International education has evolved significantly, with new models emerging that reflect the changing dynamics of global mobility, technological advancements the demand for enriched and holistic learning experiences. This essay explores the possibility of conceptualising “transglobal” higher education, which will be useful in re-evaluating mobility patterns and capturing the changing landscape.

International education in evolution

The innovative higher education initiatives, exemplified by the emergence of Minerva University from Silicon Valley in the United States, have created unique pathways.

Historically, international education involved a round-trip study abroad experiences through university-level exchange agreements or programmes offered by third-party providers in either non-profit or commercial sectors. Later, prestigious universities established educational outposts overseas to formulate global network. These campuses allow students to study in various international locations while remaining enrolled in a single system. For instance, New York University’s Global Programs has two offshore campuses in Abu Dhabi and Shanghai, labelled as “portals”, and a range of study-away sites across continents.

Some of these are called international branch campuses which allow institutions to extend their reach and provide education in diverse cultural and geographic settings. The University of Nottingham in the UK, for example, has campuses in China and Malaysia, offering students the opportunity to study in different countries while earning a degree from the same institution. These often feature curricula adapted to local contexts while maintaining the academic standards of the home institution.

Another model is the rotation, where students move between multiple campuses or partner institutions over the degree course. This model is frequently designed within a consortium or alliance framework, such as the CEMS Master in International Management. ESCP Business School's Master in Management also allows students to study at various campuses in European cities. Some practical programmes, such as the MBA programme at KEDGE Business School, require multi-location study trips. Additionally, trilateral model between universities in Korea, China, and Japan, such as those within the Campus Asia scheme, employ a rotation system.

Different terminologies in a single thematic field

The foregoing model can be encapsulated in a thematic field of “transnational”, “offshore”, “cross-border”, and “borderless”, which are often used interchangeably.

“Transnational” involves programmes and institutions operating across national borders, allowing students to earn qualifications from foreign institutions without leaving their home country. This includes branch campuses, online education and twinning programmes. For instance, the University of London International Bachelor offers degrees worldwide through local teaching institutions.

“Offshore” refers to establishing educational institutions or programmes in a different country from the home institution. This typically refers to setting up branch campuses or partnerships with local institutions to deliver the home institution's curriculum abroad. Monash University in Malaysia, for example, allows students to experience the curriculum of a prestigious university without relocating.

Cross-border education involves the movement of students, faculty, and programmes across national borders, including student exchanges, faculty mobility, joint research projects, and branch campuses. The Erasmus+ exemplifies this type, facilitating exchanges among European universities.

Borderless education emphasises removing geographical, cultural, and institutional barriers to education, powered by technological innovations, often through digital learning platforms. Examples include Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) and Collaborative Online International Learning (COIL), offering courses from top universities to learners worldwide.

Sometimes, the lines between those vocabularies are blurred. However it appears that “transnational” focuses on accessibility and flexibility within local contexts; “offshore” emphasises physical presence and infrastructural extension; “cross-border” underlines mobility and exchange, acknowledging on the importance of jurisdictional boundaries; and “borderless” stresses global accessibility and the role of technology.