US educational foreign policy as a "soft power" factor: retrospective aspect

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru

US educational foreign policy as a «soft power» factor: retrospective aspect

Panfilov Oleksandr Yuriyovych, Savchenko Olga Oleksandrivna

Panfilov Oleksandr Yuriyovych, Doctor of Philosophical Sciences, Professor, Professor of the Department of Sociology and Political Science, Yaroslav Mudryi National Law University, Kharkiv, Ukraine. Savchenko Olga Oleksandrivna, PhD, Associate Professor, Professor of the Foreign Languages Department, Ivan Kozhedub Kharkiv National Air Force University, Ukraine

The subject of the article is education as a component of US foreign policy that was used and still is as an efficient and influential factor in the development ofsociety oriented to American values, viewpoints, and way of life. The goal of the article is to analyse the place and role of education in the USforeign policy strategy in the modern era, while the main objectives are to specify the strategic directions of using education as a «soft power» by the United States as well as identify specific mechanisms that enable achieving the most effective results in this direction. Within the study, all the above objectives are solved. In particular, the main results obtained include the following: the historical context of the US use of education as a «soft power» tool is studied, the strategic directions of using educational potential as a «soft power» are analysed, the areas where educational efforts of the United States have always been concentrated are singled out. The US experience in the sphere of educational services export can be used to specify and theoretically substantiate the capabilities of Ukraine to advance its interests in the international arena using the educational opportunities our country can suggest to the world.

Keywords: educationalforeign policy, international educational programs, educational export, «softpower».

Панфілов Олександр Юрійович, доктор філософських наук, професор, професор кафедри соціології та політології, Національний юридичний університет імені Ярослава Мудрого, м. Харків, Україна. Савченко Ольга Олександрівна, кандидат філософських наук, доцент, професор кафедри іноземних мов, Харківський національний університет Повітряних Сил імені Івана Кожедуба, Україна. Зовнішня політика США в освіті як елемент «М'ЯКОЇ Сили»: ретроспективний аспект

Предметом статті є освіта як складова частина зовнішньої політики США, яка використовувалася та залишається дієвим і впливовим фактором розвитку суспільства, орієнтованого на американські цінності, погляди і спосіб життя. Метою статті є аналіз місця і ролі освіти у зовнішньополітичній стратегії США в сучасну епоху, а основні завдання - визначення стратегічних напрямів використання Сполученими Штатами освіти як «м'якої сили», а також виявлення конкретних механізмів, що дозволяють досягти найбільш ефективних результатів у цьому напрямі. У рамках дослідження досягнуто таких результатів: вивчено історичний контекст використання США освіти в якості інструменту «м'якої сили», проаналізовано стратегічні напрями використання освітнього потенціалу «м'якої сили», виділено галузі освіти, на яких США фокусують основну увагу в контексті експорту освітніх послуг. Американський досвід щодо експорту освітніх послуг може бути використано для уточнення і теоретичного обґрунтування можливостей України просувати свої інтереси на міжнародній арені, використовуючи освітні можливості, які наша країна може запропонувати світові.

Ключові слова: зовнішня освітня політика, міжнародні освітні програми, експорт освіти, «м'яка сила».

Панфилов Александр Юрьевич, доктор философских наук, профессор, профессор кафедры социологии и политологии Национального юридического университета имени Ярослава Мудрого, г. Харьков, Украина

Савченко Ольга Александровна, кандидат философских наук, доцент, профессор кафедры иностранных языков Харьковского национального университета Воздушных Сил имени Ивана Кожедуба, Украина. ВНЕШНЯЯ ПОЛИТИКА США В ОБРАЗОВАНИИ КАК ЭЛЕМЕНТ «МЯГКОЙ СИЛЫ»: РЕТРОСПЕКТИВНЫЙ АСПЕКТ

Предметом статьи является образование как составная часть внешней политики США, которая использовалась и остается действенным и влиятельным фактором развития общества, ориентированного на американские ценности, взгляды и образ жизни. Целью статьи является анализ места и роли образования во внешнеполитической стратегии США в современную эпоху. Основные задачи - определить стратегические направления использования Соединенными Штатами образования как «мягкой силы», а также выявить конкретные механизмы, позволяющие достичь наиболее эффективных результатов в этом направлении. В рамках исследования достигнуты следующие результаты: изучен исторический контекст использования образования в США как инструмента «мягкой силы», проанализированы стратегические направления использования образовательного потенциала как «мягкой силы», выделены области образования, на которых США фокусируют основное внимание в контексте экспорта образовательных услуг. Американский опыт в сфере экспорта образовательных услуг может быть использован для уточнения и теоретического обоснования возможностей Украины продвигать свои интересы на международной арене, используя образовательные возможности, которые наша страна может предложить миру.

Ключевые слова: внешняя образовательная политика, международные образовательные программы, экспорт образования, «мягкая сила».

Problem setting

Today, education is considered as one of the main resources and most effective tools of global world policy and is called «soft power» since it allows certain countries to implant their own orientations and political views among the population of other states [1, p. 87-88]. The USA has been using education for several decades to advance its influence in the world. This factor, along with military power, ensures the country's leadership in the world arena. The study deals with scientific works of foreign and domestic scholars who focus on education as «soft power», which plays a key role in the international relations affecting directly or indirectly the global policy being, according to the Italian philosopher Gramsci, an element of «cultural and ideological hegemony» [2]. A set of various general scientific methods and approaches are used to study the target phenomenon. In particular, the use of the systematic approach makes it possible to consider education as an element of the entire system used by the USA to advance their interests within the international arena; the historical-philosophical approach enable tracing the US experience in using education as a «soft power» in a historical perspective, starting from the early years after the end of World War II and especially during the Cold War; the use of the dialectical approach helps to specify the conditions and techniques that enable using education as a «soft power» tool; using the method of comparative analysis, the peculiarities of the US use of education within different periods and as compared to other countries that also show interest in this phenomenon.

Recent research and publications analysis

In recent years, the idea of «soft power» has become an issue of special interest and a number of domestic researchers focus their scientific articles and monographs on it, but they mainly view the phenomenon of «soft power» generally or as a factor public diplomacy, and pay only indirect attention to education as one of the most important and influential components of «soft power» [3-5]. The issues of educational expansion in its various aspects are quite thoroughly studied by many authors, among them are A. Belmonte, P. H. Coombs, M Cox, Ch. Frankel, J. S. Nye, N. V. Varghese and so on. But most foreign authors also do not single out education as an independent subject of research, and special studies on this topic are not numerous. There are very few works that separately consider and analyse the US policy in the field of education exports, although, in our opinion, the study of the US experience in this area is the most interesting, because this country was one of the first in the twentieth century to use the opportunities provided by the educational environment to promote its interests at the international level.

Paper objective

Therefore, understanding the place and role of education in the US foreign policy strategy in the modern era is of great interest and significance, which is the goal of the given paper. The main objectives are to analyse the strategic directions of using education as a «soft power» by the United States as well as identify specific mechanisms that allow them to achieve the most effective results in this direction. As the article deals with scientific works of foreign and domestic scholars who focus on the issues of a foreign educational policy considered as a «soft power» of a state that exports its educational services, to study the target phenomenon, various general scientific methods and approaches are applied.

In particular, the use of the historical-philosophical and concrete-historical methods make it possible to single out the specifics of foreign educational policy and track them retrospectively; the systematic and dialectical approaches enable identifying the social philosophical grounds that make it possible to provide the export of educational services being used as «soft power»; using the formal-logical method, possible transformations in the process of foreign educational policy is analysed.

Paper main body

After the end of the World War II, the United States began an unprecedented world cultural expansion, which appeared to be an effective instrument of the foreign policy of the American establishment. In 1990 the famous American political theorist and expert J. Nye formulated and later further developed the idea about the significance and efficiency of «soft power» [4; 5]. If J. Nye understands the aggregate political, economic and financial power as «hard power», then «soft power» is characterized by three main components: culture, political ideology and foreign policy. «Soft power», according to J. Nye, is the ability to get what you want not by violence or enforcement, but by winning over to your side. Today, the factor of culture as an integral part of «soft power» in world politics is acquiring a new meaning, its influence on global socio-economic processes and interstate relations is seriously increasing [6]. In this regard, states are beginning to pay more and more attention to their cultural policy, and the term «foreign cultural policy» is becoming more and more relevant, since the export, dissemination and popularization of national culture or, on the contrary, the rejection of foreign cultural expansion have become a very effective instrument of diplomacy and a rather effective means of struggling for the national interests of any state.

Foreign cultural policy, if successfully implemented, can serve as a very weighty auxiliary ideological tool that accompanies the implementation of the general foreign policy strategy of the state, creating a solid foundation that allows the state not only to defend and promote its national interests in the world arena, but also directly influence various political, economic, social processes in the world. In this regard, it is difficult to overestimate the role of education, which, along with other public institutions, is becoming increasingly open for international cooperation. Moreover, due to the special role of knowledge in the postindustrial era, education is becoming one of the decisive elements of world politics and a factor in ensuring the national security of countries due to the spread of interdependence processes.

In the second half of the XIX century, international educational programs became part of international relations and public diplomacy, providing cultural, ideological and political interaction between nations. States that take an active position in the international arena have always used international educational programs in foreign policy to form a favourable image of the country abroad and increase influence in other states. European states - France and Great Britain - were among the first to use training programs for the elite of the countries of the Middle East and Central Asia as a tool to strengthen ties between the metropolis and the colonies.

It is interesting to study the foreign educational policy of the United States of America. Various educational and cultural programs that were and still are developed by the US Department of State through the offices of the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs are widely known. These programs contribute to the national interests of the United States and demonstrate the effectiveness of the influence of their «soft power». Moreover, with the help of various educational and cultural programs, as well as foundations and non-governmental organizations, the United States has often got the opportunity to influence the internal situation in a particular state. The Fulbright Program is the largest US government-sponsored international education exchange program, founded in 1946 with the aim to foster cultural and academic ties improve mutual understanding between citizens of the United States and other countries. More than 400 ths Fulbrighters from over 155 countries have participated in the Fulbright Program since it began. 4,000 foreign students receive Fulbright scholarships each year [7]. The Open Society Foundations founded by business magnate G. Soros in mid 1980s are active nowadays in more than 120 countries around the world also shows commitment to higher education. Thus in 2020, they appropriated $ 2.3 mln on scholarship programs in Europe, that is 3.6% of $ 63.6 mln allocated on higher education issues around the world. The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace founded in 1910 and which now has centres in Washington D. C., Moscow, Beirut, Beijing, Brussels, and New Delhi; the MacArthur Foundation founded in 1970 and that is now active in approximately 50 countries; The Rockefeller Foundation founded in 1913 and Ford Foundation founded in 1936 in one way or another take part in supporting nonprofit organizations in implementing education-focused programs and strategies in the area of higher education which needs, in their opinion, modernizing shift in the mindset of the people and in their value system.

Looking back at the history of the issue, it should be noted that late 1940s - late 1980s, known as the cold war period, is the time, when the USA concentrated special efforts towards the development of its foreign educational policy. In the 1930s- 1950s the USA appeared as a leading state in terms of funding and distributing government educational programs through the world with the aim to create loyal foreign societies. During the period of ideological confrontation between the two models of the social development, the primary task was to constantly maintain and spread their own values, their own socio-political and economic way of life, to form loyal social and professional groups of people in foreign countries that would act as advocates of the pro-American orientation of their states, would promote the American model of political and economic development and behaviour in the international arena. One of the tools to spread any ideology is the education system, which is known to be the most effective way to direct a society to certain values, worldviews, ideology, lifestyle, and so on. The US government has actively used this educational function and initiated training programs for foreign citizens, and also programs to reform foreign educational systems, contributed to the spread of the values of American society. Thus, at the end of the XIX - beginning of XX centuries the United States began to create government training programs, for example, in 1900, 1,300 Cuban teachers were invited to Harvard University to study English, and in 1908, 2,000 Chinese students, who studied in American educational institutions, contributed to the improvement of the economic and political situation in China and Cuba [9].

The international educational efforts of the United States have always been concentrated in two areas: (a) government programs for training the intellectual elite and youth (academic programs), government officials, politicians, businessmen and specialists in various fields (technical programs), representatives of the armed forces (military programs) of other states; (b) reforming or developing education systems in other countries [10].

To implement international educational policy, the United States has created a large state mechanism for planning, implementation and evaluation in the educational sphere. The Department of State and the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs created in 1961 have always been involved in the training of specialists, leaders of foreign political parties, civil servants, and so on, and played a leading role in the implementation of training programs in developing countries. The Department of Defence is in charge of international military training programs. The National Security Council directs the educational policy planning process.

New threats in the international arena such as testing the atomic bomb in 1949, the victory of the Communists in China in 1949 and, finally, the Korean War in 1950-53 became external factors that influenced the adoption of new political decisions in the field international educational policy. In 1950 the National Security Council presented «United States Objectives and Programs for National Security», better known as NSC 68, that can be considered as the main doctrine of US international educational policy, which involves using training programs to struggle competing ideologies and cultural values in the world (communism, fundamentalism, anti-globalism, terrorism) [11]. Most of the training programs are distributed in the regions and countries of Europe and the Middle East, and are priority in US foreign policy.

In the early 1950s, a form of teaching youth through summer schools was initiated. The US government created a system of intensive summer training for foreign youth who could take key positions in society in the future. Young people were oriented towards the United States through the creation of two educational and information centres in other countries. Such centres became especially popular in the countries of Latin America. For years the United States has established more than a hundred centres in these regions and made English the native language for most students [12].

American educational policy is developed on the basis of annual documents in which employees of information centres and US embassies analyse the political situation in the host country, assess the scale of educational activities and identify influential groups of society in the field of political decision-making or public opinion development. The educational policy plan is created for each country, which contributes to a thoughtful and effective selection of influential citizens to study in the United States. The concept of «target audiences» has always been taken into consideration: in the 1950s in American programs focused on educating the political elite of Western Europe due to the political necessity of resisting Soviet influence; in the 1960s, programs targeted young people in developing countries and Western Europe due to their ambiguous political activism and the rise of anti- Americanism; in the 1980s, the American government concentrated its efforts on attracting the elite from the countries of Western Europe, and since the collapse of the USSR, starting from middle1990s the most of US efforts in this sphere are directed to «young democracies» - former USSR republics. Not only the social status of a potential participant in an educational project is taken into consideration, but their professional status, their role in decision-making in any field of activity, and their potential leadership qualities. The American government aspire introducing the state elite - government officials, legislators, publishers, journalists and reporters to the American way of life to demonstrate in practice the functioning of democratic institutions. Special training programs were created for these categories in the field of party building, reforming parliaments and law-making procedures. Businessmen, managers and union members let into the laws of the American style of business management and possible ways of resolving conflict situations at work. For example, almost all the German Chancellors of the Cold War period, mayors of cities, 50% of the Bundestag, all rectors of universities in West Germany, and so on participated in training programs in the United States [9]. American experts have repeatedly noted the high efficiency of such programs, since a short-term stay in the United States and demonstration of the positive features of the American way of life create a positive attitude of the program participant to the activities of the United States in the international arena.

Potential program participants are grouped by the US government into three main categories: (a) representatives of the political elite (government officials, party leaders, businessmen, journalists and publishers); (b) teachers of higher educational institutions and schools; (c) students who have the potential to become part of the political elite in the future. Most often, the United States seek to support the already existing elites. The United States believe that the professional level of a foreign citizen, their place in the political establishment, values created in the course of their training will make a significant positive impact on the ideological orientation of the elite and society as a whole. So, in different countries, from 55 to 99% of the participants in American programs are representatives of the current elite or those citizens who can affect the decision-making process and public opinion in their states [9]. Accordingly, teachers and students who may become highly professional specialists in their field are the second and third in the selection system.

Particular attention was paid to military training programs for senior and junior officers. Such programs first appeared in the 1930s, when the US government actively funded training programs for representatives of the armed forces and various groups from Latin America. The authorized program of military training (International Military Education and Training Program) appeared in 1946, when, along with the program of academic exchanges between the United States and the Republic of the Philippines, a five-year training of military students in US universities was launched. The program had the specific goal of countering the incidence of social disorder in the Philippines by strengthening the internal armed forces. In March 1947, Greece and Turkey got the opportunity to send military students to study in the United States. In these countries, there were US military advisers who selected candidates for further training in the US [13].

In the early 1950s, US international educational programs turned into practice in the Cold War politics and the main participants in international military training programs included such countries as Greece, Turkey, Iran, Pakistan, Thailand, Taiwan, Korea, Yugoslavia, and so on [14, p. 214-215, 226]. Israel traditionally participated in military training programs, and after the invasion of Afghanistan in 1979, Lebanon, Oman, Jordan, and Yemen became participants in military training programs in the United States. During the entire period of the Cold War, the United States trained more than 500 ths representatives of foreign armies [15].

In general, during the Cold War years, 600-700 thousand foreign citizens participated in government programs of the State Department plus specialists in various spheres who were trained through the US Agency for International Development and military specialists, whose training was under the Pentagon. According to the data provided by the US State Department, about 200 program graduates were heads of state, and other 600 were government members, representatives of the parliament and various ministries. The largest number of the political elite, who studied in the United States during the 1950s and late 1980s, were from such countries as South Korea, Argentina, Chile, Germany, Great Britain, Israel, Japan [15].

As noted above, there is another direction of educational expansion which involves reforming of curricula and syllabi in educational institutions of foreign countries and introducing new disciplines in them, as well as the establishment of new educational institutions in other countries. The United States introduced social and political sciences, management, and beginning from1960s, when a wave of anti-Americanism covered the world, disciplines related to the spread of North American research methods in various areas of knowledge (psychology, pedagogy, and so on). The American approach to introducing new disciplines in foreign universities can be mentioned: among the teaching staff, the US State Department choose the most professional and well-known researcher who is invited to become a participant in a short-term training program in the United States. While in the USA, the researcher familiarizes with new scientific trends, teaching methods and training techniques as well as a set of American scientists who conduct researches in the specified area. After coming back to the native country, the program participant creates new courses of study, open new research institutions, departments and laboratories and receives grants from the US establishment to buy literature and equipment, to hire employees and so on, becoming a so-called «agent of influence» acting in favour of the USA. In a similar way, the study of political science was widespread in many countries of the world. The American government believed that the study of this science would form the correct understanding of the development of international relations and US politics, as well as American liberal ideology [16].

The establishment of new educational institutions came after the introduction of new disciplines, for example, in the field of management, as the American government concentrated its efforts on the formation of a new generation of managers with the aim of spreading the American style of managing production and economic activities. It is difficult to calculate how many such universities were opened in the world at the expense of the US federal budget, but it is known that 175 universities were created in Western Europe only, which specialized in training specialists in the sphere of management [12].

In recent decades, there has appeared another trend in the concept of educational service export, in addition to the goals of political impact, in the era of globalization, higher education is largely turning into an international business. Leading world powers began to view education as part of their foreign policy pursuing not only geopolitical, but also geo-economic goals [17]. By the beginning of the XXI century, the international market of educational services can be considered as fully formed, nowadays it has become objects of foreign trade. Language courses, teaching foreigners within higher school, various means for advanced training, workshops have increasingly been and continue to be the subjects of trade within the international market. In recent years (especially under the conditions of the COVID-19 pandemic), distance learning has become increasingly organized and widespread, which simplifies the process of educational services trade. Other items of export are such products as educational programs, teaching aids, coursebooks, CDs, books, and so on. But the most popular still remain services that allow students to obtain higher education abroad. They account for the bulk of the costs that determine the size of the global education market.

The World Trade Organization estimates that the current global education market is $ 100 billion [18]. From 1963 to 2006 a number of students who studied abroad increased by 9 times and, if in 2000 there were 2 mln foreign students in the world, in 2006 there were already 2.7 mln foreign students, in 2009-3.7 mln, in 2013-4.1 mln, in 2018-5 mln people [19, p. 45-49]. Its number is predicted to grow to 7.2 mln by 2025 [20]. And more than 20% of the market of educational services offered to foreign students lies in the United States. President Obama, who stressed the importance of higher education in the world, said «We must modify, retrain and rebuild the rest of the world ... This is how we win the future. The key to winning in the future is increasing exports, and among our most valuable exports is education» [18].

Conclusions of the research

education public diplomacy

Summing up the above, it can be said that starting from the Cold War years up to current period, educating foreign representatives of various social and professional groups - teaching staff, government officials, political leaders and the military, capable of making political decisions that are beneficial to the US government, contributes to strengthening of the US national security system. The peculiarity of the US foreign educational policy lies in the fact that various educational programs, which originated over different periods of time for the implementation of foreign economic and non-political tasks, integrated into a single system, which has become an integral part of the US policy to protect the national interests of its own country, that is aimed at affecting other countries and serves as one of the ways to aggressively move forward striving for world domination [21, p. 125-126].

Education is used as an efficient «soft power» tool and has four dimensions. First, education acts as a tool for spreading political values. While studying, foreign students acquire not only professional knowledge, but also begin to share social values and cultural models of behaviour that are dominant in the USA and which they are likely to spread within their country on returning home. Second, the training of foreign students contributes to the development of informal links and interpersonal contacts which the US establishment can use as a tool to affect the political agenda and lobby business interests. The United States can use the students they taught and who now are on leading positions in various social spheres in their home countries, as «agents of influence» to affect internal political and economic processes. Thirdly, the training of foreign students can contribute to promoting national interests in bilateral relations, creating a positive image of the USA. Developing foreign ties, US educational institutions may act as a bridge between different countries and various cultures. Fourthly, the training of foreign students gives a significant profit, creates additional jobs in the educational field. Thus, the export of educational services has a huge political, social and economic impact. Using the US experience in the export of educational services can be used to specify and theoretically substantiate the capabilities of Ukraine to advance its interests in the international arena using the educational opportunities our country can suggest to the world.

References

1. Berezovska-Chmil, O. B., Chernyshova, T. O., & Kuchyn, S. P., et al. (2021). Spetsyfika rozvytku suchasnoho sotsialno-humanitarnoho seredovyshcha [The specifics of the development of the modern social and humanitarian environment]: kol. monohr. Kharkiv: SH NTM «Novyi kurs» [in Ukrainian].

2. Schwarzmantel, J. (2014). The Routledge Guidebook to Gramsci's Prison Notebooks. London: Routledge.

3. Nye, J. S. Jr. Soft Power, Hard Power and Leadership. Retrieved from https:// numerons.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/soft-power-hard-power-and-leadership.pdf.

4. Nye, J. S. Jr., & Welch, D. A. (2017). Understanding global conflict and cooperation: an introduction to theory and history. Tenth ed. Boston: Pearson.

5. Maan, A., & Cheema, A. (Eds.) (2017). Soft power on hard problems: strategic influence in irregular warfare. Lanham: Hamilton Books.

6. Nye, J. S. Jr. (2004). Soft Power. The Means to Success in World Politics. Retrieved from https://www.international.ucla.edu/asia/article/34734

7. Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs. (2021). Retrieved from https://eca.state.gov/fulbright/fulbright-alumni

8. Higher education. Open Society Foundations. (2020). Retrieved from https:// www.opensocietyfoundations.org/what-we-do/themes/higher-education

9. Frankel, Ch. (1966). Neglected Aspect of Foreign Affairs: American Educational and Cultural Policy Abroad. Washington, D. C.: The Brookings Institution.

10. Cox, M. (2010). Soft Power and US Foreign Policy. Theoretical, historical and contemporary Perspectives. New York: Routledge.

11. Belmonte, L. A. (2010). Selling the American Way: U. S. Propaganda and the Cold War. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

12. Coombs, P. H. (1965). Education and Foreign Aid. Ways to Improve United States Foreign Educational Aid. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

13. Nye, J. S. Jr. (1990). Bound to Lead: The Changing Nature of American Power. New York: Basic Books.

14. Wash, D. C. (2000). Foreign Relations ofthe USA. Vol. I-XVIII. 1964-1968. Retrieved from http:// https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1964-68v18

15. International Military and Education Program. Defence Security Cooperation Agency. Department of Defence. (2021). Retrieved from https://www.dsca.mil/international-education-and-training.

16. Coombs, P. H. (1964). The Fourth Dimension of Foreign Policy: Educational and Cultural Affairs. New York: Harper & Row.

17. Trebin, M. P. (2015). Hlobalizatsiia vyshchoi osvity: vyklyky dlia Ukrainy [Globalization of higher education: challenges for Ukraine].Materialy IIMizhnarodnoi naukovo- praktychnoi konferentsii «Studentska molod v umovakh hlobalizatsii» (m. Dnipropetro- vsk, 24 kvitnia 2015 r.) - Proceedings of the II International Scientific and Practical Conference «Student Youth in Globalization» (Dnepropetrovsk, April 24, 2015), pp. 145-151/ vidp. za vypusk profesor V. V. Kryvoshein. Dnipropetrovsk: LIRA [in Ukrainian].

18. Higher education in 2012: a global perspective. (2012). Retrieved from http://www.guardian.co.uk/higher-education-network/blog/2012/jan/23/internationalisation-in-2012?newsfeed=true

19. UNESCO Institute of Statistics. (2009). Global Education Digest: Comparing Education Statistics around the world. Retrieved from http://uis.unesco.org/sites/default/files/documents/global-education-digest-2009-comparing-education-statistics-across-the-world-en_0.pdf

20. Varghese, N. V. (2008). Globalization of higher education and cross-border student mobility. International Institute for Educational Planning, UNESCO. Retrieved from http://www.iiep.unesco.org/en/publication/globalization-higher-education-and-cross-border-student-mobility

21. Trebin, M. P., & Panfilov, O. Yu. (2021). Suchasni tendentsii zastosuvannia syly v miz- hnarodnykh vidnosynakh [Modern Power Trends in International Relations]. The Bulletin of Yaroslav Mudryi National Law University. Series: philosophy, philosophy of law, political science, sociology, 2(49), 119-138 [in Ukrainian].

Размещено на Allbest.ru