The Findings
1.Interview with Ex Head of the Department (EHD)
When EHD was asked how the project was developed，she stated，Early childhood was an area that the university was frequently being approached by overseas universities and other groups to try and set up joint arrangements. Whereas primary and secondary are not particularly easy to offer offshore. it was a huge growth area within Asia and it was an area where we had good expertise so it seemed to be something that we could do.
The EHD reported that key staff from the international partnership department in the university approached her about the collaboration with the Chinese university. The partnership idea potentially helped to align with the strategic direction of the Australian university and the push to have a global presence. In addition，the reduced government funding to support university has created a need for the university to generate income from student enrolment. Therefore，the idea of a yearly stable pool of international students’mobility would assist in generating revenue for the university.
The EHD stated，the collaboration could be viewed as a‘way of expanding our programs and developing an international student presence…’.When asked about the selected CAP model that was adopted，the EHD replied，‘It's the only model so far. I think the Chinese government or Minister for Education had sort of approved in principle the CAP type program’. To EHD，the‘two plus two’as opposed to the four to zero arrangement was viewed as a‘fair way of splitting income…students only paid us for the two years they were with us. And it gave them a chance to build their English language skills…before they then come to Australia…’.
EHD continued to state that，
The initial approach with the two plus two，was just that they wanted a way of valuating themselves by giving the students two degrees which we had quite a bit of discussion about….whether the students could basically double dip with the same content and get degrees from two institutions.
She stated a prominent challenge that emerged later was that there was‘no guidance around accreditation requirements in the early days’. After she retired，when the first cohort of Chinese was preparing to complete their last years of study in Australia，then the issue of external accreditation had to addressed so the Chinese students would have an option to work in Australia.Further to some of the challenges described were the lack of cultural understanding and differentiated level of knowledge and expectations. A key concern was the language barrier which further hindered the communication flow especially in areas such as curriculum development of the first two years of study at the Chinese university. As a result of the curriculum reform at the Chinese university，there were‘different versions of their course structure…. and was a real concern’. The Australian program was reaccredited and also changed its structure. Difficulties were faced in what could be counted as advanced credit for courses that students successfully completed in their first two years of study at the Chinese university and what could be counted as advanced credit for courses that students successfully completed in their first two years of study at the Chinese university and what type of program structure in the Chinese curriculum could be considered relevant to Australian requirements.
EHD stated，
And I mean that was incredibly difficult because their course structure that needed a certain amount of marks is assumed taught and English and basic studies…There was the imperative of being under some pressure to get some programs- some of our programs being taught offshore.
Supplying staff to teach into the degree in China has been a logistical difficulty. When asked about the sustainability and future of the partnership，EHD replied that there were hopes to‘grow research together…and to learn from their ways of doing things too，particularly if we wanted to grow our delivery of early childhood in China or other Asian countries….One program isn't enough to—as an international presence.We were still exploring opportunities in other places’. She believed that the program would provide students with the opportunity to improve their English and graduates to be more employable. (图2-2 为School of Education of RMIT)
图2-2 School of Education of RMIT
2.Interview with the New Head of the Department (HD)
As stated earlier，the HD was the one who implemented the project and received the first cohort of students into the Australian university. He was not the one who initiated the development and finalised the agreement of the partnership，curriculum，program structure and terms of the collaboration. His research expertise was in the vocational education sector and he had to appoint an early childhood coordinator to advise him.
In accordance to his interpretation of how the“two plus two”partnership was developed，he believed it stemmed from the previous Vice Chancellor's push for‘strategic vision for the institution around being an international institution…’. To the understanding of the new HD，the intention of the joint partnership was central to the need to drive enrolment numbers where there was less dependence on commonwealth funding. To cope with the competitive domestic market saturated with players，he stated that‘we could probably grow through going offshore and attracting international students….partly distinctiveness，partly financial’.
When asked about challenges faced，he stated when the original staff who initiated the project and decision makers left the university，confusion and challenges emerged. He said，we're not exactly sure，so that policy background is a little opaque and unclear…The CAP agreements were the brainchild of the formal leader of the international branch of the university and there have been many staff changes’.
The change of department head created confusion. The new HD stated，
Shortly after I arrived I was approached and told，you know，we had this new program to deliver. And actually understanding and unpacking all of that wasn't straight forward because we didn't really have anyone with a grasp of the providence of that…I didn't really know what we'd promised.
The new HD cited the confusion resulting from the lack of information and documentation which created misunderstandings of the expectations for the‘two plus two’degree to gain external accreditation approval from ACECQA. This was not originally required but was necessary if the Chinese students wished to work in Australia. He stated that the pressure to complete the external accreditation within a short time was also not easy with the new cohort arriving to Australia. He commented that the Department was not given any support from the university in terms of funding to enhance and develop the initiative properly unlike the Chinese university where support came from the government grant of the Project 211 award. The HD may have been thinking here about the research funding the deputy dean had achieved as research support in the Chinese university.
When asked about the CAP model，he commented that there were different models of partnership that a university can adopt. He understood that CAP arrangements were regulated by the Chinese MOE aim to build capacity for their early childhood workforce. To the new HD，he stated that the student numbers vary with the model used and this is a new challenge. The HD reported that‘CAP agreements haven't been very successful because they tend to be with an institution and the number of students coming don't tend to be sufficient…too demanding.…the expectations are very high and so delivering on the promise is a challenge.’
He went on stating that，(https://www.daowen.com)
…this one has been a lot of work because of the external accreditation requirements and the expectation that these students will gain registration to teach and so working through all the details of the learning that they do in China and how that counts against the ACECQA standards and the learning that they will do here in Australia and how that all comes together to create a qualification that we can say，hand on heart，they meet the ACECQA standards.That's enormously challenging.
In relation to the collaboration，he commented that there were two joint management committee (JMC) meetings each year. Key decision makers/ leaders from both universities attended the meetings to address key concerns，recommendations and plan‘next steps’agenda.
The HD stated，
I don't know quite what to do about that committee really. We need to have it but it's a long way to go just for a one-hour meeting…language issues—partly because of the language issues，you don't really get a sense of what actually is going on and we don't effectively communicate in terms of building the initiatives.
When asked about the sustainability and future，he commented that，
…we've offered Australian accreditation and not all CAP agreements have that…less reliance on the course where they're to cover the ACECQA standards and if we had that then we could be more flexible about what we contributed in terms of curriculum over there. So that would be easier for us.
As to what he would consider useful for future partnership arrangement，the new HD replied that，
So，my interest is in obviously bringing sufficient numbers of Chinese students into our program who have the required level of English and can benefit from our program，who will learn stuff and who may or may not go back and transport some of the information back to their home country. That's it for me.
3.Discussion—the questions
The questions presented in this paper for Part II，the Australian experience：How was this project developed?
In accordance to the initiator of the project from the Australian university，the EHD，she reported that the Australian university was frequently approached by potential overseas partners to consider the delivery of a joint ECE degree through their international department who connected with the agent of the Chinese university. This joint project was developed with a vested interest to generate income from a stable pool of Chinese student enrolments. The joint partnership aligned with the Australian strategic alignment to increase their global profile and in the hope to increase research collaboration in the future.
In relation to the model adopted，EHD stated that the Australian university was offered one model for the collaboration. The CAP was the only model offered and it was the‘two plus two’CAP model. This model，as reported by both participants，has been an ongoing challenge to deliver to the students a degree that is an accredited teaching qualification.
What is the long-term potential for capacity building from this initiative? As stated by EHD，the initial hope of the partnership was to‘grow research together’besides generating revenue for the university，and other future goals is to have more than one joint program in China and other Asian countries.
Both interviewees，EHD and HD viewed the learning experiences and the acquisition of English Languages skills to be an advantage for the international students. Neither mentioned the local students. However，there emerged many challenges that need to be addressed. For example，cultural understanding，communication and language barriers，the demands and rigidity of the CAP，dual accreditation challenges in curriculum and other expectations from the Chinese university in meeting the MoE's requirement of teaching component by foreign academics that created challenges for the Australian university in the deployment of academics and the low number of student enrolment.
The challenges faced by the Australian participant，EHD can be viewed from her statements and words in her answers when discussing the partnership and the joint program during her interview. These included，‘guidelines’，‘different versions of course structure’and，‘incredibly difficult’. This resulted in misunderstanding and communication of the intentions，expectations and requirements of the joint partnership. For example，the need to gain external accreditation from the Australian side was not clear. The Chinese university had already gained approval for the‘two plus’program from the MoE. The Ex Head of Department，EHD maintained that throughout the meetings and negotiation of the joint program that the need for external accreditation was not an explicit issue as the Chinese partner seemed to be interested in preparing their graduates for employment in China.
Alongside some of the challenges faced by the EHD were expectations expressed about the complication of different versions of courses and program structure. The handover，due to the change of leadership gave rise to circumstances where the new HD was challenged in not gaining an understanding of previous discussions about the collaboration. This posed barriers to advancing and building partnership and building relationship. The new HD used words such as“opaque”and‘not so straight forward’to refer the complexity of the‘two plus two’CAP program.
The lack of information and documentation resulted in an insufficient understanding of the joint project. The findings of HD's interview demonstrated emerging challenges faced in hisattempts to try to make sense of critical situations such as the pressure to gain external accreditation from the Australian authority within a short time. The inherited agreement had been silent on this and the MoE had not stipulated it was necessary but the students would not have been able to work in Australia without this negotiation. There was ongoing confusion about the need to meet the MoE's foreign component teaching and the challenges of deployment of staff and resources to the Chinese university.
Conflicts and challenges from international partnerships can be problematic. As argued by Yang (2014)，conflicting forces present in the divides of differing ideologies and parties need to develop strategies to overcome these challenges to develop the international partnership. Literature such as (Ng ＆ Nyland，2016；Yang，2014) state that the expansion of venture models of internationalisation has given rise to tensions due to diverse culture，varied pedagogical approaches，expectations，communication barriers and different values.
The joint degree program partnership with the Chinese university through a CAP initiative has produced mixed results. The nature of the CAP and evaluative reviews from the Chinese MoE meant a high level of expectations from the Chinese university. The high number of courses that students need to undertake to achieve dual accreditation in both countries as well the demand to complete other courses to meet the Chinese teacher registration are demanding. There are also IELTS standards to meet before being able to register in Australia. The high number of courses requires students to have the financial means to pay fees. The dual degree award requirements to meet the Chinese and Australian teacher registration，the MoE criteria including foreign component courses，Australian accreditation，basic computer skills and English ability for a minimum IELTS score are costly. This has created a situation of where students from the CAP arrangement have an increased financial burden to pay for the high number of courses including English，and a greater demand of time in the first two years to successfully complete the entry requirements to the Australian university. Consequently，there has been a low uptake of students for the‘two plus two’CAP arrangement.
In any new development，there are general risks associated from the business perspective and in the maintenance of the partnership relationship alongside cultural and language barriers(Marginson，2014) and in this case the change of leadership between initiation and implementation of the joint program created complications.