GLOBALIZATION OF FOREIGN ACADEMIC CREDENTIAL PLACEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS FOR GRADUATE STUDY IN THE UNITED STATES, 1932- 2015 by George F. Kacenga Bachelor of Arts, Saint Vincent College, 2002 Master of Science, Saint Vincent College, 2005 Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of School of Education in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy University of Pittsburgh 2017 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH SCHOOL OF EDUCATION This dissertation was presented by George F. Kacenga It was defended on March 23, 2017 and approved by Dr. Michael Gunzenhauser, Associate Professor, Department of Administrative and Policy Studies Dr. Maureen McClure, Associate Professor, Department of Administrative and Policy Studies Dr. Martin Staniland, Professor, Graduate School of Public and International Affairs Dissertation Advisor: Dr. John C. Weidman, Professor, Department of Administrative and Policy Studies ii Copyright © by George F. Kacenga 2017 iii GLOBALIZATION OF FOREIGN ACADEMIC CREDENTIAL PLACEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS FOR GRADUATE STUDY IN THE UNITED STATES, 1932- 2015 George F. Kacenga, PhD University of Pittsburgh, 2017 Foreign educational credential assessment is responsive to assessors’ social, economic, and cultural stimuli. Academic institutions, industries, and governmental bodies treat placement specialists’ recommendations as signals of cross-cultural productive capacity, giving significance to the methodology of foreign education-system analysis. A conceptual framework incorporating globalization, internationalization, massification, and marketization (GLIMM) helps explain how and why paradigms have shifted. GLIMM forces can help explain changes in international higher education and illustrate the fluidity of education in an evolving global society. This study employs a naturalistic qualitative research design with a two-step analysis of the target resource documents, constructivist typological study and substance analysis. The study then asks (a) what information academic credential placement recommendations offer, (b) if and how those styles have changed, and (c) if the forces of massification and marketization resulting from globalization and internationalization inform those changes. The objective of the analysis was to understand authorial intent for the placement recommendations, use of the placement recommendations, and the consequences of authors changing over time. iv This study examines 1932-2015 primary placement recommendation resource materials from all global regions and potential relationships between those materials and the increasing number of international students in the U.S. Also examined in this study are the impact of economics on international student recruitment and the evolving purpose of education through the late-20th and early-21st centuries. In the absence of regulatory oversight, HEI leaders have needed increasingly to understand national trends regarding use of credential evaluation services, in-house credentialing and necessary resources for success, and impact of inconsistent credential evaluation on fairness in enrollment and admission. The outcomes of this study are relevant to higher education leaders in that they address a common blind spot at many HEIs and challenge accreditation bodies to examine policies and adopt best practices. The researcher cataloged (a) the kinds of information and placement recommendations generally provided, (b) why the information and recommendations were credible or non-credible, (c) changes in this information during the time period under investigation, (d) if and how these changes can be linked to GLIMM, and (e) how in-house credential evaluators have responded. v TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE ................................................................................................................................... XV 1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 1 1.1 SCOPE OF THE STUDY ................................................................................... 4 1.2 RESEARCH QUESTIONS ................................................................................. 5 1.3 EVOLUTION OF INTERNATIONAL STUDENT ADMISSION POLICIES/PROCEDURES IN THE U.S. ......................................................................... 5 1.4 FOREIGN ACADEMIC CREDENTIAL PLACEMENT EVALUATION IN PRAXIS ....………………………………………………………………………………... 7 1.4.1 The Day-to-Day Basics of Foreign Academic Credential Placement Evaluation ..................................................................................................................... 7 1.4.2 Applying the Systematic Approach................................................................ 9 1.4.2.1 Evolution of the Systematic Approach .............................................. 10 1.4.2.2 Elements of the Systematic Approach ............................................... 11 1.4.2.3 Application Requirements .................................................................. 11 1.4.2.4 Establishing Educational Chronology ............................................... 12 1.4.2.5 Official Academic Records ................................................................. 14 1.4.2.6 Establishing Types of Education Programs and Grading Scales ... 15 1.4.2.7 Making a Placement Recommendation ............................................. 15 vi 1.5 EVOLUTION OF FOREIGN CREDENTIAL EVALUATION RESOURCES ...................................................................................................................... 16 1.5.1 First Wave (1932-1971) ................................................................................. 16 1.5.2 Second Wave (1974-1996) ............................................................................. 17 1.5.3 Third Wave (1999-present) ........................................................................... 17 1.5.4 The Coming Wave of Foreign Credential Evaluation Resource Development ............................................................................................................... 19 1.6 STUDY OVERVIEW ........................................................................................ 20 1.6.1 Theoretical Foundation ................................................................................. 20 1.6.1.1 Globalization, internationalization, massification, and marketization (GLIMM). .................................................................................. 20 1.6.2 Target Audience ............................................................................................. 22 1.7 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE PROPOSED STUDY .......................................... 23 1.7.1 Uncertainty for International Students ....................................................... 24 1.7.2 Uncertainty for HEIs ..................................................................................... 24 1.7.2.1 Global Engagement. ............................................................................ 25 1.7.2.2 Emergent domain engagement. ......................................................... 27 1.7.2.3 Individual campus enterprise engagement. ...................................... 28 1.7.3 Resolving Uncertainty within the Educational Environment.................... 29 2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................................................................... 31 2.1 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK..................................................................... 32 2.1.1 Education as Economic Leverage ................................................................ 33 2.1.2 Globalization, Internationalization, Massification, and Marketization ... 36 vii 2.1.2.1 Globalization........................................................................................ 40 2.1.2.2 Internationalization. ........................................................................... 41 2.1.2.3 Massification. ....................................................................................... 41 2.1.2.4 Marketization. ..................................................................................... 42 2.2 TEXTS TO BE CONSIDERED IN THIS STUDY ......................................... 42 2.3 ACCREDITATION, CREDENTIAL EVALUATION, AND INTERNATIONAL ENROLLMENT MANAGEMENT ............................................... 43 2.4 SAME CREDENTIAL, DIFFERENT EVALUATIONS ............................... 48 2.5 APPROACHES TO RESOLVING THE PROBLEM OF EVALUATIVE DIFFERENCES: CUSTOMIZATION VERSUS STANDARDIZATION ................... 51 2.5.1 An Overview of Customization .................................................................... 51 2.5.2 Customization in Practice ............................................................................. 53 2.5.3 An Overview of Standardization .................................................................. 55 2.5.4 Standardization in Practice: The Lisbon Recognition Convention .......... 56 2.6 IN SUPPORT OF THE RESEARCH QUESTIONS ...................................... 59 3.0 METHODOLOGY ..................................................................................................... 61 3.1 DATA COLLECTION OVERVIEW .............................................................. 62 3.1.1 Sampling: ........................................................................................................ 62 3.1.2 Typology Selection:........................................................................................ 62 3.1.3 Substance Analysis: