarily come into our graduate programs, for example. They would go to Tsinghua, or to the University of Hong Kong, or to NUS. And that that is a source of considerable anxiety, because the assumption is that some of these people who might make really very good immigrants – some of the leaders in our research fields and in our economic fields, commercial fields – will perhaps go back to their own country of origin, and will not become the productive Australians and migrants that they might once have been. So there is an anxiety that lies at the heart of Australian … So what’s the Australian government doing about it?
Well, to start off with, it’s continuing to rely on revenue from international student fees. But it’s also trying to develop whole range of relationships with leading Asian universities, so that they collaborate in research and teaching. They’re helping to set up campuses in Asia, so that our market share remains, even though the number of students may decline in the future. So there are a whole range of economic strategies that are being deployed to make sure that our market share does not only remain but perhaps even grows, even if it requires transnational relations, whereby education is not offered onshore, but offshore, or through various collaborative arrangements, such as twinning arrangements, or joint programs, and those kinds of things. So our research policy is becoming quite heavily dependent on collaboration with leading Asian universities, realizing of course, that many of these universities are now producing more research than our best universities are. So Tsinghua, for example, is already ahead in fields like nanotechnology, agricultural science, biotechnology, mathematics, computer sciences, and so on, ahead of even the best of Australian universities. So the strategy that is being adopted is: if they’re going to inevitably go ahead of us, then somehow, we need to get into the action, into the kind of research that they’re doing as partners.
Will Brehm 22:29
So in a sense, it’s a means to your end or our ends, as our being the Western.
Fazal Rizvi 22:37
Absolutely, absolutely. So the relationship that we are developing with these universities is becoming really quite an instrumental one, rather than one of friendship and one of collaboration on equal terms. It is becoming: how is it that we can utilize the resources that there exist, either in the form of incoming international students, or in terms of giving our researchers opportunities to work in, and work with the researchers in Tsinghua and University of Hong Kong and so on, and US? So if we can’t actually get them here, and they benefit us from bringing them here, the thing is, how do we get there? To make sure that we continue to see part of the action, rather than nothing at all.
Will Brehm 23:30
And on the flip side, many universities in Asia are actively seeking the partnerships with Western universities, with Australia. And so, what would be some of the reasons that a university like the University of Tokyo where I am, would want to partner with ANU, which it does?
Fazal Rizvi 23:51
Well, I mean, there are a whole range of reasons. To start off with, education and its benefit are largely being envisaged in transnational space, rather than national space. So their interest is in trying to rely upon the best possible resources that they can draw from ANU, and also that they can participate in the production of knowledge, utilizing the benefits of English language and English publications. Because, I mean, the colonial relations don’t only happen one way; the colonial relations continue to happen the other way as well. And in many ways, at Tokyo University, there is still assumption that, you know, the leading universities in the West are somehow better. And in any case, if they have access to English – and most of the ranking is done in the language of English – then we need to participate in that. So there are a whole range of reasons why Asian universities are interested in collaboration, but those reasons are not necessarily the same reasons as Australian universities have collaboration with Japanese universities.
Will Brehm 25:03
Right, and one of the main policies that the Australian Government was promoting that connected many universities to Asia was this Asian Literacy, which I think – if I’m not mistaken – was part of the Rudd report back in the 90s.
Fazal Rizvi 25:19
Well, the Rudd report was a report about language. So basically, the idea was that Australians will learn in Asian language. So it wasn’t Asia literacy per se, learning about Asia. More recent programs have been about Asia literacy, emerging from whole range of other ways in which this is being envisaged. So, language is just one component of the broader idea of Asia literacy, that is learning about Asia, and our relationships with Asia and our locatedness, and the inevitability of our economic future in Asia. That’s actually what Asia literacy is trying to do.
Will Brehm 26:01
Right. And then there’s other policies like student mobility and research collaboration that connects universities in Australia with those in Asia.
Fazal Rizvi 26:10
Well, these policies are familiar to Japanese and some other Asian universities. Certainly, the Japanese government has invested heavily in trying to send Japanese students to leading universities elsewhere, to develop an international consciousness, if you like, or understanding of the globalizing economy and culture. And I think Australian have come to this a little late. Like the things that Japanese universities have been doing for 20 years, Australian universities are now doing as a way of encouraging Australian students to go and spend as much as one year in Asian universities, with the assumption that they have things to offer that are as good as, if not better than, our own local universities can.
Will Brehm 27:04
And what are some of the problems that you find with this instrumentalist logic – the logic that says it’s all about a means to our ends – embedded in many of the Australian higher education policies towards Asia?
Fazal Rizvi 27:20
Well, I don’t see anything wrong with instrumentalism per se, okay. Instrumentalism is not something that is uniformly bad. But if it is reduced only to instrumentalism, then you’ve got problems. Because instrumentalism, as we know, is time specific and sooner or later, the relationship would not be deeper and smarter in ways that it needs to be if it’s only instrumental. I mean, I’m not against people doing things because it has benefits down the track, or they have economic benefits, or they have other benefits of political strategic kind. I’m not against that at all. What I am saying is, it is very dangerous to drive most aspects of your policy through this instrumentalism. Instrumentalism has to be considerably thought about in a broader set of relationships that are deeper and smarter.
Will Brehm 28:24
And looking into the future, now that Malcolm Turnbull has become the prime minister in Australia. What do you envision future policies looking like in Australia? Will there be a change?
Fazal Rizvi 28:40
Not in the short term. I mean, Malcolm Turnbull is perhaps much more aware of the contradictions and the complexities than our previous Prime Minister was, who really saw the world in black hats and white hats terms. And he would understand the complexities associated with ambivalence, or mimicry, or smart engagement, for example, than Abbott was. But these things are deeply deeply embedded in Australian culture and Australian consciousness, and it’ll take a long, long time for things to change. And I think our challenge really is to understand how we can drive our relationship in smarter directions rather than leaving it to be defined by either colonial, or more recent, instrumentalist, economic terms, you know. That we need to broaden the relationship to be multi dimensional and much more nuanced.
Will Brehm 29:47
Well, Fazal Faizvi, thanks for joining FreshEd.
Fazal Rizvi 29:50
My pleasure. Thank you very much.
Coming soon.
Coming soon.
