Entrenched disadvantage and the internationalization of education: A review of the Science without Border Programme in Brazil Journal website: http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/ Manuscript received: 23/9/2021 Facebook: /EPAAA Revisions received: 8/6/2022 Twitter: @epaa_aape Accepted: 8/6/2022 education policy analysis archives A peer-reviewed, independent, open access, multilingual journal Arizona State University Volume 30 Number 171 November 22, 2022 ISSN 1068-2341 Entrenched Disadvantage and the Internationalization of Education: A Review of the Science without Border Program in Brazil Rafael Silva Barbosa UFES Brazil Arinola Adefila Staffordshire University United Kingdom & Maria Lúcia Teixeira Garcia UFES Brazil Citation: Barbosa, R. S., Adefila, A., & Garcia, M. L. T. (2022). Entrenched disadvantage and the internationalization of education: A review of the Science without Border Program in Brazil. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 30(171). https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.30.7211 Abstract: Brazil has focused on internationalization of the higher education sector, in response to trends across the globe. The main program for promoting internationalization was the Science without Borders program. The paper analyses Brazilian international mobility from a regional perspective, particularly reviewing how inequality affected access to fellowships. The Northeast Region, which historically records higher poverty indicators than the South and Southeast regions, showed average growth statistically equal to the Southeast Region. By comparing access to scholarships and fellowships between the two largest regions of Brazil, this paper sought to analyze any structural change between the Southeast region and the Northeast. The Science without Borders (Ciência sem Fronteira, in Portuguese) program has achieved considerable results. In the first four years http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/ https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.30.7211 Education Policy Analysis Archives Vol. 30 No. 171 2 of the program, completed student exchange programs increased by 1,620% (i.e., 2011-2014). Despite this, the structure of unequal regional access remained. Using the hypothesis test methodology T for means with different variances, it was possible to evaluate at a significance level of 95%. The two largest regions in Brazil maintained the unequal profile of access to the program. The conclusion is that the growth in the offer of scholarships for internationalization between 2010 and 2019 has not changed the unequal regional profile of access to public education services in Brazil. Keywords: Brazilian education policy; public investment; internationalization; higher education Desventaja atrincherada e internacionalización de la educación: Una revisión del Programa Ciencia sin Fronteras en Brasil Resumen: Brasil se ha centrado en la internacionalización del sector de la educación superior en respuesta a las tendencias a nivel global. El principal programa de promoción de la internacionalización fue el programa Ciencia sin Fronteras. El artículo ana liza la movilidad internacional brasileña desde una perspectiva regional, particularmente revisando cómo la desigualdad afectó el acceso a las becas. La Región Nordeste, que históricamente registra indicadores de pobreza más altos que las regiones Sur y Sudeste, presentó un crecimiento promedio estadísticamente igual al de la Región Sudeste. Al comparar el acceso a becas e intercambios entre las dos regiones más grandes de Brasil, este artículo buscó analizar cualquier cambio estructural entre la región Sudeste y el Nordeste. El programa Ciencia sin Fronteras (Ciência sem Fronteira, en portugués) ha alcanzado resultados considerables. En los primeros cuatro años del programa, la iniciativa de intercambio de estudiantes logró aumentar en un 1,620% (2011-2014). A pesar de ello, se mantuvo la estructura de acceso regional desigual. Utilizando la metodología de Prueba de Hipótesis T para medias con diferentes varianzas, se logró evaluar a un nivel de significancia del 95%. Las dos mayores regiones de Brasil mantuvieron el perfil desigual de acceso al programa. La conclusión es que el crecimiento en la oferta de becas para la internacionalización entre 2010 y 2019 no modificó el perfil regional de desigualdad en el acceso a los servicios de educación pública en Br asil. Palabras clave: política educativa brasileña; inversión pública; internacionalización; educación superior A desvatagem arraigada e a internacionalização da educação: Uma revisão do Programa Ciência sem Fronteiras no Brasil Resumo: O Brasil tem focado na internacionalização do setor de ensino superior, em resposta às tendências em todo o mundo. O principal programa de promoção da internacionalização foi o programa Ciência sem Fronteiras. O artigo analisa a mobilidade internacional brasileira a partir de uma perspectiva regional, especialmente analisando como a desigualdade afetou o acesso às bolsas. A Região Nordeste, que historicamente registra indicadores de pobreza mais elevados do que as regiões Sul e Sudeste, apresentou crescimento médio estatisticamente igual ao da Região Sudeste. Ao comparar o acesso a bolsas de mobilidade de estudantes e professores entre as duas maiores regiões do Brasil, este artigo buscou analisar qualquer mudança estrutural entre a região Sudeste e Nordeste. O programa Ciência sem Fronteira alcançou resultados consideráveis. Nos primeiros quatro anos do programa, o intercâmbio de estudantes aumentaram 1.620% (ou seja, 2011-2014). Apesar disso, a estrutura de acesso regional permaneceu desigual. Utilizando a metodologia de teste de hipótese T para médias com diferentes variâncias, foi possível avaliar o nível de significância de 95%. As duas maiores regiões do Brasil mantiveram o perfil desigual de acesso ao programa. A conclusão é que o crescimento da oferta de bolsas para internacionalização entre 2010 e 2019 não alterou o perfil regional desigual de acesso aos serviços públicos de educação no Brasil. Entrenched disadvantage and the internationalization of education 3 Palavras-chave: política educacional brasileira; investimento público; internacionalização; educação superior Entrenched Disadvantage and the Internationalization of Education: A Review of the Science without Border Program in Brazil Internationalization in higher education (HE) is becoming more prominent (de Wit, 2002; 2011), though the term itself remains contested (Green, 2019), there is acknowledgement that HE needs to prepare graduates for a globalized world (Robles & Bhandari, 2017). Ambitious and competitive internationalization trends across the globe (De Wit, 2002; Naidoo & Jameison, 2005; Van Gaalen, 2010) have arisen from misconceptions about internationalization, many of which have political and economic dimensions (Jones et al., 2015). Studies of higher education internationalization processes and goals (HEI) show varied perceptions and agendas (Archanjo, 2017; Lucchesi, 2002; Lucchesi & Malanga, 2010; Scott, 2005). Internationalization does have its merits; Patel (2017) suggests that transnational collaboration can support intercultural learning and enhance an effective way through which to integrate the local and global. Understanding the cultures, knowledges and ethos of others across the globe is important today, not only because lack of awareness increases conflict and problematizes shared experiences; but also, positive outcomes could pave the way for better transnational collaborations that solve global challenges. Critical internationalization (Stein, 2019) can overcome the nefarious challenges associated with superficial forms of internationalization, by ethically and radically supporting meaningful processes of exchange and collaboration. These need to be depoliticized and radical, ensuring that students and staff engage with the ontological and epistemological challenges of our complex globalized world (Khoo, 2011). Theoretical Background Brazil is a country with deep inequalities. In 2019, 0.1% of richest have consolidated 28.3% of the country's total income, according to the human development index (United Nations, 2019). The inequality is also reflected in groups who have had access to education and where. The percentage of children aged 7 to 14 enrolled in public schools decreases as household per capita income increases: for the first quintile household per capita income distribution is 97% and for the fifth quintile it is only 38% (Bursztyn, 2016). Educational inequalities also have socioeconomic, racial, gendered, and territorial markers. Brazil has also invested during the Labor Party government in access to education and experienced an increase in the number of years of schooling from 7.2 in 2011 to 9.3 in 2018 (Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística, 2019) and an increase in the education index (average years of schooling and estimate of the number of years children will remain in school) from 0.486 to 0.765 (1990 to 2020). Another crucial element in the country’s recent developments has been a strong investment in the higher education system and increasing and diversifying access to higher education. In 2012, a quota system was introduced: 50% of places in public universities (59 federal universities and 38 institutes of education, science and technology recognized by the ministry of Education) have to be allocated to students coming from public schools (split between low income – corresponding to one minimum wage and a half or less – and higher income – above one minimum wage and a half – and taking into account the “racial” composition in the state). Simultaneously, several programs were implemented to expand access to higher education. Education Policy Analysis Archives Vol. 30 No. 171 4 At the same time Brazil has also become a player in the internationalization of higher education, mostly as an origin country of international students. Waters (2012), has argued that the evidence, to date, suggests that international education entrenches (and in some cases, particularly within emerging economies, indeed actively creates) social inequalities (p. 123). Globalization has had a direct influence on HE policy, resulting in a marked increase in international exchange programs, student mobility and students moving to other countries to study. Policy changes around internationalization in HE have modelled systems and mechanisms used in the west, though this do not often translate seamlessly due to cultural, economic, and political differences (Berger et al., 2013). Internationalization is systematically used as a model for stimulating innovative learning environments, epistemic diversity, and transnational collaborative enquiry (Bernasconi & Celis, 2017). Musselin & Teixeira (2014), make the argument that policy reforms in Latin America are designed to improve organizations and provide structural investments which enable healthy competition and contribution from academia in the region. However, instructional practices are not always aligned to holistic policy reforms, truncating opportunities for the policies to contribute to improvement in access to education, student retention and attainment. Brunner & Villalobos (2014) contend that initiatives often reinforce established approaches and frameworks, though they report a small number of cases where public mechanisms are initiated to enhance systemic change. This had led to well established investment in academic institutions and research in the region over the last 15–20 years, though this change is sometimes introduced by agitation for inclusion and political change by student movements (Bernasconi & Celis, 2017). Sustained investment is therefore a crucial element of progress. It is important to evaluate how policy reforms support or hinder positive change. It is also pertinent to demonstrate how implementation of policy may be complemented by other broader policy matters. One key policy driver has been mobility to support internationalization in Brazil. Figure 1 Brazilian Internationalization Students Note: Education statistics from the World Bank and Institute for Statistics from UNESCO. Elaboration by authors. Entrenched disadvantage and the internationalization of education 5 Brazil sent more than half a million students abroad, while receiving 123,000 between 1998 - 2017 (Figure 1). The importance of data is central to development of Brazilian HE, as it provides context for understanding knowledge exchange with other countries. High income countries similarly use data to strategically plan programs and promote knowledge exchange with specific countries. Brazil sought to reactivate relationships between Portuguese-speaking countries mostly in Africa. It is important to note the historical significance as Brazil was built with African labor, and secondly, greater proximity to the southern axis of the globe improves the quality of relations between countries. “Lula (past president) construed internationalization of higher education as a form of reparation (if only symbolically) for the historical debt Brazil accrued from slavery, and as a form to recognize Afro-Brazilian’s role in building the nation” (Cesarino, 2017; Majee & Ress, 2018). In Latin America, data in most cases is unavailable for inbound student numbers, this may be because the numbers are so low or unregistered. However, outbound student data indicates significant numbers seeking study abroad. In the period under consideration, three countries expanded outbound student number. Brazil, Colombia, and Peru increased 35.2 thousand, 25.8 thousand and 24.7 thousand, respectively. The largest relative expansion was in Paraguay, Bolivia, and Ecuador with increase of the 1,124%, 710% and 470%, respectively (See Figure 2). Figure 2 Selected Countries of the Latin America– 1998 to 2017 (Outbound Total) Note: Education statistics from World Bank and Institute for Statistics from UNESCO. Elaboration by authors. Portuguese speaking countries, have a comparable situation, the number of outbound is significantly more than inbound, with exception in the case of Angola. In absolute and relative terms, Brazil, Angola and Macao SAR, China send more students with 35,200 (204% variation), 7,600 (151% variation) and 1,8000 (235% variation), respectively (See Figure 3). Education Policy Analysis Archives Vol. 30 No. 171 6 Figure 3 Portuguese Speaking Countries – 1998 to 2017 (Outbound Total) Note: Education statistics from the World Bank and Institute for Statistics from UNESCO. Elaboration by authors. Overall, Brazil improved its participation in mobility of students, when compared to other Latin American and Portuguese speaking countries. One reason for that was the advent of the Science without Borders (SwB), as the only large-scale program of this nature designed specifically to accelerate academic excellence and internationalization in Brazil. Brazil’s Science without Borders Program Science without Borders (SwB) was a response to a conversation in the Brazilian academic ecosystem about quality, effectiveness, and regional asymmetry with respect to educational attainment and access. In Brazil, the dialogue around the value and contribution of Brazilian academics and research when compared with other international institutions was difficult to assess; this was particularly important in the case of student mobility due to significant increase in student mobility over the last 30 years (Yaluk, 2018). SwB was created to “[...] promote the consolidation, expansion, internationalization of science, technology, innovation and improve the Brazilian competitiveness through the exchange and international mobility" (Ministry of Education, 2011). Acknowledging the low level of mobility and language barriers the government was keen to strengthen Brazil’s position as an economic and political force (Ministry of Education, 2011). It is important to frame this policy in the context of the rapid economic growth of the period and the political expansion of the country amongst similar countries, the BRICS – Brazil, Russia, India, Entrenched disadvantage and the internationalization of education 7 China, and South Africa. Political scientists and economists (O’Brien and Williams, 2013; O’Neill, 2001; Wilson & Purushothaman, 2003) postulated that the development of the Brazilian economy had to be underpinned by the neoliberal principles and foundation elements of high-income countries. Particular significance was given to science, technology, and innovation as well as the accompanying research and academic substructure of educating competitive global citizens. Ideological considerations (Rivas & Mullet, 2016) purporting that it was essential for government to prepare future scientists and students for the globalized market and simultaneously expect a return in investment for the entire country were brought to the fore. Competitive graduates will contribute to innovation and development by creating knowledge that will ultimately benefit HE and make further education attractive and relevant for other young people ( Maldonado- Maldonado & Reyes, 2017). The internationalization process was promoted through mobility programs for students in higher education. Access to higher education was already developing exponentially. The Brazilian public university system grew over the past 15 years, creating new universities and institutions throughout the country (MacManus & Nobre, 2017). In 2003, Brazil had 169 public universities, increasing 75% to 296 in 2017 (Instituto Nacional de Estudos e Pesquisas Educacionais Anísio Teixeira, 2018). This process created new undergraduate and graduate courses, increasingly the number of people with undergraduate degrees from 12% in 2012 to 16.5% (persons between 25-34 years) (Instituto Nacional de Estudos e Pesquisas Educacionais Anísio Teixeira, 2018). However, most of the growth was concentrated in the South and Southeast regions, a consolidation of the skew of development and historical advantage for the more economically prosperous regions. In addition, Brazil is rapidly expanding its graduate portfolio, graduating about 18, 000 PhDs and 55,000 masters students annually. In 2020, Brazil has an average of eight PhDs per thousand inhabitants (Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior, 2020), in high income countries, the current rate is between 5 and 20 PhDs per thousand inhabitants (MacManus & Nobre, 2017; OECD, 2019). At present, the percentage of masters and PhDs in Brazil’s population is insignificant - around 2% of the population (across the OECD, 14% of adults hold a masters or doctoral degree; OECD, 2019). The most significant indicator of the expansion of access to HE participation is revealed in evaluation of the bottom 70% of the Brazilian income distribution (per capita family income). Oliveira (2020) reports the increase was most significant between 2001 and 2015. The Black population, for example, increased participation “in higher education from 21.9% of students in 2001 to 43.5% of students in 2015”. Unfortunately, race data relating to the internationalization of student s is not available. However, the analysis of regional access process may reveal the significance of specific indicators with respect to disadvantaged students’ access to the program based on the numbers applying from economically disadvantaged region. The SwB program was created on 26 July 2011 and ended on 2 April 2017; it made laudable contributions to the Brazilian educational ecosystem. SwB had notable challenges, and a review in 2015 (Sá, 2016) highlighted three major ones: high demand beyond the capacity of the program leading to bureaucratic delays and poor quality of provision and transition for students; weak language skills, especially in English with many students needing extra language coaching to fulfil requirements in the destination HEIs. Finally, the program lacked strategic application in both design and consolidation; as it was not linked effectively to an industrial strategy or policies that will lead to significant, identifiable benefits with respect to growth (Palfreyman et al., 2017). Furthermore, issues of poor funding, expansion, stratification, and inequity persistent in Brazilian HE was not sufficiently addressed by the development of the program (Maldonado- Maldonado & Reyes, 2017). It can be argued that in the first two years the SwB reproduced the inequalities dominant in the system by providing monies for the most privileged (Iorio & Education Policy Analysis Archives Vol. 30 No. 171 8 Pereira, 2018). The economic downturn 2008, contributed to problems in the implementation and sustainability of SwB in the early years. Students who may have been able to apply for the programs had major financial pressures at home, they also needed language and important upskilling to participate in the exchange programs; it can be argued that this further tilted the accessibility towards the rich and privileged (Iorio & Pereira , 2018). However, it seems that a rapid expansion of the program around 2015 reversed this trend. The exchange program enabled students to acknowledge the quality of their education (Périco & Gonçalves, 2018, p. 11). Notably, in a large study of 586 respondents about the student experience during SwB fellowships, Périco and Gonçalves (2018, p. 11) found that 87.2% Brazilian students expected their study abroad destination HEIs to be considerable better. However, after the exchange, only 40.1% of students said the study abroad experience met their expectations. Indeed, 88.5% of the dissatisfied students considered their Brazilian HEIs much better. This indicates a good positioning for Brazilian HEIs, since these students previously expected higher quality in foreign teaching and after the exchange improved their opinions about the quality of provision in their home institutions.” Nevertheless, students found the SwB beneficial. According to one assessment report presented to the Brazilian Senate (Senado Federal do Brasil, 2015), of the 14,627 students that responded to a survey, the experiences were evaluated as positive for 92% of the cases due to the opportunity to study abroad. In addition to positively evaluating the universities, 58% of the participants stated that, after the academic exchange period, they gained fluency in the language of the country of study. From an economic perspective, SwB was considered expensive, particularly when analyzing cost/benefit and cost/effectiveness for the entire country (INEP, 2016). From this perspective, the per capita expenditure was five times more than student costs in a Brazilian public university (INEP, 2016). However, this argument ignores the economic and political crises that began in 2014; since then, the Brazilian government has cut spending dramatically and reduced funding for all social programs (Peres & Santos, 2020). Education has been particularly affected, as such the costs comparisons are unjustifiable since federal government investments in social policies have been so low (Amaral, 2017). The reduction in expenditure makes it difficult to reasonably evaluate the effectiveness of the SwB Program. It is important to consider the overall value of the SwB, incorporating benefits to the academic community, student experience, employability outcomes and benefits to industry, civic society and the third sector in the long term. Brazil has several layers and inequity (Alvaredo et al., 2017), which manifest in different forms, this provides interesting angles for interrogating internationalization of Higher Education, specifically, examining how institutions access opportunities (students and staff mobility out) experiences and challenges over the period when there was a strategic internationalization push in from Brazil. The education policy of the Labor government (Lula and Dilma) between 2003-2016, was controversial and in some cases riddled with contradictions. Though the policies were quite radical, the implementations were not sufficiently robust. Policies were paper thin; they did not go far beyond simply making developmental statements. They failed to confront the complex social relationships dominant in the ecosystem which did not disrupt inequalities (Frigotto, 2010). This contradiction will be explored into the paper analyzing Science Without Borders Program. We will explore Science without Borders as a contradiction of dualistic politics – despite the social bias and alleged democratization, it serves selected groups historically benefited by educational policies, concentrated in the southeastern region of Brazil. For this, the paper examines the regional impact of SwB, highlighting the value of the program and significant economic and long-term benefits for some communities. Entrenched disadvantage and the internationalization of education 9 Methodology Context In Brazil, the database for compiling of information about inbound and outbound student experiences are weak, there is particularly poor record keeping around aspects relating to internationalization and student mobility. Surveys like the National Student Satisfaction (NSS) in the United Kingdom or Student Experience Survey (SES) in Australia are provided in some institutions, but they are ad hoc. There are, however, reports about the programs complied by various and sometimes disparate government ministries and agencies. The most recent official report. Higher Education and Student Mobility: A Capacity Building Pilot Study in Brazil (Robles & Bhandari, 2017), provides vital information about flow and net mobility in 158 Brazilian’s institution of higher education for 2017. The report also provides information on the institution's budget and policy to promote internationalization. In addition, there is an online platform of SwB (Ciência Sem Fronteria) that reports outdated information. Nevertheless, this study used the data of World Bank, UNESCO, the report Higher Education and Student Mobility and platform online of SwB, with updates from The Electronic System of the Citizen Information Service (e-SIC) to support analysis. Data Collection Data was obtained from the databases of education statistics from the World Bank and UNESCO’s Institute for Statistics, and The Electronic System of the Citizen Information Service (e- SIC) was used to collate data from the Brazilian Ministry of Education. All three sets of data were used to build a time series. Data was also extracted and cross referenced with various reports and agency information (See Table 1). Table 1 Available and Unavailable features by country – 2000 to 2017 N Variable Absent data (unavailable) Reported data Source 1 Total inbound internationally mobile students, both sexes (number) (Inboud_T). 372 348 WB/UNESCO 2 Total outbound internationally mobile tertiary students studying abroad, all countries, both sexes (number) (Outbound_T) - 720 WB/UNESCO 3 Destination of Brazil’s International Students by Country - 87 Education of Ministry (Brazil) 4 Origin of Brazil’s International Students by Region and Municipality 1,323 997 Education of Ministry (Brazil) 5 Foreign Researcher by Brazilian Municipality 419 521 Education of Ministry (Brazil) Note: Education statistics from the World Bank, Institute for Statistics from UNESCO and Education of Ministry (Brazil). Elaboration: by authors. Education Policy Analysis Archives Vol. 30 No. 171 10 Analysis The quantitative analysis focuses on disparity in access to the SwB fellowships and scholarships by examining differences in the two largest regions in Brazil (Southeast region and the Northeast region). For this, a T test for two samples with unequal variances was used to analyze the Science without Borders (SwB) data. All calculations were conducted using Stata, version 14 and excel. In general, the best variable of the series is “Total outbound internationally mobile HE students studying abroad.” As continental country with varied types of inequality, the Brazilian process of internationalization of Higher Education provides a unique vanguard for assessing how access to funding opportunities could shape inequities. The annual rate of SwB students per Brazilian regions across nine years was calculated. Following this the T test was applied to verify if there were any significant differences in the statistical average between numbers of SwB students from the Northeast and Southeast. The option for the T test was because the sample size per year was relatively small (N<30). { 𝐻0 ∶ 𝜇1 = 𝜇2 = . . . = 𝜇𝑘 𝐻1 ∶ 𝑎𝑡 𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑠𝑡 𝑜𝑛𝑒 𝑎𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑖𝑠 𝑑𝑖𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝐻0: 𝑛𝑢𝑙𝑙 ℎ𝑦𝑝𝑜𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑠 𝑖𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑚𝑒𝑎𝑛 𝑏𝑒𝑡𝑤𝑒𝑒𝑛 𝑁𝑜𝑟𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑠𝑡 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑆𝑜𝑢𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑠𝑡 𝑎𝑟𝑒 𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑙. 𝐻1: 𝑎𝑙𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑛𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 ℎ𝑦𝑝𝑜𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑠 𝑖𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑚𝑒𝑎𝑛 𝑏𝑒𝑡𝑤𝑒𝑒𝑛 𝑁𝑜𝑟𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑠𝑡 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑆𝑜𝑢𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑠𝑡 𝑎𝑟𝑒 𝑑𝑖𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑡. Data and Results Science without Borders (Ciência Sem Fronteira) The Ministry of Education spent more than R$ 14.8 billion (£ 2.9 billion or US$ 3.7 billion) between 2011 and 2019 (See Figure 4). The money paid for accommodation, tuition, living expenses and flights. The program planned to facilitate 95,000 student exchanges in total1; comprising undergraduate and PhD sandwich programs. It sent 53,000 undergraduate students and 24,000 PhDs on fellowships, respectively (See Table 2). It is difficult to fully understand why there was a short fall of 18,000 students and faculty. Evidence suggests the process was cumbersome; Granja & Carneiro (2021) noted that SwB presented difficulties through all phases, from conceptualization, based on the contemporary challenges in HE, through to formulation, implementation, and evaluation of the policy. To compound issues, over the same period significant cuts in research funding stalled motivation and opportunities for knowledge exchange (Brazil, 2021). 1 Including data from the year 2010 because SwB was created in July 2011. The microdata from Electronic System of the Citizen Information Service (e-SIC). Entrenched disadvantage and the internationalization of education 11 Figure 4 Expenditure of Science without Borders (Ciência Sem Fronteira) – 2011 to 2019 Source: Portal Transparência. (http://www.portaltransparencia.gov.br/programas-de-governo/08-ciencia-sem-fronteiras?ano=2018) and evaluation report of the Science without Borders program by the Senate Federal, 2015 [Senado Federal do Brasil, 2015], with data from CAPES and CNPQ. Production: by the authors with use of the Brazil’s Central Bank calculator (Bacen), 2019. Broad Consumer Price Index (IPCA) of the Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística (IBGE), Constant Prices of September 2019 R$. * 25 September 2019. OBS: The data available up to November 2019, is incomplete. Exchange rate: £ of 5.10 and US$ of 4.00. - 1,000,000,000.00 2,000,000,000.00 3,000,000,000.00 4,000,000,000.00 5,000,000,000.00 6,000,000,000.00 2 0 1 1 2 0 1 2 2 0 1 3 2 0 1 4 2 0 1 5 2 0 1 6 2 0 1 7 2 0 1 8 2 0 1 9 http://www.portaltransparencia.gov.br/programas-de-governo/08-ciencia-sem-fronteiras?ano=2018 Education Policy Analysis Archives Vol. 30 No. 171 12 Table 2 Internationalization Students of Brazil - January 2010 to November 2019* Local/Modalities 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Jan-Nov 2019 Total Yrs ABROAD DESTINATION (outbound) 2,837 3,633 8,992 18,269 27,165 13,420 1,724 6,073 4,183 3,201 89,497 Undergraduate (sandwich degree) 978 1,205 5,026 13,468 20,726 8,709 783 742 855 607 53,099 Undergraduate (full) 2 2 6 11 19 0 0 0 0 0 40 Master (sandwich degree) 24 49 81 69 46 29 8 22 11 9 348 Master (full) 0 0 2 0 567 4 0 0 0 4 577 PhD (sandwich degree) 1,195 1,542 2,236 2,786 3,470 3,170 561 4,590 2,747 1,897 24,194 PhD (full) 102 110 270 753 1,058 384 10 81 114 22 2,904 Postdoctoral 394 525 509 789 797 552 158 322 221 133 4,400 Visiting Professor 133 85 179 315 394 529 115 239 229 477 2,695 Linguistic Improvement 0 0 537 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 537 Specialization 9 115 146 77 88 43 0 0 0 0 478 Capacitation 0 0 0 0 0 0 77 74 0 51 202 Chair 0 0 0 1 0 0 12 3 6 1 23 BRASIL DESTINATION (inbound) 173 415 406 990 1,393 1,162 577 328 166 763 6,373 Undergraduate (sandwich degree) 0 131 0 179 238 159 226 80 76 40 1,129 Undergraduate (full) 0 1 109 226 219 211 47 0 0 0 813 Master (sandwich degree) 0 0 6 17 16 4 0 1 1 0 45 Master (full) 9 10 9 11 1 1 0 1 0 0 42 PhD (sandwich degree) 33 28 66 80 63 30 18 17 15 1 351 PhD (full) 100 126 114 177 123 94 9 80 35 90 948 Postdoctoral 19 13 41 126 260 326 200 84 13 88 1,170 Visiting Professor 12 106 34 71 296 183 5 21 10 451 1,189 Invited Professor 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 30 14 68 113 Scientific/Technological Initiation 0 0 5 44 83 107 71 13 2 0 325 Talent Youth 0 0 22 59 94 47 0 1 0 25 248 Total 3,010 4,048 9,398 19,259 28,558 14,582 2,301 6,401 4,349 3,964 95,870 Note: Ministry of Education (Brazil) with support The Electronic System of the Citizen Information Service (e-SIC). Elaboration: by authors. OBS: The data available until November 2019, the data are incomplete for this year. Entrenched disadvantage and the internationalization of education 13 From 2010 to 2019, the program was able to attract 6,000 inbound students, talented youth, masters, postdocs, researchers, and professors. This was significantly below the 18,000 projected to engage at the start of the program. The major critique of the program was poor holistic oversight. SwB paid for accommodation and flights, however the living conditions and poor infrastructure and status of higher education institutions was not sufficiently attractive to international researchers. Only elite universities with large funding pots are routinely considered, leaving most public institutions unappealing. Though this is not a uniquely Brazilian challenge, it is common to facilitate exchange between institutions with high status and HE ranking; however, this is exacerbated in Brazil. For example, in the QS ranking, which is a rough and complicated guide for HE status, Brazil has seven universities in the top seven hundred (between 100 – 700). They are all located in the Southeast of Brazil, mostly in large: four in São Paulo, two in Rio de Janeiro and one in Minas Gerais state). Federal University of Pernambuco (in the Northeast) is the only exception and is between 801-1000 in the QS ranking. Over the last 30 years, SwB has been the only extensive program promoting international mobility for Brazilian students. The entire policy for studying abroad was driven by the need to promote internationalization and knowledge exchange. Consequently, the decrease of expenditure indicates a downward trend of the process. Between the years 2015 to 2017 the reduction was of R$ 5.0 billion (£ 1.0 billion or US$ 1.4 billion) with a negative variation of 95%. The SwB, reversed to a significant extent the history of regional inequality linked to access to mobility programs in HE. The Northeast region, with a population of 57 million (27% of entire country), for example, had more access at the undergraduate level to fellowships abroad. Traditionally, regional advantage has remained with the more affluent south. Table 2 shows that SwB sent 53,000 Brazilian students abroad. The main destinations for Brazilian students were the USA, France, Germany, Portugal, Italy, and the United Kingdom (See Table 3). Students’ desire to go to the USA and the UK can be explained by improved efficiency in English language and for the internal recognition of university centers in these countries (Finardi & Archanjo, 2018). Brazil has introduced policies to use English in HE (Martínez, 2016), and this is a major driver in this regard. Destinations such as Germany and Italy were preferred for cultural reasons given the link to historical migratory flow of peoples from these countries to Brazil after the Second World War. The sociocultural link between such countries remains strong. France was a major destination because of its investment on Brazilian HE at the beginning of the 20th century; the country had a strong influence on the formation of the Brazilian higher education system and development of faculty. Strong relationships remain between academics in the two countries. Finally, Portugal has always been a destination for Brazilian students due to the period of colonization and sociocultural ties. Table 3 Brazilian’s Students by Destination Country (all modalities) - January 2010 to November 2019* Position Country Outbound Position Country Outbound 1 USA 31,509 45 LUXEMBOURG 12 2 FRANCE 13,462 46 SAO TOME AND PRINCIPE 10 3 GERMANY 7,784 47 SINGAPORE 8 4 PORTUGAL 6.417 48 SURINAME 6 5 ITALY 4,397 49 ECUADOR 6 6 UK 3,825 50 VENEZUELA 6 7 CANADA 3,650 51 SLOVENIA 6 8 SPAIN 3,548 52 SOUTH KOREA 5 Education Policy Analysis Archives Vol. 30 No. 171 14 Position Country Outbound Position Country Outbound 9 IRELAND 3,384 53 TURKEY 4 10 HUNGARY 2,140 54 SLOVAKIA 4 11 AUSTRALIA 2,034 55 HAITI 3 12 ARGENTINA 1,295 56 KENYA 3 13 NETHERLANDS 981 57 TAIWAN 2 14 SWEDEN 575 58 HONG KONG 2 15 JAPAN 534 59 SERBIA 2 16 MOZAMBIQUE 414 60 CROATIA 2 17 NORWAY 406 61 THAILAND 2 18 BELGIUM 383 62 ESTONIA 2 19 MEXICO 334 63 MONACO 2 20 CHINA 309 64 PHILIPPINES 2 21 DENMARK 290 65 GUINEA BISSAU 1 22 SWITZERLAND 265 66 LATVIA 1 23 AUSTRIA 188 67 MALTA 1 24 URUGUAY 167 68 MARTINIQUE 1 25 EAST TIMOR 148 69 PANAMA 1 26 CUBA 142 70 NICARAGUA 1 27 CHILE 127 71 TANZANIA 1 28 NEW ZEALAND 85 72 BULGARIA 1 29 COLOMBIA 83 73 GUADELOUPE 1 30 BOLIVIA 82 74 NIGERIA 1 31 CAPE GREEN 79 75 CAMBODIA 1 32 FINLAND 70 76 ZIMBABWE 1 33 SOUTH AFRICA 49 77 LEBANON 1 34 CZECH REPUBLIC 41 78 FRENCH GUIANA 1 35 ANGOLA 25 79 EGYPT 1 36 PUERTO RICO 22 80 CAMEROON 1 37 ISRAEL 22 81 ARMENIA 1 38 INDIA 21 82 BENIN 1 39 POLAND 18 83 ICELAND 1 40 GREECE 18 84 SENEGAL 1 41 COSTA RICA 17 85 ROMANIA 1 42 PARAGUAY 17 86 SAUDI ARABIA 1 43 PERU 15 87 LITHUANIA 1 44 RUSSIA 13 TOTAL 89,497 Note: Ministry of Education (Brazil) with support The Electronic System of the Citizen Information Service (e-SIC). Elaboration: by authors. OBS: The data available until November 2019, the data are incomplete for this year. It is important to point out that Argentina, a Latin American country, and Mozambique in Africa also had significant participation in SwB, receiving 1.2 thousand and 414 Brazilian students, respectively. Argentina is Brazil’s main economic partner and geographically close, while Mozambique retains a close relationship between Latin America’s only Portuguese speaking country and those on the African continent due to shared use of language and colonialization by Portugal. A Entrenched disadvantage and the internationalization of education 15 number of reports from the Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES) criticize this as the students involved in exchanges sometimes engage with countries that do not improve their English language skills which are essential goal of SwB. This argument precluded that SwB should exclude Portugal as a destination country for undergraduate students in 2013 (Portugal será excluído, 2013) This process can also favor the maintenance and invisibility of social inequalities and the hegemony of the English language, in addition to the perpetuation of differences that favor higher education systems in high income countries, such as the USA. Proficiency in the English language as a selection criterion in the first phase of the program denotes the fragility of concepts of equity that anchor the CsF when you also consider variables such as race-ethnicity and social class (Borges, 2015). The expansion of outbound numbers occurred between 2011 and 2015, this is when internally the Southeast region achieved an impressive peak of 10,000 outbound students, in just one year. Historically, the regions of Brazil that send more students abroad are the Southeast and South regions, and the data of 2010 shows that participation from these regions was 73% of total. The South region accounted for 1.5 times the number of outbound students when compared with the Northeast region (though population in the North is almost double that of the South region). After four years, by 2014, the Northeast was able to send more students than the South region with 2,848 outbound students; that is, 272 more engaging in mobility. (See Figure 5). The Northeast region increased more than the South region until 2014, after which a dramatic decrease was recorded. Figure 5 Brazilian’s Internationalization Students by Region of Origin (undergraduate) - January 2010 to November 2019 Note: Ministry of Education (Brazil) with support The Electronic System of the Citizen Information Service (e-SIC). Elaboration: by authors. * For 2019 those accounted for are from January to November 2019. 0.0 2000.0 4000.0 6000.0 8000.0 10000.0 12000.0 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019* North Northeast Middle-West Southeast South Unknown Education Policy Analysis Archives Vol. 30 No. 171 16 Brazil has 5,568 cities of 20,000 inhabitants or more representing 69% of the total. See Table 6 for categorization of cities. SwB, program engaged students from 231 cities. It is important to note that the data refers to the students' institutions, not their cities of origin. The data focuses more on institution than students’ places of origin (See Table 6). Table 5 Classification by Stratum Classification Stratum Very.small Pop. ≤20,000 Small 20,000 < pop. ≤50,000 Small.medium 50,000 < pop. ≤100,000 Medium 100,000 < pop. ≤500,000 Medium.large 500,000 < pop. ≤1 million large Pop. >1 million Note: Elaboration by authors The main cities that benefited from SwB program were medium and medium-large cities. This represented 53% (123 cities) and 11% (25 cities) of the number total (231 cities), respectively (See Figure 6). However, large cities have sent considerably more students for internationalization, during the period, the number was a total of 29,000. The program attracted 6,000 foreign academic staff to Brazil, including students, researchers, and visiting professors between 2012 and 2015. Medium and large cities were the principal destination of inbound students (See Table 8). Figure 6 Brazilian’s Internationalization Students by Municipality of Origin (undergraduate) - Jan 2010 to Nov 2019 Note: Ministry of Education (Brazil) with support The Electronic System of the Citizen Information Service (e-SIC). Elaboration: by authors. * For 2019 those accounted for are from January to November 2019. November. OBS: The data available until November 2019, the data incomplete for this year. 0.0 2000.0 4000.0 6000.0 8000.0 10000.0 12000.0 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019* very.small small small.medium medium medium.large large Entrenched disadvantage and the internationalization of education 17 More than 80% of inbound scholars were received in medium-large and large cities as shown in Table 7. Despite this expansion, the regional profile of the public offering of internationalization scholarship holders did not change. The annual rate of SwB students (See Table 8) was statistically equal (See Tables 9 and 10). Results were similar for the Northeast and Southeast regions and in the North & Northeast groups in the South & Southeast, demonstrating that they were statistically equal. Northeast mean rate of SwB is not more than the Southeast mean rate. It means that the access of Undergraduate students to SwB program follows the historical difference between the regions. Table 7 Attraction of Foreign Researchers by Municipality of Brazil (all modalities) – January 2010 to November 2019 very.small small small.medium medium medium.large large Total 2010 0 0 14 36 13 110 173 2011 0 0 31 108 49 227 415 2012 0 0 39 69 26 272 406 2013 0 0 63 208 95 624 990 2014 0 2 84 270 171 866 1,393 2015 0 1 89 210 164 698 1,162 2016 0 5 35 115 83 339 577 2017 0 0 23 79 43 183 328 2018 0 3 12 46 13 92 166 2019* 0 1 18 90 96 558 763 Total 0 12 408 1231 753 3969 6,373 Note: Ministry of Education (Brazil) with support The Electronic System of the Citizen Information Service (e- SIC). Elaboration: by authors. *For 2019 those accounted for are from January to November 2019. November. OBS: The data available until November 2019, the data incomplete for this year. Table 8 Annual Rate of SwB Students – January 2010 to November 2019 Region Northeast Southeast North & Northeast South & Southeast 2011 0.2744 0.3083 0.3490 0.2452 2012 3.2249 3.0191 2.9961 2.9956 2013 2.2254 1.5329 2.2744 1.5365 2014 0.5028 0.6268 0.4391 0.5814 2015 -0.6710 -0.5438 -0.6793 -0.5423 2016 -0.9247 -0.9117 -0.9239 -0.9043 2017 0.0377 -0.1766 0.0756 -0.1030 2018 0.1909 0.2348 0.1875 0.1360 2019* -0.2137 -0.2958 -0.2105 -0.3048 Note: Ministry of Education (Brazil) with support The Electronic System of the Citizen Information Service (e-SIC). Elaboration: by authors. * For 2019 those accounted for are from January to November 2019. November. OBS: The data available until November 2019, the data incomplete for this year. Education Policy Analysis Archives Vol. 30 No. 171 18 The annual rate of the SwB student exchange between regions North and Southeast was analyzed using one-tailed and two-tailed T tests. The results showed p-value higher than 5%, being 43.87% for one-tailed and 87.75% two-tailed (see Table 9). The same pattern was identified when we analyzed the results of the regions North-Northeast in relation with the South-Southeast. The p- values were 43.62% for one-tailed and 87.23% for two-tailed (see Table 9). Table 9 T test for two samples with unequal variances by Northeast and Southeast Northeast Southeast Mean 0,5163 0,4216 Variance 1,8338 1,4568 Comments 9 9 Mean difference hypothesis 0 Gl 16 t Stat 0,1567 P(T<=t) one-tailed 0,4387 one-tailed critical t 1,7459 P(T<=t) two-tailed 0,8775 two-tailed critical t 2,1199 Table 10 T test for two samples with unequal variances by Regions North & Northeast South & Southeast Mean 0,5009 0,4045 variance 1,7008 1,4367 Comments 9 9 Mean difference hypothesis 0 Gl 16 t Stat 0,1633 P(T<=t) one-tailed 0,4362 one-tailed critical t 1,7459 P(T<=t) two-tailed 0,8723 two-tailed critical t 2,1199 Note: Ministry of Education (Brazil) with support The Electronic System of the Citizen Information Service (e-SIC). Ninety-five percent confidence interval. Elaboration: by authors. It is important to emphasize that the end of the program represented a loss for all Brazilian regions. However, states in the Southeast continue to have access to other funds (such as Fapesp in São Paulo) that support the internationalization process. So, the impact is still varied for different regions. On the one hand, the SwB is associated with the expansion of higher education programs in Brazil. The percentage of student registrations grew by 94% in the Northeast, corresponding to double that recorded for the Southeast and more than triple that recorded in the Southern region. The Northern region had the second highest rate of growth (76%) among the regions of the country (Ministry of Education, 2015). The creation of 18 new universities (during Lula’s government in Brazil) was crucial to doubling the number of enrollments in the network of federal public Entrenched disadvantage and the internationalization of education 19 universities. This is unprecedented in the history of higher education in the country (Ministry of Education, 2015). Discussion The SwB Borders Program has unprecedented contributions, in terms of volume, in the history of the country. The last 30 years of internationalization and mobility programs for students in Brazil has created a sea change not seen before in academia. Over 53,000 undergraduate students had the opportunity to work and learn new knowledge and to develop confidence to improve their skills and build research and social networks across the globe. The SwB program had several challenges, such as poor administration and support for students trying to access to the fellowship, little or poor preparation given the language barrier; inadequate quality control, evaluation, and assessment to track student satisfaction and weak and inefficient data collection and indicators. The benefits of the program as shown by the metrics are significant, improved mobility and valuable knowledge exchange and capability development. The advantages of intercultural skills through the experience of living and networking abroad as well as opportunities to develop skills and competencies are also highlighted in some studies (Feltrin et al., 2021; Saldanha et al., 2019) On the one hand, the SwB maintained the asymmetry between the southeast and south to the rest of the country; on the other hand, the program gave opportunity for some of the students that were involved to gain experience and learn of a second language. However, the Brazilian government has not adequately evaluated the impact of the program for all universities. For example, SwB obligated universities to organize their internationalization offices and increase different English language courses especially for young undergraduate students (Finardi & Archanjo, 2018). The impact of this internationalization at home is considerable, given the wide range of collaborative papers, joint projects, English language publications, and extensive partnerships over the last 10 years (Iorio & Pereira, 2018). This analysis is not critically integrated into government reports and evaluation about SwB or is there data about the impact of the internationalization on the Brazilian regions (Iorio & Pereira, 2018; Oliveira, 2020). The termination of the program comes at a time where there are no activities, policy, or mechanisms for strategically improving internationalization in HE 2020; there will be limited opportunities for collaborative academic engagement and strategic internationalization programs in a world where competition continues to grow. Few opportunities to build upon the internationalization structure and networks exist for many Brazilian students. The positive relationships built in the seven years of existence of the SwB may be wasted. Though the high demand of young undergraduates who wish to have academic exchange remains. There is a clear loss of momentum with respect to internationalization and the specific policy to buttress and improve knowledge exchange and English language skills. As there is no program similar to the SwB, there will be a loss of qualifications, networks, and skills with respect to the next generation of professionals, researchers, and academics. Internationalization in HE has numerous challenges; De Wit (2002) and Rajani & Jamieson (2005) discuss the issues of commodification and quality, which may at time be counterproductive in the race to “internationalize.” The debate around Brazil’s contribution to knowledge which preceded the SwB, highlights essential outputs that need to be constantly reviewed – contribution to knowledge exchange, collaborative projects, overcoming the language barrier – so knowledge can be shared beyond Portuguese speaking audience (Lucchesi, 2002; McManus & Nobre, 2017). This analysis shows how important it is for the HE sector in Brazil to focus on internationalization and programs that integrate Brazilian HE with the world. Education Policy Analysis Archives Vol. 30 No. 171 20 On the one hand, SwB aimed to expand Brazilian science and promote competitiveness and Brazilian science exchange for students and professors. Nevertheless, the discussion about mobility of undergraduate students as we proposed in this paper requires a recognition that the process needs holistic actions and policies to be effective in reducing historical inequalities entrenched across Brazilian regions. This was starkly represented by different social status between universities, budgets, and social issues by region. Different realities should require different actions. To offer the same actions for different regions maintains inequalities that already exist. The huge demand for education in Brazil is central to the argument made in this paper. Improvements in education conditions for less favored regions are essential. The increase in resources and educational capacity made through new universities is a fundamental first step, but more need to be done to rapidly accelerate the funding and capabilities in these new universities. There is a movement to monitor working conditions for professors and improved opportunities that provide internationalization in regions that were not served before. This provides a good platform to ensure more holistic support of Brazilian HE so it will remain relevant and able to contribute to knowledge exchange and research. Conclusion This paper highlights the contribution of SwB to internationalization within Brazil. The regional participation in this program is worth highlighting as it demonstrates the historical challenges related to the reproduction of inequities. The significant increase of HE participation and SwB participation in the disadvantaged regions needs to be strategically monitored and expanded. Key policies around this will need to draw from more robust analysis of SwB indicators and outputs. As shown in this study, the SwB provided exponential benefits far beyond the domain of tradition internationalization. Data on access, inclusion, and collaboration between the regions were unequal, with particular respect to disadvantaged regions vs. non-disadvantaged regions. Examining small, medium, and large city engagement provides good indicators for how to grow and support the quality and contribution of Brazilian HE. Policy Implications The SwB program significantly enhanced internationalization in Brazil, though careful consideration needs to examine the ways policy change affects entrenched inequalities and opportunities for disadvantaged groups. The analysis here suggests a great need for comprehensive collection of data and evaluation. Policy makers should provide a framework for evaluating expensive programs before they are implemented. Furthermore, it is important that evaluation is responsive and built into the policy implementation with mechanisms for adapting the implementation process in real time and enhancing inclusive and broad impact. Limitations The principal limitations of the study were data management and cross referencing for the SwB. This created a significant limitation with respect to the analysis. The study was able to cross reference data from other sources to infer how the SwB may have influenced access from disadvantaged regions. This demonstrates why it is important to collate data that can be used for understanding how the funding supported universities and students beyond the first order indicators of send and receive fellowships/students. The process of internationalization of higher education in Brazil provides an interesting lens for highlighting the advantages and challenges for internationalizing education. The path towards Entrenched disadvantage and the internationalization of education 21 internationalization in this context has developed from a critical perspective, purposively trying to ensure Brazilian HE can connect with counterparts across the world, learn from others, and engage with different knowledge traditions. References Altbach, P. (2014). The giants awake: The present and future of higher education systems in China and India. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 22(46). https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v22n46.2014 Amaral, N. C. (2017). Com a PEC 241/55 (EC 95) haverá prioridade para cumprir as metas do PNE (2014-2024)? Revista Brasileira de Educação, 22(71), e227145. Archanjo, R. (2017). Moving globally to transform locally? Academic mobility and language policy in Brazil. Language Policy, 16(3), 1–22. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/305273858_Moving_globally_to_transform_loca lly_Academic_mobility_and_language_policy_in_Brazil. Alvaredo, F., Chancel, L., Piketty, T., Saez, E., & Zucman, G. (2017). World inequality report 2018. https://wir2018.wid.world/files/download/wir2018-summary-english.pdf. Berger, J. B., Hudson, K.E., & Blanco Ramírez, G. (2013). How universities work: Understanding higher education organization in northwest China. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 21(64). http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/1350. Bernasconi, A., & Celis, S. (2017). Higher education reforms: Latin America in comparative perspective. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 25(67) http://dx.doi.org/10.14507/epaa.25.3240. Borges, R. A. A (2015). Interseccionalidade de gênero, raça e classe no Programa Ciência Sem Fronteiras: Um estudo sobre estudantes brasileiros com destino aos EUA. [Dissertation, Professional master’s in Education, Universidade de Brasília). http://repositorio.unb.br/handle/10482/20443. Brasil. (2015-2021). Lei Orçamentária Anual (LOA) 2015-2021. Portal da Transparência. https://www.portaltransparencia.gov.br. Brunner, J. J., & Villalobos, C. (Eds.). (2014). Políticas de educación superior en Iberoamérica. Ediciones Universidad Diego Portales. Bursztyn, L. (2016). Poverty and the political economy of public education spending: Evidence from Brazil. Journal of the European Economic, Journal of the European Economic Association, 14(5), 1101– 1128. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jeea.12174. Cesarino, L. (2017). Anthropology and the South-South encounter: On 'culture' in Brazil-Africa relations. American Anthropologist, 119, 333-341. Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior. (2020). Relatório final de 2019 da Comissão Especial de Acompanhamento do Pnpg-2011-2020. Brasília (DF), Capes. https://www.capes.gov.br/images/novo_portal/documentos/PNPG/25052020_Relat%C3 %B3rio_Final__2019_Comiss%C3%A3o_PNPG.pdf. De Wit, H. (2011). Trends, issues and challenges in internationalization of higher education. Centre for Applied Research on Economics and Management, School of Economics and Management of the Hogeschool van Amsterdam. De Wit, H. (2002). Internationalization of higher education in the United States of America and Europe: A historical, comparative, and conceptual analysis. Greenwood Press. Feltrin, R. B., Santos, D. F., & Velho, L. M. L. S. (2021). O papel do Ciência Sem Fronteiras na inclusão social: Análise interseccional do perfil dos beneficiários do programa na Unicamp. http://repositorio.unb.br/handle/10482/20443 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jeea.12174 Education Policy Analysis Archives Vol. 30 No. 171 22 Avaliação: Revista da Avaliação da Educação Superior (Campinas), 26(1), 288-314. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1414-40772021000100016. Finardi, K., & Archanjo, R. (2018). Washback effects of the Science without Borders, English without Borders and Language without Borders Programs in Brazilian language policies and rights. In Siiner, M., Hult, F., & Kupisch, T. (Eds.). Language policy and language acquisition planning. Springer. Frigotto, G. (2011). Os circuitos da história e o balanço da educação no Brasil na primeira década do século XXI1. Revista Brasileira de Educação, 16(46). https://www.scielo.br/j/rbedu/a/VJmZWSR66pkB3948p76yRVx/?format=pdf&lang=pt. Granja, C. D., & Carneiro, A.M. (2021). O programa Ciência sem Fronteiras e a falha sistêmica no ciclo de políticas públicas. Ensaio: Avaliação e Políticas Públicas em Educação, 29(110), 183-205. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0104-40362020002801962. Green, W. (2019). Engaging “students as partners” in global learning: Some possibilities and provocations. Journal of Studies in International Education, 23(1), 10-29. Iorio, J., & Pereira, S. (2018). Social class inequalities and international student mobility: The case of Brazilian students in the Portuguese higher education system. Belgeo, 3. https://doi.org/10.4000/belgeo.24193. Instituto Nacional de Estudos e Pesquisas Educacionais Anísio Teixeira. (2018). Censo da Educação Superior 2017. Diretoria de Estatísticas Educacionais do Ministério da Educação. http://portal.mec.gov.br/docman/setembro-2018-pdf/97041-apresentac-a-o-censo- superior-u-ltimo/file. Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística. (2019). PNAD Educação. Educação 2018. IBGE. https://biblioteca.ibge.gov.br/visualizacao/livros/liv101657_informativo.pdf. Jones, E., Coelen, R., Beelen, J., & De Wit, H. (Eds.). (2015). Global and local internationalization. Sense Publishers. Khoo, S. M. (2011). Ethical globalisation or privileged internationalization? Exploring global citizenship and internationalization in Irish and Canadian universities. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 9(3–4), 337–353. Lucchesi, M. A. S. (2002). University at the threshold of the third millennium: Challenges and tendencies. Leopoldianum. Lucchesi, M. A. S., & Malanga, E. B. (2010). Perceptions of higher education in Brazil in the first decade of the third millennium. US-China Education Review, 7, 31-44. Maldonado-Maldonado, A., & Reyes, J. H. G. (2017). Is higher education in Latin America a public good? In Palfreyman, D., Tapper, T., & Thomas, S. (Eds.), Towards the private funding of higher education: Ideological and political struggles. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/e/9781315537412/chapters/10.4324/978131553741 2-8. McManus, C., & Nobre, C. A. (2017). Brazilian Scientific Mobility Program - Science without Borders - Preliminary results and perspectives. Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciências, 89(1, Suppl.), 773-786. https://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0001-3765201720160829. Majee, U. S., & Ress, S. B. (2018). Colonial legacies in internationalization of higher education: Racial justice and geopolitical redress in South Africa and Brazil. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 50(4), 463-481. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057925.2018.1521264. Martínez, R. (2016). English as a medium of instruction (EMI) in Brazilian higher education: Challenges and opportunities. In K. Finardi (Ed). English in Brazil: Views, policies and programs. (pp.191-228). Eduel. Entrenched disadvantage and the internationalization of education 23 Ministry of Education. (2015). A democratização e expansão da educação superior no país 2003–2014. Secretaria de Educação Superior do MEC. http://portal.mec.gov.br/index.php?option=com_docman&view=download&alias=16762- balanco-social-sesu-2003-2014&Itemid=30192. Ministry of Education. (2017). MEC afirma que o Ciência sem Fronteiras terá 5 mil bolsistas na pós- graduação. http://portal.mec.gov.br/ultimas-noticias/212-educacao-superior- 1690610854/46981-mec-afirma-que-o-ciencia-sem-fronteiras-tera-5-mil-bolsistas-na-pos- graduacao. Musselin, C., & Teixeira, P. (Eds.) (2014) Reforming higher education. Public policy design and implementation. Springer. Naidoo, R., & Jamieson, I. (2005). Knowledge in the marketplace: The global commodification of teaching and learning in higher education. In P. Ninnes & M. Hellestén, Internationalizing higher education (pp. 37-51). Springer. Ninnes, P., & Hellstén, M. (Eds.). (2005). Internationalizing higher education: Critical explorations of pedagogy and policy. Springer. O’Brien, R., & Williams, M. (2013). Global political economy: Evolution and dynamics. Palgrave Macmillan. O’Neill, J. (2001). Building better global economic BRICs. Global Economics Paper no. 66. https://www.goldmansachs.com/insights/archive/archive-pdfs/build-better-brics.pdf. Oliveira, A.L.M. (2020). Higher education in Brazil: Interrupted inclusion? Multiplier Effect: The Levy Economics Institute Blog. http://multiplier-effect.org/higher-education-in-brazil-interrupted- inclusion/. Palfreyman, D., Tapper, T., & Thomas, S. (2017). How inexorable is the shift from the public to the private funding of higher education? In D. Palfreyman, T. Tapper & S. Thomas (Eds.), Towards the private funding of higher education: Ideological and political struggles. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/e/9781315537412/chapters/10.4324/978131553741 211. Patel, F. (2017). Deconstructing internationalization: Advocating glocalization in international higher education. Journal of International & Global Studies, 8(2) 64- 82. Peres, U. D., & Santos, F. P. (2020). Gasto público e desigualdade social: O orçamento do governo federal brasileiro entre 1995 e 2016. Revista Brasileira de Ciências Sociais, 35(103), e3510307. https://doi.org/10.1590/3510307/2020. Périco, F. G., & Gonçalves, R. B. (2018). Academic exchange: The difficulties of adaptation and readaptation. Educação e Pesquisa, 44, e182699. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1678- 4634201844182699. Portugal será excluído do Ciência sem Fronteiras, diz Mercadante. (2013). G1. https://g1.globo.com/educacao/noticia/2013/04/portugal-sera-excluido-do-ciencia-sem- fronteiras-diz-mercadante.html. Rivas, R. M., & Mullet, S. (2016). Countervailing institutional forces that shape internationalization of science: An analysis of Brazil's Science without Borders Program. RAI Revista de Administração e Inovação, 13(1), 12 -21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rai.2016.04.001. Robles, C., & Bhandari, R. (2017). Higher education and student mobility: A capacity building pilot study in Brazil. Institute of International Education (IIE). https://faubai.org.br/pt-br/wp- content/uploads/2020/10/IIE-High-Education-and-Student-Mobility-Brazil-Pilot.pdf. OECD. (2019). Education at glance 2019. https://www.oecd.org/education/education-at-a- glance/EAG2019_CN_BRA.pdf. QS World University Rankings. (2022). QS World University Rankings. https://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/world-university-rankings/2022. Education Policy Analysis Archives Vol. 30 No. 171 24 Sá, C. M. (2016). The rise and fall of Brazil’s Science without Borders International Higher Education. International Higher Education, 85, 17-18. Senado Federal do Brasil. (2015). Relatório de avaliação do programa ciência sem fronteiras. Senado Federal. https://www12.senado.leg.br/institucional/datasenado/arquivos/avaliacao-do-programa- ciencia-sem-fronteiras. Schwartzman, S. (2015). Demanda e políticas públicas para o ensino superior nos BRICS. Caderno CRH, 28(74), 267-290. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-49792015000200003. Scott, P. (2005). The global dimension: Internationalizing higher education. In B. Khem & H. Wit, (Eds.), Internationalization in higher education: European responses to the global perspective. European Association for International Education and the European Higher Education Society (EAIR). Stein, S. (2019). Critical internationalization studies at an impasse: Making space for complexity, uncertainty, and complicity in a time of global challenges. Studies in Higher Education, 1-14. United Nations Development Programme. (2022). Human Development Reports. https://hdr.undp.org/en/countries/profiles/BRA. Van Gaalen, A. (2010). Internationalization and quality assurance. EAIE Professional Development Series for International Educators. EAIE. Waters, J. L. (2012). Geographies of international education: Mobilities and the reproduction of social (dis)advantage. Geography Compass, 6(3), 123-136. Wilson, D., & Purushothaman, R. (2003). Dreaming with BRICs: The path to 2050. Goldman Sachs Global Economics Paper, 99, 1-2. Yaluk, C. M. (2018). Outcomes of a non-degree international visiting student program: The case of the Brazil Scientific Mobility Program Students at the University of Kansas. [Doctoral dissertation, University of Kansas]. https://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/bitstream/handle/1808/28030/Yaluk_ku_0099D_16283_D ATA_1.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y. About the Authors Rafael Silva Barbosa †Died June 15, 2022 Rafael led the development of this work over the last three years. He was a young researcher, committed to research practice that was purposeful and impactful on policy and social norms. Rafael was committed to making evaluation about inequalities visible. His research connections included a broad network of interdisciplinary scholars. He will be dearly missed by all his colleagues in the UK, Brazil, and around the world. Arinola Adefila Staffordshire Centre for Learning and Pedagogic Practice Arinola.Adefila@staffs.ac.uk https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9759-0104 Arinola’s research focuses on capturing and evaluating the transformational impact education has on individuals and society. She has a strong belief in continuous lifelong and lifewide learning. Her current research is around developing pedagogies for enhancing transdisciplinary education in diverse spaces and formats. https://www12.senado.leg.br/institucional/datasenado/arquivos/avaliacao-do-programa-ciencia-sem-fronteiras https://www12.senado.leg.br/institucional/datasenado/arquivos/avaliacao-do-programa-ciencia-sem-fronteiras https://hdr.undp.org/en mailto:Arinola.Adefila@staffs.ac.uk https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9759-0104 Entrenched disadvantage and the internationalization of education 25 Maria Lúcia Teixeira Garcia Federal University of Espírito Santo garcia@uol.com.br https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2672-9310 Maria Lúcia has a PhD in psychology (USP/Brazil). Titular professor at Department of Social Work and of the Graduate Programme in Social Policy, Federal University of Espírito Santo, Espírito Santo, Brazil. Fellowship of research productivity (PQ) granted by the national council for scientific and technological development (CNPq). education policy analysis archives Volume 30 Number 171 November 22, 2022 ISSN 1068-2341 Readers are free to copy, display, distribute, and adapt this article, as long as the work is attributed to the author(s) and Education Policy Analysis Archives, the changes are identified, and the same license applies to the derivative work. More details of this Creative Commons license are available at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/. EPAA is published by the Mary Lou Fulton Teachers College at Arizona State University. Articles are indexed in CIRC (Clasificación Integrada de Revistas Científicas, Spain), DIALNET (Spain), Directory of Open Access Journals, EBSCO Education Research Complete, ERIC, Education Full Text (H.W. Wilson), QUALIS A1 (Brazil), SCImago Journal Rank, SCOPUS, SOCOLAR (China). About the Editorial Team: https://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/index.php/epaa/about/editorialTeam Please send errata notes to Audrey Amrein-Beardsley at audrey.beardsley@asu.edu Join EPAA’s Facebook community at https://www.facebook.com/EPAAAAPE and Twitter feed @epaa_aape. mailto:garcia@uol.com.br https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2672-9310 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/ http://www.doaj.org/ http://www.doaj.org/ https://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/index.php/epaa/about/editorialTeam mailto:audrey.beardsley@asu.edu https://www.facebook.com/EPAAAAPE