教育外交的地缘政治影响:富布赖特计划,1958-2023 年

IF 2.8 3区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Journal of Studies in International Education Pub Date : 2024-09-14 DOI:10.1177/10283153241275039
Marisa Lally
{"title":"教育外交的地缘政治影响:富布赖特计划,1958-2023 年","authors":"Marisa Lally","doi":"10.1177/10283153241275039","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article combines archival research and critical discourse analysis to examine 33 evaluation and report documents that evaluate the effectiveness of the Fulbright Program from 1958–2023. Specifically, the study employs argumentation analysis to understand the underlying ideological strategies used to discursively construct the Fulbright Program's multiple purposes. The study finds that the documents argue that education and mutual understanding are ephemeral concepts, the Fulbright Program has geopolitical justifications, and academic disciplines are a source of geopolitical power. This approach to analyzing the Fulbright Program's historical documents provides a model for understanding educational diplomacy schemes that use higher education as a geopolitical tool.","PeriodicalId":47802,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Studies in International Education","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Geopolitical Implications of Educational Diplomacy: The Fulbright Program, 1958–2023\",\"authors\":\"Marisa Lally\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10283153241275039\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article combines archival research and critical discourse analysis to examine 33 evaluation and report documents that evaluate the effectiveness of the Fulbright Program from 1958–2023. Specifically, the study employs argumentation analysis to understand the underlying ideological strategies used to discursively construct the Fulbright Program's multiple purposes. The study finds that the documents argue that education and mutual understanding are ephemeral concepts, the Fulbright Program has geopolitical justifications, and academic disciplines are a source of geopolitical power. This approach to analyzing the Fulbright Program's historical documents provides a model for understanding educational diplomacy schemes that use higher education as a geopolitical tool.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47802,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Studies in International Education\",\"volume\":\"7 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Studies in International Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10283153241275039\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Studies in International Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10283153241275039","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文结合档案研究和批判性话语分析,研究了 33 份评估和报告文件,这些文件对 1958-2023 年间富布赖特项目的有效性进行了评估。具体而言,本研究采用论证分析法来理解富布赖特项目多重目的的话语建构所使用的潜在意识形态策略。研究发现,这些文件认为教育和相互理解是短暂的概念,富布赖特项目具有地缘政治的合理性,而学科是地缘政治权力的来源。这种分析富布赖特项目历史文献的方法为理解将高等教育作为地缘政治工具的教育外交计划提供了一种模式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Geopolitical Implications of Educational Diplomacy: The Fulbright Program, 1958–2023
This article combines archival research and critical discourse analysis to examine 33 evaluation and report documents that evaluate the effectiveness of the Fulbright Program from 1958–2023. Specifically, the study employs argumentation analysis to understand the underlying ideological strategies used to discursively construct the Fulbright Program's multiple purposes. The study finds that the documents argue that education and mutual understanding are ephemeral concepts, the Fulbright Program has geopolitical justifications, and academic disciplines are a source of geopolitical power. This approach to analyzing the Fulbright Program's historical documents provides a model for understanding educational diplomacy schemes that use higher education as a geopolitical tool.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Studies in International Education
Journal of Studies in International Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
8.30%
发文量
30
期刊介绍: To broaden the discourse on the role of international cooperation and exchange in developing the human capacity to work in a global setting, the Journal of Studies in International Education provides a forum combining the research of scholars, models from practitioners in the public or private sector, and essays. The journal publishes research, essays, and reviews on international education. Articles place issues at the primary, secondary, higher education, professional exchange, and lifelong learning levels in a global context. Topics include: study abroad; curriculum reform; faculty development; and development assistance. Articles on related topics such as public policy and internationalization strategies also appear in the Journal.
期刊最新文献
“Intercultural Encounters”: Mentorship Relations as Spaces for Critical Intercultural Learning in Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) Geopolitical Implications of Educational Diplomacy: The Fulbright Program, 1958–2023 Advancing Internationalization in the Formal Curriculum: Content Integration and Inclusive Design University Leaders’ Perspectives on International Student Support: An Evaluation Using the Culturally Engaging Campus Environments Model International Students’ Social Media Use: An Integrative Review of Research Over a Decade
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1