CC BY
6
INTERNATIONALIZATION IN HIGHER EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS -PERSPECTIVES FROM BUSINESS UNDERGRADUATE PROGRAMS
Julián ricardo romero garibello, 2lugo manuel barbosa guerrero, 3oscar orlando
MARTÍNEZ LADINO
1Magister en Administración de Negocios MBA. Docente ocasional tiempo completo de la Universidad Colegio Mayor de Cundinamarca. Bogotá, Colombia. Email: [email protected] ORCID:
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5873-1226 2Magister en Informática Educativa. Docente de planta de la Universidad Colegio Mayor de Cundinamarca. Bogotá, Colombia. Email: [email protected]; [email protected] ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0871-8637 3Magister en administración. Docente de planta de la Universidad Colegio Mayor de Cundinamarca. Email: [email protected] ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7532-4120
Abstract
Internationalization in Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) is a global process that involves a series of endeavors for universities worldwide, in order to find out factors for internationalization of HEIs, authors compile a literature review searching a successful way to measure the internationalization process and the importance for universities. In this order, this document includes a series of perspectives in a responsible analysis that goes beyond visibility and involves researching, professional training and social responsibility, raising questions that offer to the reader the possibility of thinking in this phenomenon as a prospective process creating a new "school in the global village". The methodology implies the usage of world rankings related to internationalization in 2022 like: QS Top Universities and Times Higher Education World University Rankings 2022, proposing a correlational analysis in Colombia and involving then, the SCImago ranking as an important categories for internationalization in public HEIs. This sample for the Colombian case shows interesting findings for readers with findings on organizational factors and making-decision process based on budget restrictions.
Keywords: Internationalization, Higher Education Institutions (HEIs), research, QS Top Universities, Times Higher Education World University, business.
Introduction
A post-pandemic world and in the midst of new environments redirects the attention of organizations to unlearn and relearn in a new phase of human development, Romero Garibello, J. R., Barbosa Guerrero, L. M., & Martínez Ladino, O. O. (2022), state that in the midst of contemporary crises international relations and trade have led to a necessary discussion for supply chain actors, however, every person in the world must be present in this conversation involving people, organizations, governments and stakeholders, particularly when the risks coming from container shortages could affect world economies with an unexpected impact, an undeniable fact that HEIs cannot escape as organizations nor as an agent of change.
It is here and in this scenario precisely in which internationalization in an unstoppable trend in higher education institutions - HEIs around the world, in this way, these organizations compete to achieve greater visibility, increasing the processes of mobility and alliances among them. Considering that many authors have theorized about this concept, a good example is Knight (2007) cited by Tanhueco-Nepomuceno (2019), who posited "as people move into the 21st century, the international dimension is a key factor in shaping and challenging the higher education sector in all countries". While national educational policies may provide the framework for HEIs, diversity in the higher education system may result in different approaches to internationalization (Kirloskar & Inamdar, 2022). Students' perceptions and attitudes on internationalization may also influence their decisions to study in a different country. How they perceive internationalization and how their perceptions and socialization influence their decisions to study abroad can provide critical information for those
who have been most affected by HEIs (Ren & Wang, 2022). At present, internationalization in HEIs is an operational tool with which institutional development is obtained to increase the quality of education both internally of the program that carries it out in the institution as well as measuring it with other HEIs nationally and internationally.
We conceive the nexus between migration and higher education to refer to developments in migration policies and policies that have implications for higher education (e.g., internationalization outcomes, questions and debates about access), and developments in the higher education sector that affect migration (e.g., aspirations, strategies, politics, policies) (Cerna and Chou, 2022). In Latin America, the budget that HEIs allocated to the internationalization process of their programs is very low; very few are those that are encouraged to generate a serious internationalization plan at the inter-institutional level with marketing strategies and large agreements that include long-term stays for both professors and exchange students. From a Latin American perspective, countries such as Brazil and Chile work oriented towards the maintenance of international relations, mainly in the offer of academic services. From the educational environment, the 1998 World Declaration on Education has stated that it is important to create a cooperation office or directorate specialized in the management of international relations (Picalúa et al., 2021). As long as some HEIs continue to think that the quality of education does not require internationalization, but rather that doing social responsibility is enough, we will be condemned to have HEIs with less quality than those that see exchange as a strength for quality improvement and that this can be united with social responsibility to achieve great goals.
Approaching internationalization as a contribution to an institution's social responsibility has the potential to strategically align multiple institutional agendas, increase opportunities, and enhance impact because it fosters global and local thinking about social and intercultural engagement (Jones et al., 2021). Based on the above ideas, this article aims to present an overview through a cross-sectional analysis involving theoretical approaches, actors, ideas and a proposal of perspectives that includes questions about the future prospects of internationalization around the world to conclude on the real context of this phenomenon.
HEIs design different factors with which they apply different strategies to strengthen internationalization and one of these is to take advantage of their campuses by seeking great experiences for faculty and exchange students. Higher education institutions have been on a quest to recruit international students to university campuses, enhance the attractiveness of their institutions, and provide a distinct learning experience for the university students and faculty (Kirloskar & Inamdar, 2021). The process of internationalization of HEIs lies in strategies related to operations that include the integration of planning, budget and quality review systems at the institutional and departmental levels (Costa & Canen, 2022). The strategy of HEIs to have campuses where students with different cultures and different nationalities converge allows strengthening multiculturalism and generating great experiences that end up delighting students who make the decision to remain studying abroad.
Nowadays it is vital to understand internationalization and the success factors that enhance the internationalization of higher education by influencing many students' decision to study abroad (Jampaklay, 2022). Internationalization has been at the center of research interest in recent decades. With the increasing number of students studying abroad, there has been a growing need for higher education institutions to understand foreign student satisfaction and loyalty (Kéri and Hetesi, 2021). The European Union notes that most internationalization strategies are still mainly directed towards mobility, short and long term economic benefits, attracting and/or teaching talented students and researchers, as well as towards the international reputation and visibility of the University (Orechova, 2021). It is clear that HEIs have taken internationalization as a need to strengthen international alliances in order to achieve the educational quality demanded by society and the competition among them. Although there is an increasing presence of internationalization strategies in governmental and institutional policies, there seems to be an implementation gap between theory and practice regarding HEI internationalization (Ryan et al., 2022).
We should attend to generation of models to measure the growth of internationalization in higher education institutions in an inclussive and practical way, this would allow for agility in both efficiency and effectiveness in this area. It is possible to incorporate models of exponential growth, scalability and agility that involve criteria not only of efficiency but also of effectiveness when these respond as tools to solve universal needs, with a significant level of sustainability, thus reducing the risks of considering the use of tools as the end of the law.
Methods
The internationalization of Higher Education Institutions in the world, intends to involve, in the case of the nationality of the authors, the Colombia chapter, however, the imperative question arises as to how to effectively measure the internationalization of HEIs? The International Institute for Higher Education in Latin America and the Caribbean ISELAC, attached to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization UNESCO in (2020) brings the discussion regarding the measurement of internationalization in which it highlights the high costs that this effort represents, that in the Latin American university that has 55% of its enrollment in the private sector and, therefore, the expected return on this investment. The most renowned ranking at a global level regarding internationalization of Higher Education Institutions is the Times Higher Education World University Rankings (2022) which includes more than 1,600 universities in the world that it evaluates using 13 performance indicators, grouped into five categories. See chart 1.
Chart 1: Categories "Times Higher Education World University Rankings " Times Higher Education World University Rankings Categories
Internat...
outlook,
08%
Industry
income,
Teaching, 30% Research, 30% Research citations, 30% 03%
Source: Own elaboration based on QS Top Universities 2022.
The Times Higher Education World University stands out for being a very well known ranking at a global level, but when it is disaggregated, it is found that only 7.5% corresponds to the International Outlook category, which arises from the ratio of international to national students (2.5%), the ratio of international to national staff (2.5%) and international research collaborations (2.5%). The universities in the Top 20 are presented below:
Table 1. Times Higher Education World University Rank 2022. Top 20
TIMES HIGHER UNIVERSITY EDUCATION WORLD
UNIVERSITY RANK 2022
UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD 1
CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY 2
HARVARD UNIVERSITY 2
STANFORD UNIVERSITY
UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE
MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
PRINCETON UNIVERSITY
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY
YALE UNIVERSITY
THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO
COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY
IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON
JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY
UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA
ETH ZURICH
PEKING UNIVERSITY
TSINGHUA UNIVERSITY
UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO
UCL
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, LOS ANGELES
4
5 5
7
8
9
10 11 12 13 13
15
16 16 18 18 20
Source: Times Higher Education World University Rankings (2022)
In the Colombian case, twenty-five (25) universities reported a presence for 2022 in the Times Higher Education World University ranking, observing a very significant distance from the universities that lead this ranking globally.
Table 2. Colombian universities in the Times Higher Education World University Rankings (2022)
World Rank
Name
No. of FTE Students
No. of
stude nts per staff
Intern ationa l
Stude nts
Country/Region
1 501-600 Pontifical Javeriana University 28,885 15.3 1%
2 801-1000 University of the Andes, Colombia 15,28 12.6 2%
3 1001-1200 University of Antioquia 37,141 21.2 0%
4 1001-1200 National University of Colombia 51,722 21.6 1%
5 1201 + Del Rosario University 10,487 11.8 2%
6 1201 + EAFIT University 14,89 24.6 3%
7 1201 + Universidad Industrial de Santander (UIS) University of the North, Colombia 20,968 13.5 1%
8 1201 + 14,69 19.5 2%
9 1201 + Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana (UPB) 12,539 11.5 2%
10 1201 + University of La Sabana 11,86 16.8 4%
11 Reporter Antonio Nariño University 14,698 13.4 0%
12 Reporter University of Bogotá Jorge Tadeo Lozano 7,646 15.5 1%
13 Reporter CES University 6,199 13.5 3%
14 Reporter University of la Costa 12,023 25.7 1%
15 Reporter Externado University of Colombia 12,75 9.3 2%
16 Reporter Icesi University 6,486 8.2 2%
17 Reporter La Salle University 11,344 21.2 1%
18 Reporter University of Medellín 10,385 17.2 2%
19 Reporter Nueva Granada Military University 18,541 10.2 0%
20 Reporter Saint Thomas University, Colombia 30,49 16.9 0%
21 Reporter University of Santander 18,384 21.3 0%
22 Reporter Simón Bolívar University (Colombia) 18,351 19.5 1%
23 Reporter Technological University of Pereira 17,036 17.7 0%
24 Reporter Universidad Tecnológica de Bolívar 6,965 26.3 4%
25 Reporter Instituto Tecnológico Metropolitano 22,998 26.3 1%
Source: World University Rankings 2022
At this part of the discussion it is inescapable for the researcher and reader the proposal of the correlation between rankings at a global level, for this reason, we proceed to evaluate the correlation between the Times Higher Education World University Rankings 2022 and the QS ranking 2022. The QS Ranking (2022) evaluates universities on six performance indicators related to research, teaching, employability and internationalization. See chart 2.
Chart 2: Performance indicators of the QS World University Rankings
Performance indicators QS World University Rankings®
Employer
Research citations per reputation,
faculty member, 20% 10%
Student-to-faculty Proportion of Proportion of
Academic reputation, 40% ratio, 20% international... international...
Source: Own elaboration based on QS Top Universities 2022.
Table 3 shows the twenty universities with a presence in the Times Higher Education World University 2022 with their respective position in the QS ranking 2022.
Table 3. Times Higher Education World University Rankings 2022 vs QS ranking 2022
# Times Higher Education World University THE QS
Rankings 2022
1 University of Oxford 1 2
2 California Institute of Technology 2 6
3 Harvard University 2 5
4 Stanford University 4 3
5 University of Cambridge 5 4
6 Massachusetts Institute of Technology 5 1
7 Princeton University 7 20
8 University of California, Berkeley 8 32
9 Yale University 9 14
10 The University of Chicago 10 10
11 Columbia University 11 19
12 Imperial College London 12 7
13 Johns Hopkins University 13 25
14 University of Pennsylvania 13 13
15 ETH Zurich 15 8
16 Peking University 16 18
17 Tsinghua University 16 17
18 University of Toronto 18 26
19 UCL 18 8
20 University of California, Los Angeles 20 40
Source: Times Higher Education World University Rankings 2022 - QS ranking 2022 From the above, a Spearman correlation was sought between the Times Higher Education and the QS World University Rankings (see table) showing an average positive correlation that for universities of more than 1,400 universities globally is significant. However, attention should be redirected to the disaggregation of the components that should make an HEI a global category entity, i.e., that it should not necessarily have a high degree of mobility, but rather a high degree of mobility, that a high degree of student and faculty mobility does not necessarily lead to an indisputable relationship in the development of a university of the highest standards, which generates a new question when comparing these lists in which these organizations tend to be present; other elements of judgment must be taken into account to determine the success factors for the integral internationalization of HEIs in the world. In other words, it is evident that internationalization is indeed present in the best universities in the world without being the determining factor of their leadership, a fact that urges researchers to consider valuable missionary elements such as research and publications.
Table 4. Spearman correlation for Times Higher Education World University 2022 vs QS rankings.
Times Higher Education World QS ranking University Rankings 2022 2022
Times Higher Education Correlation coefficient 1,000 ,642**
World University Sig. (bilateral) ,002
Spearman'sRankings 2022 N 20 20
Rho Correlation coefficient ,642** 1,000
QS ranking 2022 Sig. (bilateral) ,002
N 20 20
**. The correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (bilateral).
Based on previous table, there is still a lack of absolute certainty in the measurement of the internationalization of HEIs in which the ISELAC (2020) mushroom effect is mentioned from a proliferation of spores of measurement efforts that do not reflect the reality of these initiatives beyond a justification of the personnel costs associated with this type of process; what ultimately persists in these metrics, in addition to the mobility of teachers and students, is research, being precisely at this point where it becomes closer to the reality of the universities and that ultimately can provide a better overview for the contribution in the search for the factors of internationalization.
Once the question of measurement has been cleared up, it is precisely from the perspective of the most important universities that are present in the SCImago ranking and in the QS ranking. SCImago
Institutions Rankings (2022). SCImago, (n.d.) is defined as a publicly available portal that includes the journals and scientific indicators of developed countries based on the information contained in the Scopus® database (Elsevier B.V.). indicators that can be used to evaluate and analyze scientific domains. In this way, research and publications can result in elements of high value for the internationalization of HEIs.
Table 5. Colombian universities present in SCImago and QS rankings (2022)
RANKING RANKING RANKING RANKING
UNIVERSIDAD MUNDIAL COLOMBIA MUNDIAL COLOMBIA
SCIMAGO SCIMAGO QS QS
Universidad Nacional de 409 1 145 1
Colombia
Universidad de Antioquia 543 2 338 5
Pontificia Universidad 558 3 205 2
Javeriana
594 4 236 3
Universidad del Rosario 622 5 346 6
Universidad del Valle 669 8 801 8
Universidad de Córdoba 670 10 1100 9
Source: rankings SCImago and QS (2022)
For Hernández Sampieri, (2014) Spearman's rho coefficients, symbolized as rs, and Kendall's tau, symbolized as t, are correlation measures for variables at an ordinal level of measurement (both), so that individuals, cases or units of analysis in the sample can be ordered by ranks (hierarchies). On the other hand, for Martínez Ortega, Rosa María, & Tuya Pendás, Leonel C., & Pérez Abreu, Alberto, & Cánovas, Ana María, & Martínez Ortega, Mercedes (2009) it is a measure of linear association that uses the ranks, order numbers, of each group of subjects and compares these ranks which is defined by the following equation: Ecuation 1. Linear association of ranges.
Source: Martínez Ortega, Rosa María, & Tuya Pendás, Leonel C., & Pérez Abreu, Alberto, & Cánovas, Ana María, & Martínez Ortega, Mercedes (2009).
Hernández Sampieri, (2014) also states that in Spearman's correlation both coefficients vary from -1.0 (perfect negative correlation) to +1.0 (perfect positive correlation), considering 0 as the absence of correlation between the hierarchical variables.
DISCUSSION AND RESULTS
When running the model in IBM SPSS software, a strong spearman correlation is evident for the QS and SCImago rankings with 0.893, thus demonstrating that the presence in these lists implies a relationship in successful research results and excellence:
Table 6. Sepearman correlation between QS ranking and SCImago 2022 ranking Colombia
SCI QS
Spearman's Rho SCI Correlation coefficient 1,000 ,893**
Sig. (bilateral) ,007
N 7 7
QS Correlation coefficient ,893** 1,000
Sig. (bilateral) ,007
N |
*. The correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (bilateral).
7
7
From the results, the Colombian case shows that there are indeed factors that determine the success of universities in areas such as research, quality, publications and reputation, thus generating a reflection on their organizational form, their priorities and the approach they develop. Nowadays global competitiveness is a growing trend, so companies, countries and organizations must think about internationalization processes to survive and succeed in their performance; since universities are not excluded from this contemporary reality that has involved them in a new network of relationships with mobilization of students, professors, researchers and managers. Considering the above idea, the international visibility requirements of HEIs have become a new missional issue as relevant as formative teaching or research; therefore, many academic articles have focused their attention on analyzing this process. A good example of this type of work is the paper proposed by Seeber, M., Cattaneo, M., Huisman, J., & Paleari, S. (2016), where through an investigation on the multilevel determinants of the reasons for internationalization, They try to answer the question "Why do HEIs internationalize?" posing the following hypothesis: "We argue that the rationale for internationalization in a specific HEI is related to several factors at the environmental, organizational, and intra-organizational levels." These factors are:
Environmental factors: highlighting the importance of curriculum improvement and the prestige of the institution, the ability to increase research strengths and benchmarking opportunities. Organizational factors: in a first perspective, the authors discuss for-profit and nonprofit organizations, arguing that private HEIs in many occasions have a vision of internationalization as an economic source, however; on the other hand, they take into account the weight of research and scientific production or towards teaching.
From the figures presented, it is evident that in effect the costs and the return on investment are determining factors for the development of internationalization processes of Colombian HEIs, however when taking the seven (7) Colombian universities present in the QS ranking and the SCImago ranking it is evident that four of them are public HEIs, a fact that ineffably redirects the discussion to sustain that public universities are advancing in research, development, publications and management that are not necessarily linked to return on investment, a fact that does happen in private universities, instead, public universities can find in the motivation of management of research teams and internationalization towards benefits such as internal benefits and recognition as well as promotions within the HEI.
Consequently, internationalization schemes bring new challenges for HEIs, at this point, if readers consider the size, nature and purpose of these institutions, an internationalization process for globally recognized universities could not be the same as how it could be in small programs. From this concern, Hogan, T. C. (2010) puts forward the idea of a strategic management perspective for curricular internationalization differentiating their institutions and creating a competitive advantage in the global higher education market.
The latter assumption argues that undergraduate business programs that focus on internationalization will be more effective in preparing students to operate in a global society and a global economy within a multinational corporate environment than those programs that do not.
CONCLUSIONS
If we continue to a deeper level of research involving regional experiences, we should probably find other perspectives supported by endemic factors to each corner of the world, however, this article pursues an overview focused on the internationalization of HEIs, in particular, in the entrepreneurial undergraduate field. Therefore, drawing a conclusion, the cumulative benefits of internationalization for students and the academic community in many ways are undeniable, however, the discussion continues based on experienced results that should converge in new models of theoretical constructs that contribute to standardize procedures and maximize these potential benefits.
The impact of internationalization compared to QS and SCImago differs in their research
dissemination strategies because QS has not implemented how to have its own publishing house,
through which it can strengthen its research dissemination part, something that SCImago has as a
research dissemination strategy and at the same time strengthening internationalization.
REFERENCES
[ 1] Cerna, L. y Chou, M. (2022). Politics of internationalisation and the migration-higher education nexus. Globalisation, societies and education, ahead-of-print, 1-14
https: //ezproxy. unicolmayor. edu. co:2162/10.1080/14767724.2022.2073975
[2] Costa, R.P. y Canen, A.G. (2022). Internacionalización de las Instituciones de Educación Superior: percepciones de los académicos. Articulo - ensayo: aval. pol. públ. educ. 30 (114) • Jan-Mar 2022. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0104-403620210002903229
[3] Hernández Sampieri, R. ((2014)). Metodología de la investigación. México D.F: McGraw-Hill.
[4] Hogan, T. C. (2010). A strategic management approach to curriculum internationalization for undergraduate business programs: Focus on small U.S. based colleges and universities (Order No. 3482547). Available from Education Database; ProQuest Dissertations & Theses A&I. (910330291).
[5] ISELAC (2020). La internacionalización de la educación superior: ¿y la medición para cuando?. Retrieved from: https://www.iesalc.unesco.org/2020/03/07/la-internacionalizacion-de-la-educacion-superior-y-la-medicion-para-cuando/
[6] Jampaklay, A., Penboon, B., Lucktong, A. (2022). Internacionalización de la educación superior en Tailandia: promesas y realidad. Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences - anteriormente Kasetsart Journal (Ciencias Sociales), Volumen 043, Número 1, enero de 2022- marzo de 2022, páginas 183-193. ISSN: 2452-3151(0125-8370) DOI: doi.org/10.34044/j.kjss.2022.43.1.25
[7] Jones, E., Leask, B., Brandeburgo, U., de Wit, H. (2021). La responsabilidad social global y la internacionalización de la educación superior para la Sociedad. Journal of Studies in International Education. Vol. 25(4) 330-347. 2021 European Association for International Education.
[8] Kéri, A., Hetesi, E. (2021). ¿Es solo la universidad con la que están satisfechos? - Satisfacción de los estudiantes extranjeros y su efecto en la lealtad. International Review on Public and Nonproft Marketing. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12208-021-00311-5
[9] Kirloskar, P., & Inamdar, N. (2021). Shifting international student mobility directions and factors influencing students' higher education destination choices. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Leadership Studies, 2 (3), 160-178. DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.52547/johepal.2.3.160
[10] Kirloskar, P., & Inamdar, N. (2022). International cooperation among universities: Accommodating diversity within Indian higher education. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Leadership Studies, 3 (2), 72 -83. DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.52547/johepal.3.2.72
[11] Knight, J. (2007). Internationalization: a decade of changes and challenges.
[12] Martínez Ortega, Rosa María, & Tuya Pendás, Leonel C., & Pérez Abreu, Alberto, & Cánovas, Ana María, & Martínez Ortega, Mercedes (2009). EL COEFICIENTE DE CORRELACION DE LOS RANGOS DE SPEARMAN CARACTERIZACION. Revista Habanera de Ciencias Médicas, 8(2), [fecha de Consulta 9 de Agosto de 2022]. ISSN: Disponible en: https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=180414044017
[13] Picalúa, V.P., Payares, K.M., Navarro, E.J., Hurtado, K. (2021). Gestión de la experiencia de las unidades principales de internacionalización en las instituciones de educación superior. Form. Univ. vol. 14 no. 2 págs. 37 a 46. La Serena, http://dx.doi.org/ 10.4067/S0718-50062021000200037
[14] QS (2022) QS World University Rankings. Retrieved from: https://www.topuniversities.com/qs-world-university-rankings?qs_qp=topnav
[15] Ryan, D., Faulkner, F., Dillane, D., Inundación, R.V. (2022). Las comunidades de práctica como solución a la brecha de implantación en la internacionalización del currículo. Investigación y Desarrollo de la Educación Superior 41 No. 3, págs. 882 y 897
[16] Ren, Z. y Wang, F. (2022). Socialization towards Internationalization: Survey Research on University Students in China. Journal of International Students. Volume 12, Issue 3, pp. 736-755ISSN: 2162-3104 (Print), 2166-3750 (Online) doi: 10.32674/jis.v12i3.3603ojed.org/jis
[17] Romero Garibello, J. R., Barbosa Guerrero, L. M., & Martínez Ladino, O. O. (2021). Crisis mundial de contenedores el caso de Colombia y México. Toma de decisiones para las empresas y política comercial. Aglala, 12(S1), 59-72. Recuperado a partir de https: / / revistas. curn. edu. co/index.php/aglala/article/view/2071.
[18] Romero Garibello, J., Barbosa Guerrero, L., & Martínez Ladino, O. (2021). Crisis mundial de contenedores en caso de Colombia y Perú. Análisis para la toma de decisiones. Conocimiento Global, 6(S2), 177-193.
Recuperado a partir de https://conocimientoglobal.org/revista/index.php/cglobal/article/view/219
[19] Seeber, M., Cattaneo, M., Huisman, J., & Paleari, S. (2016). Why do higher education institutions internationalize? An investigation of the multilevel determinants of internationalization rationales. Higher Education (00181560), 72(5), 685-702.
[20] SCImago Institutions Rankings (2022). Ranking de Universidades Colombia 2022. Retrieved from: https://www.SCImagoir.com/rankings.php?country=COL§or=Higher%20educ.
[21] SCImago, (n.d.). SJR — SCImago Journal & Country Rank [Portal]. Retrieved Date you Retrieve, from http://www.scimagojr. com
[22] Times Higher Education (2022). World University Rankings 2022. Retrieved from: https: / / www. timeshighereducation. com/worlduniversityrankings/2022#! / page/0/length/25/locations/C OL/sort_by/rank/sort_order/asc/cols/stats
