There is pressure on universities to “change their roles from the servants of the welfare state to the builders of a neo-liberal state and to encourage market selection instead of the common good and equalization of opportunity” (Häyrinen-Alestalo & Peltola, 2006, p. 254). Unterhalter and Carpentier (2010) articulate the resulting tensions that arise as being consistent with the inequities imposed by globalization. While developments in higher education appear to provoke innovation and creativity in how universities are responding to global change, unintended consequences are apparent. Naidoo (2010) for example, challenges the so-called neutrality of the knowledge society, arguing that a knowledge economy that is closely tied to competition and issues of access and exclusivity is highly problematic. Amidst critiques of the ‘edubusiness’ (Luke, 2010) that is the predominant discourse of the internationalization of higher education are calls for ethical and principled practices (Hebert & Abdi, 2012; ACDE, 2013). But what does ethical internationalization mean? Framed by critical globalization theories (Appadurai, 1996) and postcolonial thought (Pratt, 1992/2008), and drawing on multiple data (surveys, interviews) from students and faculty in a single Canadian university participating in the broader EIHE study, this paper seeks to illustrate how faculty and students might view ethical internationalization. How are discourses of internationalization emerging in students’ lived experiences? Are they mindful of the need and call for global social responsibilities? What do students gain from their curriculum, and does this include awareness of equities and inequities, and social justice? Does their understanding include visions for a better world? Do faculty members recognize their implicit and explicit roles in the university as a contact zone? How do they address and challenge the pressures exerted by the internationalization imperative, and do they enact ethical practices? The complex, multi-layered experiences of students and faculty engaged in internationalization, will illustrate the importance of generating alternatives to prevailing discourses in international higher education. A mixed-methods design, used across all sites of the broader study, generated multiple data sets consisting of surveys conducted among undergraduate students, qualitative interviews of faculty members and selected administrators, and documents reflecting internationalization policies of the institutions. Analysis of the survey data was descriptive, and organized according to thematic categories. Interview data were coded according to emergent themes, as well as identifying generative and unique insights.

ACDE (2013). Canadian Deans’ Accord on Internationalization. Ottawa: Association of Canadian Deans of Education. Retrieved from http://www.csse-scee.ca/docs/acde/Accord_Internationalization_EN.pdf Appadurai, A. (1996). Modernity at large: Cultural dimensions of globalization. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. Häyrinen-Alestalo, M., & Peltola, U. (2006). The problem of a market-oriented university. Higher Education, 52(2), 251–281. Hébert, Y., & Abdi, A. A. (2013). Critical perspectives on international education: redefinitions, knowledge-making, mobilities and changing the world. In Y. Hébert & A. A. Abdi (Eds.), Critical Perspectives on International Education (pp. 1–41). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. Knight, J. (2008). The internationalization of higher education: Are we on the right track? Academic Matters (Oct–Nov), 5–9. Luke, A. (2010). Educating the Other: Standpoint and theory in the ‘Internationalization’ of higher education. In E. Unterhalter and V. Carpentier (Eds) Global inequalities and higher education: Whose interests are we serving? (pp. 43–65). New York: Palgrave Macmillan Marginson, S. 2006. Dynamics of national and global competition in higher education. Higher Education 52, (1), 1–39. Naidoo, R. (2010). Global learning in a neoliberal age: implications for development, in Unterhalter, E. & Carpentier, V. (Eds), Global inequalities and higher education: Whose interests are we serving? (pp. 117 – 141). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.